WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 35 of their Senate colleagues in reintroducing the Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act, bicameral legislation to guarantee the right of public sector employees to organize, act concertedly, and bargain collectively in states that currently do not afford these basic protections. This comes at a critical time, after President Trump’s recent executive order ended collective bargaining for over a million federal workers. “Trump has already stripped hundreds of thousands of federal workers of their collective bargaining rights, and even more public sector workers could be next. Unions built the middle class, and they’re still
...Read more the best tool for workers to fight for better pay and fair treatment. This legislation would make sure our teachers, firefighters, and more than a million Americans who serve their communities have a seat at the negotiating table,” said Murphy. “The Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act ensures that teachers, nurses, child welfare workers, firefighters, and so many others who serve our communities are afforded the same right to join a union as workers in the private sector,” said Blumenthal. “All workers deserve the free and unhindered opportunity to organize and collectively bargain for better pay, benefits, and working conditions.” The Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act would establish baseline federal protections to ensure all public service workers can join a union and negotiate workplace conditions—regardless of state law. Unlike private sector workers, there is currently no federal law protecting the freedom of public sector workers to join a union and collectively bargain for fair wages, benefits, and improved working conditions. Specifically, this bill would set a minimum nationwide standard of collective bargaining rights that states must provide, including allowing public service workers to join together and have a voice on the job to improve both working conditions and the communities in which they live and work. The legislation gives public service workers the freedom to: Join together in a union selected by a majority of employees;
Collectively bargain over wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment;
Access dispute resolution mechanisms;
Use voluntary payroll deduction for union dues;
Engage in concerted activities related to collective bargaining and mutual aid;
Have their union be free from requirements to hold rigged recertification elections; and
File suit in court to enforce their labor rights. U.S. Senators Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cosponsored the legislation. The Public Service Freedom to Negotiate Act is endorsed by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME); the Communications Workers of America (CWA); American Federation of Teachers (AFT); AFL-CIO; Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU); Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE); International Brotherhood of Teamsters; International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM); International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE); International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE); International Union of Police Associations (IUPA); International Union of Painters & Allied Trades (IUPAT); Laborer’s International Union of North America (LiUNA); National Education Association (NEA); National Nurses United; Service Employees International Union (SEIU); Transport Workers Union of America (TWU); UNITE HERE!; United Autoworkers; United Steelworkers (USW). Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, joined his Democratic colleagues on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in sending a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio regarding the State Department’s recently announced plans to restructure the Department – including folding USAID into the Department of State. In their letter, the senators emphasize that the State Department’s proposal for USAID is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers, and that broader efforts to restructure, including the closure of U.S. embassies and consulates, are illegal without Congressional action and would be an unjustified seismic shift in the U.S foreign policy enterprise. “On March 28, 2025, the State Department
...Read more sent a Congressional Notification indicating its intent to fold USAID into the Department of State. The proposal, if implemented, and action taken to date to gut USAID, are clearly an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers. The executive branch may not eliminate a congressionally created and funded agency without congressional authorization. Such action would be incompatible with the express will of Congress. The administration’s plan to permanently dismantle USAID and fire all of its employees will not only render it impossible for any retained USAID programs to be implemented, but will also cause significant disruption to the State Department’s core mission. The actions outlined in this proposal are unconstitutional, illegal, unjustified, damaging, and inefficient,” the senators wrote. “In addition, we have seen reports on additional restructuring that would include dozens of U.S. embassies and consulates being closed, a fifth of the State Department’s workforce slashed, career positions being reclassified into political “Schedule P/C” positions, and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) being absorbed into separate divisions under the DFC. This reorganization would have dramatic U.S. national security implications, constitutes an unjustified seismic shift in the U.S. foreign policy enterprise, and includes many proposed measures that would be illegal without congressional action. We demand that you follow the law and engage with the relevant committees before the State Department begins to execute any such plans, including you testifying before the relevant committees to explain and defend these plans to restructure the country’s premier diplomatic agencies,” they continued. “Given the gravity of these potential consequences, we expect that the administration will immediately engage with Congress before taking any further steps toward implementing these plans, as required by law,” the senators concluded. U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Secretary Rubio, On March 28, 2025, the State Department sent a Congressional Notification indicating its intent to fold USAID into the Department of State. The proposal, if implemented, and action taken to date to gut USAID, are clearly an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers. The executive branch may not eliminate a congressionally created and funded agency without congressional authorization. Such action would be incompatible with the express will of Congress. The administration’s plan to permanently dismantle USAID and fire all of its employees will not only render it impossible for any retained USAID programs to be implemented, but will also cause significant disruption to the State Department’s core mission. The actions outlined in this proposal are unconstitutional, illegal, unjustified, damaging, and inefficient. In addition, we have seen reports on additional restructuring that would include dozens of U.S. embassies and consulates being closed, a fifth of the State Department’s workforce slashed, career positions being reclassified into political “Schedule P/C” positions, and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) being absorbed into separate divisions under the DFC. This reorganization would have dramatic U.S. national security implications, constitutes an unjustified seismic shift in the U.S. foreign policy enterprise, and includes many proposed measures that would be illegal without congressional action. We demand that you follow the law and engage with the relevant committees before the State Department begins to execute any such plans, including you testifying before the relevant committees to explain and defend these plans to restructure the country’s premier diplomatic agencies. According to the congressional notification we received, the administration would eliminate USAID’s status as an independent establishment in the executive branch, abolish multiple USAID bureaus and offices, as well as “realigning certain USAID functions to the Department.” As you know, Congress mandated that USAID be established in statute. Some reporting about the State Department’s plans also suggest an attempt to dissolve certain State Department bureaus that focus on functional and bilateral assistance, which could potentially result in the dissolution of multiple bureaus already authorized in law. Any attempt to dissolve those bureaus requires congressional action to modify or repeal the relevant authorizing statutes. It is also our understanding that the State Department is considering substantially shrinking its workforce and diplomatic footprint around the world. This includes a potential major cut in staffing and the closure of multiple embassies and consulates abroad. If carried out, these plans would undermine our ability to conduct diplomacy abroad at a time when China is increasing its presence globally and outpacing the U.S. presence in multiple regions. Beyond the immediate structural and personnel changes, these proposed reforms could have a severe deleterious impact for U.S. global leadership and influence. The State Department, USAID, and its diplomatic corps are the backbone of American foreign policy, advancing U.S. interests, strengthening alliances, and responding to global crises. Slashing their workforces, closing embassies, consulates, and missions, and dismantling key bureaus would severely weaken America’s ability to conduct diplomacy, support democracy, and counter the growing influence of strategic competitors like China and Russia. At a time when global challenges are increasing, from conflicts and humanitarian crises, such as the recent earthquakes in Myanmar, to economic instability, the United States cannot afford to undermine its own diplomatic capacity. Given the gravity of these potential consequences, we expect that the administration will immediately engage with Congress before taking any further steps toward implementing these plans, as required by law. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, joined 22 of their Senate colleagues in a letter to President Donald Trump regarding the firing of the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) and Commander of U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM), General Timothy Haugh, as well as the reassignment of the Deputy Director of the NSA, Wendy Noble. “These actions severely compromise our ability to keep Americans safe. As you are well aware, our nation currently faces serious cyber threats from foreign adversaries, such as from China’s Salt Typhoon, with near-daily attacks against our critical infrastructure,” the senators wrote. “In addition, our nation’s military is engaged in ongoing operations against multiple
...Read more threats, from the Houthis in Yemen to Russian aggression in Eastern Europe. Given the dangers facing the United States, it is inexplicable that the Administration would remove the senior leaders of NSA/CYBERCOM without cause or warning, and risk disrupting critical ongoing intelligence operations.” The senators warned that ending the dual-hat arrangement—where one officer leads both NSA and CYBERCOM—could seriously undermine U.S. national security: “Premature termination of the dual-hat arrangement would severely degrade the speed and effectiveness of NSA’s and CYBERCOM’s abilities to execute their missions and could have dire consequence for our national security. As Congress on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis has repeatedly made clear in the National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 2017, 2018, and 2020, clear criteria must be met before any termination can be considered and both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs must together certify that separation will not “pose risks to the military effectiveness of the United States Cyber Command that are unacceptable to the national security interests of the United States.” The senators requested written justification for why Director Timothy Haugh and Ms. Wendy Noble were removed from their posts and asked for a Congressional briefing regarding any additional actions the administration plans to take with respect to NSA and CYBERCOM, including but not limited to the separation of the dual-hat. U.S. Senators Mark Warner (D-Va.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Angus King (I-Maine), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear President Trump, We write with alarm at the sudden and inexplicable firing of the Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) and Commander, U.S. Cyber Command, General Timothy Haugh, as well as the reassignment of the Deputy Director of the NSA, Wendy Noble. Not only have both dutifully served this nation for decades under both Democratic and Republican administrations, but their removals were conducted in the middle of the night with no consultation with Congress and, according to reports, at the behest of a private citizen who has a record of promoting conspiracy theories. These actions severely compromise our ability to keep Americans safe. As you are well aware, our nation currently faces serious cyber threats from foreign adversaries, such as from China’s Salt Typhoon, with near-daily attacks against our critical infrastructure. In addition, our nation’s military is engaged in ongoing operations against multiple threats, from the Houthis in Yemen to Russian aggression in Eastern Europe. Given the dangers facing the United States, it is inexplicable that the Administration would remove the senior leaders of NSA/CYBERCOM without cause or warning, and risk disrupting critical ongoing intelligence operations. Furthermore, we urge you to exercise careful consideration and consultation with Congress on any further actions that may impact NSA’s or CYBERCOM’s abilities to provide the critical intelligence and operational support to policymakers and warfighters. This includes, but is not limited to, any considerations to terminate the dual-hat arrangement. Premature termination of the dual-hat arrangement would severely degrade the speed and effectiveness of NSA’s and CYBERCOM’s abilities to execute their missions and could have dire consequence for our national security. As Congress on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis has repeatedly made clear in the National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 2017, 2018, and 2020, clear criteria must be met before any termination can be considered and both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs must together certify that separation will not “pose risks to the military effectiveness of the United States Cyber Command that are unacceptable to the national security interests of the United States.” As Members of the respective committees of oversight, we request that you formally provide in writing a justification for why Director Timothy Haugh and Ms. Wendy Noble were removed from their posts and provide a briefing to Congress on any additional actions you plan to take with respect to NSA and CYBERCOM, including but not limited to the separation of the dual-hat. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) joined 71 members of Congress in sending a letter to U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon demanding a reversal of a recently announced policy that abruptly changed department practice and imposed new red tape on states. The policy would block states from accessing pandemic relief funds they rely on to support students’ learning. “We write to request the immediate reversal of the Department of Education’s recent March 28, 2025, action to revise the liquidation extension policy for COVID-19 relief funds,” the members wrote. “Just over a month ago, the Department announced a
...Read more policy change to the longstanding extension policy that imposed an additional step for processing of extension reimbursements. … However, on March 28, 2025, with many state extension requests having been approved more than six months ago, the Department suddenly announced on March 28 that ‘the Department is modifying the liquidation period to end on March 28, 2025,’ the very same day as the announcement.” “In short,” they continued, “the Department changed the spending rules it affirmed just one month ago, without providing any notice, and imposing more federal red tape.” The members noted that the abrupt change—coupled with the mass firings at ED—seriously threaten the ability of schools to support students’ learning: “When combined with the massive reduction in force announced earlier this month, the Department jeopardizes an estimated $4 billion from the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 and American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 in nearly all of our states and outlying areas and roughly 1,000 school districts nationwide. This action is particularly harmful to rural school districts that faced the greatest disruptions during the authorized program period. This will also have a disproportionate impact on $800 million reserved for identification and support for students experiencing homelessness, which was implemented slowly in many states. The March 28th decision of the Department improperly imposes its will on state and local budget decisions in a manner not contemplated by Congress.” The members criticized McMahon for undermining Congress’s intent to give states the flexibility they need to meet local needs: “Congress intended the Secretary to support states and districts in their use of the flexibility under the law to ensure the unique needs of their communities were met and to implement evidence-based learning loss interventions. The Department is now trying to change the spending rules and impose an administrative hurdle by stating ‘the Department will consider an extension to your liquidation period on an individual project-specific basis.’…We are astonished by the amount of hypocrisy here from an administration that has repeatedly said it wants to return education to the states, including your recent statement that ‘Education is fundamentally a state responsibility. Instead of filtering resources through layers of federal red tape, we will empower states…’ Now, it appears the Department is turning its back on states by arbitrarily imposing more federal red tape.” They concluded: “Let’s be very clear: The abrupt change in the liquidation extension policy is yet another way this administration is seeking to strip educational opportunities for students in order to pay for tax cuts for billionaires and large corporations. President Trump and Congressional Republicans are intent in claiming any savings they can in the federal budget that they intend to use to pay for their tax cuts for billionaires and large corporations. It is appalling to us that those billionaire and corporate giveaways are valued over the students in rural school districts that faced supply chain disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic that led to the districts’ need for these liquidation extensions, valued over students experiencing homelessness who have seen the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief funds dedicated to them spent down slowly, and valued over so many other students that will be attending schools that are already facing difficult budget choices for the next school year without the additional burden of this changed policy. That is, unless states undertake the newest burden put in place by your Department and are able to navigate the Department’s bureaucratic maze and receive funds for projects that may have been committed to years ago. We believe there is a better way.” U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Angus King (I-Maine), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. U.S. Representatives Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-Va.-03), Alma Adams (D-N.C.-12), Donald Beyer (D-Va.-08), Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.-01), Julia Brownley (D-Calif.-26), Shontel Brown (D-Ohio-11), André Carson (D-Ind.-07), Greg Casar (D-Texas-35), Sean Casten (D-Ill.-06), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas-20), Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.-09), Danny Davis (D-Ill.-07), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.-01), Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.-17), Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.-10), Sarah Elfreth (D-Md.-03), Veronica Escobar (D-Texas-16), Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.-13), Dwight Evans (D-Pa.-03), Shomari Figures (D-Ala.-02), Jesús García (D-Ill.-04), Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas-29), Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas-34), Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.-06), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.-01), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.-04), Robin Kelly (D-Ill.-02), Timothy Kennedy (D-N.Y.-26), Summer Lee (D-Pa.-12), Lucy McBath (D-Ga.-06), Sarah McBride (D-Del.-01), Jennifer McClellan (D-Va.-04), Betty McCollum (D-Minn.-04), Kristen McDonald Rivet (D-Mich.-08), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.-02), LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.-10), Donald Norcross (D-N.J.-01), Johnny Olszewski (D-Md.-02), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine-01), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.-02), Andrea Salinas (D-Ore.-06), Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.-38), Terri Sewell (D-Ala.-07), Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.-11), Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.-12), Darren Soto (D-Fla.-09), Haley Stevens (D-Mich.-11), Mark Takano (D-Calif.-39), Dina Titus (D-Nev.-01), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.-12), Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.-24), and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.-01) signed the letter as well. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary McMahon: We write to request the immediate reversal of the Department of Education’s (“the Department”) recent March 28, 2025, action to revise the liquidation extension policy for COVID-19 relief funds. Just over a month ago, the Department announced a policy change to the longstanding extension policy that imposed an additional step for processing of extension reimbursements. That policy stated “Beginning today, all future payments under the CARES Act, CRRSA Act, and ARP Act spent on allowable expenditures must be paid by the states in advance and then submitted to the U.S. Department of Education for reimbursement.” While the Department’s action added an unnecessary burden on states, it continued the longstanding extension policy established years ago in stating “All [COVID-19 Pandemic relief funding] expenditures must fall under the approved expenditures as outlined in guidance for ESSER, ARPA, and HEERF.” However, on March 28, 2025, with many state extension requests having been approved more than six months ago, the Department suddenly announced that “the Department is modifying the liquidation period to end on March 28, 2025”, the very same day as the announcement. Specifically, the Department stated that “The extension approval was issued recently, so any reliance interests developed are minimal...So you could not rely on the Department adhering to its original decision.” In short, the Department changed the spending rules it affirmed just one month ago, without providing any notice, and imposing more federal red tape. This abrupt and chaotic revision of policy is not helpful to students whose states, school districts, or institutions of higher education are uncertain about the Department’s commitments to implementing federal funding designed to support students. The March 28th decision is an imposition of an unauthorized layer of bureaucratic red tape on the expenditure of resources passed by Congress to support learning recovery for our nation’s students. When combined with the massive reduction in force announced earlier this month, the Department jeopardizes an estimated $4 billion from the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 and American Rescue Plan Act of 2021(“ARP Act”) in nearly all of our states and outlying areas and roughly 1,000 school districts nationwide. This action is particularly harmful to rural school districts that faced the greatest disruptions during the authorized program period. This will also have a disproportionate impact on $800 million reserved for identification and support for students experiencing homelessness, which was implemented slowly in many states. The March 28th decision of the Department improperly imposes its will on state and local budget decisions in a manner not contemplated by Congress. Second, we are alarmed by your lack of a recognition of the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on our nation’s students. The Department’s March 28 policy change asserts “Extending deadlines for COVID-related grants, which are in fact taxpayer funds, years after the COVID pandemic ended is not consistent with the Department’s priorities and thus not a worthwhile exercise of its discretion.” We are surprised to learn the Department is unaware of recent results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (“NAEP”) which show “National scores are below pre-pandemic levels (2019) in ALL tested grades and subjects.” NAEP results also reveal “Gaps are growing between higher-performing and lower-performing students.” Further, chronic absenteeism still is too high with the latest data indicating “a majority of students still attended schools with 20% or higher levels of chronic absence. This serious absenteeism is in stark contrast to 2019, when slightly over a quarter of schools experienced such high levels of chronic absence.” Years after the COVID-19 pandemic, our schools and communities still have much work to do to help students recover and the Department’s termination of the remaining resources Congress passed for that purpose will only serve to delay and undermine our students’ recovery. Third, Congress intended the Secretary to support states and districts in their use of the flexibility under the law to ensure the unique needs of their communities were met and to implement evidence-based learning loss interventions. The Department is now trying to change the spending rules and impose an administrative hurdle by stating “the Department will consider an extension to your liquidation period on an individual project-specific basis.” This is despite the fact that such extensions to liquidation periods were noticed more than one year ago, with some granted more than six months ago, and that states assured to the Department that “The SEA will ensure that LEAs [school districts] use ARP ESSER funds for activities allowable under section 2001(e) of the ARP.” We are astonished by the amount of hypocrisy here from an administration that has repeatedly said it wants to return education to the states, including your recent statement that “Education is fundamentally a state responsibility. Instead of filtering resources through layers of federal red tape, we will empower states…”. Now, it appears the Department is turning its back on states by arbitrarily imposing more federal red tape. We would be heartened if the Department’s new policy was really intended to better support students. However, actions of the past two months tell a starkly different story. The Department has cancelled hundreds of millions in teacher training grants that were at work in addressing educator shortages and improving the quality of instruction in our schools. The Department has cancelled hundreds of millions of research and evaluation contracts on critical issues like an evaluation of transition supports for students with disabilities, which was intended to provide states and school districts with high quality evidence on approaches to support students with disabilities with their transition to post-school outcomes. The Department also cancelled an evaluation of the programs that receive the largest amount of funding appropriated for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, depriving Congress and the Department of critical information about the implementation of those programs. The Department cancelled contracts for the Comprehensive Centers program, which—in addition to being statutorily required—were poised to provide effective capacity building support and technical assistance to states, school systems, and schools in addressing chronic absenteeism, and math and literacy learning, among other locally and regionally identified challenges. The Department also canceled the Long Term Trend NAEP for 17 year olds, which has been providing data on student achievement for decades. The Department has implemented a massive dismantling and reduction in staff, which has reduced the number of staff available at the Office for Civil Rights to protect the rights of all students. Finally, the massive reduction also appears to have delayed the processing of COVID-19 relief reimbursement requests prior to the announcement of the changed policy that is the subject of this letter. Let’s be very clear: The abrupt change in the liquidation extension policy is yet another way this administration is seeking to strip educational opportunities for students in order to pay for tax cuts for billionaires and large corporations. President Trump and Congressional Republicans are intent in claiming any savings they can in the federal budget that they intend to use to pay for their tax cuts for billionaires and large corporations. It is appalling to us that those billionaire and corporate giveaways are valued over the students in rural school districts that faced supply chain disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic that led to the districts’ need for these liquidation extensions, valued over students experiencing homelessness who have seen the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief funds dedicated to them spent down slowly, and valued over so many other students that will be attending schools that are already facing difficult budget choices for the next school year without the additional burden of this changed policy. That is, unless states undertake the newest burden put in place by your Department and are able to navigate the Department’s bureaucratic maze and receive funds for projects that may have been committed to years ago. We believe there is a better way. We urge you to immediately rescind your March 28 revision to the longstanding liquidation extension policy. Further, we believe you should work with us to start properly executing our federal education laws as Congress intended. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to oppose Republicans’ budget proposal, which will hand billionaires and corporations a massive tax cut paid for by slashing Medicaid, SNAP and other programs that millions of working American families rely on. “The budget we're debating really comes down to one simple idea: the massive transfer of wealth and resources from the poor and the middle class to the ultra wealthy,” Murphy said. “What is being proposed in the Senate right now is stunning in its scope. This is the program that insures 24% of American families. One-quarter of Americans get their health insurance from Medicaid. You don’t know it as Medicaid because it’s called something different in each state. In Connecticut, it's called HUSKY.
...Read more In Wisconsin, it’s called BadgerCare. But in every state, about a quarter of the population gets their insurance through a Medicaid-funded program. Most of those folks are working full-time, but for one reason or another, that's where they get their insurance. You're talking about kicking millions of people off of that program, and for what? For what? To rack up the biggest bill ever on the credit card of the middle class – an explosion in debt – but also to fund a tax cut for the fabulously wealthy.” Murphy shared how Linda, a cancer survivor from Sherman, Connecticut, relies on Medicaid to maintain her health and keep working after losing her job and health insurance: “Linda lives in Sherman, Connecticut, a small town in western Connecticut. Following the economic downturn in 2008, Linda had trouble finding work. And that was tough for her, because she's a cancer survivor. She had high health care expenses, and she needed work. She was underemployed. She worked in plant nurseries and agriculture. Her husband, at the same time, lost his job as an auto mechanic. They lost their health care insurance. But then, when the Affordable Care Act passed, Medicaid was expanded. More people were made eligible for Medicaid. And in 2010, she was able to sign up for Medicaid. She said, ‘I had so much anxiety all the time about how to pay for health care. We were going through all of our money, and we just thought, ‘this isn't right. People shouldn't have to worry about just being basically healthy.’ But once she got health care, she was able to restart her life. Linda went back to school, because now she had health care. She got a new degree. She found a job teaching agriculture at a local high school. But that program didn't provide health care, so she still needed that Medicaid. Medicaid, she says, ‘just provides such a baseline for society. It allowed me to maintain my health so that I was able to continue working.’” He continued: “The Medicaid cuts that they are talking about will destroy Medicaid expansion. In fact, some states will automatically cancel the Medicaid expansion program when these cuts are made, meaning that people like Linda all across the country are going to lose their health care. For what? For a massive tax cut for the wealthy.” Murphy concluded: “What are we doing? Why are my colleagues choosing to destroy health care for millions of Americans in order to pass a tax cut that basically helps corporations and billionaires and millionaires? It is fundamentally immoral. And I have to believe – like in 2017, when Republicans were trying to destroy the Affordable Care Act, which insured 20 million Americans – that there are a handful of Republicans who know that this isn't right. Who maybe aren't ready to stop it today – tonight's vote isn't the final vote – but might be willing to stand up to this thievery before it's too late. The people of this country–who are getting killed by higher prices that are coming because of the tariffs, and are going to be hurt by these Medicaid cuts, and are going to be furious when the rich become richer at their expense – they are counting on just a small handful of my Republican colleagues to realize right from wrong.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you, Mr. President. The budget that we're debating really comes down to one simple idea: the massive transfer of wealth and resources from the poor and the middle class to the ultra wealthy. “What is being proposed in the Senate right now is stunning in its scope. You are talking about a piece of legislation that has such deep cuts to Medicaid – this is the program that insures 24% of American families. One-quarter of Americans get their health insurance from Medicaid. You don’t know it as Medicaid because it’s called something different in each state. In Connecticut, it's called HUSKY. In Wisconsin, it’s called BadgerCare. But in every state, about a quarter of the population gets their insurance through a Medicaid-funded program. Most of those folks are working full-time, but for one reason or another, that's where they get their insurance. “You're talking about kicking millions of people off of that program, and for what? For what? To rack up the biggest bill ever on the credit card of the middle class – an explosion in debt – but also to fund a tax cut for the fabulously wealthy. “This is the 2017 tax cut, which is essentially going to be mirrored, we believe, by this tax cut. The top 1% of earners got tax cuttings 852 times bigger than working families in America. We don't know the final shape of this tax cut, but it won't look fundamentally different from that. “This is a really bad time to be a working mom or dad in America. This week we are passing, apparently, a massive cut in health care benefits for working families in order to pad the pockets of the wealthy. But we are also dealing with the Trump tariff plan, which has been a keystone cop-like rollout that will ultimately raise prices for every single American. Tariffs can work as part of a coordinated, thoughtful approach to trying to rebuild American industry, but they only work when you partner those tariffs together with industrial policy, incentives to help promote the industry that you are trying to punish when the products come from abroad. “I'm not reflexively opposed to the use of tariffs, but this use of tariffs is bananas. Because it is not paired with any domestic industrial policy, meaning that you're just going to get the downside – the massive increase in costs for consumers – without the upside – job creation in the United States of America. “And so before I get to the insult to middle-class families that will come through the budget, let's just talk about what's going to happen with these tariffs. We know how it’s going to work because we saw how tariffs worked in Trump’s first term. Let me just take one specific example. “In Trump's first term he imposed a 20% escalating tariff on washing machines and the idea was that we want washing machines to be made in the United States instead of outside the United States. But because he didn't pair that together with any more comprehensive help for the washing machine industry in the United States, it was only downside. And it was only downside, not just because of the lack of a comprehensive policy but also because there were no checks on the corporations that saw the tariffs as a means to gouge consumers. You have to also partner tariffs together with some accountability for corporations, for the greedy corporations that get wide-eyed when they see the tariffs and realize that this is an opportunity to not just pass the tariff along but to jack up the price a little bit more and say that it was all because of the tariffs. “Here’s what happened on washing machines: You got a 20% escalating tariff. We have the data. We saw what happened. The economic data tells us that the washing machine companies passed along the 20% tariff and then padded the price increase, sometimes by 15%, sometimes by 50%. But it's worse than that. The price increase was not just for imported washing machines. They also increased the price of the domestic washing machines that weren't subject to the tariff. Why not? Why not? The Trump administration won't hold us accountable for that. No one really looks to see whether the washing machine was made in America or not. We'll just raise the price on everything. “What do you buy when you buy a washing machine as well? A dryer. So guess what happened? Even though dryers weren’t subject to the tariff, the price got jacked up on the dryers as well. Dryers went up by fifteen percent sometimes in cost. Fifteen percent, twenty percent. “All of a sudden, prices went up for everything. Now, Trump collected a bunch of money in tariffs. He made $80 billion. But that was literally just middle-class people paying the additional amount to the company and the company passing it along to the government. So it was just a tax. It was just a tax. “Okay, maybe you could live with that if it revitalized the domestic washing machine industry. If there were tens of thousands of people going back to jobs in that industry. But that didn't happen. I think there were one or two domestic washing machine factories that opened up and Trump, of course, made a big deal. You know how many jobs it was in total? Less than 2,000 jobs. Less than 2,000 jobs were created for a tariff that jacked up costs for every American and resulted in $80 billion of middle class taxes being collected by the government. That works out to about $800,000 per job. “So that's what's coming, at scale. Not just on washing machines but on virtually every consumer product. A big price increase, little to no domestic job creation, all the pain on the middle class. Tariffs can work, but this is not the way that they work. “And so this week, Senate Republicans, instead of trying to help consumers deal with the impact of these tariffs – I mean, we’re talking about huge price increases coming for American families. And this week we could be sitting here voting for bills that cancel the tariffs, or trying to help middle class families in another way. We’re doing exactly the opposite. Instead of helping families deal with the impact of the tariffs, instead of holding the greedy corporations in check as they ready to gouge consumers, we are debating a bill that would cut almost a trillion dollars out of Medicaid – the program that provides insurance for a quarter of Americans – that will result in raising health care costs for tens of millions of Americans, and we're talking about giving a massive tax break to the billionaire CEOs of the companies that are going to be doing the price gouging, and to the companies themselves. “That’s outrageous! That’s outrageous. If you are a regular, ordinary American, what you are being told is that you're going to have to pay huge new price increases on everything you buy. You are going to have your health care disappear, and corporate profits and take-home pay for CEOs are going to skyrocket. “Who's asking for that? What American is asking for prices to go up, my health care to be cut and billionaires to get a big tax break? “Let's start talking about these tax cuts, okay? They're the center of this bill. Everything in the Trump administration is about a simple story: how do I help my Mar-A-Lago billionaire friends? So this is the old tax cut, because we don't know all the details of the new one. If you look at the poorest Americans versus the richest Americans, the tax cut is 852 times bigger. “But here's a back-of-the-napkin analysis of what this new tax cut is likely to look like if it’s basically formed like the old one. And instead of taking the poorest Americans versus the richest Americans, instead let's just look at sort of the bottom 60% of income earners in this country. That’s roughly about everybody who makes $90,000 or less. So that’s a lot of your neighbors, right? I mean, $90,000 is an income that is familiar to a lot of Americans. “So under this new tax cut, if it looks like the old one, and that's the signal that we get, households in the top one percent are going to get an average tax cut that's 120 times bigger than the tax cut given to people who are making $90,000 or less. So that's 152 times bigger than the very poor. But let's take somebody who’s making $60,000. The richest 1% are going to get a tax cut that is 120 times bigger. How is that fair? “Okay, now you'd say, that's because they make a lot more money. So of course they're going to get a bigger tax cut. But let's do the math in a different way. As a share of after-tax income, the tax cuts at the top are still more than triple the total value of the tax cut received for people with incomes in the bottom 60%. So even when you adjust for the fact that they are making more money, they are still getting a tax cut whose value is three times bigger than folks who are making a middle income in this country. And why? I mean, does anybody believe in trickle-down economics anymore? It has been completely discredited. “And, again, we have the 2017 tax cuts as evidence. Donald Trump trotted out a big promise. He said these tax cuts for corporations and billionaires and millionaires, they'll trickle down to everybody else, and I’ll tell you the number: the average worker will get a $4,000 salary increase.That was the promise. The money will trickle down. The corporations will be so generous. So generous. They'll take their giant tax cut – bigger than they even asked for. Senator Whitehouse just showed you the chart where corporations have gone from providing 30% of American tax revenue down to 10% of American tax revenue. What a great deal for corporations. Okay! That's a nice chart, that makes sense if the corporations are taking their lower tax liability and turning it around to wages. But instead, they're not. They're keeping it for themselves. For their executives, for their top shareholders. The analysis shows that that promised $4,000 salary increase as a result of the tax cuts wasn't $4,000. It wasn't $2000, it wasn’t $1000, it wasn’t $100. It was zero. Because all of that money – virtually all of that money – ended up getting gobbled up by the corporations, mainly for stock buybacks. It didn't go to increase compensation for their employees. “So it's not to raise wages. I guess it's just to make rich people richer. From 2017, when that tax cut passed, that first Trump tax cut passed, until 2023, Elon Musk's wealth grew by 1,222%. I don’t even know what that looks like. Jeff Bezos’s grew by 96%, Zuckerberg’s by 50%, Rupert Murdoch’s by 50%. I use those names because those were the billionaires that were at Trump's inauguration cheerleading him into office because they know that another big tax cut for their company and for them personally is coming. “Now, I will admit to you, median income overall grew from 2017 to 2023. So everybody in the country was making more in 2023 than they were making in 2017. But median income was not growing by 50%, 96%, or 1,222%. “So this is a massive tax cut, the vast majority of it going to the very, very wealthiest. But what makes this even harder to understand is what Senator Whitehouse laid out for you. “Most of this is just going on your credit card. Most of this is just being borrowed, and that has a consequence: the national debt potentially doubling as a result of this massive tax cut for the very, very wealthy. And it's just so heartbreaking, the hypocrisy. I mean I could string together a 24-hour long video of my Republican colleagues talking ad nauseam about ‘the danger of debt,’ ‘the rising deficit.’ ‘We can't spend money on kids.’ ‘We can't spend money on climate.’ ‘We can't spend money on schools.’ ‘We can't help people go to college.’ ‘No, no, no, we can't do any of that, we can’t do anything of that, because the debt– the deficit.’ “And yet when it comes to a billionaire tax cut, a corporate tax cut, we're going to potentially double the debt? Nobody is caring about the debt. In fact, they’re rigging the rules of the Senate–they’re breaking the rules of the Senate–just so they can get away with a massive increase in debt and deficit. “But somewhere along the line they said, well, you know what? We can't borrow the whole thing. We've got to make it look like we're cutting some spending. So let's cut some spending to make it at least look like it's not all borrowed. But let's make sure that the spending we’re cutting only hurts poor people and the middle class, because God forbid we can cut spending that helps the rich or the affluent. God forbid we take away some of the tax breaks that help them. “And so where are the cuts coming? Medicaid. 80% of the cuts are Medicaid. $880 billion in a House bill, similar amount, cutting Medicaid. Medicaid, as I said, is the program that insures 24% of Americans. At least two-thirds of those are working, working full time. They just don't have health insurance through their employer, so they have to get it through Medicaid. “And so when Republicans decided that they couldn't borrow the whole thing, like we'll double the national debt but we're not going to triple the national debt, they targeted the cuts to hurt the middle class and poor people. “And so I just want to end by telling you what this means in real time. I don't actually know what it means to give billionaires another $50,000 in tax breaks. I really don't know what that means. I don't know what that life is like. I don't know what it's like to have seven houses and four yachts. I don't know what a billionaire does with an extra $50,000. I can't actually explain that to you. I don't understand that kind of rapacious greed. “What I do know is what happens to poor people–the people who live in my neighborhood, in the south end of Hartford–when they lose their Medicaid. Linda lives in Sherman, Connecticut, a small town in western Connecticut. Following the economic downturn in 2008, Linda had trouble finding work. And that was tough for her, because she's a cancer survivor. She had high health care expenses, and she needed work. She was underemployed. She worked in plant nurseries and agriculture. Her husband, at the same time, lost his job as an auto mechanic. They lost their health care insurance. But then, when the Affordable Care Act passed, Medicaid was expanded. More people were made eligible for Medicaid. And in 2010, she was able to sign up for Medicaid. She said, ‘I had so much anxiety all the time about how to pay for health care. We were going through all of our money, and we just thought, “this isn't right. People shouldn't have to worry about just being basically healthy.”’ But once she got health care, she was able to restart her life. Linda went back to school, because now she had health care. She got a new degree. She found a job teaching agriculture at a local high school. But that program didn't provide health care, so she still needed that Medicaid. Medicaid, she says, ‘just provides such a baseline for society. It allowed me to maintain my health so that I was able to continue working.’ “The Medicaid cuts that they are talking about will destroy Medicaid expansion. In fact, some states will automatically cancel the Medicaid expansion program when these cuts are made, meaning that people like Linda all across the country are going to lose their health care. For what? For a massive tax cut for the wealthy. “Emily Grenelli is a worker at one of Connecticut's biggest behavioral health and substance abuse providers. So every day, she’s talking to people who rely on Medicaid so that they can get help for their mental health disorder or their substance abuse disorder. Let’s be honest: we all have somebody in our life who has a serious mental illness or has struggled with substance abuse. So you know these people. She wrote me a letter talking about the fact that the conversations in their therapy groups in the last month have fundamentally changed. They're actually not doing therapy any longer for mental illness or for substance abuse. They are now doing therapy for the anxiety all these people have, knowing they're about to lose their health insurance. “One case manager told me, she writes, that she was working with a client to find housing and the client now just wants to stop looking, because she feels like there is no point, because she's going to lose her Medicaid. Republicans are going to strip her Medicaid from her. She won't be able to get her medication and services. She feels hopeless. The clinician told me about an hour-long session she had the day before. 75% of it was focused on the client's fear of losing her benefits and what that would mean for her and all the other clients. She shared with me that if there was a way for her to leave the country right now, she would. At this provider, 35% of their clients would likely lose access to mental illness and substance abuse services if these cuts go through. “What are we doing? Why are we doing this? Why are we choosing, why are my colleagues choosing to destroy health care for millions of Americans in order to pass a tax cut that basically helps corporations and billionaires and millionaires? It is fundamentally immoral. And I have to believe – like in 2017, when Republicans were trying to destroy the Affordable Care Act, which insured 20 million Americans – that there are a handful of Republicans who know that this isn't right. Who maybe aren't ready to stop it today – tonight's vote isn't the final vote – but might be willing to stand up to this thievery before it's too late. “The people of this country–who are getting killed by higher prices that are coming because of the tariffs, and are going to be hurt by these Medicaid cuts, and are going to be furious when the rich become richer at their expense – they are counting on just a small handful of my Republican colleagues to realize right from wrong. “I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Wednesday joined the entire Senate Democratic Caucus in a letter urging President Donald Trump to rescind his March 27 executive order to end collective bargaining agreements between public employee unions and dozens of federal agencies and bureaus. The senators blasted the move as a “gross overreach” of presidential authority, asserting that the executive order is a clear attempt to gut the federal merit-based civil service and implement a system of political cronyism. They stressed that the order poses a grave threat to the ability of over one million federal workers to carry out their missions and deliver
...Read more important services for the American people – and thus should be rescinded immediately. “We write today in outrage over your recent executive order entitled Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs, a gross overreach of the authority granted in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA). This order is an insult to the hardworking public servants who go to work on behalf of the American people,” the senators began. “The executive order effectively classifies two thirds of the federal workforce as having national security missions, a blatant misuse of a limited authority intended to provide operational flexibility to address legitimate security needs,” the senators continued. “There is no evidence that the long-standing collective bargaining agreements at these agencies have jeopardized our nation’s security in any way; to the contrary, the protection collective bargaining has provided for employees allows them to conduct their work on behalf of the American people—including blowing the whistle on fraud or abuse—without political interference.” “This Administration clearly does not have even a basic understanding of the legally binding nature of federal collective bargaining agreements and is actively trying to bend the law to undermine protections for federal civil servants. We urge you to immediately rescind this illegal executive order so that our dedicated public servants can continue to work on behalf of the American public without fear for their job or political retribution,” they concluded. U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also joined the letter. The letter is endorsed by the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU), International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE), and Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear President Trump: We write today in outrage over your recent executive order entitled Exclusions from Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs, a gross overreach of the authority granted in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA). This order is an insult to the hardworking public servants who go to work on behalf of the American people. They care for our veterans, deliver disaster assistance, prevent wildfires, help farmers improve crop yields, manage health benefits for 9/11 first responders, research treatments and cures for diseases, keep air travel safe, process tax returns, staff our national parks and much, much more. Nearly one third of these dedicated civil servants are veterans seeking to continue their service to our country out of uniform. The executive order effectively classifies two thirds of the federal workforce as having national security missions, a blatant misuse of a limited authority intended to provide operational flexibility to address legitimate security needs. The national security exemption has existed for nearly 50 years and has been used only sparingly by Republican and Democratic Administrations—including during your first term—to exclude federal offices with an unquestionable core function in intelligence, counterintelligence, or national security. There is no evidence that the long-standing collective bargaining agreements at these agencies have jeopardized our nation’s security in any way; to the contrary, the protection collective bargaining has provided for employees allows them to conduct their work on behalf of the American people—including blowing the whistle on fraud or abuse—without political interference. Federal employees’ collective bargaining agreements are critical to ensuring they continue to serve the American people with the peace of mind that comes with being protected from unfair labor practices. Unlike in the private sector, federal employee unions in most cases cannot negotiate pay or benefits, which are set by Congress, and they are legally prohibited from striking. The federal collective bargaining agreements do, however, protect federal employees from illegal firings, retaliation, and discrimination. They also promote resources for whistleblowers and veterans. These federal union contracts give employees in the civil service protections from retaliation so they can serve the American people fairly and effectively without partisan political interference. This executive order, which ruthlessly strips collective bargaining agreements for over one million federal workers, is the most recent attack your Administration has levied against our merit-based civil service in the effort to cut the workforce and replace them with political cronies. While the CSRA does give the president the authority to limit collective bargaining agreements due to national security concerns, the executive order’s direction to terminate mass swaths of federal employee collective bargaining agreements is clearly intended to broadly dismantle the CSRA, which is specifically designed to grant federal employees the right to collective bargaining as a means to resolve workplace issues while maintaining the smooth functioning of government operations. When the Secretary of Labor testified in February in front of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, Members of Congress asked her both in-person and through questions for the record whether she and the Administration would commit to honoring all legally binding collective bargaining agreements signed by federal agencies and labor unions, and whether federal employees have the right to organize and collectively bargain without fear of retaliation. The Secretary answered, “if confirmed, I will follow the law and work with the experts at the Department to understand the collective bargaining process at the Department and the terms and conditions of the collective bargaining agreements in place.” This Administration clearly does not have even a basic understanding of the legally binding nature of federal collective bargaining agreements and is actively trying to bend the law to undermine protections for federal civil servants. We urge you to immediately rescind this illegal executive order so that our dedicated public servants can continue to work on behalf of the American public without fear for their job or political retribution. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 14 of their Senate Democratic colleagues in a letter to U.S. Attorney General (AG) Pam Bondi inquiring into what policies and procedures she will commit to implementing in her capacity as AG to ensure that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) will continue to meaningfully function in its intended capacity under Kash Patel’s stewardship. In February, President Trump announced that Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel would also serve as Acting Director of ATF, the primary federal law enforcement agency responsible for addressing gun-related crime and violence in America. However, the Senators’ letter to AG Bondi argues that Mr. Patel threatens to undo the
...Read more significant gains made in recent years to ensure Americans’ safety as he lacks the relevant experience to lead ATF and has ties to the gun industry. “As the primary federal law enforcement agency dedicated to curbing illegal firearm use and enforcing federal firearms laws and regulations, it is critical that ATF be led by an experienced Director who has been confirmed by the Senate for this role and is dedicated to upholding the agency’s mission. For the reasons outlined below, Mr. Patel is not that person,” the senators wrote. “We therefore write to inquire into what policies and procedures you will implement to ensure that ATF will continue to meaningfully function in its intended capacity.” Gun violence in the United States is a public health crisis. In 2024, the U.S. Surgeon General issued an advisory listing firearm violence—including homicide, suicide, nonfatal injuries, and unintentional injuries and deaths—as a “significant public health challenge[] that require[s] the nation’s immediate awareness and action.” Though under the Trump Administration, the Surgeon General has since removed the advisory, the report analyzed data from 2002 to 2022, finding that since 2020 the leading cause of death for children and adolescents in America has been gun violence, with rates higher than car crashes, poisoning, and cancer. In 2022 alone, 48,204 people died in the United States of gun-related injuries. That said, following passage of the historic Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and coordinated, nationwide efforts to curb gun violence during the Biden Administration, the United States is starting to see positive results. In 2023, provisional data indicates gun-related deaths totaled 46,728—representing a decline from 2022 by three percent or 1,476 fewer deaths. Violent crime has also declined significantly, due in part to ATF’s data collection, investigation, and enforcement efforts. “While the decrease in violent crime and gun-related deaths is encouraging, 2023 still had ‘the third-highest number of gun-related deaths ever recorded in the United States,’ evidencing that significant challenges to America’s gun violence crisis remain,” the senators wrote. “The Department of Justice must do everything within its power to sustain this downward trend, including ensuring ATF is empowered to carry out its mandate and keep firearms from falling into the hands of those who should not have them. Now is not the time to pull back on ATF leadership and practices that helped bring about this progress.” The senators’ letter went on to explain why Mr. Patel is not the right person to lead ATF. “As an Acting Director, Patel’s appointment has not been subject to Senate confirmation, a crucial process for vetting those nominated by the President for significant leadership roles in the Executive, including ATF Director. Disturbingly, Mr. Patel would not affirm that firearm background checks—a well-established procedure for keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals—are constitutional during his confirmation hearing for FBI Director. Notably, Mr. Patel’s appointment has been applauded by extreme gun advocacy groups seeking to rollback commonsense gun regulations,” they continued. “Mr. Patel’s appointment threatens to undo the lifesaving progress ATF has made to reduce gun violence in America.” The senators concluded: “Attorney General Bondi, you have served as a prosecutor for much of your career. During your Senate confirmation hearing, you testified about the importance of keeping Americans safe, prosecuting criminals and gunrunners, reducing recidivism, and enforcing existing gun laws. During one exchange, you assured the Committee: ‘I will do everything in my power to prevent illegal gunrunners in our country.’ In discussing your time as Florida Attorney General and mass shooting responses, you reiterated: ‘I am an advocate for the Second Amendment, but I will enforce the laws of the land.’” To better understand how AG Bondi intends to accomplish these goals, the senators asked that she promptly respond to a series of questions. U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. Full text of letter is available HERE and below: Dear Attorney General Bondi: We write with great concern regarding President Trump’s appointment of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel as Acting Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). As the primary federal law enforcement agency dedicated to curbing illegal firearm use and enforcing federal firearms laws and regulations, it is critical that ATF be led by an experienced Director who has been confirmed by the Senate for this role and is dedicated to upholding the agency’s mission. For the reasons outlined below, Mr. Patel is not that person. We therefore write to inquire into what policies and procedures you will implement to ensure that ATF will continue to meaningfully function in its intended capacity. Gun violence in the United States is a public health crisis. In 2024, the U.S. Surgeon General issued an advisory listing firearm violence—including homicide, suicide, nonfatal injuries, and unintentional injuries and deaths—as a “significant public health challenge[] that require[s] the nation’s immediate awareness and action.” Analyzing data from 2002 to 2022, the Surgeon General reported that since 2020 the leading cause of death for children and adolescents in America has been gun violence, with rates higher than car crashes, poisoning, and cancer. In 2022 alone, 48,204 people died in the United States of gun-related injuries. That said, following passage of the historic Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and coordinated, nationwide efforts to curb gun violence during the Biden Administration, we were starting to see positive results. In 2023, provisional data indicates gun-related deaths totaled 46,728—representing a decline from 2022 by three percent or 1,476 fewer deaths. Violent crime has also declined significantly, due in part to ATF’s data collection, investigation, and enforcement efforts. For example, ATF’s crime gun intelligence tools eTrace, which “is used to trace the purchase and/or use history of firearms used in violent crimes,” and the National Integrated Ballistic Information Network, which “is the only interstate automated ballistic imaging network in operation in the United States,” together “have transformed crime-solving by generating over 1.1 million investigative leads from ballistic evidence and linking suspects to major crimes within hours.” ATF has also worked to increase DNA matches from cartridge casings and has expanded Crime Gun Intelligence Centers, which use “data-driven strategies” to foster “cross-agency collaboration.” ATF has also focused on eliminating firearms trafficking networks that unlawfully smuggle guns from the United States to Mexico, arming dangerous cartels which, in turn, send illicit drugs such as fentanyl into the United States. And ATF created an Emerging Threats Center, which among other things, has focused on the proliferation of privately-made firearms, or ghost guns, and machine-gun conversion devices, or Glock switches. These represent only some examples of ATF’s nationwide initiatives to reduce gun violence and keep Americans safe. While the decrease in violent crime and gun-related deaths is encouraging, 2023 still had “the third-highest number of gun-related deaths ever recorded in the United States,” evidencing that significant challenges to America’s gun violence crisis remain. The Department of Justice must do everything within its power to sustain this downward trend, including ensuring ATF is empowered to carry out its mandate and keep firearms from falling into the hands of those who should not have them. Now is not the time to pull back on ATF leadership and practices that helped bring about this progress. Mr. Patel is, quite simply, not the right person to lead the ATF. As an Acting Director, Patel’s appointment has not been subject to Senate confirmation, a crucial process for vetting those nominated by the President for significant leadership roles in the Executive, including ATF Director. Disturbingly, Mr. Patel would not affirm that firearm background checks—a well-established procedure for keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals—are constitutional during his confirmation hearing for FBI Director. Notably, Mr. Patel’s appointment has been applauded by extreme gun advocacy groups seeking to rollback commonsense gun regulations. Last year, Mr. Patel spoke at the inaugural summit for group Gun Owners of America, a “no-compromise gun lobby” that has announced it “look[s] forward to dismantling gun control with Kash.” Mr. Patel’s appointment threatens to undo the lifesaving progress ATF has made to reduce gun violence in America. Attorney General Bondi, you have served as a prosecutor for much of your career. During your Senate confirmation hearing, you testified about the importance of keeping Americans safe, prosecuting criminals and gunrunners, reducing recidivism, and enforcing existing gun laws. During one exchange, you assured the Committee: “I will do everything in my power to prevent illegal gunrunners in our country.” In discussing your time as Florida Attorney General and mass shooting responses, you reiterated: “I am an advocate for the Second Amendment, but I will enforce the laws of the land.” To better understand how you intend to accomplish these goals, please promptly respond to the following questions: Recently, we have seen notable success in curtailing gun violence. While the United States experienced a spike in gun-related crimes and deaths during the pandemic, through bipartisan congressional action and the previous Administration’s efforts, that trend has begun to reverse. Given ATF’s central role in curbing violent crime, it is of paramount importance that the agency be staffed by experienced leaders, agents, and others who support ATF’s core mission, without the appearance of or actual conflict, in order to continue this downward trend. By contrast, firearm-industry personnel advocate for gun companies’ bottom lines by pushing for the repeal of commonsense gun regulations in order to sell more weapons and weapons accessories. Hiring such individuals for critical public-safety positions at ATF would endanger the agency’s core mission and Americans’ safety while prioritizing increases in private company profits. Will you place constraints on the hiring of firearm-industry personnel for ATF positions? If not, why? ATF must comply with all existing legal obligations. This includes exercising statutorily-required regulatory authority over the firearms industry, fully implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, and complying with the Administrative Procedures Act if changing existing ATF regulations. However, Acting Director Patel lacks experience with ATF’s core responsibilities, including ATF’s regulatory oversight of the gun industry. Moreover, Acting Director Patel was only temporarily appointed under the Vacancies Reform Act and has not been subject to the Senate’s advice and consent process for this role. It is therefore particularly important that you exercise your authority as Attorney General to give final approval of all actions ATF takes under Acting Director Patel’s stewardship, including all policy changes. Will you commit to personally reviewing for approval all new or revised ATF policies and actions? If not, why? Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.) on the floor of the Senate starting at 7pm Monday night for Booker’s marathon speech. Booker, Murphy, and other Senate Democrats are taking the Senate floor to elevate the voices of Americans who are being harmed by the Trump administration’s actions and to lay out President Trump and Elon Musk’s attacks on democracy. Throughout the night and into today, Murphy has directed questions to Booker. During the fifth hour of Booker’s speech, Murphy referenced his 2016 filibuster to demand action on gun violence: “There is so much similarity between the debate that you are forcing this Senate to have tonight and the debate that we were having back in 2016 on this epidemic of gun violence. I always describe it
...Read more this way: the only thing that matters, the thing that matters more than anything else in your life is protecting your loved ones from physical harm. Right? You would give anything, right? Anything. You would give your life’s savings, your house. You would perhaps give your own life in order to protect your child or your brother or sister or mother or father from physical harm. And so when you and I have sat across from the victims of gun violence, many of which live in your neighborhood and my neighborhood in Newark and Hartford, we are looking at a kind of desperation and sorrow that is unique, that is unique, that comes with not just losing a loved one to gun violence, but feeling powerless in that exercise, feeling like there was nothing you could do, and watching your elected leaders stand by and allow for this reality to continue to occur in your neighborhood, where kids are being shot down in cold blood, and your elected leaders, the adults in charge of your community, are standing idly by.” He continued: “That is not fundamentally different than the reality that will be visited upon millions of families if this size of a cut in Medicaid funding goes into effect because families out there who rely on Medicaid to keep alive their son or daughter who has a complicated medical disease, have no other quarter, have no other last resort besides Medicaid. And so Medicaid stands between life and death for their son or daughter. There is no other place for them to go. And so that same empty, hollow look that we have seen so many times in the eyes of a mother or father who lost a son or daughter to gun violence, that is the look that we are choosing to visit upon millions of families in this country who when faced with the loss of their only health insurance option for their disabled child, will watch their child potentially face the same fate as those young men in your neighborhood and my neighborhood. And so that's the reason why I pose this question to you that you're answering about the moral gravity of this moment because it is not fundamentally different than the one that brought us here in 2016.” Booker will continue speaking on the floor for as long as he is physically able, and Murphy will stay with him throughout. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, joined a bicameral letter urging United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM) Acting CEO Victor Morales and Special Advisor Kari Lake to rescind the Trump administration’s illegal actions to dismantle the agency, terminate grants for several government-funded outlets worldwide, and place Voice of America and other federal staff on administrative leave. “Congress reaffirmed its commitment to your agency, its mission, and its personnel by funding the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM) at $866.9 million in the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extension Act, 2025, and expects that each of the entities will continue their unique mission of broadcasting content to
...Read more audiences around the world,” the lawmakers wrote. “Your decisions to terminate the grants to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia (RFA) (in addition to withholding funds for the BenarNews service), Middle East Broadcasting Networks, and Open Technology Fund; place on administrative leave Voice of America (VOA), Office of Cuba Broadcasting, Technology, Services, and Innovation, and other federal staff; cancel hundreds of contracts; and pull transmissions from the air violate several provisions in the appropriations bill.” “These actions are not just illegal and wasteful, they run counter to our interests,” they continued. “America’s authoritarian adversaries are investing billions in state-backed media, targeting the same countries USAGM entities reach. With an audience of 427 million people speaking more than 60 languages, USAGM networks are a trusted and reliable source of information in the face of state censorship, including in the People’s Republic of China, Iran, Russia, North Korea, Cuba, and Afghanistan, and across Eastern Europe, Africa, and Southeast Asia. The technology developed by the Open Technology Fund and used across grantees will leave users who are dependent on their tools to circumvent censorship stranded. Once America loses the trust of these audiences, it will be difficult to get it back.” “We respectfully request that you rescind the actions you have taken to date and refrain from any further downsizing or terminations, and that you ensure you are in compliance with your legal requirements, including to consult and notify Congress of any proposed changes and to meet congressional spending directives,” they concluded. U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), as well as U.S. Representatives Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Norma Torres (D-Calif.), and Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) also signed the letter. The full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Acting CEO Morales and Ms. Lake: You are at the helm of an agency with a critical mission to increase freedom of expression, circumvent censorship, and deliver objective, accurate, and relevant information to hundreds of millions of people worldwide. This mission directly supports U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. Given its importance, we write to express our concerns with the decisions you have made in response to the March 14, 2025 Executive Order titled “Executive Order on Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy.” Congress reaffirmed its commitment to your agency, its mission, and its personnel by funding the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM) at $866.9 million in the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extension Act, 2025, and expects that each of the entities will continue their unique mission of broadcasting content to audiences around the world. Your decisions to terminate the grants to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia (RFA) (in addition to withholding funds for the BenarNews service), Middle East Broadcasting Networks, and Open Technology Fund; place on administrative leave Voice of America (VOA), Office of Cuba Broadcasting, Technology, Services, and Innovation, and other federal staff; cancel hundreds of contracts; and pull transmissions from the air violate several provisions in the appropriations bill. This includes sections 7015 and 7063, and the provisions under the United States Agency for Global Media heading, of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2024, as carried forward by the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extension Act, 2025. Additionally, the actions you have taken to significantly downsize the agency, including termination of the new building lease and closeout costs, will cost the U.S. taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars. These actions are not just illegal and wasteful, they run counter to our interests. America’s authoritarian adversaries are investing billions in state-backed media, targeting the same countries USAGM entities reach. With an audience of 427 million people speaking more than 60 languages, USAGM networks are a trusted and reliable source of information in the face of state censorship, including in the People’s Republic of China, Iran, Russia, North Korea, Cuba, and Afghanistan, and across Eastern Europe, Africa, and Southeast Asia. The technology developed by the Open Technology Fund and used across grantees will leave users who are dependent on their tools to circumvent censorship stranded. Once America loses the trust of these audiences, it will be difficult to get it back. In 2020, when then-USAGM CEO Michael Pack instituted mass firings, then-Senator Rubio led a bipartisan effort to have such actions reversed. In the letter, Senator Rubio and colleagues stated: “We are at a critical moment in history where malign actors including Russia, China, and Iran, are using advanced tools and technology to undermine global democratic norms, spreading disinformation, and severely restricting their own free press to hamper access to independent news for their citizens. As these and other authoritarian regimes further crack down domestically, their citizens turn to outside media as their only trustworthy source of unbiased, accurate news.” This is no less true today. We are equally troubled that these actions put staff across all of those entities, who have faithfully served the interests of the U.S. government, at risk if they are forced to return to authoritarian countries where they may be subject to harassment, persecution, or arbitrary arrest. The agency appears to have no plan in place to address these risks. Already, 1,300 VOA staff and 75 percent of RFA U.S.-based staff have been put on leave. We respectfully request that you rescind the actions you have taken to date and refrain from any further downsizing or terminations, and that you ensure you are in compliance with your legal requirements, including to consult and notify Congress of any proposed changes and to meet congressional spending directives. We request that you respond to this letter no later than April 4, 2025 confirming your intent to do so. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) in reintroducing the Save Our Small (SOS) Farms Act of 2025. This legislation improves the farm safety net and expands federal crop insurance by allowing small farms to better access crop insurance policies often limited to large commercial farms to protect their business. Extreme weather and other disasters can cause severe losses for farms lacking crop insurance, forcing them to depend on disaster relief. This disproportionately affects small farms, which often cannot access insurance. A recent survey by the Connecticut
...Read more Department of Agriculture revealed that Connecticut farmers have lost over $50 million due to weather-related events in 2023 and 2024. The SOS Farms Act aims to provide a stronger safety net by expanding the number of farms eligible to purchase crop insurance, lower coverage costs for small farms, and directing the USDA to develop more responsive coverage options for farmers during extreme weather. According to the nationwide 2022 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Census of Agriculture, only 5% of Connecticut farms are enrolled in crop insurance, compared to 19% of farms nationally. “Small farmers in Connecticut work hard to keep their businesses running, but don’t have adequate insurance programs to protect them when extreme storms and droughts wipe out their crops. This legislation would make disaster assistance and insurance more affordable and effective, so local farmers aren’t left behind when disaster hits,” said Murphy. “Climate change has made it abundantly clear that we need a stronger safety net for farmers when floods, drought or other natural disasters strike. Our measure makes necessary reforms to programs that simply do not work for farmers by making coverage and assistance more accessible and affordable than before. Small farms are an essential part of Connecticut’s culture, environment, and economy—they deserve the best protection and support to recover from devastating storms,” said Blumenthal. "After the Connecticut River Valley was devastated by severe flooding during the summer of 2023, many small farms throughout the region lost hundreds of acres of crops,” said Larson. “The Save our Small Farms Act will better tailor our nation’s crop insurance programs to the unique needs of small to midsized farmers. Our bill will make crop insurance more affordable and accessible and reduce the paperwork burdens our farmers face to access support when disaster strikes. The entire Connecticut delegation will continue to stand together with our farmers, so they get the support they deserve and are not left on their own to pick up the pieces after a natural disaster.” “More and more farmers across Connecticut are facing the devastating impacts of extreme weather events. Unfortunately, the broken federal crop insurance system has let smaller farms fall through gaps in coverage and left them on the hook with major losses. The Save Our Small Farms Act reforms the crop insurance system and provides small farmers with the safety net they need to access assistance programs and recover from damages that come at no fault of their own. I look forward to once again working with my colleagues from Connecticut to ensure this issue receives the attention it deserves in Congress,” said Courtney. “As the backbone of our food system, small farms deserve fair access to the resources they need to thrive,” said DeLauro. “Each year, as the climate crisis intensifies, unforeseen and catastrophic weather events are becoming more and more common. This makes our efforts to protect our farmers crucial, which is why I am a strong supporter of The Save Our Small Farms Act, which will guarantee that federal programs serve all farmers, not just the largest operations. This legislation is necessary to address the gaps in our current farm safety net. I am proud to support this legislation aimed at bolstering our agricultural economy, safeguarding local producers, and creating a more resilient food supply.” “Each year seems to bring worse storms than the last, with Connecticut’s small farmers incurring ever-steeper crop losses because of increasingly common severe weather. The Save our Small Farms Act expands crop insurance options for small farmers and improves how the federal government provides disaster aid in times of crisis. This is a commonsense bill that brings federal agricultural policy in line with the realities of climate change and the hardships our nation’s small farmers face,” said Himes. “In the Fifth District, small farms help feed our communities and drive our economy. Although these farmers need assistance, our crop insurance and disaster programs too often leave them behind. And as we continue to see extreme weather patterns becoming more frequent, we must find new solutions to ensure small farm operators are protected before disasters strikes,” said Hayes. “The SOS Farms Act would expand coverage and assistance, lower costs for small farmers, and direct the USDA to develop more responsive coverage options. Small farms are an essential part of our culture, environment, and economy.” Specifically, the SOS Farms Act: Creates a streamlined application process to the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP), which offers farmers the opportunity to purchase coverage for losses due to natural disasters in areas where crop insurance is unavailable. The bill provides new authority to USDA to launch pilot projects to address emerging needs and to improve data collection to support the development of new crop insurance policies.
Producers may not be able to find an insurance policy that covers any or all of their crops, or insurance premiums may be prohibitively expensive.
Paperwork requirements, premiums, and service fees have often kept small farms from accessing NAP coverage. 2. Directs the Farm Service Agency to create an on-ramp from NAP coverage to a true insurance policy under the Whole Farm Revenue Protection Program (WFRP), the most comprehensive crop insurance program for small and mid-sized farms. 3. Expands WFRP to allow smaller farms to better access crop insurance policies by: Reducing paperwork requirements for applicants.
Allowing policies for farms that use crop-rotation.
Modifies insurance plans to improve effectiveness for specialty crop and diversified farms.
Increases response timeliness of insurance applications.
Requires providers and the Risk Management Agency to account for different cultivation cycles for different crops when calculating premium discounts.
Authorizing the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation to study WFRP participation by small farms that sell to local or regional markets.
Expanding the network of insurance agents selling crop insurance policies to small farms through increased compensation 4. Directs USDA to develop an index-based insurance policy that is responsive to crop and income losses due to extreme weather events. A weather index-based insurance policy uses extreme weather events as a proxy for agricultural income losses.
This approach reduces paperwork while making the policy more responsive to losses from adverse weather conditions.
Insurance would also be based on a farm’s income instead of the price of its crops, better aligning payouts with income losses associated with crop losses.
Since payouts are automatically triggered by a weather event, producers would not have to fill out paperwork or wait months to receive support following a natural disaster. The SOS Farms Act is endorsed by the California Climate and Agriculture Network, California FarmLink, Coastal Enterprises, Inc., Community Alliance with Family Farmers, Community Farm Alliance, Dakota Rural Action, Environmental Working Group, Farm Action, Farm Aid, Farm to Table - New Mexico, Farmshare Austin, Friends of Family Farmers, HEAL (Health, Environment, Agriculture, Labor) Food Alliance, Illinois Stewardship Alliance, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Kiss the Ground, Land for Good, Land Stewardship Project, Maine Farmland Trust, Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association, Marbleseed, Michael Fields Agricultural Institute, Michigan Food and Farming Systems, Midwest Farmers of Color Collective, Missouri Coalition for the Environment, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC), National Young Farmers Coalition, New Entry Sustainable Farming Project, Northeast Organic Farming Association of New Hampshire (NOFA-NH), Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides, Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association, Organic Farming Association, Pasa Sustainable Agriculture, Pesticide Action and Agroecology Network, Regenerate America, Renewing the Countryside, Rogue Farm Corps, Rural Advancement Foundation International, Rural Coalition, Sierra Club, Sustainable Food Center, and World Farmers. A one-pager of the legislation is available HERE, and the full bill text is available HERE. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday joined U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03) in sending a letter to U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick demanding the reinstatement of over 800 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) employees who were terminated. The letter coincides with Coasts Week, observed the week of March 24th to highlight the critical importance of the nation’s shores and coastal waterways to community resilience and the economy. In Connecticut, employees at the Milford Laboratory, part of the National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS) Northeast Fisheries Science Center, were among those who were fired by the mass terminations at NOAA. “Mass firings, office
...Read more closures, and the threat of budget cuts severely undermine NOAA’s work to share weather and climate forecasts, facilitate restoration and resiliency projects, and sustainably manage our ocean’s resources – especially in Connecticut,” the lawmakers wrote. “These attacks on NOAA are dangerous to human health and safety and economically nonsensical. Simply put, NOAA saves lives and taxpayer money.” Between 2021 and 2024, NOAA supported 15 projects across Connecticut to help bolster our $6.5 billion marine economy that 3,189 businesses and 61,385 employees rely on. “As a coastal state, Connecticut communities benefit greatly from a strong and fully staffed NOAA. Our state is directly threatened by rapid sea level rise, and has seen firsthand the impacts of severe storms on our coasts. In 2012, Superstorm Sandy killed four Connecticut residents and cost over $350 million to recover from,” the lawmakers continued. “These indiscriminate firings are devastating to NOAA – to the critical work the agency does to protect our communities and to the dedicated employees themselves who have devoted their careers to public service. We demand that you immediately reinstate these federal workers and stop any action that undermines NOAA’s critical mission for the benefit of Connecticut, the national economy, and the planet,” they concluded. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Secretary Lutnick, We write to express our deep outrage over the potentially illegal termination of over 800 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) employees and to call for their immediate reinstatement. Mass firings, office closures, and the threat of budget cuts severely undermine NOAA’s work to share weather and climate forecasts, facilitate restoration and resiliency projects, and sustainably manage our ocean’s resources – especially in Connecticut. These attacks on NOAA are dangerous to human health and safety and economically nonsensical. Simply put, NOAA saves lives and taxpayer money. The agency’s work informs severe storm warnings so people can prepare for natural disasters like tornados, flash floods, hurricanes, and wildfires. In the longer term, NOAA’s weather and climate data helps communities take action to reduce damage from extreme weather events. These resiliency measures drastically cut the cost of disaster recovery projects, reducing the burden on agencies like the Federal Emergency Management Agency and, ultimately, taxpayers. Between 2021 and 2024, NOAA supported 15 projects across Connecticut to help bolster our $6.5 billion marine economy that 3,189 businesses and 61,385 employees rely on. These projects advanced coastal resilience efforts to better prepare for severe storms, as well as habitat restoration and conservation initiatives to protect the bedrock of our seafood industry. Dismantling NOAA’s workforce puts this support in jeopardy. NOAA safeguards coastal resources and supports industries in coastal communities that inject $10 trillion annually into the U.S. economy. As a coastal state, Connecticut communities benefit greatly from a strong and fully staffed NOAA. Our state is directly threatened by rapid sea level rise, and has seen firsthand the impacts of severe storms on our coasts. In 2012, Superstorm Sandy killed four Connecticut residents and cost over $350 million to recover from. NOAA’s coastal resiliency projects work to mitigate that risk. In short, eliminating NOAA employees endangers the people of Connecticut, our businesses, and our critical infrastructure. We understand that mass terminations at NOAA have directly impacted employees in Connecticut, with staff at the Milford Laboratory, part of the National Marine Fishery Service (NMFS) Northeast Fisheries Science Center, among those who were fired. This is bad news for our state and the country. Focusing on aquaculture projects, NOAA staff at the Milford Lab were working on cutting-edge research to maintain the sustainability and economic viability of the U.S. seafood industry. Unjustly firing experienced employees decimates the institutional knowledge necessary to best carry out that work. In 2022, NMFS helped support 2.3 million fisheries jobs that generated $321 billion in sales. These job cuts will hurt commercial and recreational fishers, shellfish growers, and everyone down the supply chain whose livelihoods are tied to a healthy ocean. Further, a less effective and efficient domestic seafood industry will result in American consumers relying more heavily on imported sources of seafood. These indiscriminate firings are devastating to NOAA – to the critical work the agency does to protect our communities and to the dedicated employees themselves who have devoted their careers to public service. We demand that you immediately reinstate these federal workers and stop any action that undermines NOAA’s critical mission for the benefit of Connecticut, the national economy, and the planet. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, joined 14 of their Senate colleagues in signing a letter calling on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee to hold hearings to investigate why members of President Trump’s national security team were recklessly and illegally discussing classified military operations on unsecured devices. The senators also criticized the incompetence and carelessness of how these Trump officials mishandled the situation and inadvertently added a journalist to the group chat. New reporting details the classified
...Read more military plans that were discussed in the commercial, unclassified messaging app. “We write to you with grave concern regarding the recent revelations reported in The Atlantic about the Trump Administration’s reckless handling of classified information about U.S. military operations,” the senators wrote. “This gross mishandling of highly classified information has weakened our national security and could have put at risk American lives, particularly the men and women involved in the military strikes in Yemen.” “For this reason, we are calling on the Senate Armed Services Committee, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to hold joint or separate hearings to investigate this matter fully and get to the bottom of why members of the National Security Council were using unclassified, internet-connected smartphones and channels to discuss highly sensitive military information, when there are known ways to tamper with unclassified devices and when it is possible that dozens of foreign intelligence agencies are targeting the unclassified smartphones used by these senior U.S. government officials,” they continued. “Our national security demands that we act with urgency to uncover the full details of this severe security breach and implement measures to prevent such recklessness in the future.” U.S. Senators Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Chairman Wicker, Chairman Cotton, and Chairman Risch: We write to you with grave concern regarding the recent revelations reported in The Atlantic about the Trump Administration's reckless handling of classified information about U.S. military operations. According to the reporting and the screenshots provided in the original story and a second piece published the following day, the Vice President of the United States, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, the Director of National Intelligence, the National Security Advisor, and other key national security officials discussed classified information about imminent U.S. military operations using internet-connected smartphones that were not approved for discussing classified information, via a commercial, unclassified messaging app called "Signal." Planning military strikes using consumer-grade, internet-connected smartphones is reckless and illegal because they can be hacked by foreign governments. Additionally, due to their inexcusable carelessness, a reporter was added to this Signal chat and was provided access to incredibly sensitive information about future military operations that included planned air strikes on terrorist targets. This gross mishandling of highly classified information has weakened our national security and could have put at risk American lives, particularly the men and women involved in the military strikes in Yemen. It is even more outrageous that members of the Trump Administration - from the President to Cabinet officials who were part of the Signal group - have tried to downplay, mislead, and excuse this reckless and likely illegal behavior. During a recent Senate oversight hearing featuring Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Senators and the American people were left with more questions than answers following the officials' testimony and repeated evasions. Since that initial hearing, and as a direct result of Administration officials' attempts to downplay the severity of the breach and the importance of the information disclosed, additional reporting from the Atlantic has been published containing further details of what was actually discussed, which included strike planning and explicit operational details like specific timing, types of aircraft used, and sequencing of events related to the pending attack on the Houthi terrorists, any of which could have jeopardized the operation and endangered servicemembers if it had fallen into the hands of our adversaries in advance. This raises pressing questions regarding the possible spillage of classified information to an uncleared reporter and onto unclassified devices which can be hacked by foreign intelligence agencies, the irresponsibility of high-ranking Administration officials, and the increased risk this created for U.S. troops who carried out the strikes. For this reason, we are calling on the Senate Armed Services Committee, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to hold joint or separate hearings to investigate this matter fully and get to the bottom of why members of the National Security Council were using unclassified, internet-connected smartphones and channels to discuss highly sensitive military information, when there are known ways to tamper with unclassified devices and when it is possible that dozens of foreign intelligence agencies are targeting the unclassified smartphones used by these senior U.S. government officials. The American people deserve answers, and we need to know if there are any other such chat conversations using Signal or any other messaging app or other actions being taken by Trump Administration officials that are putting our national security and military personnel at risk. We urge your committees to use the Senate's full oversight powers to compel the following individuals, who were part of the messaging group, to speak to the Senate in both open and closed hearings: Vice President JD Vance; Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth; Secretary of State Marco Rubio; National Security Advisor Michael Waltz; Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard; CIA Director John Ratcliffe; White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles: Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller; and U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff. Our national security demands that we act with urgency to uncover the full details of this severe security breach and implement measures to prevent such recklessness in the future. We look forward to your prompt attention to this matter and stand ready to support the committees in any capacity necessary. We trust that you will give this matter the serious attention it requires. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to object to a Republican request for unanimous consent to pass a resolution that claims to condemn domestic terrorism but instead gives special treatment to Elon Musk. Murphy slammed the hypocrisy of condemning violence against Musk’s businesses while excusing the January 6th rioters who brutally attacked Capitol Police officers. “Come on, this resolution is not about violence or domestic terrorism. It just isn't,” said Murphy. “This is a resolution that says one thing and one thing only: Elon Musk is in charge. He matters more than anybody else. Musk is subject to a different set of rules than everybody else. The Trump administration serves him, not us. The Republican Party serves him, not us. Elon
...Read more Musk right now is effectively stealing from the American people. He is combing through our government, awarding himself contracts, canceling contracts for his competitors. He is shutting down agencies that stand in the way of his business [and] his growth. He's giving himself access to secret information about government enforcement actions against his competitors.” “He is also, at the same time, currently the largest funder of Republican politics in the nation,” Murphy continued. “He spent a quarter of a billion dollars backing President Trump’s campaign. He recently told the president that he would contribute another $100 million to the president's political arm, and guess what? At that same time, the president stood on the White House lawn to give a taxpayer-funded commercial for Elon Musk's cars. That's corruption at a scale that we have not seen before in this country. The integration of the Trump White House and the Republican Party and the business interests of the richest man in the world. It's wrong.” Murphy highlighted the resolution’s pandering to Elon Musk despite thousands of other domestic terrorism incidents: “This resolution claims to say something about domestic terrorism, but the only terrorism, the only violence it mentions, is violence carried out against – you guessed it – Elon Musk. On an annual basis, there are 11,000 reported incidents of domestic terrorism. 11,000. Only a handful of them impact Tesla dealerships, but they're the only acts of violence mentioned in this resolution. 52% of the reported attacks were based on racial or ethnic targeting by radicalized attackers, but they aren't mentioned in this resolution. Only Elon Musk is mentioned in this resolution. Because a different set of rules apply to him. Because he is in charge, and he deserves protection that no one else gets. He deserves a White House TV commercial for his cars. He deserves to give himself contracts and steal from his competitors. He deserves to have his own resolution.” Murphy proposed the Senate also agree to a resolution expressing disapproval of the pardons of January 6th rioters: “This resolution just says that the specific set of people who viciously attacked police officers – the ones that hit the police officers over the head with metal poles – that those people shouldn’t have been given a get-out-of-jail-free card. And so why don't we just be consistent? We don’t we say that violence matters when it's committed against Elon Musk's dealerships, and it matters when it's committed against the people that protect us? And so my offer is to just pass both resolutions right now. Right now, we could just agree by unanimous consent to your resolution, and we could agree as a body that you shouldn't pardon the people who brutally beat the people who show up every day to protect us. They matter, too. Elon Musk isn't the only person that matters.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Mr. President, thank you. Reserving the right to object. Come on, this resolution is not about violence or domestic terrorism. It just isn't. This is a resolution that says one thing and one thing only: Elon Musk is in charge. He matters more than anybody else. “Musk is subject to a different set of rules than everybody else. The Trump administration serves him, not us. The Republican Party serves him, not us. Elon Musk right now is effectively stealing from the American people. He is combing through our government, awarding himself contracts, canceling contracts for his competitors. He is shutting down agencies that stand in the way of his business [and] his growth. He's giving himself access to secret information about government enforcement actions against his competitors. “He is also, at the same time, currently the largest funder of Republican politics in the nation. He spent a quarter of a billion dollars backing President Trump’s campaign. He recently told the president that he would contribute another $100 million to the president's political arm, and guess what? At that same time, the president stood on the White House lawn to give a taxpayer-funded commercial for Elon Musk's cars. That's corruption at a scale that we have not seen before in this country. The integration of the Trump White House and the Republican Party and the business interests of the richest man in the world. It's wrong. “This resolution claims to say something about domestic terrorism, but the only terrorism, the only violence it mentions, is violence carried out against – you guessed it – Elon Musk. “On an annual basis, there are 11,000 reported incidents of domestic terrorism. 11,000. Only a handful of them impact Tesla dealerships, but they're the only acts of violence mentioned in this resolution. 52% of the reported attacks were based on racial or ethnic targeting by radicalized attackers, but they aren't mentioned in this resolution. Only Elon Musk is mentioned in this resolution. Because a different set of rules apply to him. Because he is in charge, and he deserves protection that no one else gets. He deserves a White House TV commercial for his cars. He deserves to give himself contracts and steal from his competitors. He deserves to have his own resolution. “And people are asking why? Why does the richest man in the country get this special treatment? To most people it feels pretty fishy. It definitely feels wrong. Now I hate violence of any kind, whether it's perpetrated against right, left, or center. I’ve spent my life on this floor fighting violence. But I also hate inconsistency. “So I'm going to make my colleague a pretty reasonable offer here. At the same time that President Trump is saying that he's going to vigorously pursue people that attack Tesla dealerships, he's giving pardons to the people who beat the hell out of Capitol Police officers. So I don't think we should consent to a resolution that says we care about violence but only when it is committed against the business interests of the richest man in the world. “I have a way to solve that problem. Senator Murray has a really simple resolution. A resolution that expresses our disapproval of the pardons that were issued for the very specific set of individuals who on January 6th brutally attacked Capitol Police officers. Now I understand that many of my Republican colleagues think that the people who trespassed here shouldn’t have been prosecuted. Let’s set aside that disagreement. This resolution just says that the specific set of people who viciously attacked police officers – the ones that hit the police officers over the head with metal poles – that those people shouldn’t have been given a get-out-of-jail-free card. And so why don't we just be consistent? We don’t we say that violence matters when it's committed against Elon Musk's dealerships, and it matters when it's committed against the people that protect us? And so my offer is to just pass both resolutions right now. Right now, we could just agree by unanimous consent to your resolution, and we could agree as a body that you shouldn't pardon the people who brutally beat the people who show up every day to protect us. They matter, too. Elon Musk isn't the only person that matters. Capitol Police officers matter, too. “So I'd ask the Senator to modify her request to add the following: that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 42, a resolution condemning the pardons for individuals who were found guilty of assaulting Capitol Police officers, that the resolution be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. If we agree to move forward on this unanimous consent, I think we can move forward on the Senator's request as well.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) on Thursday released the following statement on the Trump administration’s sudden termination of federal public health grants to state and local health departments in Connecticut, totaling $150 million. “The Trump administration’s sudden termination of funding – appropriated and authorized by Congress – for state and local public health departments in Connecticut is both illegal and morally bankrupt. These cuts will have devastating impacts on our communities. Fewer people will have access to the mental health and addiction treatment they need,
...Read more and it will hamstring our efforts to stop the spread of infectious diseases like measles. Our delegation will fight tooth and nail to reverse this dangerous decision.” ### Read less WAHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Wednesday released the following statement on the Trump administration closing three watchdog offices within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS): "This is yet another illegal power grab by the Trump administration to shutter independent agencies created and funded by Congress. Closing these three offices — the Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman, the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, and the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman — is an attempt to bypass any scrutiny or oversight of their cruel agenda. By doing so, the Trump administration has eliminated most safeguards on immigration detention at a
...Read more time when watchdog offices are most needed. The result will leave people being held in detention vulnerable to abuse, make the immigration system more chaotic than it already is, and increase costs for taxpayers. Once again, the Trump Administration is choosing to create more challenges at the border than trying to solve them.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday released the following statement after the Supreme Court upheld the Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) rule to rein in the proliferation of ghost guns in a 7-2 decision:
"Today’s ruling is a major defeat for the gun lobby and a big win for the movement to stop gun violence. No matter what the gun lobby says, ghost guns are guns. They're easy to get and practically untraceable, which is why dangerous criminals love them. Requiring serial numbers and background checks for ghost guns makes our communities safer, and I’ll be pushing the Trump administration to make sure this rule is enforced.”
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released a statement on the Department of Justice’s new rule dismantling a decades-old policy of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) that blocked violent offenders from regaining access to firearms. "With this rule, Trump is taking yet another step to hand the gun lobby exactly what it wants—a corrupt pay-to-play scheme where he and his Attorney General alone decide who gets their gun rights back. No impartial experts, no real process, just political favors and backroom deals. If you’re wealthy or well-connected, it doesn’t matter if you’re a domestic abuser or if there’s an active restraining order against you—you’ll get a pass. This is a shameful policy that makes a mockery of Congress, puts guns back
...Read more in the hands of dangerous people, and gives the gun industry millions of new clients as a thank you for backing Trump. Make no mistake—this isn’t about rights or public safety, it’s about boosting gun sales and rewarding Trump’s donors while our communities pay the price." ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 26 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter calling on President Donald Trump to reverse the illegal firing of Commissioners Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). “This action contradicts long standing Supreme Court precedent, undermines Congress’s constitutional authority to create bipartisan, independent commissions, and upends more than 110 years of work at the FTC to protect consumers from deceptive practices and monopoly power,” the senators wrote. “We urge you to rescind these dismissals so the FTC can get back to the people’s work.” “Congress established the FTC in 1914 as an independent agency made up of bipartisan, multi-member, expert
...Read more commissioners who are tasked with protecting consumers,” the senators continued. “In 2024 alone, the FTC used this authority to return more than $330 million to consumers, while simultaneously blocking anticompetitive mergers and challenging monopoly power that can result in higher prices, fewer choices, and less opportunity for American consumers, workers, and small businesses. The FTC has consistently carried out this mandate as a bipartisan commission under Republican and Democratic administrations.” U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear President Trump, On March 18, 2025 you announced your intention to fire Commissioner Slaughter and Commissioner Bedoya from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). This action contradicts long standing Supreme Court precedent, undermines Congress’s constitutional authority to create bipartisan, independent commissions, and upends more than 110 years of work at the FTC to protect consumers from deceptive practices and monopoly power. We urge you to rescind these dismissals so the FTC can get back to the people’s work. Congress established the FTC in 1914 as an independent agency made up of bipartisan, multi-member, expert commissioners who are tasked with protecting consumers. In 2024 alone, the FTC used this authority to return more than $330 million to consumers, while simultaneously blocking anticompetitive mergers and challenging monopoly power that can result in higher prices, fewer choices, and less opportunity for American consumers, workers, and small businesses. The FTC has consistently carried out this mandate as a bipartisan commission under Republican and Democratic administrations. When establishing the FTC, Congress lawfully exercised its power to establish a bipartisan, multi-member, expert commission and to shield that commission from political pressure by allowing commissioners to serve 7-year terms and limiting the President’s power to remove commissioners only “for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” Under the law, as you are aware, the President retains the sole authority to nominate new commissioners and to appoint the Chair of the Commission. The President may also appoint a new Chair among the sitting commissioners at any time. Ninety years ago, the Supreme Court held that Congress’s authority to create bipartisan, multi-member, expert commissions—and specifically the FTC—“cannot well be doubted” because “it is quite evident that one who holds his office only during the pleasure of another cannot be depended upon to maintain an attitude of independence. . . .” In a 2020 decision involving whether Congress could insulate the single director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from at-will removal by the President, the Supreme Court declined to revisit this precedent, finding important differences between the CFPB and the FTC, including that the FTC has multiple expert members to ensure the Commission retains relevant expertise at all times, that each President can influence the makeup of the Commission by nominating new members and appointing the Chair (as you have already done), and that the Commission is funded through the traditional appropriations process that the President may influence. As such, the structure of the FTC does not undermine executive authority and is well within Congress’s power to establish independent agencies tasked with protecting Americans from harmful business practices, fraud, and outright corruption. As Commissioners duly appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, Commissioners Slaughter and Bedoya must be allowed to continue their work at the Commission. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 23 of their Senate colleagues in reintroducing the Stop Comstock Act (SCA), landmark legislation to repeal an arcane 1873 law, the Comstock Act, that anti-choice extremists have repeatedly invoked as a backdoor means to effectively ban abortion nationwide without a single act of Congress. The Comstock Act is a centerpiece of Project 2025, the blueprint that Donald Trump and his Administration are following, and if misused, this ancient law would effectively end access to medication abortion nationwide without a single act of Congress. Donald Trump has installed an anti-abortion extremist as head of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) who declined to acknowledge the settled science proving
...Read more mifepristone’s safety and efficacy, signaling that access to medication abortion will continue to face threats under this Administration. “Donald Trump and Republicans are so desperate to ban abortion nationwide that they’re dragging out a law from the 1800s to do it. It doesn’t get more shameless than this—using a law passed before women could even vote to strip them of their right to make their own health care decisions,” said Murphy. “I’m helping lead a vital measure to protect women’s reproductive freedom again lawless, reckless use of the Comstock Act,” said Blumenthal. “Women’s health care is under attack like never before under the Trump Administration, in Congress, and in far too many states. Anti-abortion extremists are seeking to misuse this long-dead law – literally over 150 years old – to block access to safe and effective medication abortion. I’ll continue to fight these efforts by supporting the Stop Comstock Act which makes clear that the law doesn’t prohibit access to this much needed and widely used medication.” The Comstock laws are a set of 1800s laws meant to ban the mailing or shipping of every obscene, lewd, indecent, article, matter, thing or device, with the goal of restricting abortion, contraceptives, and even love letters. The Stop Comstock Act would repeal language in the Comstock Laws that could be used by an anti-abortion administration to ban the mailing of mifepristone and other drugs used in medication abortions, instruments and equipment used in abortions, and educational material related to sexual health. Medication abortion is how nearly 60% of abortions take place in this country today. It is the most common form of abortion in the United States. U.S. Senators Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Angus King (I-Maine), Catherine Cortez-Masto (D-Nev.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) also cosponsored the legislation. The legislation been endorsed by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Reproductive Rights, National Women’s Law Center, Reproductive Freedom for All (formerly NARAL Pro-Choice America), Take Back the Court Action Fund, Healthcare Across Borders, Expanding Medication Abortion Access (EMAA). A summary of the bill is available HERE and the full bill text is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Thursday released the following statement on President Trump’s executive order to bypass Congressional approval and illegally dismantle the Department of Education (ED).
“Trump’s attempt to close the Department of Education has nothing to do with helping our kids learn better or empowering teachers. It’s about making it easier to sell our public schools off to the highest bidder. The billionaire class is rooting for the destruction of public education because they see your local elementary school as their next target to run for profit. Our kids will pay the price.”
###
HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined the Senate Democratic caucus in filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of protecting the right of millions of Americans to receive reproductive health care from the provider of their choosing. The case, Medina v. Planned Parenthood of South Atlantic, challenges South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster’s attempt to block in-state Medicaid program beneficiaries from accessing reproductive health care at the Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (PPSAT) affiliate’s health centers. The case is centered around whether individuals can privately enforce the “free-choice-of-provider provision” in the
...Read more Medicaid statute, which gives Medicaid beneficiaries the right to choose among any qualified health care provider that agrees to participate in Medicaid. A loss at the Supreme Court would pave the way for states to arbitrarily exclude Planned Parenthood from the Medicaid program and deny tens of millions of Americans the ability to receive comprehensive, essential reproductive health care from the provider of their choosing. In their amicus brief, the senators argue that the plain text of the Medicaid statute and legislative history make clear that Congress enacted the free-choice-of-provider provision to provide any individual eligible for Medicaid with the right to choose among qualified health care and that Congress has provided beneficiaries the ability to enforce that right in court. “The right to select one’s own healthcare provider has been a core promise of the program ever since. And for decades, Congress has approved of — indeed, relied on — private enforcement in federal court as a critical means of protecting that right,” the senators wrote. The senators continued: “Limiting Medicaid beneficiaries’ access to healthcare providers who specialize in women’s health care — merely because they separately provide abortion services — limits their access to all healthcare and erects false barriers to care.” “Private enforcement enables Medicaid beneficiaries to hold states accountable when they accept federal taxpayer money while violating beneficiaries’ right to choose the providers on whom that money is spent. Without such individual enforcement, vital healthcare facilities shutter, leaving our least resourced without access to affordable or accessible healthcare,” the senators added. Close to 70% of Planned Parenthood’s health centers are located in communities with a shortage of primary care services and unmet health care needs. This makes them critical heath care access points for people across the country, providing a number of essential health care services from wellness exams, cancer screenings, contraception and more. “Congress intentionally established Medicaid beneficiaries’ right to receive health care services from the provider of their choice when it enacted the free-choice-of-provider provision nearly sixty years ago. That promise to Medicaid beneficiaries should be honored,” the senators concluded. U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also joined the senators in filing the brief. The senators’ amicus brief to the Supreme Court can be read in full HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Tuesday joined 36 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon expressing outrage at the administration’s reckless and illegal firing of half of the workforce at the U.S. Department of Education. The senators condemned the mass layoffs— part of a broader effort by the Trump administration and Elon Musk to attack public education—warning that closing offices and cutting 1,300 jobs will devastate America’s schools and harm students across the country. “At a time of massive income and wealth inequality, when 60 percent of people live paycheck to paycheck, millions of Americans
...Read more cannot afford higher education, and 40 percent of our nation’s 4th graders and 33 percent of 8th graders read below basic proficiency, it is a national disgrace that the Trump Administration is attempting to illegally abolish the Department of Education and thus, undermine a high-quality education for our students,” the senators wrote. The senators noted that these layoffs and closures will have devastating effects on the nation’s students, including by limiting the department’s ability to guarantee federal funding reaches communities that rely on it, ensure students can access federal financial aid, and uphold students’ civil rights. Not even 24 hours after the staff reductions were announced, the Free Application for Federal Financial Aid (FAFSA) experienced a glitch that prevented students and families from accessing the application. Education Department workers responsible for fixing it had reportedly been fired. The senators continued: “[The layoffs] would also mean decreased enforcement of rights for children with disabilities and fewer resources for students from low-income backgrounds and children with disabilities, like the 26 million students from low-income backgrounds and over 100,000 public schools in every community across this country that rely on Title I funding; the 7.5 million students with disabilities who benefit under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the 7 million students who receive Pell grants to help access higher education.” In Connecticut, 1,000 K-12 schools and over 533,000 K-12 students, including those with disabilities, from low-income backgrounds, and English learners, rely on critical federal funding coming into Connecticut. Financial aid and support also support students across Connecticut attend and complete college including through $286 million in Pell Grants for 63,000 students in Connecticut and $19 billion in current and outstanding federal student loans supporting the education of 517,000 borrowers in Connecticut. They concluded: “We will not stand by as you attempt to turn back the clock on education in this country through gutting the Department of Education. Our nation’s public schools, colleges, and universities are preparing the next generation of America’s leaders—we must take steps to strengthen education in this country, not take a wrecking ball to the agency that exists to do so.” U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Maize Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Secretary McMahon: We write to express our outrage that you, President Trump, and unelected billionaire Elon Musk are taking steps to abolish the Department of Education (“the Department”) and eliminate educational opportunities for millions of students across the country, something that 61 percent of Americans oppose. This most recently includes a 50 percent cut to the workforce, resulting in the termination of over 1,300 workers at the Department of Education, as well as the abrupt, last-minute closure of all Department of Education buildings beginning at 6:00 PM on the same day that these terminations were announced. At a time of massive income and wealth inequality, when 60 percent of people live paycheck to paycheck, millions of Americans cannot afford higher education, and 40 percent of our nation’s 4th graders and 33 percent of 8th graders read below basic proficiency, it is a national disgrace that the Trump Administration is attempting to illegally abolish the Department of Education and thus, undermine a high-quality education for our students. As Secretary of Education, you are the foremost public servant responsible for carrying out the Department of Education’s mission to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. Despite that responsibility, your first act as Secretary was announcing it was your “final mission” to dismantle the Department of Education, fire the public servants who keep it running, and terminate opportunities for students in public schools, colleges, and universities across the country. The false claims of financial savings by dismantling the Department of Education so that billionaires can receive huge tax breaks is bad public policy and morally reprehensible. The billionaires that are in charge of our federal government right now will not be harmed by these egregious attacks: wealthy families sending their children to elite, private schools will still be able to get a quality education even if every public school disappears in this country. But for working-class families, high-quality public education is an opportunity they rely on for their children to have a path to do well in life. Defunding federal support for public education would result in either higher property taxes or decreased funding for public schools, including in rural areas. It would also mean decreased enforcement of rights for children with disabilities and fewer resources for students from low-income backgrounds and children with disabilities, like the 26 million students from low-income backgrounds and over 100,000 public schools in every community across this country that rely on Title I funding; the 7.5 million students with disabilities who benefit under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the 7 million students who receive Pell grants to help access higher education. It is undeniable that terminating 50 percent of the Department of Education’s workers will have harmful effects on public education in this country. The Department of Education already has the smallest staff of the 15 Cabinet agencies despite having the third largest discretionary budget, behind only the Departments of Defense and Health and Human Services. These reductions will have devastating impacts on our nation’s students and we are deeply concerned that without staff, the Department will be unable to fulfill critical functions, such as ensuring students can access federal financial aid, upholding students’ civil rights, and guaranteeing that federal funding reaches communities promptly and is well-spent. Not even 24 hours after the staff reductions were announced, the Free Application for Federal Financial Aid (FAFSA) experienced a glitch that prevented students and families from accessing the application, but the staff normally responsible for fixing those errors had reportedly been cut. The Department has also reportedly shuttered several regional offices responsible for investigating potential violations of students’ civil rights in local schools. We are deeply alarmed that cases will go uninvestigated and that students will be left in unsafe learning environments as a result. The Trump Administration also says it wants to ‘return education back to the states.’ Let us be very clear—public education is already run by states and local school boards. While just 11 percent of public education is federally funded, the Department of Education has a necessary and irreplaceable responsibility to implement federal laws that ensure equal opportunity for all children in this country. These laws guarantee fundamental protections, such as ensuring that children with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment, that students from low-income backgrounds and students of color will not be disproportionately taught by less experienced and qualified teachers, and that parents will receive information about their child’s academic achievement. Without the Department of Education, there is no guarantee that states would uphold students’ civil and educational rights. Let us not forget that it was federal troops who protected the “Little Rock Nine” from a violent mob of segregationists when they integrated Central High School in the wake of the Brown v. Board U.S. Supreme Court decision. Not only was the state not going to provide this protection, but it was then-Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus who ordered the state’s National Guard to bar Black students from entering the school. Even today, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights regularly investigates and resolves complaints of student discrimination related to students’ race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability status. We will not stand by as you attempt to turn back the clock on education in this country through gutting the Department of Education. Our nation’s public schools, colleges, and universities are preparing the next generation of America’s leaders—we must take steps to strengthen education in this country, not take a wrecking ball to the agency that exists to do so. Sincerely, ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Monday joined Governor Ned Lamont and Connecticut Transportation Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto in announcing that the Connecticut Department of Transportation has begun construction on the Dutch Point Viaduct rehabilitation project on Interstate 91 southbound in Hartford. The Dutch Point Viaduct is the 61-year-old, 1,800-foot elevated bridge structure on I-91 southbound between the area of the Connecticut Convention Center and the Colt Armory. It includes ramps to and from the Whitehead Highway, connecting I-91 to downtown Hartford. The purpose of the project is to upgrade the structural elements of the bridge to current safety standards. Improvements include the replacement of the viaduct’s bridge deck,
...Read more drainage system, and installation of new barrier walls and highways lights, among other structural enhancements. Upon completion in fall 2026, the reconstruction project will improve safety for motorists, increase the viaduct’s load-carrying capacity, and extend the viaduct’s service life until it is replaced as part of the Greater Hartford Mobility Program. The $91.85 million project is funded by a mix of 90% federal funds and 10% state funds. The funds are sourced from various federal programs, including those dedicated to highway and bridge maintenance and improvement. “This $82 million investment will make a big difference for thousands of people across Connecticut who rely on this stretch of I-91 every day,” said Murphy. “The Dutch Point Viaduct is long overdue for repairs, and this plan to fix its aging infrastructure will help ease traffic flow and make driving safer for commuters without causing unnecessary disruption for drivers and local businesses.” “This blockbuster $82 million federal grant will positively impact safety and quality of life for all Connecticut,” said Blumenthal. “This project is in our capital city but is key to transportation interests statewide. I’m proud to continue to fight for federal investments that improve aging infrastructure and make our roadways safer.” “The Dutch Point Viaduct is a vital artery for thousands of commuters and visitors traveling through the Hartford region every day,” said Lamont. “Modernizing this aging bridge is a crucial investment to ensure the safety and reliability of this key stretch of highway. I appreciate the hardworking Connecticut Department of Transportation crews and contractors for their dedication to completing these upgrades.” “Like many of Connecticut’s aging bridges, the I-91 viaduct was built for a different time and requires significant upgrades to the bridge deck to extend its service life,” said Eucalitto. “We urge motorists to slow down and move over when they see our crews working on the highway or in the roadway shoulder on this important project. Thanks to Governor Lamont and our federal, state, and local partners, we are upgrading this critical infrastructure while ensuring minimal disruption to commuters and businesses downtown.” One lane of I-91 southbound in the area will be closed for approximately 18 months while work on the project is underway. Temporary nighttime lane closures between 7:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. and daytime shoulder closures between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. will occur throughout the duration of the construction period. Additionally, the State Street on-ramp to I-91 southbound will be closed during all three stages of the project. Motorists should anticipate potential delays during these times but can rely on traffic control measures and signage to guide them through the work zone. ### Read less WASHINGTON— U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) joined his Democratic colleagues on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee in sending a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio questioning the status of the Administration’s foreign assistance “review.” The senators called on Rubio to testify before the Committee and to consult with Congress on his proposed changes, as required by law. “We are seeking immediate clarification on the status of the Administration’s foreign assistance review,” the senators wrote. “Your announcement of the conclusion of the review of USAID awards stands in contrast to statements made by your Director of Foreign Assistance and Deputy Administrator of USAID, Pete Marocco, in a meeting with us on March 6th.” “We have expressed support for a
...Read more legitimate process and are willing to engage in good faith,” they continued. “We are aware of awards, including for humanitarian U.S. commodity programs, that were terminated, then un-terminated and again re-terminated within a matter of days. This lack of clarity is harmful to American interests, diplomatic relationships, our foreign assistance partners, and people globally who are suffering from food insecurity and malnutrition.” They concluded: “We also note that the letter you submitted to Congress on February 3 communicated your ‘intent to initiate consultations’ consistent with appropriations law, but no such consultations or required notifications have occurred. We expect that you will consult with Congress before the conclusion of the review and reiterate our request that you appear for hearings before the Committee on these actions and their implications for U.S. national security.” U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Secretary Rubio: We are seeking immediate clarification on the status of the Administration’s foreign assistance review. On March 10, you tweeted that the Administration’s review of USAID programs was complete, resulting in the cancellation of 83% of the Agency’s programs, or 5,200 contracts. Your announcement of the conclusion of the review of USAID awards stands in contrast to statements made by your Director of Foreign Assistance and Deputy Administrator of USAID, Pete Marocco, in a meeting with us on March 6th. Mr. Marocco briefed senators on the Foreign Relations Committee that the President’s 90-day review of U.S. foreign assistance would conclude in mid-April, following consideration of the outcome of the Office of Management and Budget’s data call. Mr. Marocco also stated that the Administration would consult with Congress on programs during the remaining review period. The March 10 tweet is also in contrast with a court filing on February 26th in which Pete Marocco attested that the foreign assistance “review” was completed, resulting in the termination of approximately 5,800 awards for USAID—a 93% reduction in USAID programs—and 4,100 State Department awards—a roughly 60% reduction. State and USAID orally briefed these terminations to House and Senate committees of jurisdiction. We have expressed support for a legitimate process and are willing to engage in good faith. We ask that you urgently, and personally, provide clarity to this Committee regarding the nature and status of the review and that you provide the Committee with a current list of terminated and retained awards to date. Specifically, we are seeking information on whether this review is ongoing for both USAID and State Department awards; whether there will be additional rescissions of terminations; and the metrics used in decision-making. We are aware of awards, including for humanitarian U.S. commodity programs, that were terminated, then un-terminated and again re-terminated within a matter of days. This lack of clarity, for example, is harmful to American interests, diplomatic relationships, our foreign assistance partners, and people globally who are suffering from food insecurity and malnutrition. We also note that the letter you submitted to Congress on February 3 communicated your “intent to initiate consultations” consistent with appropriations law, but no such consultations or required notifications have occurred. We expect that you will consult with Congress before the conclusion of the review and reiterate our request that you appear for hearings before the Committee on these actions and their implications for U.S. national security. We look forward to your prompt response. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, on Thursday released a statement on his decision to vote ‘no’ on the Republican-led spending bill. WATCH VIDEO HERE “Trump has a plan – and he’s implementing it – to destroy our economy and our government, to create a crisis that allows him to hand our government over to his billionaire friends and to suspend our democracy. I wish that weren’t true, but it is. The question then is this: does the funding bill make it easier or harder for Trump to implement that plan? I judge that it makes it easier, and so I can’t support it. “The basics here are this. Republicans are in charge, [and] they need Democratic votes to pass a funding bill. But they never negotiated with Democrats. They
...Read more didn’t even try. They wrote their own partisan bill. They filled it with all sorts of right-wing shit. This isn’t a ‘continuing resolution.’ It doesn’t just continue last year’s funding, even though the press is reporting it that way. It makes big changes to law. And they’re all changes designed to make it easier for Trump to implement that plan to destroy our country. “For instance, it makes massive cuts to housing programs, to Social Security, to programs for health care for working families. That paves the way for Musk to advance his illegal assault on those government services. It gives Trump brand new spending powers – for instance, the ability to start new military programs that haven’t even been authorized by Congress. At this moment of crisis, that sounds like a really dangerous idea. And it takes key guardrails off of presidential spending authority that allows Trump and Musk to more easily move money from one account to the other. “Now listen, Trump and Musk are going to keep acting illegally, no matter what this funding bill says. Whether we stop them – that’s going to be up to the courts and up to our ability to mobilize people all over this country against their agenda, which is deeply, deeply unpopular. But by passing a bill that makes their plan easier to implement, Democrats risk putting a bipartisan veneer of endorsement on their campaign to give our government to the billionaires and to destroy the rule of law. And I just won’t be a part of that.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement after voting against the confirmation of Gail Slater to lead the Department of Justice’s antitrust division.
“Monopolies lead to higher prices and lower quality products for everyone, but they’re great for billionaires. Antitrust enforcement is our best tool to break them up and shift power away from mega corporations and back to regular people. I’m hopeful Gail Slater will build on former Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter’s aggressive antitrust agenda. However, antitrust can also be a tool to corruptly reward friends and punish enemies, and I cannot support her confirmation as President Trump continues to lead our country into a constitutional crisis.”
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 45 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter calling on Social Security Administration (SSA) Acting Commissioner Leland Dudek to address concerns about President Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s plans to purge the Social Security workforce. The Trump Administration’s plans to terminate Social Security employees threaten millions of Americans’ ability to access their earned benefits. Connecticut has over 700,000 Social Security recipients, which is about 20% of the population. Cuts to the Social Security workforce will mean delays for seniors and could lead to field offices closing in Connecticut. “As one of the nation’s most popular and effective programs, Social Security provides a foundation of
...Read more income on which workers can build for their retirement, as well as valuable insurance protection against unexpected hardship,” the senators wrote. “By slashing staff and eliminating field offices, fewer Americans will be able to seek assistance during pivotal life events and risk causing further hardship to those in dire circumstances.” In-person services are critical for people who lack reliable internet access and cannot navigate Social Security’s website. On average, 120,000 Americans visit and 233,000 call SSA field offices every day. The Trump Administration’s plans to cut staff and eliminate field offices will threaten Americans’ access to their earned benefits when they need them most. In their letter, the senators called on Dudek to cease activities that threaten Americans’ Social Security benefits. The senators also requested that Dudek provide information on the number of SSA employees that have left or been terminated, how terminating staff with over 20 years of experience would improve customer service, and how SSA will determine which field and regional offices are shut down. “Despite your stated commitment to transparency, the agency’s decision to strip down SSA while keeping Members of Congress, community leaders, advocates, and the public in the dark undermine the agency’s own stated policy and best practices. As you know, even subtle changes to SSA’s service delivery can cause significant disruptions to its customers. SSA must take care to ensure that community leaders and stakeholders are consulted so service to the public continues in the most effective, efficient, and caring way possible,” the senators concluded. U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Angus King (I-Maine), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Gary Peters (D-Mich.) also signed the letter. The text of the letter is available HERE and below. Acting Commissioner Dudek: We write to express our strong concern over the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) reckless actions to shutter offices, slash SSA’s workforce, and close field offices across the country. These draconian cuts to SSA will have a devastating toll on Americans’ ability to access their earned benefits. Additionally, they seem to have been made with no consideration for their impact on the agency’s ability to achieve its mission. Nearly every American interacts with SSA at certain points in our lives, particularly during significant moments like a birth and adoption; marriage and divorce; onset of a life-altering disability; retirement from work; or the death of a spouse. SSA employees help seniors enroll into Medicare, help Americans determine when to retire and file for Social Security benefits, and help Americans file for disability benefits. Access to in-person services is especially important for people who have difficulty speaking by phone, who do not have reliable internet access, and people who have difficulty understanding program rules. Every day, over 120,000 people visit and 233,000 call SSA’s field offices, on average. In Fiscal Year 2024 alone, SSA processed over 8 million Social Security benefit claims, 1.4 million Supplemental Security Income (SSI) claims, and received over 57 million calls to their field offices and nearly 80 million calls through SSA’s 1-800 Number. As one of the nation’s most popular and effective programs, Social Security provides a foundation of income on which workers can build for their retirement, as well as valuable insurance protection against unexpected hardship. By slashing staff and eliminating field offices, fewer Americans will be able to seek assistance during pivotal life events and risk causing further hardship to those in dire circumstances. The agency’s brash decision defies the President’s pledge to not touch Social Security and the Administration’s policies. In the Office on Management and Budget and Office of Personnel Management joint memo about slashing the federal workforce, there are references to ensuring that any workforce reductions at Social Security will have a positive effect on the delivery of services. Based on the rash actions to date, we have serious concerns that the administration takes this assurance and commitment seriously. Empirical evidence and basic common sense shows that further reducing staff and field offices will have a substantial adverse impact on Americans’ ability to access Social Security benefits. A 2017 academic study found field office closures lead to “large and persistent reductions” in the number of applications and receipt of disability benefits, which are more acutely felt among those with severe physical and mental disabilities, low income, and those without a college degree. Similarly, a 2020 Social Security Advisory Board report found that a two-year long hiring freeze and reduction in field office operating hours resulted in higher congestion in the field offices, with the number of visitors waiting over an hour increased by 78 percent and the average wait time increased 37 percent to 24.9 minutes. Simply put, making it more cumbersome to access Social Security does not make the program more efficient nor does it improve customer service. The administration hasn’t even provided estimates of what the changes it has already taken credit for will mean for customer services and key workloads. Your characterization of its recent reorganizations and staffing reductions as “duplicative,” “redundant” or “non-mission critical” is an utter farce and insulting to the thousands of Americans who dedicated their career in service of the agency’s mission. These public servants worked on critical projects focusing on improving customer service for all its customers, reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, and ensuring that all Americans, particularly those with disabilities, can access SSA offices and their earned benefits. Moreover, eliminating those staff does not eliminate their work. Driving staff out of the agency and forcing the remaining staff to complete more work is a recipe for burnout, low morale, and worse productivity. Despite your stated commitment to transparency, the agency’s decision to strip down SSA while keeping Members of Congress, community leaders, advocates, and the public in the dark undermine the agency’s own stated policy and best practices. As you know, even subtle changes to SSA’s service delivery can cause significant disruptions to its customers. SSA must take care to ensure that community leaders and stakeholders are consulted so service to the public continues in the most effective, efficient, and caring way possible. The only explanation that can justify SSA’s actions is to appease the President and Elon Musk in their crusade to dismantle the federal government. Musk made his views towards Social Security clear when he called the program “the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time.” We urge you to cease any activities that threaten Americans’ Social Security benefits. To understand the agency’s recent actions, please detail the steps SSA took to ensure customer service remains uninterrupted for the millions of Americans no later than March 12, 2025. This should include: Any and all qualitative and quantitative analyses conducted to evaluate the impact of these changes on SSA’s ability to administer the programs and on SSA’s customers since January 20, 2025;
A report detailing how:
Reduced staff in the regional offices would improve customer service;
Reduced staff in field offices would improve customer service;
Reduced staff in state disability determination services would improve customer service;
Reduced staff in hearings offices would improve customer service;
Reduced staff in appeals councils would improve customer service;
Reduced staff in Social Security Card Centers would improve customer service;
Reduced staff in teleservice centers would improve customer service;
Reduced staff in program centers would improve customer service;
A report explaining how driving out experienced SSA employees with at least 20 years of experience would improve customer service; For the decision to consolidate ten regional offices into four, please also provide: The number of SSA employees working when the regional office closed and their responsibilities;
The percentage of SSA employees in the regional office who were terminated, resigned, or retired;
The number of claims or post-entitlement actions that were pending in the regional office at the time of closure, and how SSA will ensure those pending cases are timely addressed;
The list of evaluating factors or criteria SSA considered in determining to close the regional office.
A list of all community outreach meetings SSA conducted with key community leaders (e.g., mayor, city council, etc.), unique institutions (e.g., schools for the blind, hospitals, prisons, etc.), advocacy groups, community-based organizations that represent SSA clients, employees and labor groups about the proposed closure, consolidation, or relocation of the affected office since January 20, 2025;
Whether you or other senior SSA officials conducted any outreach with Members of Congress and U.S. Senators and/or their staff who represent the affected regional office about the proposed closure prior to your February 28 announcement. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), joined 44 of their Senate colleagues and 210 members of the U.S. House of Representatives in reintroducing the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO Act), comprehensive labor legislation to protect the rights of workers to stand together and bargain for fairer wages, better benefits and safer workplaces. The legislation was renamed in honor of former AFL-CIO President Richard L. Trumka. “Workers are getting screwed by a system that favors big corporations and the billionaire class over the people who actually make our economy run. The PRO Act should be the floor of what is possible. It's about
...Read more making sure every worker has the right to stand together and the power to fight for fair wages, better benefits, and safer workplaces,” said Murphy. “Workers deserve higher wages, better benefits, and safer workplaces,” said Blumenthal. “But for far too long, large corporations and the ultra-wealthy have put profits over people and blocked workers’ ability to unionize and bargain. It’s time to restore fairness to a system that prioritizes corporate greed over workers and families. That’s why I’m proud to once again support the PRO Act.” Large corporations and the wealthy continue to capture the rewards of a growing economy while working families and middle-class Americans are left behind. From 1979 to 2023, annual wages for the bottom 90% of households increased just 44 percent, while average incomes for the wealthiest 1% increased more than 180 percent. Unions are critical to increasing wages and creating a strong economy that rewards hardworking people. Through the power of collective bargaining, the typical union worker earns 16 percent more than the typical non-union worker. The American people’s support for unions is surging. According to a 2024 Gallup poll, 70 percent of Americans approve of labor unions — remaining at near record highs. Despite growing support for unions, billionaire- and special interest-funded attacks on the rights of workers, unions and labor laws have eroded union density and made it harder for workers to organize. The share of American workers who are union members has fallen from roughly one in three workers in 1956 to a new low of 9.9 percent in 2024. The PRO Act restores fairness to the economy by strengthening the federal law that protects the right of workers to join a union and bargain for higher pay, better benefits and safer workplaces. The PRO Act would protect the right to organize and collectively bargain by: Bolstering remedies and punishing violations of the rights of workers through authorizing meaningful penalties for employers that violate their rights, strengthening support for workers who suffer retaliation for exercising their rights and authorizing a private right of action for violation of the rights of workers.
Strengthening the rights of workers to join together and negotiate for better working conditions by enhancing their right to support secondary boycotts, ensuring unions can collect “fair share” fees, modernizing the union election process and facilitating initial collective bargaining agreements.
Restoring fairness to an economy rigged against workers by closing loopholes that allow employers to misclassify their employees as supervisors and independent contractors and increasing transparency in labor-management relations. U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cosponsored the legislation. More than 18 organizations endorsed the PRO Act, including the AFL-CIO, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), United Autoworkers (UAW), United Steelworkers (USW), Communications Workers of America (CWA), National Nurses United (NNU), International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO (DPE), National Postal Mail Handlers Union (NPMHU), American Federation of Teachers (AFT), International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers (SMART), the American Federation of Musicians, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Laborers’ International Union of North America (LiUNA), Transport Workers Union (TWU), International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) and the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades (IUPAT). Full text of the bill is available HERE. A fact sheet on the bill is available HERE. A section-by-section summary is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) sent a letter to Chair and Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Jim Risch (R-Idaho) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), requesting a holdover on Tuesday’s business meeting amid the illegal dismantling of USAID and the wrongful termination of foreign aid contracts. “We should not confirm any additional nominees for State Department positions until Secretary Rubio appears before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and fully explains the dismantling of USAID, the firing of dedicated public servants, and the unilateral cancellation of contracts without the consultation with Congress. What was billed as a 90-day ‘good faith’ review has become a six-week unconstitutional
...Read more purge of billions in foreign aid programs, completely shrouded in darkness. As of today, Secretary Rubio has not briefed the committee a single time to explain this wholesale destruction of American soft power and its impacts on our national security. The administration is also refusing to spend appropriated funds, in direct violation of the Constitution and our laws, and has thus far failed to fully comply with a Supreme Court order to pay organizations for work that has already been completed. These issues must be resolved immediately, but at the very least, there should be no business as usual until Secretary Rubio testifies before the Committee.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, joined U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Vice Chair of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Ranking Member of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee, and U.S. Representative Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.-14), Acting Ranking Member of the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security in releasing the following statement on U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem ending the collective bargaining agreement with tens of thousands of frontline employees at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA): “Transportation Security Officers keep Americans safe. They often work
...Read more long hours and in difficult conditions to stop threats and protect air travel. Secretary Noem’s decision to abandon them and end the collective bargaining agreement between TSA and its workers is yet another slap in the face by the Trump Administration to working men and women. This agreement improved retention at TSA, keeping more dangerous criminals, drugs, and weapons off our planes. Now, after firing critical employees at the Federal Aviation Administration, the Trump Administration is weakening TSA’s airport security screening too. “In recent years, we led the effort to improve transportation security by providing TSA with the resources to ensure stability and experience in these positions. Today’s news undermines that progress. The Department’s statement does not defend its decision with facts, but with complaints about union dues and workers using hard earned benefits like family and medical leave. Rather than spend her time policing how hard-working DHS employees choose to spend their money, Secretary Noem should focus on keeping our national transportation network secure.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday joined Senate Democrats for a media availability following reports that President Trump will soon sign an executive order abolishing the U.S. Department of Education. Murphy slammed the plan as a dangerous move that would hurt families across the country and prioritize profits for the billionaire and corporate class over ensuring every kid in America has access to a quality education. Murphy blasted the out-of-touch billionaires in the Trump Administration who are dismantling programs ordinary Americans rely on: “The billionaires that are in charge of our government right now send their kids to the most elite private schools, and if every public school disappears in this country, they will still be able to get their kids an
...Read more education. And it’s consistent with the entire way they are approaching the first six months of this administration. Billionaires don’t need Medicaid. So, to them, it doesn’t matter if Medicaid disappears, and rural hospitals close and addiction treatment centers shutter their doors– because the billionaires will still get their healthcare. They talk about Social Security being a Ponzi scheme. They’re shutting down Social Security offices around the country because they don’t need Social Security. They’re billionaires–they’re never going to need a Social Security check – like millions of American seniors do – in order to put food on the table.” Murphy tore into Trump and his corporate backers for prioritizing their tax cut over meeting the basic needs of working-class Americans: “All that matters is hoarding as much money – stealing as much money – from middle class and poor families in this country, so that they can pass that money along to the billionaires, the millionaires, and the corporations. Everything that they are doing is about making sure that they shrink the parts of government that help regular people, so that they can pass along more benefits and more help to their billionaire friends.” Murphy condemned the administration for trying to sell off America’s public schools to the highest bidder at the expense of millions of families: “The voucher program that they are talking about, that they will be more easily able to implement if the Department of Education is gone, is really about just making it easier for the billionaire and corporate class to be able to buy up our schools, so that they can make money off of it like they make money off of the Medicare program, like they make money off of so many other aspects of our government. So if the Department of Education closes, it’s going to hurt millions of families in this country– it is just going to enable the theft of resources from regular families to pad the pockets of the billionaires – but is also likely to result in you waking up one day and finding out that your local elementary school that your kids go to is owned by a private equity firm on the other side of the country and is being run for profit instead of being run for the education of your kids.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thanks, Chuck, for gathering us here today. So, nobody wants this. Nobody in America wants the destruction of public education. The plan to eliminate the Department of Education is wildly unpopular in this country except for a handful of people on the fringy right. So the question is, why are they doing it? “I think Bernie’s point is really important. Billionaires do not need public schools. Billionaires don’t understand the magic that happens in public schools. The billionaires that are in charge of our government right now send their kids to the most elite private schools, and if every public school disappears in this country, they will still be able to get their kids an education. “And it’s consistent with the entire way they are approaching the first six months of this administration. Billionaires don’t need Medicaid. So to them, it doesn’t matter if Medicaid disappears and rural hospitals close and addiction treatment centers shutter their doors– because the billionaires will still get their healthcare. “They talk about Social Security being a Ponzi scheme. They’re shutting down Social Security offices around the country because they don’t need Social Security. They’re billionaires–they’re never going to need a Social Security check – like millions of American seniors do – in order to put food on the table. So the billionaire mindset is just different than ordinary, average Americans. And that’s why, to them, public education doesn’t matter. “But to Senator Schumer's point, here’s the other reason why: all that matters right now is the billionaire and corporate tax cut. All that matters is hoarding as much money – stealing as much money – from middle class and poor families in this country, so that they can pass that money along to the billionaires, the millionaires, and the corporations. Everything that they are doing is about making sure that they shrink the parts of government that help regular people, so that they can pass along more benefits and more help to their billionaire friends. “But then here’s the last piece of the story of why. The billionaire class, the corporate class, the private equity class– they are sick to death that they don't have their hands inside the Department of Education treasury; that they can’t get their hands on our schools like they’ve gotten their hands into our healthcare system and every other aspect of our economy. “What they want to do is to sell off our public schools to the highest bidder. The voucher program that they are talking about, that they will be more easily able to implement if the Department of Education is gone, is really about just making it easier for the billionaire and corporate class to be able to buy up our schools, so that they can make money off of it like they make money off of the Medicare program, like they make money off of so many other aspects of our government. “So if the Department of Education closes, it’s going to hurt millions of families in this country– it is just going to enable the theft of resources from regular families to pad the pockets of the billionaires – but is also likely to result in you waking up one day and finding out that your local elementary school that your kids go to is owned by a private equity firm on the other side of the country and is being run for profit instead of being run for the education of your kids. “So this is deeply unpopular, nobody wants the Department of Education eliminated, and it's really important for us to explain to the American people why it’s happening.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to expose the unprecedented corruption of the Trump administration’s first six weeks in office. Murphy condemned Trump’s normalization of pay-to-play politics, where billionaire donors dictate policy and taxpayer money is funneled into the pockets of the president, Elon Musk, and the corporate elite. “In the first six weeks of the Trump presidency, Trump and Elon Musk and their billionaire friends have engaged in a stunning rampage of open public corruption,” Murphy said. “It's not fundamentally different than what happened in Russia. These are efforts to steal from the American people to enrich themselves. And their strategy is to do it all out in the open, to do it at such a dizzying pace that
...Read more the country just gets overwhelmed or anesthetized or dulled into a sense that we just all have to accept the corruption – or, maybe more charitably, that this is just how government works, that government is just corrupt, and so the fact that it's happening out in the open instead of happening secretly, well, it's really nothing new.” Murphy laid out more than 20 examples of blatant corruption from just the first six weeks of the Trump presidency, including: The launch of Trump’s meme coin, enabling anyone seeking to influence the administration to privately funnel money directly to the president.
The gutting and manipulation of watchdog agencies like the NLRB, CFPB, and OSHA to benefit Elon Musk, the billionaires in Trump’s cabinet, and other elites.
The Eric Adams quid pro quo and the weaponization of the DOJ to reinforce a system of political retribution and favoritism.
The use of government contracts and stock deals to reward Trump’s allies, enriching them through taxpayer-funded opportunities and further consolidating political power. “This is how democracies die,” Murphy continued. “Democracies die when the very powerful people steal from us so regularly, so openly, so unapologetically, that we come to believe that it's normal. And listen, I understand that many Americans may think that all of this stuff just used to happen quietly, and the only difference is that Trump and Musk are just putting it all out in the open. And I'm not saying that there haven't been instances of corruption. Democrats and Republicans in this body have been accused of, and convicted of, acts of corruption. It has been a fact of life in American politics for a long time. But never before has the corruption happened this openly or this frequently. And so I lay it all out for you this afternoon in the hopes that it is not too late for us to decide to stand up, as a body and as a nation, to say that this isn’t okay.” He concluded: “The Trump meme coin is not okay. It's not okay for people who have interest before the federal government to be able to anonymously funnel money to the president of the United States. It's not okay for Elon Musk to have access to Department of Labor enforcement data, against him or his competitors, that nobody else gets access to. It's not okay to just cancel contracts that were going to Musk's competitors and substitute in his own business, just because he has the ability to do it as a friend of Donald Trump. The rule of law matters. Doing things by the rules matter. This level of corruption was not occurring behind the scenes prior. It is not just that the cover got pulled off of it all. And it's our decision, as a body and as a country, to decide not to normalize this scale of corruption.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Mr. President, I’m a big Boston Red Sox fan. One of the most famous players in Red Sox recent history is Manny Ramirez. Manny Ramirez was a good baseball player, but he had a habit of doing some pretty ridiculous things on the field and off the field that were really detrimental to the team, some really bizarre on-field behavior – cutting off throws from other outfielders before they got to the infield – bizarre off-the-field behavior that disrupted the team. It became so regular that a phrase was adopted among the Red Sox fans: ‘That's just Manny being Manny.’ Over the years it just was accepted that every year Manny Ramirez was going to do a whole bunch of stuff that was really detrimental to the team. And over time, it just kind of became accepted, that that was a fact of life, a way of life with Manny Ramirez. And as time went on, people reacted less hostilely. It barely got noticed in some cases when he was engaged in these detrimental forms of conduct. “And I tell that story because it stands for kind of a universal concept: when bad behavior gets normalized, it no longer feels like bad behavior. Even if that behavior is hurting people. Today, the world is littered with corrupt governments, governments where the leaders and the really rich men who surround the leaders – the oligarchs – steal from people. That's what they do, the leaders and the leaders' friends just keep a hand constantly in the government treasury and they steal taxpayer dollars. They rig the rules of the economy in order to make themselves fabulously rich. They hurt the citizens of those countries. “Vladimir Putin, for instance, has never had a job outside of government, but he's reportedly worth $200 billion. One of his many houses cost $1.4 billion to build, supposedly the landscaping costs on an annual basis for that house are $2 million alone. That $1.4 billion house was paid for by money he stole from the Russian treasury. In other words, he stole it from the Russian people. Putin and his friends have been doing it for so long and doing it so openly and brazenly – Putin, for instance, wears a watch that retails for half a million dollars, even though his official salary is only $140,000. They've been doing this so openly and brazenly, they're so public in their corruption in Russia, that it's just accepted. It's just mainstream, the fact that Putin and his cronies steal from the Russian people. “That's what's happening in America today. And it's heartbreaking for me to say this, but in the first six weeks of the Trump presidency, Trump and Elon Musk and their billionaire friends have engaged in a stunning rampage of open public corruption. It's not fundamentally different than what happened in Russia. These are efforts to steal from the American people to enrich themselves. And their strategy is to do it all out in the open, to do it at such a dizzying pace that the country just gets overwhelmed or anesthetized or dulled into a sense that we just all have to accept the corruption – or, maybe more charitably, that this is just how government works, that government is just corrupt, and so the fact that it's happening out in the open instead of happening secretly, well, it's really nothing new. “But this is not how government works. The things that have happened over the last six weeks are unprecedented. The president and his billionaire friends are not supposed to steal from us. They are not supposed to use their power and their access to power – their access to government levers – to rig the rules to enrich themselves. That has always been wrong. It is still wrong. And we do not have to accept this. “And so in the next few minutes, I want to try out an exercise. I want to try to lay out for you as quickly as I can just some of the most significant instances of blatantly corrupt activity that's happened in just the first six weeks of Trump's presidency. When you see it all together, there is no way to avoid a simple conclusion. This White House is on its way to being the most corrupt in the history of the country. And just because they are doing it out in the open for everybody to see doesn't mean that it's not corrupt. “My hope is that if you see it all in one place, the gravity of this moment may hit you. My hope is that my colleagues and the public choose not to normalize a president or his advisors using the Oval Office as a blunt mechanism to make themselves even wealthier. It is our decision – our decision – to have zero tolerance for corruption. It's also our decision to just decide to become a place like Russia where our leaders are allowed to routinely steal from us. “This is a heartbreakingly long list. This is just 20 or so examples of corrupt behavior in the first six weeks of the Trump presidency. So here it goes. We're going to start on January 17. “On January 17, Trump launches the meme coin. This is maybe the most corrupt of all of the acts, because what is the meme coin? The meme coin is essentially a mechanism by which Russian oligarchs or corporate CEO's can literally send money privately directly to Donald Trump. Nobody knows who buys the meme coin, but Trump makes money when people buy it. And so it is just an open sewer valve that allows for anybody who is trying to influence the Trump administration to be able to secretly funnel money to Donald Trump. He reserves 80% of the coin. He waits to release that coin until the price jumps back up again, which essentially means he's waiting for people who want favors from him to buy a bunch of the coin to inflate the value so that he releases more and makes more money. It’s a disgusting kind of corruption because this is essentially Trump just posting his Venmo for anybody secretly to wire him as much money as they want. We've never seen something like this before where anybody who has anything to gain from the Trump administration, through a manipulation of the value of Trump's meme coin, can funnel money directly to the president, whisper in his ear, ‘That was me. That was me that purchased all that coin, that jumped up the value that allowed you to release new coin. Hey, take care of me on the back end.’ “On January 20, when he's sworn in, he institutes his new energy agenda. Now, open reporting suggested that during the campaign he met with the oil and gas industry and they cut a deal in which the oil and gas industry would give him a billion dollars of campaign contributions in order to receive favorable treatment when Trump was sworn in. And guess what happens on January 20? Trump unveils his energy strategy, and what does it do? It preferences oil and gas and it punishes oil and gas’ competitors. It, for instance, freezes all permits on wind projects, both for the land and the sea. It undercuts permitting processes, not for oil and gas but for oil and gas' competitors. Oil and gas got exactly what they asked for. They gave a campaign contribution and they got the favorable treatment. Five days later, Trump fires 17 inspectors general. What do inspectors general do? They look for corruption inside of these agencies. What do you do if you are trying to engage in corruption, if you are trying to steal from the American people? You fire the inspectors general. “Two days later, on January 27, Trump fires Gwynne Wilcox from the NLRB, the National Labor Relations Board. When she's fired, the National Labor Relations Board cannot function any longer? Why does this matter? Because the person that's been put in charge of reviewing the hirings and firings of these agencies is Elon Musk, who, by the way, has lots of cases before the NLRB. So do the people that are standing behind Trump during the inauguration. Almost all of them have active cases before the NLRB. The billionaires supporting Donald Trump now don't have to worry about the NLRB because on January 27, the NLRB is rendered powerless. “Three days later, on January 30, Trump awards more than $800,000 worth of stock to several of the board members of the Trump Media and Technology Group. This is the publicly traded company behind his social media platform. So now his Cabinet members – people like Kash Patel and Linda Mcmahon – are owning equity in Trump's media platform; equity that can be cashed out, sold to people who want to buy them out of their interest at any time. Those people who might want to buy them out, Cabinet members, could be individuals with issues before the Department of Education, before the FBI. Yet another avenue in which people who have influence, who want to gain influence inside the Trump administration, have a conduit to be able to move cash from their pocketbooks, from their treasury, from their bank accounts, into the bank accounts of Trump cabinet members. “Shortly thereafter, we start to see the weaponization of the DOJ. On February 23, a civil complaint from DOJ that had been pending against SpaceX– Elon Musk's signature company – is dropped. Eight days later, the DOJ drops a case against a Republican Congressman. On February 19, two or three weeks later, the DOJ opens up something called Operation Whirlwind, which threatens anyone who dares to criticize the work of Elon Musk and DOGE. Over the course of the next three weeks, the DOJ is turned into an entity that drops cases against those who are loyal to Donald Trump and pursues aggressively investigations against those who are trying to criticize Donald Trump. “On February 1, Trump fires the director of the CFPB and announces plans to shut down – to shutter – the Consumer Financial Protection Board. Again, very much like the NLRB, this is an agency that was, at the moment that it was rendered powerless, investigating Elon Musk and many of the biggest financial backers of Donald Trump. So once again, those that have access to Donald Trump, the billionaires that are close to him, now don't have to worry about labor violations being investigated by the NLRB, now they don't have to worry about consumer protection actions being taken against them by the CFPB. “On February 4, there is the first of two extraordinary meetings in the White House in which Donald Trump convenes his business partners – his business patterns – the Saudi Golf League and the PGA to try to negotiate a solution to the dispute between those two golf leagues. Why? Because Trump has a business interest in that dispute being resolved. The Saudi Golf League plays tournaments at Trump’s courses in the United States, so if the White House, using its official power, can try to negotiate a settlement between those two groups, Trump stands to make money. “On February 6, something absolutely stunning happens. Pam Bondi, the AG, issues a memorandum in which she proposes to dull the criminal enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. If you are representing a foreign government before the United States, you have to register so that we know if you are acting on behalf of American interests or you are acting on behalf of foreign interests. In the prior Trump administration, Trump officials got in big trouble for secretly working for, and getting paid by, foreign governments without registering. Well, what does Trump announce? That they are going to limit the applicability of the enforcement of that statute, making it much easier for Trump's friends – for his MAGA crowd, for the people who show up to Mar-a-Lago – to get paid quietly by foreign governments in order to influence Donald Trump. “On February 10, maybe aside from the meme coin, the most stunning act of corruption: the Eric Adams quid pro quo, in which Eric Adams, indicted for corruption, is let off the hook. His charges are dismissed in exchange for the mayor's pledge of political loyalty to Donald Trump. They literally went on TV and announced the deal that we're getting rid of the charges against Eric Adams, as long as the mayor pledges political loyalty to the President. That was so corrupt that six or seven DOJ officials resigned, because they refused to withdraw those charges, but the deal went through because the seventh, or the eighth, or the ninth official finally filed the withdrawal. “And now in America, it is 100% clear that if you want to get away with corruption, if you want to steal from your constituents and you're an elected official in this country, all you have to do is just sign up for political loyalty with Donald Trump, and he will instruct the Department of Justice to let you get away with it. “On February 10, Donald Trump directs the DOJ to pause enforcement of U.S. laws that prohibit companies from paying bribes overseas. Come on! Like, come on! He instructs the DOJ to pause enforcement of U.S. laws that prohibit companies to pay bribes overseas. Here’s an example: Goldman Sachs was engaged in outright bribery–they were paying bribes to Malaysian officials, so that they could get a contract to manage the resources of the Malaysian sovereign wealth fund. “American companies should not be overseas bribing foreign governments. That compromises America's reputation and America's national security. But now, we are going to pause enforcement of the laws that stop American companies from bribing foreign governments, because corruption is now being normalized. This is what you do if you want to normalize corruption, is that you make it legal for American companies to engage in corruption overseas. That makes it easier for Trump to get away with corruption here. “Two days later, on February 12, the announcement comes out that the State Department is going to buy $400 million of armored Teslas. Okay, so now it’s getting even more blatant. It’s getting even more brazen. The State Department is just going to buy a whole bunch of product from Elon Musk, product they were not previously scheduled to buy. It is true that the Biden administration had a blueprint that was going to buy some electric vehicles, but it was around $483,000-worth of vehicles. Trump revises that blueprint of spending so that now the federal government is going to spend $400 million on armored Teslas from Elon Musk. “Let’s see: that's February 12. That same day, Elon Musk's people infiltrate the Department of Labor. And reporting suggests that during that infiltration, Elon Musk's personal representatives get access to enforcement information at OSHA, not only against Elon Musk's companies–and by the way, SpaceX has an employee injury rate that is nine times higher than the industry average–but also workplace safety violations against Elon Musk's competitors. Here’s the message: if you are close to Donald Trump personally, if you support him politically, you can get secret access to enforcement data against your companies and your companies' competitors. That's what happens on February 12. “Three days later, there's some suspicious firings at the FDA. Again, related to Elon Musk's personal financial interests. Elon Musk owns a medical device company called Neuralink. It is currently being reviewed by the FDA. And guess what? On February 15 and 16, all over a weekend, there are 20 people fired from the FDA's Office of Neurological and Physical Medicine Devices. Fired by DOGE, run by Elon Musk. Clear message: you're going to get fired if you aren't on the right side of Elon Musk's application. Now, whether that was explicit or not, if the guy who is firing you has a pending application before your department, aren't you going to think twice? Aren't you going to think twice about ruling against his interests? This is why this is all unprecedented. Again, this feels normal because it’s been happening every day. But never before in American history have we allowed someone who has a pending application for approval of a medicine or a medical device to be able to personally decide who gets hired and who gets fired at the regulatory agency making the decision over that medical device. “But now, this stuff is happening every day. Because on February 15 as well, that same weekend, there's an announcement that the FDA cuts are going to be even deeper, perhaps as big as 50%. That means that hundreds of drugs and devices won't get approved at the FDA. And you know who benefits from that? The folks that are selling the snake oil products. And guess who’s selling the snake oil products? The people who work for Donald Trump, selling vita-gummy scams. The Director of the FBI is selling vaccine reversal pills. When the FDA gets gutted, it’s the people who sell those unregulated products who stand to gain. “On February 19, four days later, we find out that the IRS is going to be cut by 7,000 people. And the biggest chunk of the folks who are going to be laid off are the people who do the audits of the billionaires, and the millionaires, and the corporations. And so once again, Elon Musk and the people standing behind Donald Trump on Inauguration Day are going to get off, because the IRS just had its enforcement powers–its audit powers–absolutely gutted.” “That same day, on February 19, you start to receive word that advertising on Elon Musk’s platform is starting to grow again. And the reporting on February 19 indicates that American companies have come to the collective decision that they need to keep advertising on Elon Musk’s platform, because Elon Musk has so much regulatory power inside the federal government. That they need to make sure they're paying Musk through Twitter and through X, so that if they ultimately need something from the federal government, they can get it. This, again, is why we have never, ever in the history of this country, allowed for the richest man in the world, somebody who controls major companies, to also have an official position inside the government. Because, of course, of course, it opens up these clear avenues where people are going to do business with him privately to try to curry favor with him publicly. “I’m not done. It just keeps going. The next day, on February 20, the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’s monthly meeting is canceled and not rescheduled. And so we were very worried that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who makes money off of his attacks on vaccines, would continue those attacks when he took over HHS. Because if faith in vaccines continues to plummet, it is very likely that RFK Jr. will make money. Why? Because the not-for-profit that he will likely return to, the company that he will return to after he leaves, makes money as vaccine misinformation spreads, and he also continues to collect fees for referring cases to a company that handles claims of personal injury due to vaccines. And so when the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices is canceled, it is a clear indication that yes, this campaign of assault on vaccines is going to continue, which, not surprisingly, is likely to make RFK Jr. even more money. “On February 26, we see Trump's MAGA hats, that are for sale on his website, displayed in the Oval Office. And it's just a reminder that so many people inside Trump's universe continue to sell merchandise on the side in order to make money. Donald Trump has always done this, and we've just accepted it, even though it is a kind of corruption in and of itself. But Kash Patel, the Director of the FBI, is still selling Kash-branded merchandise even while he's going to run the FBI. Elon Musk and others are selling DOGE merchandise. So as they trumpet their brand inside the government, they’re making money off their brand outside of the government. “On February 26, maybe the third-most significant [instance] of brazen corruption happens. News breaks that Elon Musk is just going to have the FAA cancel a contract with Verizon that has been in the works for years, and instead just substitute in Starlink for Verizon. Just extraordinary that this is happening in plain view of everybody. Elon Musk takes his private company, uses his access to government to just shove out of the way his competitors, and instead insert himself and his company. Again, we've never seen this ever before in American history, and now it’s happening on a daily basis. “And now we get to this week. This week, Wired reports that guests are paying millions of dollars to dine with Donald Trump at Mar-A-Lago, and business leaders are being targeted with advertisements that sell access to a one-on-one meeting with the President of the United States for $5 million. Come on! Like, seriously! There's advertisements that say if you're a business CEO and you pay $5 million to Donald Trump, you can get a meeting with him. This isn't okay! And yet, because it happens every single day, every single day they're asking for us to pretend that this is normal. This is just six weeks. It's just six weeks. And the last thing on the list is an offer to meet with the president for $1 million or $5 million. If any previous president had sent out an advertisement suggesting that you can meet with them for a payment to them of $1 million to $5 million, in and of itself we would deem that to be unacceptable. But Donald Trump and Elon Musk believe that because they have arranged this dizzying pace of corruption, in which not a day goes by in which something doesn't happen inside our government in which Elon Musk or Donald Trump use their power in order to rig the rules to enrich themselves, that we are all going to feel that it's normal. “This is how democracies die. Democracies die when the very powerful people steal from us so regularly, so openly, so unapologetically, that we come to believe that it's normal. And listen, I understand that many Americans may think that all of this stuff just used to happen quietly, and the only difference is that Trump and Musk are just putting it all out in the open. And I'm not saying that there haven't been instances of corruption. Democrats and Republicans in this body have been accused of, and convicted of, acts of corruption. It has been a fact of life in American politics for a long time. But never before has the corruption happened this openly or this frequently. And so I lay it all out for you this afternoon in the hopes that it is not too late for us to decide to stand up, as a body and as a nation, to say that this isn’t okay. “The Trump meme coin is not okay. It's not okay for people who have interest before the federal government to be able to anonymously funnel money to the president of the United States. It's not okay for Elon Musk to have access to Department of Labor enforcement data, against him or his competitors, that nobody else gets access to. It's not okay to just cancel contracts that were going to Musk's competitors and substitute in his own business, just because he has the ability to do it as a friend of Donald Trump. The rule of law matters. Doing things by the rules matter. This level of corruption was not occurring behind the scenes prior. It is not just that the cover got pulled off of it all. And it's our decision, as a body and as a country, to decide not to normalize this scale of corruption. I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday questioned Christopher Landau, nominee to be U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, and Michael Rigas, nominee to be U.S. Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources. Murphy pressed Landau on the administration’s hollowing out of USAID and how he can claim there was a good faith review if he also purports to not know the extent of furloughs and terminations. Murphy pushed Rigas on the executive branch’s legal obligation to spend money appropriated by Congress. A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with the nominees can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Landau, I deeply appreciate your service to this country and your willingness to come
...Read more before this committee. But I’ll be honest with you, I find it pretty offensive that you are trying to maintain that there is some good faith review happening at USAID, when the representatives of the administration in charge of cost-cutting have made it clear that the goal is to destroy USAID. Do you know what percentage of USAID employees have been fired or furloughed?” LANDAU: “Senator, I do not. I’m here as a private citizen. I’m a nominee, so I am not part of the administration at this point.” MURPHY: “Do you have a ballpark guess? You’re about to help lead America's diplomatic efforts–a ballpark guess as to how many USAID employees have been fired or furloughed?” LANDAU: “Again, Senator, I’ve just looked at the way the president has set this forth–that he has instituted a 90-day review period–” MURPHY: “You haven’t read reports that you might be able to cite today?” LANDAU: “Well, I’ve seen some reports, again, in the press, but I want to be very careful before I start acting as if I know what is going on behind the scenes. I’m not part of the administration yet. Obviously, if I am confirmed, you can call me before you for oversight.” MURPHY: “Here’s the problem: so the number is 94%. 94% of USAID staff have been fired or essentially permanently furloughed. And you stated to us that you believe this is a good faith 90-day review. And yet, you actually don't know how many people have been fired or furloughed. How can you come to the conclusion that this is a good faith review when you actually don't know the extent of the terminations? Wouldn't it be relevant as to the question of whether it was a good faith review if 94% of the agency had already been terminated?” LANDAU: “Well, Senator, again, I think it’s important to recognize: what are the programs and how are these people that are being fired or furloughed–” MURPHY: “But how did you come to the conclusion that this is a good faith review if you don't even know what's happening? You can’t have it both ways. You can’t come to the committee and say, ‘I know this is a good faith review, but I don't know anything that's happening because I’m not in the administration.’” LANDAU: “Well, Senator, again, I assume– there's a presumption of government regularity that exists generally in the law. I believe strongly that the president wants to comply with the law, wants to make sure that we are doing the American taxpayers' bidding by looking carefully at these programs and making sure that we separate the baby from the bathwater.” MURPHY: “I just don't think you can have it both ways. I don't think you can come here and tell us that you know that this is a good faith review but assert that you don't have any basic information about what's happening. Mr. Rigas, which branch of government has the power to decide how taxpayer money is spent? Is it the legislative branch, the executive branch, or the judicial branch?” RIGAS: “Thank you for the question, Senator. Congress has the power of the purse. The executive has the power to make sure the laws are faithfully implemented, and the courts arbitrate disputes between those two branches.” MURPHY: “So, if Congress has authorized an agency or a department, and has appropriated money with the caveat that the money shall be spent, does the administration have the obligation to spend that money in accordance with how Congress has appropriated the dollars?” RIGAS: “Senator, I’m not a lawyer but my understanding is the executive has a role in how those moneys are spent. So to the extent that the–” MURPHY: “I think Republicans and Democrats on this committee should care about the answer to this question. That’s a pretty easy one. If Congress has authorized a function, an agency or department, and has appropriated dollars with the word ‘shall,’ do you believe the executive branch can decide not to spend those dollars?” RIGAS: “Well I’m familiar with mandatory entitlement programs which have that language, and those are on autopilot, so–” MURPHY: “This is not an entitlement program. Let me give you an example. The National Endowment for Democracy is established by law. We appropriate every year, and we say that the dollars appropriated–in this case, $315 million–shall be spent. You are going to oversee spending at the Department of State. Do you believe that the executive branch could choose not to spend dollars that are appropriated by Congress with a ‘shall’ rather than a ‘may?’” RIGAS: “I don't think so but I’m not the ultimate arbiter of that question. And how the money is spent–” MURPHY: “You are the arbiter of that question. You are actually being nominated for the job that would decide how those dollars are spent.” RIGAS: “I think the question at hand here is on what things is the money being spent, not whether it should be spent or not.” MURPHY: “No, we decide how the money is spent, and you’re supposed to execute it. If we say $315 million is to be spent at the National Endowment for Democracy, do you believe that you have the ability to deny that money to be spent on the functions that Congress appropriates? This is a really important question.” RIGAS: “I don't think so, but I also think what’s at–” MURPHY: “So you don’t think so. So yes or no?” RIGAS: “I think that if that’s what the law says, then that is what needs to happen.” MURPHY: “Okay, thank you.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined CNN’s State of the Union with Dana Bash to discuss President Donald Trump’s meeting with President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky and the upcoming joint address to Congress. Murphy explained why President Trump appears to be aligning himself with Vladimir Putin: “The White House has become an arm of the Kremlin…It appears as if America is trying to align itself with dictators. Donald Trump wants us to have our closest relationships with despots all around the world because that makes it easier for him to transition America into a kleptocratic oligarchy where Elon Musk and Donald Trump rule and steal from the American people. If we were allied with democracies, that would be harder. But if the United States’ closest partner is
...Read more Russia, then it makes it a lot easier for Donald Trump, Elon, and their billionaire pals to steal from the American people, to steal our data, to steal our Medicare, to steal our Medicaid in order to enrich themselves.” On the Trump-Zelensky meeting, Murphy said: “The back half of that meeting ended up just being the Kremlin literally driving the message of the White House. It is a sad day in America when we are getting closer and closer to Russia, a brutal dictatorship, and we are getting further and further away from democratic allies. Nobody in America wants that. People in America want that war to end, but they don't want it to end by handing the entirety of Ukraine to Russia and elevating the power of a dictator in the Kremlin.” On President Trump’s upcoming joint address to Congress, Murphy said: “I think that State of the Union speech is going to be a farce. I think it's going to be a MAGA pep rally, not a serious talk to the nation. I think Donald Trump is going to spew a series of lies about his alignment with Russia, about what he's trying to do to allow Elon Musk to essentially monetize the American government to enrich Musk and his billionaire crowd. And I'm just not going to be a part of that.” He continued: “Listen, the case I'm making to Democrats is that we have to fight every single day. Every single day. Republicans flood the zone. Democrats have to flood the zone. They flood the zone with lies. We flood the zone with truth. We are going to stop this billionaire takeover of government. We are going to stop their destruction of democracy, which they have to do, because what they are attempting to do – gut Medicaid in order to feed another set of tax cuts to Elon Musk and his billionaire friends – it’s unpopular. We're going to stop that billionaire takeover, that destruction of our democracy, only by fighting them every single day.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, and U.S. Representative Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.), Acting Ranking Member of the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Thursday sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem raising concerns about the implementation and funding of recent Executive Actions affecting the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Murphy and Underwood emphasize the consequences of prioritizing civil immigration enforcement over national security threats and call for transparency on DHS’s compliance with existing laws, funding decisions, and policy changes. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Noem, The
...Read more recent Executive Actions direct significant changes across the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with potentially grave implications for the DHS mission, its employees, American communities, and for the resources provided by Congress in prior fiscal years (FY). Given the consequences of prioritizing civil immigration enforcement over the prevention of future attacks against the United States, we have several questions relating to the execution and implementation of the identified subject areas below. We request the information and responses by March 5, unless otherwise indicated. Specifically, we ask for: Written updates on the status of DHS’s review of grants for non-governmental organizations pursuant to the Presidential Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies entitled “Advancing United States Interests When Funding Nongovernmental Organizations” (February 6, 2025).
Written updates on the status of DHS’s compliance with current law relating to requests for assistance to the Department of Defense (DOD), specifically whether DHS complied with the requirement to conduct an ‘alternatives analysis’ and a cost-benefit analysis as specified.2
Written updates on the status of DHS’s compliance with the Ms. L, et al. vs. ICE, et al. court settlement regarding family separation. Additionally, please provide responses relating to the questions below on any funding agreements DHS has signed since January 20, 2025.
Please provide written copies of all DHS or component specific memorandums and field guidance that cover the implementation of the Executive Actions and other policy changes that impact DHS signed since January 20, 2025.
To the extent detailed funding implications are not covered in the memos or guidance (as described below), please provide responses to the following:
If using current or prior year funds to execute the Executive Actions, please identify by Executive Action(s), the directed action within such Executive Action(s), the funding source(s) (by account/Program Project Activity), and total amount(s); and
If additional resources are needed, please identify the type of resources (e.g., personnel, assets, etc.), the Executive Action(s) supported through these resources, anticipated amount(s) and source(s) for those funds, including whether Congress should anticipate a budget amendment to FY 2025. Please specify whether DHS, or any component, plan to make any changes from direction provided in the FY 2024 enacted appropriations bill (P.L. 118-47, Division C) and the accompanying Joint Explanatory Statement regarding the purpose(s) for funding provided, including any level(s) specified, such as hiring levels, detention beds, etc. during the period of the continuing resolution. If so, when will DHS provide notice to the Committees on these changes?
What quantifiable measures does DHS, or any component, plan to use to assess the results of the Executive Actions issued after January 20, 2025?
Do any funds Congress provided for the Shelter and Services Program (SSP), Citizenship and Integration Grant Program, and the Case Management Pilot Program remain frozen or paused?
If funds for these programs remain frozen or paused, please explain the statutory authority permitting DHS to freeze or pause Congressionally appropriated funding and the process and timeline for DHS to make those funds available to recipients.
Please provide a timeline of any actions taken related to the funding freeze or pause, as well as how the review of these programs has been handled.
Please provide a copy of any additional departmental guidance from DHS leadership related to these funds.
Please provide written copies of all external funding agreements DHS has entered since January 20, 2025, including interagency agreements, federal partnership agreements, and agreements with non-federal entities, to include agreements with state, local, and tribal governments. In conclusion, as we move forward in the 119th Congress we trust that the transparency, communication, and commitment to work with our Committees will continue as it has in prior Administrations. We look forward to your response and your response to our joint letter to you from February 14th that is past our requested deadline. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Thursday joined U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), and U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) in issuing the following statement on the Trump Administration’s reckless termination of nearly all U.S. foreign assistance programs: “It is clear that the Trump Administration’s foreign assistance ‘review’ was not a serious effort or attempt at reform but rather a pretext to dismantle decades of U.S. investment that makes America safer, stronger and more prosperous. There is no
...Read more indication Secretary Rubio conducted a program-by-program review of the more than 9,000 awards or considered the dire national security implications of these rash actions. Ending programs first and asking questions later only jeopardizes millions of lives and creates a power vacuum for our adversaries like China and Russia to fill. “While it’s easy to assume that these cuts will only affect people thousands of miles away, the fact is, the impact will be felt by American farmers who will no longer get top dollar for their crops to feed the hungry, churches who will no longer have the support of the U.S. government in their missions, American families who fall sick when diseases like Zika, Ebola and Malaria once again reach our shores and U.S. biotech companies who will no longer sell their drugs to treat the vulnerable overseas. Secretary Rubio should immediately come before our Committee. We expect him to not only consult with Congress but follow the law.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Wednesday joined a group of eleven Senate Democrats in sending a letter pressing U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Scott Turner on whether his plan to reprivatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will make mortgages more expensive. Following his confirmation, Secretary Turner said he would act as “quarterback” in the Trump Administration’s plan to reprivatize the multi-trillion-dollar companies. “During your confirmation process, you repeatedly spoke of the desire to reduce housing costs, a goal we share. However, right out of the gate, you are actively advocating for policy changes that would likely raise housing costs for hardworking Americans,” the senators wrote. The senators continued: “
...Read more Changes to the ownership of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be a monumental undertaking that would affect our entire housing system and touch the lives of homeowners and renters across the country. If mismanaged, ending the conservatorships and Treasury’s role with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could make mortgages more expensive, cut off access to mortgage credit, destroy many of the important reforms made over the past 16 years, and compromise our entire housing market and the broader U.S. economy.” The senators also raised concerns that privatization could result in a taxpayer-funded giveaway worth billions for wealthy investors and hedge funds, quoting one investor’s optimism that “Trump and his team will get the job done.” They concluded: “Our housing finance system is a complex, multi-trillion-dollar market that touches the lives of every American family. It is critical that any effort to reprivatize Fannie Mac and Freddie Mac does not result in windfalls for wealthy investors while raising housing costs for American families. We look forward to your prompt and thorough reply on this urgent matter.” U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Turner: We are writing with questions about your role in any effort to reprivatize the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and requesting your commitment that any reprivatization process will not raise housing costs for American families. During your confirmation process, you repeatedly spoke of the desire to reduce housing costs, a goal we share. However, right out of the gate, you are actively advocating for policy changes that would likely raise housing costs for hardworking Americans. One of the first policy issues you addressed as Secretary, in an interview on the day you were sworn in, was privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. You indicated that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) would be “one of” the “partners at the table” in the privatization effort and that you will serve as the “quarterback” in the process. You did not indicate who your additional partners would be in these discussions. Reprivatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac threatens to raise the cost of mortgages and rent and make it even harder to access credit for purchasing a home. At a time when so many Americans are struggling with housing costs, we must ask why you are choosing as one of your first priorities a policy that only makes it harder for Americans to afford housing. Since 2008, when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the Enterprises) experienced severe financial stress and needed a significant investment from taxpayers, the Treasury Department has held senior preferred shares and warrants to purchase 79.9% of common shares in the two companies. At the same time that Treasury made this investment, the Enterprises’ regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), placed them in conservatorship and began operating as both their regulator and conservator. In conservatorship, the Enterprises have made significant changes that have improved their operations to reduce risk and better serve homebuyers and renters, providing access to affordable mortgages for hardworking Americans across the country. This includes families who often go underserved in our housing system, including lower income families and people in rural areas. Changes to the ownership of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be a monumental undertaking that would affect our entire housing system and touch the lives of homeowners and renters across the country. If mismanaged, ending the conservatorships and Treasury’s role with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could make mortgages more expensive, cut off access to mortgage credit, destroy many of the important reforms made over the past 16 years, and compromise our entire housing market and the broader U.S. economy. It could also generate billions of dollars for hedge funds and other wealthy investors in the Enterprises at taxpayers’ expense. One prominent hedge fund manager and investor in the Enterprises’ common shares has written that he sees “large asymmetric upside” in investments in the Enterprises because he believes there is a “credible path for their removal from conservatorship” and he expects that “Trump and his team will get the job done.” Given the enormous housing affordability threats posed by the privatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we request that you respond to the following questions by March 12, 2025: Will HUD, and you as HUD Secretary, be the quarterback of any efforts to make changes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? What specific responsibilities will you have in this role?
If you help lead the process to end the conservatorships of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, do you commit to ensuring that any changes do not raise mortgage costs or make it more difficult to access mortgage credit for American homebuyers?
Will you commit to ensuring that any changes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will not result in higher rents for American families?
You have said that “[t]here are partners that will be at the table” on efforts to reprivatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and that “[w]hen you’re a quarterback, you’ve got to work with the entire huddle.” What other partners will be at the table when discussing changes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
HUD does not play a direct role in oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and recent public documents and agreements regarding the conservatorships and Treasury’s investments in the Enterprises have only involved the Treasury Department and FHFA. What authority does HUD have with respect to the Enterprises and their ongoing conservatorships?
Will you commit to ensuring that hedge funds and other wealthy investors who stand to profit off of an end to the conservatorship or any changes to Treasury’s ownership stake in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac do not have an opportunity to unduly influence potential changes to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac?
Will you commit to running a transparent and open process with regard to all meetings and deliberations over potential changes to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Will you ensure that the Administration adheres to the public process outlined in the recent side letter agreement between Treasury and FHFA prior to taking any actions regarding the conservatorships or privatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Will you work with all relevant agencies to conduct a thorough analysis of any housing market, mortgage cost, and financial stability impacts of any planned changes to the Enterprises prior to making any changes that would affect the Enterprises’ conservatorship status, Treasury’s ownership stake in the Enterprises, or taxpayers’ compensation for their investment in the Enterprises? Our housing finance system is a complex, multi-trillion-dollar market that touches the lives of every American family. It is critical that any effort to reprivatize Fannie Mac and Freddie Mac does not result in windfalls for wealthy investors while raising housing costs for American families. We look forward to your prompt and thorough reply on this urgent matter. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Wednesday released a statement on the Trump administration’s illegal move to terminate the overwhelming majority of U.S. foreign aid programs. “This is further evidence that our country is barreling toward a full-blown constitutional crisis. The administration is brazenly attempting to blow through Congress and the courts by announcing the completion of their sham ‘review’ of foreign aid and the immediate termination of thousands of aid programs all over the world. The wholesale dismantling of USAID and our foreign aid infrastructure has been cloaked in secrecy because they know what they’re doing is illegal. Congressionally appropriated funding must resume, and Secretary Rubio and
...Read more Pete Marocco must testify before the Foreign Relations Committee to explain themselves immediately.” ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, joined Democratic leaders of the Senate Judiciary and Appropriations Committees in sending a letter to President Trump denouncing his transfer of immigrants from the United States to the detention center at Guantánamo Bay as unlawful and asking for answers to basic questions yet to be provided to Congress. “We write to object to your illegal and unjustified transfers of immigrants from the United States to the detention center at Naval Station Guantánamo Bay, which follows your directive to the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security to prepare the base to hold tens of thousands of noncitizens. These actions are unprecedented, unlawful, and harmful to
...Read more American national security, values, and interests,” the senators wrote. “The United States has never sent anyone from the United States to be detained at Guantánamo before now.” On the unlawful and unjustified nature of the directive, the senators wrote: “There is no basis in U.S. immigration law for transferring noncitizens arrested inside the United States to a location outside of the United States for detention prior to or for the purposes of conducting removal proceedings. Noncitizens inside the United States are entitled to numerous protections under U.S. immigration law and the U.S. Constitution. For example, removal processes under our immigration laws afford noncitizens due process and an opportunity to seek protection from removal to a place where they could face persecution or torture. These rights cannot be extinguished by transfer to a location outside the United States. Simply put, if the processes for obtaining a lawful removal order have not been followed, the forcible removal of a noncitizen to Guantánamo violates U.S. immigration law.” They continued: “Individuals in civil immigration detention have a right to access counsel under ICE detention standards, and immigration laws governing removal proceedings. Impeding access to counsel for detained immigrants also may violate the Constitution in some circumstances. In addition, individuals in immigration detention may have appeal or other review rights and cannot be held indefinitely, and the only effective means by which a detained individual could assert these rights would be through access to counsel.” On the Trump Administration’s false claim that only high-risk immigrants are detained, the senators wrote: “While no noncitizen should be sent from the United States to Guantánamo, it also appears that your Administration’s claims that it was sending ‘worst of the worst’ there are misleading. Public reporting indicates that noncitizens who DHS deemed low risk were sent to Guantánamo. In response to inquiries from Judiciary Committee staff, your Administration has even left open the possibility that families, including children, will be detained at Guantánamo, stating that future decisions regarding detention would be made on a ‘case-by-case basis.’” The senators concluded: “Your efforts to house or detain noncitizens forcibly removed from the United States at the MOC and the Camp 6 law of war detention facilities at Guantánamo are cruel, unlawful, and unprecedented. Such hasty and unlawful actions will cause harms to the United States for years to come. As those familiar with the long history of operations at Guantánamo can tell you, detaining individuals there is not a quick fix. Congress has not appropriated funds for such purposes for good reason. Given the isolated location of the base, its controversial history, and the lack of legal authority to detain noncitizens there, continuing down this path will invite more litigation, drain resources, place undue strain on our servicemembers, diminish military readiness, undermine support from our allies, and harm our standing in the world.” U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear President Trump: We write to object to your illegal and unjustified transfers of noncitizens from the United States to the detention center at Naval Station Guantánamo Bay, which follows your directive to the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security to prepare the base to hold tens of thousands of noncitizens. These actions are unprecedented, unlawful, and harmful to American national security, values, and interests. The United States has never sent anyone from the United States to be detained at Guantánamo before now. More than three decades ago, the base was used temporarily to house sudden influxes of migrants from Haiti and Cuba who were interdicted at sea by the U.S. Coast Guard. Since then, the Department of State and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have jointly provided housing and other services for a small number of migrants interdicted at sea at the Migrant Operations Center (MOC). Operations supporting even this limited number of migrants have proven challenging and there have been serious concerns regarding the living conditions of the MOC and insufficient access to basic legal rights and services. There is no basis in U.S. immigration law for transferring noncitizens arrested inside the United States to a location outside of the United States for detention prior to or for the purposes of conducting removal proceedings. Noncitizens inside the United States are entitled to numerous protections under U.S. immigration law and the U.S. Constitution. For example, removal processes under our immigration laws afford noncitizens due process and an opportunity to seek protection from removal to a place where they could face persecution or torture. These rights cannot be extinguished by transfer to a location outside the United States. Simply put, if the processes for obtaining a lawful removal order have not been followed, the forcible removal of a noncitizen to Guantánamo violates U.S. immigration law. Moreover, U.S. immigration law does not provide authority to detain noncitizens after their removal from the United States following a final order of removal. Immigration custody authority is based on immigration enforcement powers to seek and execute a removal order. Once an individual with a removal order departs the United States and arrives in a location outside the United States, the removal order has been executed. After that point, there is no basis under immigration law to retain custody of the individual. In addition, individuals in civil immigration detention have a right to access counsel under ICE detention standards, and immigration laws governing removal proceedings. Impeding access to counsel for detained noncitizens also may violate the Constitution in some circumstances. In addition, individuals in immigration detention may have appeal or other review rights and cannot be held indefinitely, and the only effective means by which a detained individual could assert these rights would be through access to counsel. Based on information provided to the Judiciary Committee and in court filings, we are concerned that your Administration did not consider these serious legal concerns or have any plan to address them prior to transferring noncitizens from the United States to Guantánamo. In response to the Judiciary Committee’s inquiry regarding how noncitizens will access counsel once on the base, DHS stated, “Removable aliens housed will be those with final orders pending removal.” This suggests that noncitizens with final orders of removal do not need access to counsel, which is inaccurate. After individuals and legal organizations filed suit seeking access to the noncitizens, the Department of Justice filed a brief arguing that these noncitizens’ constitutional rights were not violated, because, though they did not have a right to meet with attorneys in person under the circumstances, other means of communicating with counsel, such as by telephone, were available. Yet just the day before, when the Judiciary Committee requested details regarding how noncitizens being held at Guantánamo could contact counsel when granted access to a phone, DHS did not know what, if any, procedures were in place to notify them of their rights or provide them with contact information for legal services. Your Administration’s actions and these responses raise serious legal concerns and call into question what effort, if any, was put into ensuring that the transfer of noncitizens complied with applicable laws and regulations. While such clarification should be unnecessary, we must also emphasize that there is no colorable argument that noncitizens, including those convicted, accused, or suspected of crimes or criminal associations, can be held in law of war detention or in Department of Defense custody, whether at Guantánamo or anywhere else. The law of war detention facility at Guantánamo has been used to hold alleged members of al Qaeda and “associated forces” in connection with the armed conflict between the United States and these groups following the 9/11 attacks. While these detention operations have been the subject of significant controversy and criticism, these detainees have all been captured abroad and detained pursuant to the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force and Section 1021 of the FY 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. While no noncitizen should be sent from the United States to Guantánamo, it also appears that your Administration’s claims that it was sending “worst of the worst” there are misleading. Public reporting indicates that noncitizens who DHS deemed low risk were sent to Guantánamo. In response to inquiries from Judiciary Committee staff, your Administration has even left open the possibility that families, including children, will be detained at Guantánamo, stating that future decisions regarding detention would be made on a “case-by-case basis.” Your efforts to house or detain noncitizens forcibly removed from the United States at the MOC and the Camp 6 law of war detention facilities at Guantánamo are cruel, unlawful, and unprecedented. Such hasty and unlawful actions will cause harms to the United States for years to come. As those familiar with the long history of operations at Guantánamo can tell you, detaining individuals there is not a quick fix. Congress has not appropriated funds for such purposes for good reason. Given the isolated location of the base, its controversial history, and the lack of legal authority to detain noncitizens there, continuing down this path will invite more litigation, drain resources, place undue strain on our servicemembers, diminish military readiness, undermine support from our allies, and harm our standing in the world. We urge you to heed these lessons, follow the law, refrain from any further expansion of facilities, and cease transferring noncitizens to Guantánamo. To inform our oversight of this situation, please answer the following questions by March 10, 2025: What is your Administration’s claimed legal authority for transporting noncitizens from the United States to the Naval Station at Guantánamo Bay? Relatedly, what is your claimed legal basis for detaining noncitizens there, whether at the MOC, JTF-GTMO, or other facilities?
What are your Administration’s criteria for determining which noncitizens would be sent to Guantánamo?
Will you definitively state that families and children will not be sent to Guantánamo?
For what crimes, if any, were the individuals previously sent to Guantánamo convicted? Were individuals provided with representation in their criminal proceedings?
To what legal processes and rights does your Administration consider individuals sent to Guantánamo to be entitled, including relative to individuals in immigration detention inside the United States and individuals currently housed at the MOC?
How will your Administration ensure that these rights, such as access to counsel and administrative and judicial review, are upheld given the restricted access to Naval Station Guantánamo Bay?
How many ICE personnel are stationed at the MOC? How many are stationed at Camp 6?
What are the projected costs of expanding the MOC and any other operations or actions associated with the transfer of noncitizens to or from Naval Station Guantánamo Bay? How much have the actions already taken cost U.S. taxpayers and how does that compare to the cost of detaining immigrants inside the U.S.? What is the source of funding for these efforts?
What impact will these operations and expenditures have on military readiness and availability of funds for immigration detention and enforcement inside the United States?
How does your Administration plan to ensure the facilities meet required standards of care for housing, food, medical care, security, sanitation, education, employment, and the like for both detained noncitizens and U.S. military personnel at the base, given the already deteriorated state of facilities at the base? What contingency plans do you have in place for weather conditions or other emergency situations?
How does your Administration plan to ensure that Congress and the American people, including the press and civil society, have access to information regarding these operations, including who is, was, or will be detained there and under what conditions and authorities?
What is your long-term objective and strategy for these detentions, including your plan for individuals for whom repatriation or resettlement may not be feasible?
Reporting indicates that in one case, you have brought a noncitizen you had transferred to Guantánamo back to the United States. Is this true? If so, why, and under what authorities? We look forward to your prompt response. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 19 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio urging him to restore funding for global health, development, and humanitarian programs. In the wake of the Trump administration’s abrupt termination of key foreign assistance programs and personnel without review, the senators highlight the national security imperatives of U.S. global health efforts, which keep Americans safe, strengthen U.S. leadership, and increase global stability. “The Trump Administration’s freeze on foreign assistance and opaque waiver process, coupled with the attempted dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International
...Read more Development (USAID) has significantly weakened our ability to respond to emergencies, left gaps in disease surveillance, and undermined global partnerships— leaving a vacuum that our adversaries are eager to fill,” the senators wrote. Without American global health programs, current outbreaks of infectious diseases like Ebola, Marburg Virus, and Bird Flu have the potential for spreading to U.S. soil. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an infectious disease can spread from a remote village to a major city in the United States in as little as 36 hours. Additionally, the foreign assistance funding freeze has stopped critical Malaria interventions before peak transmission and paused many clinical trials and data collection endeavors that require continuous data collection. As a result, product development for desperately needed drugs and vaccines have been brought to a halt. “The U.S. cannot afford to withdraw from the global stage. Weak health systems in already fragile regions create opportunities for infectious disease to spread unchecked, for extremist groups to gain influence, and for adversaries to expand their reach,” they continued. The senators warned Secretary Rubio that Russian leaders have publicly praised the decision to dismantle USAID, an agency that helps counter China’s efforts to expand its Belt and Road Initiative in Africa and Latin America. Additionally, China is already stepping in to fill the vacuum left by the United States at the World Health Organization. “We urge you to reverse the damaging personnel actions at USAID, and swiftly restart U.S. investments in global health, development, and humanitarian aid—not just as a moral obligation, but as part of the necessary strategy to protect America’s national security. In the meantime, there must be a clear process to achieve and implement waivers for these critical programs… Restoring these investments and the professional staff with training and skillsets to implement these life-saving programs will strengthen global health security, reinforce our leadership on the world stage, and make us safer at home,” the senators concluded. U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Rubio, At a time when the world faces increasing instability—from disease outbreaks, to violent conflicts, to economic crises—U.S. investments in global health, development, and humanitarian aid are more than acts of goodwill; they are strategic imperatives contributing to our strength, security, and prosperity. Without strong and sustained U.S. leadership, American lives and economic stability is at risk. The Trump Administration’s freeze on foreign assistance and opaque waiver process, coupled with the attempted dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has significantly weakened our ability to respond to emergencies, left gaps in disease surveillance, and undermined global partnerships— leaving a vacuum that our adversaries are eager to fill. The freeze on global health activities is particularly troubling. There is resounding evidence that global health programs protect Americans. Recent history has shown that infectious disease outbreaks in distant regions can quickly reach U.S. soil, causing devastation to lives and livelihoods. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a disease can spread from a remote village to a major city-- including in the United States-- in as little 36 hours. Such deadly diseases continue to emerge in countries which need assistance to respond. Consider the following examples: Ebola: Uganda is currently experiencing a deadly outbreak of Sudan Ebola virus in its capital city of Kampala, with a population of 1.9 million people. Suspected cases have also been reported in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. USAID and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) global health programs are critical to helping countries control and manage these outbreaks. The 2014-2016 West African Ebola outbreak spread beyond the region, with cases reaching the U.S. and Europe. American led investments in global health systems helped contain the crisis, prevented further transmission and strengthened global preparedness. Just within the last four years, USAID and CDC frontline health responders played critical roles in halting 11 similar outbreaks, but we are unaware of any USAID personnel having been deployed to Kampala to specifically respond to the outbreak. The Trump Administration’s retreat from these investments has left the world—and the U.S.—more vulnerable to future outbreaks.
Marburg Virus: Tanzania recently confirmed an outbreak of Marburg virus—an illness as deadly as Ebola, but with less treatment and vaccine options. This deadly outbreak has highlighted the urgent need for disease surveillance and rapid response. The U.S. has long been a leader in these efforts, but the freeze on USAID has hindered our ability to detect and contain these threats before they become global crises.
Malaria: While malaria may seem like a distant problem, it deeply affects regions where the U.S. has significant interests. The next few weeks, just before peak transmission, are critical for malaria prevention campaigns. Malaria is preventable, but if this particular window is missed, lives will be lost, most of whom will likely be children. The President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) has reduced cases and deaths worldwide, fostering healthier, more productive societies and reducing the risk of political instability and migration crises. The halt in U.S. funding threatens decades of progress. According to Malaria No More, halting PMI programs for 90 days would prevent the delivery of approximately: 9 million insecticide-treated bed nets; 25.3 million rapid diagnostic tests for malaria; 15.6 million life-saving antimalarial treatments; 48 million doses of seasonal malaria chemoprevention; and safe, effective indoor residual spraying for 3.8 million people.
Bird Flu: Bird flu has already caused one death in the U.S. and is currently circulating throughout America’s livestock. With the foreign aid freeze, the monitoring of bird flu effectively ends in 49 countries, leaving the U.S. in the dark regarding a pressing threat should the virus evolve or mutate to start spreading more rapidly among humans.
PEPFAR: Though the waiver for certain PEPFAR activities is slowly being implemented, critical prevention services remain paused. Without access to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and other prevention services, HIV transmission will increase, risking an upsurge of the disease across partner countries and undermining the more than $100 billion in U.S. investment contributed toward the HIV response to date. In addition, the foreign assistance funding freeze has paused many clinical trials and data collection endeavors that require continuous data collection. This will significantly delay the product development timelines for desperately needed drugs and vaccines. Clinical trials are now hanging on by a thread and will have to shut down soon if the pause is not lifted. This risks the health of the trial participants around the world and the lives in the U.S. and globally that could be saved thanks to the results of these trials. Furthermore, U.S. global health programs that treat, monitor, and prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, Polio, and other infectious diseases are all vital to saving lives and keeping Americans safe. The U.S. cannot afford to withdraw from the global stage. Weak health systems in already fragile regions create opportunities for infectious disease to spread unchecked, for extremist groups to gain influence, and for adversaries to expand their reach. Already, Russian leaders have publicly applauded the decision to dismantle USAID, an agency that is also uniquely positioned to forestall China’s expansion of its Belt and Road Initiative in Africa and Latin America. China is already trying to fill the vacuum left by the United States at the World Health Organization when President Trump issued his intent to withdraw. Investing in foreign assistance, including global health and development programs, strengthens our alliances, promotes stability, and reduces the need for costly emergency interventions and military engagements. We urge you to reverse the damaging personnel actions at USAID, and swiftly restart U.S. investments in global health, development, and humanitarian aid—not just as a moral obligation, but as part of the necessary strategy to protect America’s national security. In the meantime, there must be a clear process to achieve and implement waivers for these critical programs. Nearly all USAID staff and critical implementing partners have been eliminated and payment systems are not functioning for the vast majority of implementers, rendering the waiver process irrelevant. Restoring these investments and the professional staff with training and skillsets to implement these life-saving programs will strengthen global health security, reinforce our leadership on the world stage, and make us safer at home. Sincerely, ### Read less As Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, sat seething in his office last month watching President Trump blame diversity requirements at the Federal Aviation Administration for the deadly plane crash over the Potomac River, members of his staff warned him against publicly venting his rage. The midair collision had happened less than 12 hours earlier, they reminded him; bodies were still in the water and families were still being notified about the deaths of loved ones. Perhaps it would be more befitting of a U.S. senator to be respectful of the tragedy and all of its unknowns, rather than seize the political moment and respond? Mr. Murphy had no time for that. “Everybody in this country should be outraged that Donald Trump is standing up on that podium and lying to you —
...Read more deliberately lying to you,” he said in an impassioned video he recorded and posted within 30 minutes of Mr. Trump’s news conference. “Every single senator and member of Congress should call him out for how disgraceful it was.” Many did, but none managed to do so quite as quickly or concisely as Mr. Murphy, 51, who has seemed to be everywhere, all at once, since Inauguration Day, staging a loud and constant resistance to Mr. Trump at a time when Democrats are struggling to figure out how to respond to him. Mr. Murphy, a career politician who rose to national prominence as a gun safety advocate after the 2012 Sandy Hook elementary school shooting in Newtown, Conn., has emerged in the opening weeks of Mr. Trump’s second term as one of the most effective Democratic communicators pushing back against a president unbound. In two-minute videos on social media, which he records from his office on Capitol Hill; an almost constant stream of posts on X; passionate floor speeches; and essays he writes on his Substack, Mr. Murphy is attempting to explain in digestible sound bites that what is happening in Washington is very simple: It’s a billionaire takeover of American democracy. He is also seizing a political opportunity to position himself as a future national leader for Democrats who find themselves deep in the wilderness as they seek a strategy for simultaneously rebuilding their party and resisting Mr. Trump. “It’s an overwhelming moment,” Mr. Murphy said in an interview on Wednesday in his office on Capitol Hill. “Our political brand is fundamentally broken, the rule of law is disintegrating and a lot of people still don’t know what Trump’s actual agenda is.” Mr. Murphy has spent the past three years immersing himself in the literature and ideas of the “new right,” listening to the podcast “Red Scare” and reading thought leaders like Curtis Yarvin and Patrick Deneen. He credits that immersion for his being prepared for Mr. Trump’s return to power. “It gave me a window into how thoughtful they were being to make sure they were ready on Day 1,” he said. Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said that Mr. Murphy has been meeting the moment “when too many Democratic elected officials seem several steps behind. He’s providing Democrats with a messaging blueprint for how to take on Trump and Musk and win back working-class voters.” Mr. Murphy, who is aging out of the “boy wonder” phase of his political career (he was 33 when first elected to the House), is not exactly charismatic; he is cerebral and serious. At a recent news conference, he did not crack a smile when Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, made corny jokes about his grandson losing his first tooth, waiting them out stone-faced until it was his turn to speak. The comedian Hasan Minhaj recently described him as having the look of a McKinsey consultant, “just blending into congressional crowds of white men like an arctic fox.” At times, Mr. Murphy can sound like a high school history teacher giving a civics lesson. “Dictators and despots, they use law enforcement to try and compel loyalty,” he said in one video, explaining why people needed to care that the Justice Department had dropped its charges against Mayor Eric Adams of New York. “They threaten you with arrest if you’re not loyal; they will let you get away with crimes if you are loyal. That’s what’s happening in America today.” But a constitutional crisis can offer an opportunity for a civics refresher, and Mr. Murphy appears to be breaking through. Over the past two months, he has doubled his Instagram following on both his official and political accounts. Since Jan. 1, Mr. Murphy’s Facebook and Instagram accounts have racked up 29.2 million impressions. On Substack, Mr. Murphy’s subscribers have increased by 223 percent. His campaign has spent more on fund-raising ads on Meta in 2025 than it did in the entirety of the 2023-24 cycle, when he was running for re-election. “My 16-year-old son for the first time, he said to me, ‘What’s going on? My friends are seeing your stuff,’” Mr. Murphy said. “I’m showing up on a 16-year-old’s TikTok feed.” That is one of his current metrics of success. “People are trying to understand this moment,” he said. “They’re looking for people who can explain it in terms that are pretty simple. I want to create explanations and content that get sent to people that are not reading and thinking about politics every day, but know something is screwy and want to understand it.” Mr. Murphy insists he is not just doing all this to set up a run for president, in part because he thinks it is no sure thing that there will even be a race to enter in four years. “Right now, there is a distinct possibility that we do not have a free and fair election in 2028, and all of our work is to make sure that doesn’t happen,” he said. Mr. Murphy said he can easily envision a future where “the press is so demoralized, the opposition is so beleaguered and harassed that you just don’t have the ability to mount an opposition.” For a decade, the issue of gun violence has defined Mr. Murphy’s career; the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School took place a month after he won his Senate seat, having served in the House since 2007. For years, he has been haranguing his colleagues to go out and run on the issue of gun safety, because he thinks it is a winning electoral issue that politicians are scared to touch. After the pandemic, he dove into the issue of loneliness, calling it an epidemic and “one of the most important political issues of our time.” But for now, those issues are all on the back burner. “Nothing matters other than the question of whether or not we let the billionaires destroy our democracy,” he said. “There’s a ticking time bomb inside our body politic right now. It’s very possible this thing could be completely rigged by the summer or fall of this year.” So Mr. Murphy has decided to set his hair on fire to get people to pay attention. He is on YouTube, doing interviews with Mr. Minaj and political influencers like Brian Tyler Cohen, Mehdi Hassan and Jack Cocchiarella. He is on Substack, talking to Anand Giridharadas. He is on TikTok talking to Aaron Parnas. And he is wherever you get your podcasts, talking to Jon Favreau. “The actual TV appearance has limited impact right now,” he said. “What you’re actually doing those TV appearances for is to create content that ultimately lives somewhere else.” Mr. Schumer, who has come in for criticism from some progressive activists for failing to effectively respond to Mr. Trump, has been encouraging him to keep going. “Chris Murphy’s frustration and anger at what Trump is doing is genuine and he has a unique, strong, and incredibly valuable way of pushing back,” he said. Mr. Murphy is also shifting with the times. These days, he bemoans the fact that economic populists in Congress like Senators Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, and Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, are treated like radicals. He thinks their ideas have the best chance of crossing over and picking up voters who are currently in Mr. Trump’s camp. But in 2016, Mr. Murphy was an early and eager backer of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign over Mr. Sanders in what became a heated Democratic primary. His party’s devastating 2024 losses, coupled with Mr. Trump’s blatant abuses of his authority, have made Mr. Murphy rethink a conventional approach to politics. These days, he has been meeting with his Senate colleagues to persuade them that this is not a time to play by any old political rules. “They do not deserve the benefit of the doubt,” he has told other Democrats of Mr. Trump and Republicans. “They are deliberately hiding what they are doing so that responsible, thoughtful, fact-based people will say nothing.” When Elon Musk made a straight-armed gesture on Inauguration Day that drew comparisons to a Nazi salute, Mr. Murphy was not among those wringing his hands about misinterpreting it. “It was absolutely a ‘Heil’ — a Hitler salute,” he said. “Their pattern of lying allows us to assume the worst.” Read less In 2024, candidate Donald Trump ran for president as someone who cared about the average worker in America. But during his first month in office, he has fallen head over heels for the billionaire class and forgotten the people who elected him. Right from the start, President Trump handed our government over to the richest man on the planet, Elon Musk, and gave him access to all our most sensitive, personal data so that Musk can use that exclusive access to make himself even richer. Even worse, Trump and Musk have launched a dizzying series of assaults on low- and middle-income workers, making clear that this billionaire takeover of our government will leave American workers even more powerless than they were before. And it’s not just Musk – Trump has
...Read more surrounded himself with a band of billionaires who could not be more out of touch with the everyday experience of most Americans. The federal minimum wage has been the same since 2009: $7.25. Sixty-two percent of Americans support raising the minimum wage to $15 because they agree if you work a full-time job, you shouldn’t be living at or below the poverty level. You know who doesn’t agree? Trump and his billionaire cabinet. His newly confirmed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent – net worth $521 million – made it clear during his confirmation hearing that he believes workers don’t deserve a raise in the embarrassingly low national wage floor. [Image: Former President Donald Trump speaks to the crowd at the Republican National Convention] President Donald Trump ran a campaign to help American workers. Has he lived up to that? FILE: Trump speaks to the crowd at the Republican National Convention at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on Thursday, July 18, 2024. (Paul Steinhauser/Fox News Digital) It only took one week for Trump to set his sights on destroying labor unions, where many workers join together to bargain for higher wages and better working conditions. Trump’s first target was the agency responsible for protecting workers’ rights, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB conducts union elections, investigates allegations of unfair labor practices, and protects workers from being exploited by their employers, all of which enrages billionaires like Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Musk. The NLRB can’t operate with less than three of its five members. So, what did Trump do? He paralyzed it by firing NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox, who had another three years left in her term. With just two members left, the board has been rendered completely toothless and unable to order parties to pay remedies or recognize a union. But it’s certainly not surprising, with Musk in charge. Musk has always hated workers. He made that point very clear, outright declaring "I disagree with the idea of unions," and he’s successfully fought tooth and nail to block Tesla workers from ever forming one. Tesla is the only major U.S. car manufacturer whose workers aren’t represented by a union, and they are worse off because of it. Tesla employees make about 30% less than workers at GM and Ford, who are unionized through the UAW. And before Trump killed the NLRB, Musk’s companies were the subject of 24 investigations for alleged labor violations. Now he has free rein to mistreat his workers. We know what comes next because Trump has spent the first month in office executing a radical plan to hand government over to the billionaires. It’s called Project 2025, and this anti-worker, pro-corporate plan previews what’s ahead. Project 2025 outlined an end to all project labor agreement requirements, which protect good-paying union jobs, and a repeal of Davis-Bacon, which assures that construction jobs using taxpayer dollars pay a living wage to construction workers. Even worse, Project 2025 calls for limiting when workers receive overtime pay to only when they work more than 80 hours in two weeks. If you work 60 hours one week and 20 the next week, you won’t get the overtime pay you earned in the first week. Trump and Musk have also spent their first weeks in office relentlessly demonizing federal workers. These are the people who inspect our food to make sure it’s safe, provide medical care to veterans, administer Social Security payments and process passports. Four out of five federal workers live and work outside the D.C. area. Before he was confirmed, Director of the Office of Management and Budget Russ Vought said, "We want to put [federal workers] in trauma." The greatest insult to workers will be the giant tax and spending bill that Trump and congressional Republicans are pushing through Congress. It cuts taxes for billionaires, millionaires and corporations, and to pay for those tax giveaways, Republicans are going to gut the programs that help minimum-wage workers and their families, like Medicaid. Medicaid pays for most nursing home beds in the country, where the parents of hard-working Americans spend their final days. Those nursing home beds will disappear, and working families will face bankruptcy, having to shoulder all the cost of expensive acute care for their loved one. All of these attacks on workers happening at the same time, aren’t a big coincidence. Trump has decided to empower the ruling class – the billionaires, the big corporate CEOs, the financial firm titans – and gut protections and services for everyone else. Musk doesn’t care about helping working people because his priority is using his newly purchased power to make money off his control of government. He used his role at the White House to get a meeting with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi so he could talk about opening a Tesla factory in India and shipping jobs overseas. He shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau so he can turn X into an unregulated payments app. He destroyed USAID to give China, where he manufactures half of his cars, more power on the world’s stage. Unsurprisingly, Musk's personal net worth has increased $130 billion since the election. Trump might have run as someone who cared about regular people, but he’s governing like someone obsessed with one, singular idea: steal from workers in order to enrich the very, very wealthy and the corporate class. Every day Americans see more proof of Trump’s blind loyalty to members of his own billionaire clique and his abandonment of the working-class voters who supported him last November. The evidence is stacking up and increasingly impossible to ignore. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation, on Monday joined 17 of his Senate colleagues in supporting a bipartisan resolution acknowledging the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The resolution expresses the U.S. Senate’s unwavering support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity while condemning Russia’s illegal aggression and attempts to seize Ukrainian territory. It also commends NATO, the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, and the international community for their continued efforts to support Ukraine’s defense and the protection of human rights on its territory; recognizes Ukraine’s democratic progress during wartime; and emphasizes
...Read more Ukraine’s right to be included in any discussions with Russia about its future. U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), John Curtis (R-Utah), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Susan Collins (R-Maine), John Cornyn (R-Texas), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) also cosponsored the resolution. Full text of the resolution can be found HERE and below: RESOLUTION acknowledging the third anniversary of Russia’s further invasion of Ukraine and expressing support for the people of Ukraine. Whereas, on February 24, 2022, Russia launched a full-scale, unprovoked, and illegal invasion of Ukraine, which followed Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and its illegal occupation of parts of the Donbas region in 2014; Whereas the international community recognizes the sovereignty and full territorial integrity of Ukraine within the 1991 borders; and Whereas the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the people of Ukraine have demonstrated a determined resistance that has prevented Russia from taking control of their country: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate—
(1) expresses continued solidarity with the people of Ukraine and condolences for the loss of tens of thousands of Ukrainian people to Russian aggression; (2) rejects Russia’s attempts to militarily seize sovereign territory in Ukraine and elsewhere in Europe; (3) reaffirms the support of the United States for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine; (4) commends NATO, the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, and the international community for their continued efforts to support Ukraine’s defense and the protection of human rights on its territory; (5) supports Ukraine’s aspirations to integrate into Euro-Atlantic structures; (6) recognizes Ukraine’s efforts to strengthen its democracy during wartime; (7) encourages the transatlantic community to continue to denounce Russia’s illegal and unprovoked war in Ukraine and counter Russian aggression; and (8) emphasizes that Ukraine must be a partici2 pant in discussions with the Russian Federation 3 about Ukraine’s future. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Wednesday joined 21 members of Congress in writing a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, urging him to replace the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), a nuclear arms agreement between the United States and Russia. On February 5, 2026, the 2010 New START Treaty between the United States and Russia will expire. Unless a new agreement is in place by that date, there will be no legal limits on U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear forces, reversing decades of work to reduce the risk of nuclear war. In their letter, the bicameral lawmakers urge Secretary Rubio to work with Congress to replace New START and prevent a dangerous and costly arms race between
...Read more the United States and Russia. “The Trump administration has a historic opportunity to initiate high-level talks for a new pact and, until those talks reach completion, to mutually agree to respect the limits of New START using existing technical means of verification. Given the time it would take to negotiate a new agreement, an executive understanding that both sides will adhere to New START limits would help to reduce uncertainty in this interim period,” the members wrote. They added: “We condemn Putin’s nuclear saber-rattling against Ukraine. Russia’s illegal war against the Ukrainian people is at odds with our democratic ideals. Yet even when our nations have had profound disagreements, including during the Cold War, we managed to come to the table to bring the world back from the precipice of nuclear catastrophe.” U.S. Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D.-Ore.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jack Reed (D-R.I), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Cory Booker (D-N.J), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Angus King (I-Maine), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also signed the letter, along with U.S. Representatives Bill Foster (D-Ill.-11), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.-02), Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.-05), Eleanor Holmes-Norton (D-D.C.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.-05), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12), and Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas-37). Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Secretary Rubio: On February 5, 2026, the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) between the United States and Russia will expire. Unless a new agreement is in place by that date, there will be no legal limits on U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear forces, reversing decades of work to reduce the risk of nuclear war. We urge you to work with Congress to replace New START and prevent a dangerous and costly arms race between the United States and Russia, the world’s two largest nuclear powers. We also ask that the Department of State provide a briefing on the Administration’s plan for New START in a timely manner. For five decades, American presidents, including Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and both George H.W. and George W. Bush, have supported the U.S.-Russia nuclear arms control process. This long-standing, bipartisan effort has enjoyed high approval ratings among the American public, who recognize the dangers of nuclear proliferation. The Trump Administration has a historic opportunity to initiate high-level talks for a new pact and, until those talks reach completion, to mutually agree to respect the limits of New START using existing technical means of verification. Given the time it would take to negotiate a new agreement, an executive understanding that both sides will adhere to New START limits would help to reduce uncertainty in this interim period. It is critical that the Administration not increase the U.S. arsenal above New START limits or resume nuclear testing, which would set back the bipartisan progress made on nuclear nonproliferation and arms control. An unconstrained arms race would make the U.S. less secure and increase the risks to global security. New START enhances U.S. national security by placing legal limits on all Russian-deployed intercontinentalrange nuclear weapons. The United States and Russia agreed in 2021 to extend the treaty through February 5, 2026, and in February 2023, President Vladimir Putin announced Russia was “suspending” its implementation of the treaty. While Russia has agreed to abide by the treaty’s limits, we believe it is in the best interest of both of our nations to pursue formal mechanisms aimed at preventing a nuclear arms race. We condemn Putin’s nuclear saber-rattling against Ukraine. Russia’s illegal war against the Ukrainian people is at odds with our democratic ideals. Yet even when our nations have had profound disagreements, including during the Cold War, we managed to come to the table to bring the world back from the precipice of nuclear catastrophe. Today, we must do so again. Thank you for your attention to this important issue. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday questioned Lori Chavez-DeRemer at a hearing on her nomination for Secretary of Labor. Murphy pressed Chavez-DeRemer on whether she would prevent Elon Musk or any private company from accessing sensitive labor investigation data and on her views regarding the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Murphy highlighted Elon Musk’s current conflicts with the Department of Labor and pressed Chavez-DeRemer for her commitment to ensuring he cannot access sensitive data he could use to enrich himself: “Elon Musk is right now the subject of several OSHA investigations. Multiple companies are subject to multiple investigations. His rocket
...Read more company has an injury rate that is about nine times higher than the industry average. I heard you say you will protect data privacy, but let me ask once again the very specific question: will you commit to denying access to Elon Musk or any of his representatives to information about labor violations at OSHA or any other information about labor violation investigations at the Department of Labor?” Murphy continued: “This is an individual who owns companies that have existing investigations. He has a direct interest in getting information about the seriousness of those investigations. He has interest in getting information about investigations against his competitors. It seems like a pretty simple commitment to make, to say ‘I am not going to give any private company exclusive access to information about open investigations against them or their competitors.’ Why can't you just make that commitment to us?” As billionaires Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk argue the only agency responsible for protecting workers’ rights, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), is unconstitutional, Murphy asked Chavez-DeRemer if she agrees: “Both SpaceX and Amazon have filed suits against the NLRB, contesting its constitutionality. It is a pretty extreme argument, saying that the NLRB is actually unconstitutional. I know you were asked earlier about the firing of one of the members. Do you believe that the NLRB is constitutional?” A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Chavez-DeRemer can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much for your willingness to serve and come before this committee. I think Senator Murray's questions were really important regarding the security of data and sensitive information at the Department of Labor, and so I just want to drill down and maybe make a finer point here. “Elon Musk is right now the subject of several OSHA investigations. Multiple companies are subject to multiple investigations. His rocket company has an injury rate that is about nine times higher than the industry average. I heard you say you will protect data privacy, but let me ask once again the very specific question: will you commit to denying access to Elon Musk or any of his representatives to information about labor violations at OSHA or any other information about labor violation investigations at the Department of Labor?” CHAVEZ-DEREMER: “Thank you Senator. On this same issue, committing to privacy, again, I know that for most listening to this it seems as though when we’re trying to answer these questions, but I have not been in these conversations. I am not confirmed. I only see what is happening possibly on the news and so forth. The president has the executive power to have his coalition of advisors and determine what is best for the American people. He made a promise to the American people that he was going to do these things and check into what is happening. Other than that, I don't have – I have not been read in on any of this. And if confirmed, I commit to taking a deeper look and working with your office and any other office on this issue.” MURPHY: “This one feels pretty simple. This is an individual who owns companies that have existing investigations. He has a direct interest in getting information about the seriousness of those investigations. He has interest in getting information about investigations against his competitors. It seems like a pretty simple commitment to make, to say ‘I am not going to give any private company exclusive access to information about open investigations against them or their competitors.’ Why can't you just make that commitment to us?” CHAVEZ-DEREMER: “Well again, the president has the executive power to exercise it as he sees fit. I am not the president of the United States. I work for the president of the United States, if confirmed, and I will serve at the pleasure of the president. On this issue, again, I have not been into the Department of Labor. So I will commit to working with your office, I will commit to coming back– if confirmed, and I am in the Department of Labor– coming back and answering those questions to this committee. Wholeheartedly I will commit to that.” MURPHY: “But you have the ability to disagree with the president. You certainly serve at his pleasure, but that doesn't mean you have to take actions you believe to be unethical. If the president asks you to give access to information to benefit a friend of his who has pending investigations, you wouldn't say no?” CHAVEZ-DEREMER: “Well, the president, I think, in building his team – a formidable team – to determine that, I don't think is expecting yes-men and -women. We are going to be advisors to the president, and I would talk to the president. But on this issue, one, I am not an attorney. I would certainly consult with the Department of Labor solicitors. I would certainly consult with the White House and their attorneys. But until I am confirmed and in the Department of Labor, I would not be able to say specific to this, without having the full picture, before that.” MURPHY: “I don’t think you need to be an attorney to understand that giving access to a company, to sensitive data about labor violations at their company or to competitors’ companies is deeply unethical. “Let me ask you another question. Both SpaceX and Amazon have filed suits against the NLRB, contesting its constitutionality. It is a pretty extreme argument, saying that the NLRB is actually unconstitutional. I know you were asked earlier about the firing of one of the members. Do you believe that the NLRB is constitutional?” CHAVEZ-DEREMER: “I believe the NLRB definitely has its authority and I respect that authority. I know you mentioned, or I mentioned, that I’m not an attorney. That being said, it looks like the courts are dealing with that, but what I respect is the fact that it is [a] separate, independent agency and I think it has a role to play, and I respect that. As the Department of Labor Secretary, if confirmed, I will take that very seriously.” MURPHY: “But do you believe it is constitutional?” CASSIDY: “You can answer that question real fast.” CHAVEZ-DEREMER: “Thank you. I definitely believe the NLRB is an important agency, independent. And I will work with the NLRB, as we have very different jurisdictions but we often overlap. And so I think it is important to recognize it is an important agency, independent and so forth.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to sound the alarm on President Donald Trump’s blatant disregard for the rule of law. Murphy condemned Trump’s efforts to use the justice system as a tool to punish his critics and protect his allies, warning the confirmation of Kash Patel to lead the FBI would be a dangerous step toward dismantling American democracy. On the dangerous nomination of Kash Patel to lead the FBI, Murphy said: “If your plan is to destroy the rule of law and turn the Department of Justice into a political weapon that rewards loyalty and punishes dissent, then Kash Patel is the perfect person to lead the FBI, and that is likely exactly why he was chosen. [...] He has an enemies list. He thinks that people who helped
...Read more elect Joe Biden are criminals. [...] Honestly, how on Earth are we going to let someone lead the world's most important, most revered law enforcement agency, who is secretly in business with the Chinese Communist Party, who believes that the FBI organized the invasion of the Capitol, who runs a fake charity, who has a brand in order to make money off of his affiliation with Donald Trump?” Murphy called out Patel’s sham foundation: “While he believes this, he also knows that there's a money-making opportunity in all of this. This is his logo: K$H. He’s a brand. He says all these things because he believes them, but also because it makes him a hero to the gullible conspiracy theorists inside MAGA. He uses them. He sells stuff to them: sweatshirts, T-shirts, lapel pins. K$H. Now if you buy this sweatshirt for $55, it says all net profits go to the Kash Foundation. But you know what we found out, unsurprisingly, is that in 2023, by selling all these sweatshirts and merch, the K$H Foundation had $1.3 million in revenues. Now it purports to support heroic whistleblowers with legal services and other support services. You know what percentage of that $1.3 million went to actual services? Less than 15%. Kash Patel pocketed almost all the money that he made from selling these T-shirts.” Murphy detailed how President Trump is brazenly using the Department of Justice to curry favor and punish critics: “Trump ordered the Department of Justice to cut a deal with the indicted mayor of New York City, Eric Adams. The deal was simple. If Adams pledged loyalty to Trump and agreed specifically to cooperate with Trump's immigration raids in the city, Trump would look the other way regarding Adams' corruption. The charges would be dropped, and Adams could keep stealing money as long as he was politically loyal to Trump. They didn't hide this deal. Adams and a high-ranking Trump official literally went on TV to announce that they had formed an alliance based upon the release of charges in exchange for political loyalty. He added: “There is not a rule of law anymore. There is one set of law for people or entities who are loyal to Donald Trump, and there is one set of law for people who dare criticize him. That is not democracy. And if we don't find a way, Republicans and Democrats, to come together to defend the rule of law, if we don't say that what is happening today – deals being cut with corrupt politicians in exchange for their pledges of loyalty to Donald Trump – if we can't speak with one voice about that kind of corruption, well, then our democracy is cooked.” He concluded: “The law loses all meaning when it becomes simply what the president, what the leader, on any given day decides. This is the worst possible moment to put a person like Kash Patel in charge of the FBI. It is heartbreaking to see so many of my Republican colleagues, many of whom I admire, put loyalty to Donald Trump ahead of loyalty to this country, and more specifically loyalty to that sacred principle, the rule of law. My prediction is that if you vote for Kash Patel, more than any other confirmation vote you make, you will come to regret this one to your grave.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, the idea that men and women citizens are bound by a common set of laws that are applied consistently and universally, regardless of one's income or political power or political affiliation, it's a fairly modern invention. Because for thousands of years, laws were simply what rulers used to impose and maintain power, to control people. Laws were applied or crimes were invented for the ruler's critics, and laws were ignored or waived away for those in favor with the regime. “Now early Americans had watched the British kings apply laws selectively, both in Britain and in the colonies, and they sought – our founders sought – to create a nation where all men were equal in the face of the law, and [where] the law was applied uniformly and justly. “That idea – equal justice, the law applies to everybody regardless of who you support politically or who you are aligned with politically – was in many ways the founders’ most vital check against tyranny. That's the difference between a democracy made of equal citizens and an autocracy where the law is simply whatever the ruler decides. It is a foundational principle of American constitutional democracy. It is not something that we can take for granted. “Now, I will admit, likely every president has made a decision or decisions that compromised that belief in the rule of law. Often those decisions were related to one of the maximalist powers that the president supposes. That's the power of the pardon. I, for instance, did not agree with President Biden's decision to issue pardons to his family members. I thought that was excessive. I thought that compromised the rule of law. “But this President's contempt for the rule of law, Donald Trump's contempt for the rule of law, is unprecedented. What we are all watching right now is Donald Trump throwing away the idea that laws apply to everyone equally. And it is astonishing to watch so many of my Republican colleagues fall in line. Some of them may be on board for the destruction of the rule of law because they want the Trump family to rule forever, but many of them know that this is wrong, what is happening, and their silence is heartbreaking. “Donald Trump issued a statement over the weekend: quote, ‘He who saves the country does not violate any law.’ That's a quote attributed to one of the most notorious dictators of the last half millennium: Napoleon Bonaparte. It’s a stunning claim that Trump, not the law or Congress, decides what is legal and illegal. “If he had said that in 2017, maybe we could just write it off as Trump being Trump, as just bluster trolling. But this time he is actually implementing a methodical campaign to seize control of the law and apply it differently depending on whether you support him or oppose him. “Take, for example, what happened on Friday night. Trump ordered the Department of Justice to cut a deal with the indicted mayor of New York City, Eric Adams. The deal was simple. If Adams pledged loyalty to Trump and agreed specifically to cooperate with Trump's immigration raids in the city, Trump would look the other way regarding Adams' corruption. The charges would be dropped, and Adams could keep stealing money as long as he was politically loyal to Trump. “They didn't hide this deal. Adams and a high-ranking Trump official literally went on TV to announce that they had formed an alliance based upon the release of charges in exchange for political loyalty. But when Trump told the highest-ranking Justice Department employees in New York City to execute the corrupt deal, they wouldn't. The top official resigned rather than take part in the corruption. So did the next in the chain of command. By the time that Trump found someone who would implement the deal, seven DOJ lawyers and four of Adams' deputy mayors had resigned because what was happening in plain view was a fundamental challenge, a fundamental corruption to the rule of law, a rule of law that up until today Republicans and Democrats had both revered. “Meanwhile, other parts of Trump's team are engaging on the other side of the ledger, targeting and harassing – using the law – the President's critics. Because that's what happens in a nation without the rule of law. Law enforcement lets loyalists like Adams off the hook and is overzealous in targeting critics. “Let me give you just one example of what is happening right now as we speak. Last month, Trump's new FCC Chairman opened an investigation into a single radio station that had the audacity to simply file a news report about an ICE raid that was happening locally. Multiple other sources filed similar reports with similar footage, but only one investigation was opened, and you guessed it, it was against the radio station that was owned by a high-profile critic of Donald Trump, George Soros. “So the game is clear. Like, we can see it. They're not even hiding it. There is not a rule of law anymore. There is one set of law for people or entities who are loyal to Donald Trump, and there is one set of law for people who dare criticize him. That is not democracy. And if we don't find a way, Republicans and Democrats, to come together to defend the rule of law, if we don't say that what is happening today – deals being cut with corrupt politicians in exchange for their pledges of loyalty to Donald Trump – if we can't speak with one voice about that kind of corruption, well, then our democracy is cooked. “Which brings us to the pending nominee to lead the FBI, Kash Patel. If your plan is to destroy the rule of law and turn the Department of Justice into a political weapon that rewards loyalty and punishes dissent, then Kash Patel is the perfect person to lead the FBI, and that is likely exactly why he was chosen. “Listen, Kash Patel is a joke. Many of my Republican colleagues know this. He has spent the last four years taking the most extreme positions inside the world of MAGA in order to make money for himself. “For instance, he says that he can provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the FBI was behind the January 6 invasion of this building. Let me say that again. The man that my Republican colleagues are about to vote to lead the FBI believes that there is irrefutable proof that the agency he is about to lead secretly organized the violent assault on the Capitol. That is bananas. My Republican colleagues know that. That is a lie. And we're about to put this guy in charge of the FBI? An agency that he claims organized a secret plot to invade the Capitol? “He wrote a book called ‘Government Gangsters’ and at the end he added an Appendix entitled ‘Enemies List.’ Like, straight out of the McCarthy era. He has a list – he wrote it down – of people he believes are enemies of America. And, shocker, they're all Democrats, or Republicans who dared speak out and criticize Donald Trump. “You're going to put at the head of the FBI – the agency that can arrest anyone they want, put people in jail – a man who thinks that anyone who disagrees with Donald Trump politically is an enemy of the United States. Patel has further suggested that anybody who administered the 2020 election could be subject to arrest. Why? Because he believes in his heart that the election was rigged, despite the fact that Joe Biden won by seven million votes – far, far more than Trump won by in 2024. So anybody who helped rig the 2020 election is, in his mind, a potential criminal. “This is off-the-wall stuff. But of course it is, because while he believes this, he also knows that there's a money-making opportunity in all of this. This is his logo: K$H. He’s a brand. He says all these things because he believes them, but also because it makes him a hero to the gullible conspiracy theorists inside MAGA. He uses them. He sells stuff to them: sweatshirts, T-shirts, lapel pins. K$H. “Now if you buy this sweatshirt for $55, it says all net profits go to the Kash Foundation. But you know what we found out, unsurprisingly, is that in 2023, by selling all these sweatshirts and merch, the K$H Foundation had $1.3 million in revenues. “Now it purports to support heroic whistleblowers with legal services and other support services. You know what percentage of that $1.3 million went to actual services? Less than 15%. Kash Patel pocketed almost all the money that he made from selling these T-shirts. “He even hocks a COVID vaccine reversal pill. Let me say that again: the incoming director of the FBI, in addition to selling T-shirts and pocketing most of the proceeds, also sells a vaccine reversal pill that is just pure snake oil. But if there are enough people loyal to Donald Trump to buy anything Trump's lieutenants sell on the internet, then fair game. “To top it all off, just recently after his confirmation hearing, we also found out that Kash Patel has been a fashion consultant to a shadowy holding company controlled, it seems, by members of the Chinese Communist Party. Honestly, how on Earth are we going to let someone lead the world's most important, most revered law enforcement agency, who is secretly in business with the Chinese Communist Party, who believes that the FBI organized the invasion of the Capitol, who runs a fake charity, who has a brand in order to make money off of his affiliation with Donald Trump? He has an enemies list. He thinks that people who helped elect Joe Biden are criminals. “This is a really dangerous moment. It’s a really dangerous moment. This deal that Donald Trump just cut with the mayor of New York, it's a big deal. It's a big deal. I admit that prior presidents have made decisions that compromise the rule of law. But we've never seen anything like this, so brazen and out in the open, that the mayor of New York and a Trump official would go on national TV to announce that they had made an arrangement in which Mayor Adams could continue his corruption as long as he was politically loyal to Donald Trump. “They did that out in the open on TV because it's a signal to everybody else out there that the law will be applied differently to you if you are loyal to the president and that the law will be zealously applied to you, maybe in excess of the letter of the law, if you are a critic of the president. That's why they went on TV, to show the world the corruption, as a signal that things are different now, that the law is not the law, the law is what President Trump decides the law is. “The law loses all meaning when it becomes simply what the president, what the leader, on any given day decides. This is the worst possible moment to put a person like Kash Patel in charge of the FBI. It is heartbreaking to see so many of my Republican colleagues, many of whom I admire, put loyalty to Donald Trump ahead of loyalty to this country, and more specifically loyalty to that sacred principle, the rule of law. My prediction is that if you vote for Kash Patel, more than any other confirmation vote you make, you will come to regret this one to your grave. I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to call out Republican’s latest tax and spending plan for benefitting billionaires and corporations at the expense of seniors and working families. Murphy slammed Trump for using the government as a cash machine for his family and billionaire friends, gutting oversight, handing out policy favors, and now pushing a tax plan that delivers massive breaks to the ultra-wealthy—paid for by slashing programs that millions of Americans rely on like Medicare and Medicaid. “The heart of this Republican economic proposal is a massive tax cut for the very, very wealthy and for corporations. And this time, not borrowed to be paid back later by middle class taxpayers, this time paid for by immediate cuts to
...Read more some of the programs that regular, ordinary Americans, many frail seniors, depend on, like the Medicaid program,” Murphy said. Murphy slammed Trump for letting Elon Musk hijack the government to enrich himself: “Since Elon Musk, the richest man in the universe, has taken control of the government with Donald Trump, the value of his business has gone up by 30%. Tesla’s stock has gone up by 30%. Of course it has. Because Elon Musk is now able to get inside the government to arrange things to benefit his companies. For instance, the NLRB is gone. They fired the Democrat on the board, it is unable to muster a quorum. It’s not coincidental that the NLRB had several open investigations of Tesla. Our foreign policy has been monetized to support people like Elon Musk. News just broke yesterday that Vietnam is really worried about Trump's tariff policy, and so the way that they're going to try to get some help from the Trump administration is to give some help to Elon Musk's businesses. They are going to give Elon Musk a Starlink contract, and they believe that by doing that, they’ll be able to get some help from the Trump administration on tariffs. So, Elon Musk and the billionaires are able to operationalize and monetize our foreign policy.” On Trump also cashing in on the presidency, Murphy said: “Trump is doing very well too. He made $100 million off of a meme coin–a meme coin, where we have no idea, as Americans, who's buying it. It is very likely foreign actors trying to influence the administration, who can secretly buy the meme coin and then whisper to Donald Trump that we got your back when you needed it. $40 million from Amazon for a new documentary of the First Lady, legal settlements from ABC News, Meta, and X, all–shockingly–settled with cash payments to the Trump family after the election.” Murphy called out the GOP tax plan for funneling billions to the rich while working families get next to nothing: “If you're in the top 1%, your average tax cut is about $70,000. That's a lot of money. That's a lot of money. But if you're making $30,000 a year–and there's a whole bunch of people in this country that are making $30,000 a year, especially when Republicans refuse to support the minimum wage going above $7.25 an hour – if you make $30,000 a year, you are going to get about $130. $70,000 if you're doing really, really well. $130 for everybody else. That doesn’t make any sense. Why do people making $600,000 a year need $70,000 while only a hundred bucks goes to everybody else?” He debunked Republicans’ claim that the extending the 2017 tax cuts will help working people: “It's a scam. Trickle-down economics is a scam. When you put this much money into the hands of the wealthy, it does not trickle down to everybody else. When you give corporations those enormous tax cuts, it does not trickle down to everybody else. It stays in the pockets of the wealthy. The corporations use it in order to do stock buybacks, in order to inflate CEO salaries. It just separates the rich from the poor. It is a scam. It is a scam.” On how Republicans plan to pay for this giveaway to billionaires, Murphy said: “The cut that they're contemplating in the House of Representatives is a cut to Medicaid. Now, they're also thinking about cuts to Medicare, your parents’ primary health insurance. They're contemplating cuts to the Affordable Care Act, that's the program that insures 20 million working Americans. But they’re really zeroed in on Medicaid, and they're contemplating such devastating cuts to Medicaid that it would eviscerate the program.” He concluded: “The whole thing just feels like a scam to people: the favors being given to billionaires that are inside the government, the tax cut that benefits the very, very wealthy at the expense of everybody else, the cutting of services that help regular people in order to finance the tax cut. And whether it ends up being one bill or two bills, the centerpiece is still the centerpiece. The transfer of resources and wealth from regular people, from the middle class, from poor people, to the very, very wealthy, the millionaire and billionaire class, the corporations.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you, Mr. President. I’m down here on the floor this afternoon with my colleague Senator Kaine from Virginia, and the Ranking Member of the Finance Committee, Senator Wyden, to talk about the spending and tax bill that is coming before the Congress, driven by Republicans and the Trump administration. “Whether it's one bill or two bills, it doesn't really matter. It is the centerpiece of Donald Trump's economic agenda. And it's really important to talk about the impacts that this spending and tax package will have on the American public. “While there will be some new spending for defense and some new spending on immigration policy, the heart of this spending and tax package will be familiar to many Americans, because they remember it from 2017, during the first Trump administration. “The heart of this Republican economic proposal is a massive tax cut for the very, very wealthy and for corporations. And this time, not borrowed to be paid back later by middle class taxpayers, this time paid for by immediate cuts to some of the programs that regular, ordinary Americans, many frail seniors, depend on, like the Medicaid program. “Just for a little bit of context, it does appear to a lot of Americans that this whole thing feels a bit like a scam, that this is a government that is being handed over to the billionaire class in order to operationalize government to make money for the very, very wealthy, and for the rest of us to pay the price. The cost of gas is going up, the cost of groceries continues to go up. And meanwhile Donald Trump and his billionaire crowd are doing better than ever. “Just a couple of examples. Since Elon Musk, the richest man in the universe, has taken control of the government with Donald Trump, the value of his business has gone up by 30%. Tesla’s stock has gone up by 30%. Of course it has. Because Elon Musk is now able to get inside the government to arrange things to benefit his companies. “For instance, the NLRB is gone. They fired the Democrat on the board, it is unable to muster a quorum. It’s not coincidental that the NLRB had several open investigations of Tesla. “Our foreign policy has been monetized to support people like Elon Musk. News just broke yesterday that Vietnam is really worried about Trump's tariff policy, and so the way that they're going to try to get some help from the Trump administration is to give some help to Elon Musk's businesses. They are going to give Elon Musk a Starlink contract, and they believe that by doing that, they’ll be able to get some help from the Trump administration on tariffs. So Elon Musk and the billionaires are able to operationalize and monetize our foreign policy. “And of course, Elon Musk has access to the data, especially the data inside Treasury, that's going to help him gain an advantage on his competitors, whether he’s trying to set up a new tax payment system or he’s trying to set up a new universal payment capacity on Twitter. “So it's not shocking that the value of Musk's business has gone way up, because he now controls the federal government in a way that can benefit his business. “But Trump is doing very well too. He made $100 million off of a meme coin–a meme coin, where we have no idea, as Americans, who's buying it. It is very likely foreign actors trying to influence the administration, who can secretly buy the meme coin and then whisper to Donald Trump that we got your back when you needed it. $40 million from Amazon for a new documentary of the First Lady, legal settlements from ABC News, Meta, and X, all–shockingly–settled with cash payments to the Trump family after the election. “And, the monetization of foreign policy for Donald Trump, just like the monetization of foreign policy for Elon Musk. News this week that the PGA and the Saudis were meeting with the President to try to settle their disputes. Not coincidental to the fact that Donald Trump is in business with one of those golf leagues. “So it just appears to many Americans this administration puts the billionaires, the corporations, those that are loyal and friendly to Donald Trump first, and all the rest of us second. “The apex of this effort to turn our government–and government policy–over to the billionaires is this tax cut. Again, this tax and spending package has a lot of elements to it, but the centerpiece is a tax cut that is 852 times bigger for the top 1% of earners in this country than for low-income families. That's a number that's a little hard to get your head wrapped around so I just wanted to put it on this chart. That's what 852 times looks like. “The rates go down for folks that make more than $600,000 a year, but they don't move for folks that make under $600,000 a year. They're not trying to hide what's going on here: rates are coming down if you make a whole ton of money. Rates are staying the same if you're middle income or lower income. “Another way to tell the story is that if you're in the top 1%, your average tax cut is about $70,000. That's a lot of money. That's a lot of money. But if you're making $30,000 a year – and there's a whole bunch of people in this country that are making $30,000 a year, especially when Republicans refuse to support the minimum wage going above $7.25 an hour – if you make $30,000 a year, you are going to get about $130. $70,000 if you're doing really, really well. $130 for everybody else. That doesn’t make any sense. Why do people making $600,000 a year need $70,000 while only a hundred bucks goes to everybody else? “The corporations are in the mix here too. They came to Congress in 2007 and said ‘we need a lower tax rate.’ And then Trump and his Republican allies gave them a tax rate even lower than they asked. “And they made this claim that all this extra money going to the corporations was going to be passed down to workers. They had a specific claim that it was going to result in $4,000 more in income to every American. Because that's how trickle-down economics works in the brains of Republicans. You give a whole bunch of money to corporations, and they’re going to be generous and they’re going to give that money to workers in extra income. “Well, we now have eight years of experience since that first tax cut that they are looking to reauthorize. We know what happened. The studies show that it wasn't $4,000 of extra income; it wasn't $3,000; it wasn’t $2,000; it wasn’t $1,000; it wasn't $500; it wasn’t $400. It wasn’t even $200. It was zero. The tax cut resulted in an increase in salary – to those people that worked for those corporations that got the big tax cut – a salary increase of zero. It's a scam. Trickle-down economics is a scam. When you put this much money into the hands of the wealthy, it does not trickle down to everybody else. When you give corporations those enormous tax cuts, it does not trickle down to everybody else. It stays in the pockets of the wealthy. The corporations use it in order to do stock buybacks, in order to inflate CEO salaries. It just separates the rich from the poor. It is a scam. It is a scam. “Now, the last thing I'll say before turning it over to Senator Kaine is that this version of the giant billionaire and corporate tax cut is so much worse than the first version. It still is a tax cut for the wealthy that's 852 times bigger than for folks at the bottom of the income scale. But whereas in 2017 it was all borrowed–and that's bad because that money has to be recouped somehow, that means that everybody eventually is going to either pay higher interest rates or have their taxes raised, or their services cut to service all that debt–trillions of dollars worth of debt–this time Republicans are contemplating not borrowing the money, but instead just taking it from poor people and middle class people. Just taking it from them to give it to the billionaires and the corporations. “The cut that they're contemplating in the House of Representatives is a cut to Medicaid. Now, they're also thinking about cuts to Medicare, your parents’ primary health insurance. They're contemplating cuts to the Affordable Care Act, that's the program that insures 20 million working Americans. But they’re really zeroed in on Medicaid, and they're contemplating such devastating cuts to Medicaid that it would eviscerate the program. And maybe you can say well, Medicaid, it’s for poor people and that's not me. “Well, listen, I think we have an obligation to try to make sure that everybody in this country, even poor children, have access to health care. But Medicaid also pays for your parents’ or your neighbors' nursing home costs. If you cut the amount of money that they're talking about out of the Medicaid program, you're literally talking about nursing homes shutting down and seniors being out on the street. That's not hyperbole. That's what happens if you make these massive cuts to Medicaid. And so what they're talking about this year is not just running up a credit card bill in order to fund the tax cuts for the wealthy. They're literally talking about putting seniors out on the street in order to fund a tax cut for the wealthy. “The whole thing just feels like a scam: the favors being given to billionaires that are inside the government, the tax cut that benefits the very, very wealthy at the expense of everybody else, the cutting of services that help regular people in order to finance the tax cut. And whether it ends up being one bill or two bills, the centerpiece is still the centerpiece: the transfer of resources and wealth from regular people, from the middle class, from poor people, to the very, very wealthy, the millionaire and billionaire class, the corporations. “And so, we're going to tell this story–here on the Senate floor, all over the country–while this bill moves its way through the process, either as one bill or two bills. Because regardless of the process, the story is still the same: a scam. To take money from regular people to make the lives of the rich and powerful even more lavish. I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, and U.S. Representative Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.), acting Ranking Member of the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Friday sent a letter to Kristi Noem, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, demanding answers about reports that FEMA froze funding for critical grant programs. The lawmakers requested the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) clarify the authority behind these potential funding holds, their impact on public safety, and the recent firing of FEMA employees tied to grant administration. Murphy and Underwood emphasized the myriad ways this funding supports public safety and disaster preparedness: “FEMA federal
...Read more assistance funding appropriated by Congress supports counterterrorism, transportation and port security, fire departments and other first responders, state and local emergency management, border security, flood mapping, alerts and warnings to the public, and more. These funds make our communities more safe and secure, and enjoy bicameral and bipartisan support. There is no question as to Congressional intent that FEMA federal assistance be quickly provided to eligible applicants, with annual appropriations language requiring many of these grants to be announced, applied for, and awarded within 205 days of the date of enactment.” “Recipients of FEMA grants count on these funds to provide essential services for the American people across virtually every State, Territory, and Tribe,” they continued. “They fund firefighters, emergency medical technicians, and the equipment they use. They harden our infrastructure to protect against acts of terror. They allow for the identification of flood risk so we don’t build in flood plains. They protect our religious institutions from threats of violence. They fund the infrastructure to notify the public of impending danger. They build out national emergency management capabilities, such as urban search and rescue teams that respond to disasters across the country in times of need.” They concluded: “Any ‘financial holds’ on these funds would be both reckless and in contravention of appropriations law. Even the slightest delay in the disbursement of awarded funds can have devastating effects on our communities. If any such holds are in place, they should be lifted immediately absent extremely compelling circumstances that have not yet been communicated to the Committees.” Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Noem, The Committees are seeking information related to the possible freezing of grant funding within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). According to a February 11, 2025, report from NBC News, “(a) senior official at the Federal Emergency Management Agency instructed subordinates to freeze funding for a wide array of grant programs Monday,” February 10, 2025. The article cites an email with the subject line, “URGENT: Holds on awards,” which purportedly instructs FEMA employees to “put financial holds on all of your awards—all open awards, all years (2021, 2022, 2023, 2024).” FEMA federal assistance funding appropriated by Congress supports counterterrorism, transportation and port security, fire departments and other first responders, state and local emergency management, border security, flood mapping, alerts and warnings to the public, and more. These funds make our communities more safe and secure, and enjoy bicameral and bipartisan support. There is no question as to Congressional intent that FEMA federal assistance be quickly provided to eligible applicants, with annual appropriations language requiring many of these grants to be announced, applied for, and awarded within 205 days of the date of enactment. Recipients of FEMA grants count on these funds to provide essential services for the American people across virtually every State, Territory, and Tribe. They fund firefighters, emergency medical technicians, and the equipment they use. They harden our infrastructure to protect against acts of terror. They allow for the identification of flood risk so we don’t build in flood plains. They protect our religious institutions from threats of violence. They fund the infrastructure to notify the public of impending danger. They build out national emergency management capabilities, such as urban search and rescue teams that respond to disasters across the country in times of need. Any “financial holds” on these funds would be both reckless and in contravention of appropriations law. Even the slightest delay in the disbursement of awarded funds can have devastating effects on our communities. If any such holds are in place, they should be lifted immediately absent extremely compelling circumstances that have not yet been communicated to the Committees. As such, please provide written responses to the following questions, including any associated documentation: Were any such holds placed on FEMA grant programs, and if so, are such holds still in place?
Under what authority or authorities were such holds implemented?
If any such holds were or are in place, what funds were withheld and over what time period(s), split by both program and recipients?
What, if any, reviews were conducted, are currently underway, or are planned with respect to these funds?
How are these reviews being performed, what office is performing them, and how and when will these results be communicated to the Committee? In addition, the Committees are seeking information following recent news out of FEMA related to the administration of grant programs and the firing of agency personnel. On February 11, 2025, we understand that four FEMA employees were fired for activities related to the Shelter and Services Program (SSP), and funding that was drawn down by New York City government pursuant to their SSP grant award. In a statement to the Associated Press on February 10, 2025, your spokesperson, Trisha McLaughlin, stated that “(i)ndividuals who circumvented leadership and unilaterally made this payment will be fired and held accountable.” However, you have not provided any evidence that the actions of these employees were illegal, misaligned with the law, or contrary to the intent of Congress. On January 28, 2025, you issued a memorandum, Direction on Grants to Non-governmental Organizations. In that memorandum, you directed that “all Department grant disbursements and assessments of grant applications that: (a) go to non-profit organizations or for which non-profit organizations are eligible, and (b) touch in any way on immigration, are on hold pending review, except to the extent required by controlling legal authority.” The memorandum did not impact grants to state, local, tribal, or territorial governments, or grants for which those governments are eligible. We understand that FEMA paused disbursements to non-governmental organizations (NGOs) awarded grants under SSP pursuant to the aforementioned memorandum. However, because the memorandum did not apply to grants to state, local, tribal, or territorial governments, it did not impact SSP grants to New York City government. SSP grants to New York City and other recipients were awarded pursuant to enacted appropriations by this Committee and the applicable Notices of Funding Opportunity (NOFOs), and were subject to budget submissions and spend plans requiring approval by FEMA prior to funding drawdowns by the recipients. Considering that: (1) your January 28, 2025, memorandum did not impact SSP grants to New York City government; (2) the awarding of funds to New York City government were made before the current administration took office on January 20, 2025; (3) the awarding of SSP grants, including to New York City government, were implemented in accordance with enacted law and Congressional intent; and (4) mechanisms were in place for New York City government to draw down funding for eligible expenses per their approved budget and spend plan; what is the justification for the firing of the four FEMA employees? Further, what leadership was “circumvented,” and in what way(s) did they “unilaterally” make “this payment?” Please provide responses to the bulleted grant questions immediately, including supporting documentation (and dates), along with any written guidance or direction related to such holds. If guidance or direction was provided via non-written means, please provide a written description of such guidance or direction. Please provide responses to the SSP-related questions by February 21, 2025. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), joined 30 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to President Donald Trump demanding the Trump administration, Elon Musk, and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) make no cuts to Medicare and Medicaid to pay for tax cuts for billionaires. This follows reports that Elon Musk and DOGE officials gained access to key payment and contracting systems at the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services (CMS), which administers Medicare and Medicaid. In 2024, 68 million seniors and people with disabilities relied on Medicare coverage for essential health care, including hospital visits, screenings
...Read more for cancer, diabetes, and depression, and prescription drugs. Nearly 80 million Americans relied on Medicaid, making it the largest public health insurance program in the United States. “We write to say no to Elon Musk and DOGE, and demand hands off Medicare or Medicaid,” the lawmakers wrote. “We strongly oppose any efforts by Musk – or anyone else in your administration – cutting or damaging these vital programs. Medicare and Medicaid must not be raided to pay for tax cuts for billionaires. Every cut risks Americans paying more, waiting longer, and wading through more insurance red tape for care. Every cut risks hospitals and community health centers struggling harder to keep their doors open and forcing health providers and workers out of their jobs.” They added: “We continue to fight for a health care system that works better for all Americans, so they experience lower costs, shorter wait times, and receive better care. But your Administration, Elon Musk, and DOGE have already made that harder. Your Administration is already responsible for the shut-down of Medicaid portals across all 50 states, disruptions to vital health care communication, closures of community health centers, and significant delays in funding for life-saving health research. Cuts to Medicare and Medicaid will only serve to deepen the harm.” The lawmakers concluded: “It is dangerously unacceptable that an unelected Musk and his unqualified acolytes have access to sensitive CMS systems and are ready to bypass Congress to make life and death decisions affecting millions of Americans. No one asked for this lawless approach to our critical government health care systems. We urge you to stop this threat to Americans’ health care, now.” U.S. Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. The full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear President Trump: We write with alarm at recent actions by your Administration that put Medicare and Medicaid at risk – threatening access to care for 140 million Americans. On February 5, Elon Musk and representatives of his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) gained access to key payment and contracting systems at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the agency that administers these vital programs. Masquerading as a false crusade against waste, fraud, and abuse, Musk appears intent to break the programs that seniors, people with disabilities, children, and families rely on to get their health care. We write to say no to Elon Musk and DOGE, and demand hands off Medicare or Medicaid. We strongly oppose any efforts by Musk – or anyone else in your administration – cutting or damaging these vital programs. Medicare and Medicaid must not be raided to pay for tax cuts for billionaires. Medicare and Medicaid are lifelines for millions of Americans. In 2024, 68 million seniors and people with disabilities seniors relied on Medicare coverage for essential health care, including hospital visits, screenings for cancer, diabetes, and depression, and prescription drugs. Nearly 80 million Americans relied on Medicaid, making it the largest public health insurance program in the United States. Medicaid provides funding to states for services at nursing homes, hospitals, rural health clinics as well as home health services, addiction and mental health services, and family planning. Americans rely on Medicaid for pregnancy and childbirth, as well as long-term services and supports to care for people with disabilities, older adults, and chronically ill Americans. But now, DOGE is invading CMS, posing immeasurable risks to Americans’ health care. DOGE representatives, with no training or expertise, could make unilateral, politically motivated decisions to target both beneficiaries and health care providers while blocking access to care and essential payments for services. Every cut risks Americans paying more, waiting longer, and wading through more insurance red tape for care. Every cut risks hospitals and community health centers struggling harder to keep their doors open and forcing health providers and workers out of their jobs. We continue to fight for a health care system that works better for all Americans, so they experience lower costs, shorter wait times, and receive better care. But your Administration, Elon Musk, and DOGE have already made that harder. Your Administration is already responsible for the shut-down of Medicaid portals across all 50 states, disruptions to vital health care communication, closures of community health centers, and significant delays in funding for life-saving health research. Cuts to Medicare and Medicaid will only serve to deepen the harm. It is dangerously unacceptable that an unelected Musk and his unqualified acolytes have access to sensitive CMS systems and are ready to bypass Congress to make life and death decisions affecting millions of Americans. No one asked for this lawless approach to our critical government health care systems. We urge you to stop this threat to Americans’ health care, now. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—On the seventh anniversary of the tragic shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 17 of their Senate colleagues in introducing the Age 21 Act, legislation to raise the minimum age to purchase assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines from 18 to 21—the same age requirement that already applies to purchasing handguns from federally licensed dealers. Individuals under 21 have used assault weapons in some of the most devastating school shootings in U.S. history, including the mass shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, and Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. “From Uvalde to
...Read more Parkland, it’s just a fact the profile of these shooters are often teenagers who were able to legally get their hands on a deadly weapon like an AR-15. A majority of Americans support raising the age to purchase assault weapons or handguns to 21. Congress should do it,” said Murphy. “Too many innocent lives lost, too many individuals facing relentless grief—we must take action to stop the epidemic of gun violence plaguing our nation. By raising the minimum age requirement for purchasing assault weapons, the Age 21 Act keeps guns out of the hands of individuals who lack the necessary maturity to handle firearms, combatting gun violence hurting our communities. This legislation takes meaningful action to prevent senseless, unnecessary tragedies,” said Blumenthal. Gun violence is a national crisis, claiming over 46,000 lives in 2023 — the third-largest number of gun-related deaths in American history. Assault weapons, originally engineered for military combat to maximize damage, are frequently used in mass shootings because of their ability to inflict catastrophic harm in mere seconds. More than 85 percent of deaths in public mass shootings involving four or more fatalities were caused by assault rifles. Furthermore, shootings involving assault weapons or large-capacity magazines result in more than 2.5 times as many people being shot compared to incidents involving other firearms. The bill’s restrictions on the sale of assault weapons, handguns, large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, and related ammunition to individuals under the age of 21 would apply to both federally licensed and private sellers. Additionally, the legislation would bar most individuals under 21 from possessing these items, with limited exceptions for specific circumstances such as service in law enforcement or the armed forces. U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cosponsored the legislation. The Age 21 Act is endorsed by organizations including Brady: United Against Gun Violence, March for Our Lives, Giffords, Newtown Action Alliance, and Everytown for Gun Safety. A one-pager on the bill is available HERE. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) on Thursday reintroduced the Office of Gun Violence Prevention Act, legislation to establish a permanent office focused on gun violence prevention at the U.S. Department of Justice. “The White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention played a huge role in implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, helping drive down the number of gun deaths by 12 percent last year. It was wildly successful, so of course President Trump shut it down. This legislation would make the Office permanent at the Department of Justice to help state, local, and federal agencies work together to enforce gun safety laws and fund local gun violence prevention programs,” said Murphy. “Today we are reintroducing the
...Read more Office of Gun Violence Prevention Act because we will not let the critical, life-saving work and the love and support that this office has offered countless communities no longer exist,” said Frost. “Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress would rather side with the gun lobby than protect our people. But the truth is that leaders like that aren’t just ignoring the gun violence crisis— they are enabling it. But here’s what this Administration doesn’t understand is that we don’t give up. The gun lobby? The politicians who’d rather send “thoughts and prayers” than actually save lives? We outwork them. We out organize them. And we rise above them. We are reintroducing this bill because when innocent lives are on the line, we refuse to back down.” "GIFFORDS is proud to support the Office of Gun Violence Prevention Act introduced today by Senator Murphy and Congressman Frost. The Office of Gun Violence Prevention wasn't just a name—it was a proven force for safer communities that brought together law enforcement, public health experts, and community leaders to implement real solutions. We cannot allow this vital work to be undone with each change in administration. By making this office permanent through legislation, we send a clear message that protecting American lives from gun violence isn't a temporary commitment—it's a national priority that transcends partisan politics,” said GIFFORDS Vice President of Government and Political Affairs Vanessa N. Gonzalez. “The Office of Gun Violence Prevention was more than just a policy decision. It was the first time we had a dedicated team inside the White House giving this crisis the attention it deserves,” said Angela Ferrell-Zabala, executive director of Moms Demand Action. “We need leaders like Senator Murphy and Representative Frost—along with popular, common sense solutions—driving change to end gun violence in our communities. Our movement isn’t letting up. We’ll keep organizing, not just to protect our progress, but to push it forward.” “The White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention showed us what’s possible with a whole-of-government approach to fight gun violence. This office helped make a real difference in the fight to keep Americans safe, from driving historic drops in homicides to coordinating urgent resources for communities devastated by senseless acts of gun violence. The shuttering of this office, alongside Trump’s attack on gun safety measures, makes his priorities crystal clear: gun industry profits over American lives. Rep. Frost and Sen. Murphy understand what's at stake – American lives. Their bill would ensure this vital work continues regardless of who sits in the Oval Office. Congress must act to restore this office and the communities it served,” said Kris Brown, President of Brady. “Over 1.2 million Americans have been shot since the Sandy Hook shooting tragedy and guns are the leading cause of death for American children and teens. The Biden Administration’s White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention was a landmark achievement. It saved lives by strengthening background checks, cracking down on ghost guns, promoting safe storage, and funding community-based solutions,” said Po Murray, Chairwoman of Newtown Action Alliance. “Homicide rates have declined because of these efforts. But just weeks into his second term, Donald Trump has declared war on these protections. His executive order doesn’t just dismantle progress—it actively puts American lives at risk. That is why we need Congress to step up to support the Office of Gun Violence Prevention Act. The safety of our communities should never depend on who sits in the Oval Office.” “The Office of Gun Violence Prevention made real, tangible progress — it saved actual human lives. That’s a fact. But it was also a powerful symbol to survivors and young people across the country who yearn for a world where we don’t have to live in terror and fear of being shot anymore,” said Madelyn Cobb, March For Our Lives Policy Manager and a student at George Washington University. “That’s why we called for it back in 2019 at a Democratic Presidential forum, to be a clarion call while Trump callously ignored our pleas for safety in his first term. We’re incredibly happy that Rep. Frost and Sen. Murphy’s bill to codify this office into law is being introduced once again, in the shadow of its unceremonious closure under Trump. At a time when Trump is making it easier for gun violence to metastasize, it is the beacon of hope we need.” Specifically, the newly created Office of Gun Violence Prevention would: Convene an Advisory Council of senior DOJ officials, survivors, community violence intervention providers, public health officials, medical professionals who provide trauma care, mental health clinicians, state and local public health department officials, teachers, members of student groups, and veterans.
Coordinate gun violence prevention efforts across federal agencies.
Identify gaps in data needed for gun violence prevention research, policy development, and strategy implementation, and develop a plan to collect and analyze the data.
Make policy recommendations.
Educate the general public about federal laws, regulations, and available grant programs, including awareness campaigns directed at firearm owners, parents and legal guardians of minors, and gun violence prevention professionals, that include education related to safe storage of firearms and suicide prevention.
Work to optimize the administration of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
Annually report information to Congress on gun violence in the United States, recommendations for policy initiatives to reduce gun violence, and a description of the Director’s activities. Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Thursday questioned Linda McMahon at a hearing on her nomination for Secretary of Education. Murphy pressed McMahon on how a Trump administration executive order restricting federal funding for DEI programs will impact schools across the country. McMahon refused to provide clarity for the thousands of teachers and school administrators who are wondering whether offering African American history courses, supporting cultural student groups, or celebrating Black History Month will put their federal funding at risk. A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with McMahon can be found below MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Ms. McMahon, good to see you. You and
...Read more I have spent a lot of time over the years, and I appreciate your willingness to sit before the committee and answer some really important questions. “I want to talk to you about an executive order that the Trump administration issued that commands agencies, including the Department of Education, to eliminate grants to organizations and entities that support DEI programs and activities. As you know, this has a lot of schools all across the country scrambling, because they have no idea what that means. They don't know because the order doesn't define DEI as to whether they are in compliance or out of compliance, and whether they are going to have their federal grants compromised. How does a school know whether it’s running a DEI program or not?” MCMAHON: “Well certainly, and thank you Senator, and it is good to see you again outside of the state of Connecticut, where we run into each other. DEI, I think, has been–it’s a program that's tough. It was put in place ostensibly for more diversity, for equity and inclusion. And I think what we're seeing is that it's having an opposite effect. We are getting back to more segregating of our schools, instead of having more inclusion in our schools. When there are DEI programs that say that Black students need separate graduation ceremonies or Hispanics need separate ceremonies, we are not achieving what we wanted to achieve with inclusion.” MURPHY: “Let me give you an example then. So this order applies to Department of Defense schools, and those schools have canceled all programming around Black History Month. So if a school in Connecticut celebrates Martin Luther King Day and has a series of events and programming teaching about Black history, are they in violation of a policy that says schools should stop running DEI programs?” MCMAHON: “Not in my view, that is clearly not the case. The celebration of Martin Luther King Day and Black History Month should be celebrated throughout all of our schools. I believe that Martin Luther King was one of the strongest proponents of making sure that we look at all of our populations, when he said that he would hope that his children wouldn't be judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character, and I think that is the fundamental basis that we should celebrate Black History Month.” MURPHY: “West Point has closed down all ethnic clubs. So the Society of Black Engineers can no longer meet because they believe that to be in compliance with this order, they cannot have groups structured around ethnic or racial affiliations. Would public schools be in violation of this order? Would they risk funding if they had clubs that students could belong to based on their racial or ethnic identity?” MCMAHON: “Well, I certainly today don't want to address hypothetical situations. I would like, once I'm confirmed, to get in and assess these programs, look at what has been covered–” MURPHY: “Isn’t that a pretty easy one? I mean, you're saying that it's a possibility that if a school has a club for Vietnamese American students or Black students, where they meet after school, that they could be potentially in jeopardy of receiving federal funding?” MCMAHON: “Again, I would like to fully understand what that order is and what those clubs are doing.” MURPHY: “That’s pretty chilling. I think schools all around the country are going to hear that. What about educational programming centered around specific ethnic and racial experiences? My son is in a public school. He takes a class called African American History. If you are running an African American history class, could you perhaps be in violation of this executive order?” MCMAHON: “I’m not quite certain, and I’d like to look into it further and get back to you on that.” MURPHY: “So there's a possibility– there's a possibility, you’re saying– that public schools that run African American history classes, right, this is a class that has been taught in public schools for decades, could lose federal funding if they continue to teach African American history?” MCMAHON: “No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that I would like to take a look at these programs and fully understand the breadth of the executive order and get back to you on that.” MURPHY: “I think you are going to have a lot of educators and a lot of principals and administrators scrambling right now. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, my time’s expired.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 45 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. expressing serious alarm over the Trump Administration’s recent decisions that threaten to undermine America’s biomedical research infrastructure and set us back generations. The steps the Trump administration has taken would create a serious funding shortfall for research institutions nationwide, threaten to undermine progress on lifesaving scientific advancements, and could cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars and threaten the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of workers. “
...Read more As the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world, NIH plays a critical role in sustaining the research infrastructure necessary for scientific breakthroughs in cancer treatment, infectious disease prevention, and medical technology innovation, among many others,” the senators wrote. “President Trump has wreaked havoc on the nation’s biomedical research system in recent weeks. In his first several days in office, President Trump imposed a hiring freeze, communications freeze, ban on travel, and cancellation of grant review and advisory panels that are necessary to advance research. While some of these efforts have been reversed, they continue to cause confusion and miscommunication among researchers and recipients of NIH funds.” Last week, the NIH announced it would set the maximum reimbursement rate for indirect costs to 15 percent—creating a serious funding shortfall for research institutions of all types across the country. This move would dismantle the biomedical research system and stifle the development of new cures for disease. It won’t produce cost savings—it will just shift costs to states who can’t afford to pay the difference. Importantly, this action by the Trump administration is illegal—Congress’ bipartisan Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Bill prohibits modifications to NIH’s indirect costs. “This change to NIH’s indirect cost rate represents an indiscriminate funding cut that will be nothing short of catastrophic for the lifesaving research that patients and families are counting on. The Administration’s new policy means that research will come to a halt, sick kids may not get the treatment they need, and clinical trials may shut down abruptly,” the senators added. On Monday, a federal judge in Boston temporarily blocked the NIH rate cut and set a hearing for February 21. The senators’ letter points out that, in addition to the stifling impact on discovering new cures and ripping away treatment from those who need it, changes to NIH policy and communications threaten jobs in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. NIH research supported more than 412,000 jobs and fueled nearly $93 billion in new economic activity in Fiscal Year 2023 and every dollar the NIH invests in research generates almost $2.50 in economic activity. “The Trump Administration has left researchers, universities, and health systems with great uncertainty about whether they can continue to support entire research programs and patient clinical trials across the country. Institutions and grantees nationwide are dealing with an unprecedented external communications ‘pause’ enacted by new leadership at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the lack of transparency regarding the Administration’s illegal funding freeze, and the uncertainty of how new Executive Orders would be applied to their critical work. These actions resulted in NIH freezing grant reviews and cancelling advisory meetings, delaying critical funding that scientists need to continue advancing new cures and treatments. These disruptions do not just slow research—they cost lives,” the senators continued. They concluded: “Our standing as a world leader in funding and producing new medical and scientific innovations has been put at risk by these recent actions from the Trump Administration. We urge you to stop playing political games with the lifesaving work of the NIH and to allow NIH research to continue uninterrupted.” U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Secretary Kennedy, We write to express our serious concern with the Trump Administration’s recent decisions that threaten to undermine the nation’s biomedical research infrastructure and set us back generations. The steps the Trump Administration has taken will create a serious funding shortfall for research institutions nationwide, threaten to undermine progress on lifesaving scientific advancements, could cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars, and threaten the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of workers. As the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world, NIH plays a critical role in sustaining the research infrastructure necessary for scientific breakthroughs in cancer treatment, infectious disease prevention, and medical technology innovation, among many others. President Trump has wreaked havoc on the nation’s biomedical research system in recent weeks. In his first several days in office, President Trump imposed a hiring freeze, communications freeze, ban on travel, and cancellation of grant review and advisory panels that are necessary to advance research. While some of these efforts have been reversed, they continue to cause confusion and miscommunication among researchers and recipients of NIH funds. Just last week, NIH announced an illegal plan to cap indirect cost rates that research institutions rely on. In capping indirect cost rates at 15 percent for NIH-funded grants, this policy would cut funding essential for conducting research, such as operating and maintaining laboratories, equipment, and research facilities. This change to NIH’s indirect cost rate represents an indiscriminate funding cut that will be nothing short of catastrophic for the lifesaving research that patients and families are counting on. The Administration’s new policy means that research will come to a halt, sick kids may not get the treatment they need, and clinical trials may shut down abruptly. These confusing and harmful policy changes threaten patient safety. The strength of the American research enterprise – recognized as the best in the world – is built on Congress’ bipartisan commitment to supporting essential research infrastructure. This funding, which Congress has long appropriated on a bipartisan basis, fuels groundbreaking medical discoveries and cements the United States’ position as the global leader in biomedical research. In addition to the stifling impact on discovering new cures and ripping away treatment from those who need it, changes to NIH policy and communications threaten jobs in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, with everyone from custodians, to research trainees, to scientists facing potential layoffs. NIH research supported more than 412,000 jobs and fueled nearly $93 billion in new economic activity in Fiscal Year 2023. Every dollar the NIH invests in research generates almost $2.50 in economic activity. These reckless policy changes not only threaten biomedical innovation and research, but also the livelihoods of thousands of workers in every state across the nation. The Trump Administration has left researchers, universities, and health systems with great uncertainty about whether they can continue to support entire research programs and patient clinical trials across the country. Institutions and grantees nationwide are dealing with an unprecedented external communications “pause” enacted by new leadership at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the lack of transparency regarding the Administration’s illegal funding freeze, and the uncertainty of how new Executive Orders would be applied to their critical work. These actions resulted in NIH freezing grant reviews and cancelling advisory meetings, delaying critical funding that scientists need to continue advancing new cures and treatments. These disruptions do not just slow research – they cost lives. The NIH plays a critical role in our nation’s efforts to fund scientific advancements that improve health and save lives. Our standing as a world leader in funding and producing new medical and scientific innovations has been put at risk by these recent actions from the Trump Administration. We urge you to stop playing political games with the lifesaving work of the NIH and to allow NIH research to continue uninterrupted. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) sent a letter to Gene L. Dodaro, U.S. Comptroller General and head of the Government Accountability Office (GAO), calling for an investigation into the legality and scope of the agreement authorizing Elon Musk and his aides to use private servers to access sensitive and classified information. Murphy also requested a review of their designation as ‘special government employees’ (SGEs) and urged the GAO to assess whether they adhered to federal ethics and security requirements. “While the designation absolves Musk and his aides of some government requirements that apply to most federal employees, it does not absolve them of all obligations, nor does such a designation afford Musk and his aides carte blanche access to government data and
...Read more servers,” Murphy wrote. “I also believe that Musk and his aides are subject to various conflict of interest statutes which prohibit federal employees from participating in matters that impact their own financial interests. Given the authority that President Trump has ceded to Musk and his aides, it is imperative the public understands whether Musk and his aides have complied with the law and whether highly sensitive data could be at risk if accessed by private actors who seek to benefit from the information illegally, or worse, by foreign adversaries who wish to attack this country.” Murphy warned the SGE designation could be exploited to give Trump’s political allies access to sensitive data without complying with ethics rules, referencing concerns of his colleagues from 2015: “As Senator Charles Grassley has rightly noted, the use of this designation at times has allowed some of the President’s political allies to work for the government while keeping their private sector jobs. Under this designation, many standard ethics and disclosure requirements are circumvented, but not all. In this case, press reports state Musk and his aides have set up private servers in at least one, and possibly multiple, federal agencies. This is very alarming if true. As Senator Grassley noted, “[t]he public’s business ought to be public with few exceptions…When employees are allowed to serve the government and the private sector at the same time and use private email, the employees have access to everything and the public, nothing.” In 2013, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and other Senate Republicans raised repeated concerns about Hillary Clinton’s use of the SGE designation as U.S. Secretary of State and the use of private emails and servers to conduct government business. At the time, Grassley warned, “This is worrisome because if the government isn’t properly tracking who holds this designation, it may be failing to catch conflicts of interest between government service and private-sector jobs.” Full text of the letter is available HEREand below: Dear Comptroller General Dodaro, I write to request an investigation into the legality and scope of the agreement authorizing Elon Musk and his private aides to utilize private servers to access, obtain information on, and otherwise enter varying levels of sensitive and classified information that belongs to the federal government, and to work in the federal government as ‘special government employees’ (SGE). On Monday, February 3, 2025, a White House official confirmed that Elon Musk (and by extension, his aides) have been designated SGEs. While the designation absolves Musk and his aides of some government requirements that apply to most federal employees, it does not absolve them of all obligations, nor does such a designation afford Musk and his aides carte blanche access to government data and servers. I also believe that Musk and his aides are subject to various conflict of interest statutes which prohibit federal employees from participating in matters that impact their own financial interests. Given the authority that President Trump has ceded to Musk and his aides, it is imperative the public understands whether Musk and his aides have complied with the law and whether highly sensitive data could be at risk if accessed by private actors who seek to benefit from the information illegally, or worse, by foreign adversaries who wish to attack this country. As Senator Charles Grassley has rightly noted, the use of this designation at times has allowed some of the President’s political allies to work for the government while keeping their private sector jobs. Under this designation, many standard ethics and disclosure requirements are circumvented, but not all. In this case, press reports state Musk and his aides have set up private servers in at least one, and possibly multiple, federal agencies. This is very alarming if true. As Senator Grassley noted, “[t]he public’s business ought to be public with few exceptions…When employees are allowed to serve the government and the private sector at the same time and use private email, the employees have access to everything and the public, nothing.” Specifically, I ask you to examine, and make publicly available, the following: any agreements, and any related documents, concerning the designation of Musk and his aides as ‘special designation employees;’
all documents associated with required ethics compliance for Musk and his aides, including whether the required financial disclosures have occurred;
whether all ethics officers at the relevant agencies were consulted or aware of the presence of Musk and his aides and compliance with federal law;
the security of the private servers, including whether such servers can be exploited or accessed by individuals without appropriate security clearances;
the names of the individuals who used, or continue to use, private e-mail addresses to conduct the business of the federal government (and for these individuals, identify any dual employment);
whether any work-related emails from such servers have been deleted;
whether any “Department considered any other candidates besides [Musk and his aides] for the expert position requiring expert knowledge on policy, administrative, and other matters? If so, please provide the supporting documentation. If not, why not?”
whether [Musk and his aides] will be “reminded before [their] departure from government employment about [their] obligations in preserving [their] email communications and records;”
whether Musk and his aides have adhered to legal obligations and otherwise to safeguard data, including, but not limited to, creating data inventories, undertaking data minimization and purpose limitation, and adhering to the highest levels of cybersecurity to protect the data from exploitation and exfiltration; and
whether Musk and his aides can identify whether any data that they have accessed (within their authorized access level or not), has also been accessed impermissibly by any other party without authorization, and if so, what remedial measures have taken place. Given the stakes of what has occurred, I request that you expedite this investigation. Respectfully submitted, ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday reintroduced legislation to promote gender equity in college and K-12 sports. The Fair Play for Women Act would promote fairness in participation opportunities and institutional support for women's and girls' sports programs, ensure transparency and public reporting of data by college and K-12 athletic programs, hold athletic programs and athletic associations more accountable for Title IX violations and discriminatory treatment, and improve education and awareness of Title IX rights among college and K-12 athletes as well as athletics staff. U.S. Representative Alma Adams (D-N.C.) introduced companion
...Read more legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives. “For all the progress we’ve made since Title IX, women and girls still don’t get a fair shot when it comes to sports. Schools are spending less on recruiting, facilities, and scholarships for women’s teams, and too many have bent the rules to make their numbers look better than they really are. The Fair Play for Women Act would bring real accountability and transparency to college and K-12 sports so all athletes get the support they deserve,” said Murphy. "For too long, schools have found ways to bend the rules and shortchange women athletes—skewing the numbers, dodging accountability, and failing to meet the promise of equality. The Fair Play for Women Act strengthens Title IX enforcement, brings real transparency to college and K-12 athletics, and ensures every girl gets the same shot at success as her male peers,” said Adams. Specifically, the Fair Play for Women Act would: Hold schools and athletic associations accountable for discriminatory treatment. The bill would codify that state and intercollegiate athletic associations, including the NCAA, cannot discriminate based on sex, along with asserting non-discrimination protections within all school-based athletics, including club and intramural sports. It would also provide a robust private right of action for all athletes in their discrimination claims, making it easier for athletes to push for change at their schools. The bill would authorize the Department of Education to levy civil penalties on schools that repeatedly discriminate against athletes and require schools to submit publicly available plans to remedy violations, providing more tools to compel compliance and resolve ongoing discrimination.
Expand reporting requirements for college and K-12 athletics data and make all information easily accessible to the public. The bill would establish a one-stop shop for key athletics data by expanding the scope and detail of reporting by colleges, extending these requirements to include athletics at elementary and secondary schools, and requiring the Secretary of Education to house all data on the same public website. The bill also requires that schools certify the data they submit and report how they are claiming Title IX compliance, it directs the Department of Education to publish an annual report on gender equity in school-based athletics. These provisions will help weed out reporting tricks by programs to skirt non-discrimination laws and make it easier for athletes and stakeholders to evaluate persisting gaps in athletic programs or use publicly available data in their claims against schools.
Improve education of Title IX rights among athletes, staff, and stakeholders. The bill would require Title IX trainings on an annual basis for all athletes, Title IX coordinators, and athletic department and athletic association staff. The bill would also establish a public database of all Title IX coordinators at colleges andK-12 schools, included in the one-stop shop for athletics data. These provisions will ensure all people involved with K-12 and college athletics understand what Title IX means and what students’ rights are under the law. U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) co-sponsored the legislation. U.S. Representatives Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) and Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) co-sponsored legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives. “The Fair Play for Women Act really is about fairness—enabling women and girls to have equitable opportunities in sports and holding schools accountable when they don’t. The stark truth is that despite progress after Title IX, women and girls still face fewer opportunities than boys to participate in sports and insufficient resources for their teams. This necessary legislation will confront the continued lack of gender equity and fairness in sports,” said Blumenthal. “Despite decades of underinvestment and neglect, women’s sports have surged in popularity, proving what women athletes have always known—there is a massive, untapped audience eager to support them,” said Trahan. “The Fair Play for Women Act will build on that momentum by addressing the real barriers still holding women’s sports back: Title IX loopholes that deny thousands of women and girls every day the opportunity to compete and thrive in the sports they love.” "Since the passage of Title IX we've seen an increase in the number of female students participating in sports. Despite that increase, college women still have nearly 60,000 fewer athletics opportunities than men, and high school girls have about one million fewer opportunities to play sports than high school boys. I'm co-leading the Fair Play for Women Act to promote strong Title IX protections and compliance from K-12 schools and colleges,” said Bonamici. Athlete Ally, Billie Jean King Foundation, Champion Women, Katie's Save, National Organization for Women, National Women's Political Caucus, The Drake Group, Voice in Sport Foundation, and Women's Sports Foundation endorsed the legislation. "The Fair Play for Women Act is a step in the right direction to ensure student-athletes are able to play, compete and lead - in sports and beyond - without barriers," said WSF CEO Danette Leighton. "For 50 years and counting, the Women's Sports Foundation has championed a simple message: when girls play, they lead and we all win! That's why we applaud the introduction of this bill, as it seeks to create a level playing field to allow girls and women to thrive through the transformative power of sports." "The Drake Group applauds the Senator Murphy/Representative Adams team for stepping up to the plate to provide better Title IX compliance tools through the Fair Play for Women Act. The legislation closes significant collegiate athletics reporting loopholes and establishes long overdue K-12 reporting and training obligations. As important, the Act provides for a private right of action and civil penalties as well as clearly holding athletics governance associations accountable for discriminatory treatment. This is good, common sense gender equity legislation deserving of widespread non-partisan support," said Kassandra Ramsey, Esq., President, The Drake Group A one-pager of the legislation is available HERE. Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) is taking a front-and-center role in the efforts to push Democrats toward becoming the party of economic populism and to challenge President Trump. The Connecticut senator has emerged as one of the loudest and most prominent voices among party members looking to convince Democrats to change their focus around America’s working-class coalition, arguing they’ve lost trust with the voters they desperately need on their side. Without an obvious leader to counter Trump’s early return to power, Murphy is one of the figures seeking to fill that void as the party tries to rebuild from the ground up. “He’s really interesting right now,” said Matt Duss, a former senior policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who has worked with
...Read more Murphy to co-sponsor legislation in the Senate. “He’s articulating a really powerful theory of the case about rebuilding an American political consensus. And he’s doing so in a unifying and constructive way.” In the frantic first few months following Democrats’ electoral defeat, Murphy has seemed to do the impossible — gain an equal amount of praise from the two polarizing sides of his party. The lack of enemies has garnered attention as lawmakers, party leaders and campaign operatives start to work past their most glaring problems toward renewed relevance. “For him to be joining this, I think is notable,” Duss said about Murphy’s anti-corruption message directed at his own party. The senator is “seen as part of the Democratic mainstream, not known as this radical,” he continued. “It’s a sign that the Democratic Party more broadly has lost its way.” The 51-year-old senator has generally taken a supportive role in the upper chamber without angering his colleagues. He’s an easy vote for most of his party’s legislative agenda and isn’t perceived as a rabble-rouser on either side. He’s progressive but isn’t considered too far left. He has effectively kept a steady profile during times when the party has descended into finger-pointing. Now, he seems pleased to step into a more adversarial role that some say may put him at odds with more corporate-friendly Democrats. The more he pushes corporate reform and an anti-billionaire message, the more he could collide with Democrats who don’t see their reliance on donor money as the root cause of their troubles. So far, the crux of his critique, which he launched on social media following Trump’s reelection and has since spread in interviews and policy memos, is that the economic menu Democrats are offering voters is stale. Voters have shifted away and see the party as incapable of meeting their material needs. Democrats, he argues, have become more isolated and detached from their base. Murphy wrote in a postelection letter that a “populist message of power de-concentration is a truly unifying message, across income brackets and political ideologies,” asserting a plausible path ahead. Observers note he is trying to make the case earlier than others that Democrats need to stand in clear opposition to the ultrawealthy people and priorities favored in Trump’s Washington. Both wings of the party seem to have accepted Murphy’s prognosis. So far he hasn’t appeared to alienate the ever-skeptical left, who often accuse “establishment” Democrats of moving toward their side for political gain. In 2020, for example, a variety of senators became more progressive on various hot-button policies to try to win the presidential nomination against leaders like Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Murphy has been welcomed among Sanders allies who want to see the movement they helped build coalesce around a new leader. His ability to fly under the radar until more recently, some Democrats say, could be a hidden asset. “He doesn’t come top of mind, but that’s not a bad thing,” said a senior Democratic strategist who talks regularly with the activists and grassroots coalitions Murphy would need to court to gain more influence. “He can win them over, especially if he has Bernie’s blessings,” the strategist said. “What people on the left and right respect about Bernie is he [is] principled. So if Bernie embraces him, that’s it, he has that electorate locked up.” A spokesperson for Murphy did not return requests for comment. The search for Democratic leadership is just starting to take shape as the party debates why they got wiped out so badly in the 2024 election cycle. Some are getting noticed for taking a cozier approach to the GOP president, such as Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who met with him at Mar-a-Lago, while others are publicly chastising how his leadership model resembles an “oligarchy.” Murphy is not shy about going after Trump when he sees fit. On Sunday, he warned that “democracies don’t last forever” in an appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” calling the current state of politics “the most serious constitutional crisis the country has faced.” “The president is attempting to seize control of power and for corrupt purposes. The president wants to be able to decide how and where money is spent so that he can reward his political friends, he can punish his political enemies. That is the evisceration of democracy,” he said. Democrats say balancing talk about the real-time threats he sees to fragile democratic structures with the economic plight for millions of people is one path to breaking through in the Trump era. “Let’s make sure we choose the right enemies,” Duss said. “The enemies are corporate elites that have captured our political system. The elites have gamed the system for their own benefit. There’s a reason why Trump gets traction when he says the system is rigged. It’s because the system is rigged.” “But it’s rigged on behalf of people like Trump and his flunkies. I think part of the message we’re hearing from Sen. Murphy and we’ve heard for a long time from Sen. Sanders is Democrats need to be less timid about saying that,” he added. Democrats who are more evenhanded in their approach than the activated progressive left agree that he’s cutting through much of the discussion about next steps. Mixing an economic populist message while articulating the corruption concerns around Trump could start to catch on. “Murphy is tapping into the outrage and urgency that millions of people across the country are feeling better than almost anyone else in the Senate at the moment,” said Doug Gordon, a Democratic strategist. “He is smartly abandoning the cautious, poll-tested, talking point-based way too many Democrats have communicated the last several years.” “People want to see action and fight, and Murphy is tapping into that,” Gordon said. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced bicameral legislation aimed at reducing gun violence by preventing the theft of firearms from federally-licensed gun dealers (FFLs). The Safety Enhancements for Communities Using Reasonable and Effective (SECURE) Firearm Storage Act would address the problem of “smash and grab” gun store burglaries by requiring all firearms to be securely stored when a federally-licensed gun dealer is not open for business. Additionally, the bill would authorize the Attorney General to review and put forth additional security measures to reduce the risk of theft, and require a new section on the FFL application for an applicant to describe security plans before a license can be approved. "Every
...Read more day, we see the consequences of stolen guns being used in crimes that devastate families and communities across this country. Gun dealers need to take simple steps to secure their inventory, just like any other business that sells dangerous products. It’s about basic responsibility—if you’re selling deadly weapons in your store, you should have to lock them up when you close.” said Murphy. “Thousands of guns disappear each year during gun store burglaries - posing a serious public safety threat when these firearms show up again in the wrong hands. Responsible gun storage requirements for gun retailers are critical to preventing senseless and unnecessary deaths in our communities. I am proud to support the SECURE Firearm Storage Act, which strengthens sensible safety standards and would save countless lives, and I will continue to fight to put an end to the scourge of gun violence,” said Blumenthal. Gun thefts from FFLs are a significant problem across the country. In 2023, FFLs reported 13,301 guns to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) as lost through burglaries, larceny, robberies, or simply missing from inventory. These guns frequently end up being used in crime; one study found that between 2012 and 2018, nearly 14,800 guns recovered in crimes had been reported as lost or stolen from gun dealers. Thefts of guns from FFLs can be deterred by reasonable security measures, and FFLs that fail to take such measures have been the targets of recent burglaries. For example, last September, multiple suspects allegedly broke into a gun store in Springfield, Maryland, and stole 14 guns. Last May, a 14-year-old was arrested and charged with 16 counts of firearm theft stemming from a FFL burglary in New Castle, Delaware. Last February, two suspects allegedly burglarized a store in Virginia, taking six handguns. Such thefts could be deterred or prevented if FFLs ensured that their guns were stored securely. U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) also cosponsored the legislation. The legislation has been endorsed by Brady United Against Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, and GIFFORDS. To decrease the loss or theft of guns from FFLs, the SECURE Firearm Storage Act would take several commonsense measures to reduce firearm loss by: Requiring FFLs, when their premises are closed, to secure all firearms in their inventory either by fastening them to an anchored steel rod or storing them in a locked safe or gun cabinet;
Requiring FFLs to store all paper records of firearms transactions in a secure location so the records can be preserved in case they are needed for crime gun tracing investigations;
Authorizing the Attorney General to prescribe regulations with additional security requirements relating to alarm and security cameras, site hardening on FFL premises, and security of electronic records;
Ensuring that an FFL that fails to follow these security requirements would face a civil penalty for the first violation; possible FFL license suspension for the second violation; and possible license revocation upon a third violation; and,
Adding a new section to the FFL application for applicants to describe how they will comply with these security requirements, and directing the Attorney General to ensure that an applicant’s plan will be compliant before approving a license application. Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Sunday that President Trump’s attempts to “seize control of power” were threatening democracy and causing a constitutional crisis with little precedent. “I think this is the most serious [constitutional] crisis the country has faced, certainly since Watergate. The President is attempting to seize control of power, and for corrupt purposes,” Murphy told ABC News’s Martha Raddatz on “This Week,” in a clip highlighted by Mediaite. “This is a red-alert moment when this entire country has to understand that our democracy is at risk, and for what? The billionaire takeover of government,” he added later. Trump ally and tech billionaire Elon Musk, the leader of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has in
...Read more recent weeks dispatched staff to multiple agencies to access databases, including the Office of Personnel Management and the Treasury Department. Government officials have sought to limit DOGE’s access to data and computer systems have faced punitive action or been pushed aside. David Lebryk, a top career Treasury Department official, retired recently after butting heads with Musk allies on government payment systems. Lebryk’s retirement followed a clash over a request from DOGE for access to a payment system used by Treasury Department officials to disburse funds. “The President wants to be able to decide how and where money is spent so that he can reward his political friends, he can punish his political enemies. That is the evisceration of democracy,” Murphy said Sunday. Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) said last week that Democrats have appeared “surprised and flat footed” after actions taken by Musk and DOGE on the federal government. “I’m going to keep hitting this: the Democrats are THE ONLY political opposition. They had three months to prepare for these acts. And they seem surprised and flat footed,” Kinzinger posted on the social platform X. The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined ABC’s This Week with Martha Raddatz to sound the alarm on Donald Trump’s corrupt power grab and the billionaire takeover of the U.S. government. Murphy slammed Trump’s move to eliminate USAID and vowed to keep fighting to protect American democracy. “I think this is the most serious constitutional crisis the country has faced, certainly since Watergate,” said Murphy. “The President is attempting to seize control of power, and for corrupt purposes. The President wants to be able to decide how and where money is spent so that he can reward his political friends, he can punish his political enemies—that is the evisceration of democracy. You stand that next to the wholesale endorsement of political violence with the pardons
...Read more given to every single January 6th rioter— including the most violent, who beat police officers over the head with baseball bats— and you could see what he's trying to do here. He is trying to crush his opposition by making them afraid of losing federal funding, by making them afraid of physical violence. So yes, this is a red alert moment when this entire country has to understand that our democracy is at risk—and for what? The billionaire takeover of government.” Murphy blasted Trump’s plan to cut USAID, calling it a gift to billionaires and a threat to global stability: “The military tells us that if you eliminate foreign aid, you will have to double the number of bullets you buy them. Why? Because we prevent conflict around the world through things like economic development and conflict resolution. I think the American public are learning about the scale of this corruption, how our foreign policy is being turned over to billionaires like Elon Musk to help them financially. As the American people are learning how much influence the billionaires have, how corrupt our policy has become, they are turning against this handover of government to the very few economic elites.” He continued: “Most of what USAID is doing is employing Americans, and often foreign nationals, to try to prevent instability and conflict. They are also working to try to reduce the reasons why young people join terrorist groups overseas. They are chasing Chinese and Russian influence. I mean, listen. The major question of the next 50 years is who will control the piping of the international economy: the United States or China? It's USAID, not the U.S. military, that is working to try to blunt Chinese influence, so it's ultimately American and European rules that control the global economy, not Chinese rules. So USAID is out there protecting American jobs and American interests, and if you roll up USAID, it is just a massive gift to China in particular, and that is very bad for U.S. national security interests, very bad for the U.S. economy and U.S. workers.” Murphy argued that Democrats shouldn’t shy away from forcefully defending our democracy: “I'm not going to calm down. I had 800 people at a rally with 24 hours' notice in Connecticut this last weekend. This is a fundamental corruption. And democracies don't last forever, and what those who are trying to destroy democracies want is for everyone to stay quiet, for everyone to believe that the moment isn't urgent. They want to use violence and the threat of violence and the threat of arrest to keep the opposition at home. We are not going to do this. We see this as a crisis of epic proportions. We are watching the billionaires try to steal government from the people, and I think the broad cross-section of the American public, as you have seen in the last week, is going to rise up and say, enough.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined their Senate colleagues in introducing the Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act to prevent companies from using algorithms to collude to set higher prices. As recent reporting, a Justice Department lawsuit, and multiple private lawsuits have shown, big corporations are using algorithms to raise prices and limit competition, including companies like RealPage that have facilitated collusion to increase rents by more than $3 billion in 2023 alone. This legislation would make such collusion illegal to lower costs for families and support small businesses. "These pricing algorithms are just one more tactic corporations use to get
...Read more around the law and screw regular people. It’s how the poultry industry colludes to keep the price of chicken high,” said Murphy. “If we really care about lowering costs and disrupting the corrupt status quo, this is the kind of bill that Congress should pass.” “Predatory algorithms significantly suppress competition in today's markets and allow companies to collude to raise prices to unaffordable levels. The Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act will eliminate coercive anticompetitive software and empower consumers,” said Blumenthal. Price fixing and other forms of collusion are illegal under current antitrust laws. However, current antitrust laws may be insufficient when competing companies delegate their pricing decisions to an algorithm without agreeing to fix prices. Current law requires proof of an agreement to fix prices before condemning the conduct. When pricing decisions of multiple competitors are delegated to a single algorithm, that agreement may not exist even though the use of the algorithm may have the same effect as a traditional agreement to fix prices. This type of conduct has already occurred in rental housing, and we must ensure that it does not spread to other sectors of our economy with the proliferation of algorithmic pricing. To strengthen current price fixing law, this legislation would: Close a loophole in current law by presuming a price-fixing “agreement,” when direct competitors share non-public information through a pricing algorithm to raise prices;
Increase transparency by requiring companies that use algorithms to set prices to disclose that fact and give antitrust enforcers the ability to audit the pricing algorithm when there are concerns it may be harming consumers;
Ban companies from using non-public, competitively sensitive information from their direct competitors to inform or train a pricing algorithm; and
Direct the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to study pricing algorithms’ impact on competition. U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) also cosponsored the legislation. The Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act is endorsed by Consumer Reports, the Open Markets Institute, and Accountable.US. Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), along with 25 of their Senate colleagues, sent a letter urging U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Doug Collins to take immediate actions to secure veterans’ personal information provided by VA or other agencies to Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). This call follows Musk’s takeover of the U.S. Treasury’s payment system, which includes private information of veterans and their families, and reports of DOGE employees accessing VA computer systems at the Department’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. “Among many tasks, the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is entrusted with safeguarding the private and sensitive information of
...Read more millions of veterans…Veterans risked their lives to defend our country, and they deserve better than to have an unelected billionaire reviewing their medical records, targeting the benefits they have earned, or using their private information for personal gain,” the senators wrote. “Our nation’s veterans have entrusted their health records, including genetic samples, disability data, bank information, and other private information, to VA. The Department also stores sensitive veteran casework, files of whistleblowers who have come forward with concerns about waste, fraud, and abuse, and sensitive investigative files with veteran and federal employee information,” the senators added. “Meanwhile, the President has given unfettered access to federal databases and systems to Mr. Musk, an unelected citizen, and a team of colleagues with no formal documented employment agreement with the U.S. government. It is a group of private citizens with no experience in the federal government, who lack proper approval from legal and agency authorities, lack the appropriate security clearances, and lack the requisite background investigations or ethical conflict requirements. We are outraged these unelected, unvetted, and unaccountable individuals now have access to sensitive information that has been heavily secured for decades and by Administrations of both parties,” they continued. There are millions of veterans’ medical records stored in VA’s computer systems. These confidential records include veterans’ prescriptions, diagnoses, and procedures they have undergone. Access to these medical records could give Musk and DOGE the ability to identify veterans who have received abortions or abortion counseling in the past. The Million Veteran Program, which manages the genomic data of its more than one million veteran participants for authorized research programs, also stores its data in VA data systems. In addition, the U.S. Treasury’s payment system stores private information of veterans, surviving spouses, and their families, including their monthly disability compensation amount, home address, and bank account numbers. The senators concluded, “During your confirmation process, you claimed you would be focused on rooting out corruption and ensuring accountability at VA, and committed to following the laws passed by Congress. We now call on you to respond quickly and comprehensively to these privacy violations by revoking DOGE’s access to VA systems and insisting they permanently remove all VA data collected from their files.” U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Collins, Among many tasks, the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is entrusted with safeguarding the private and sensitive information of millions of veterans. Today, we call on you to immediately secure any personal and related information regarding veterans provided by VA or other agencies to Elon Musk and associates under the auspices of the “Department of Government Efficiency” established under Executive Order 14158. Further, we call on you to deny and sever their access to any VA or other government system that includes information about veterans, and to require them to immediately and permanently delete any information in their possession. Veterans risked their lives to defend our country, and they deserve better than to have an unelected billionaire reviewing their medical records, targeting the benefits they have earned, or using their private information for personal gain. Our nation’s veterans have entrusted their health records, including genetic samples, disability data, bank information, and other private information, to VA. The Department also stores sensitive veteran casework, files of whistleblowers who have come forward with concerns about waste, fraud, and abuse, and sensitive investigative files with veteran and federal employee information. Veterans and VA employees entrusted the Department with this information with the understanding that it would be kept private and only used to help deliver the highest quality of services to veterans, their families, and survivors. Meanwhile, the President has given unfettered access to federal databases and systems to Mr. Musk, an unelected citizen, and a team of colleagues with no formal documented employment agreement with the U.S. government. It is a group of private citizens with no experience in the federal government, who lack proper approval from legal and agency authorities, lack the appropriate security clearances, and lack the requisite background investigations or ethical conflict requirements. We are outraged these unelected, unvetted, and unaccountable individuals now have access to sensitive information that has been heavily secured for decades and by Administrations of both parties. These actions are in direct violation of federal laws meant to protect our national security and the privacy of our citizens’ personal information. This includes information on Social Security payments, Medicare, Medicaid, student loans, veterans’ disability compensation payments, GI Bill payments, federal civil servants’ personnel records, and much more. With every hour, we see DOGE further expand its efforts to create a massive private database of previously guarded data outside the federal government’s cyber and legal protections. It is an abhorrent and illegal overreach of executive powers, which conflicts with various federal statutes, including the Federal Information Security Modernization Act, the Privacy Act, the EGovernment Act of 2002, and likely several other cyber and national security laws. During your confirmation process, you claimed you would be focused on rooting out corruption and ensuring accountability at VA, and committed to following the laws passed by Congress. We now call on you to respond quickly and comprehensively to these privacy violations by revoking DOGE’s access to VA systems and insisting they permanently remove all VA data collected from their files. Sincerely, ### Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) warned that there’s an ongoing risk to democracy, saying it’s time for a “red-alert mode.” Murphy joined CNN on Wednesday to discuss his criticisms and concern over the Trump administration and the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) recent actions impacting the federal government. “I just think there’s a tipping point at which you can’t get your democracy back. And I see all of these very purposeful lines of effort that the Trump administration, Elon Musk, are taking, and I think we just have to be, right now at this moment, on red-alert mode,” Murphy said. The Trump administration’s initial actions have sparked widespread shock and concern among Democrats. The administration has moved to shutter the U.
...Read more S. Agency for International Development, and DOGE officials have gained access to the Treasury Department’s federal payment system, which controls $6 trillion annually and includes Americans’ tax records. Murphy has been an outspoken critic of the recent moves, appearing at a protest outside the Treasury building this week and calling out Musk as an unelected billionaire skirting congressional power. The Connecticut Democrat sounded the alarm earlier this week that Americans’ tax records have been “potentially compromised” by Musk officials. Murphy disagreed with DOGE officials who say they are sorting through government spending to make sure it aligns with the Trump administration’s agenda. As Democrats grapple with the impact of their election losses under GOP congressional control and a second Trump administration, many are questioning who will step up to unite the party. “I just think if we don’t stop this very soon, it is going to be hard to mount a credible political opposition in the not so distant future,” Murphy said. “So, this is the moment to me.” Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), joined 37 of their Senate colleagues in reintroducing the Right to Contraception Act, legislation that would create a statutory right to obtain and use contraceptives. The bill would also help ensure health care providers have a right to provide contraceptives and share information about this essential care. Companion legislation was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by U.S. Representative Lizzie Fletcher (D-Texas). In July 2022, the Right to Contraception Act passed the House with a vote of 220-195. That same month, Republicans blocked an attempt in the U.S. Senate to pass the bill by unanimous
...Read more consent. They did the same in June 2023. In June 2024, Republicans blocked Senate Democrats’ attempt to pass the bill on the floor. U.S. Senators Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cosponsored the legislation. The Right to Contraception Act is endorsed by Power to Decide, National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, National Women's Law Center, Guttmacher Institute, Reproductive Freedom for All (formerly NARAL Pro-Choice America), Population Connection Action Fund, Americans for Contraception, Advocates for Youth, National Partnership for Women & Families, American Public Health Association, American Humanist Association, National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women’s Health , Center for Biological Diversity, Ibis Reproductive Health, Physicians for Reproductive Health, Upstream USA, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, National Health Law Program, SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change, National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice, Reproductive Health Access Project, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Upstream USA, In Our Own Voice: National Black Women's Reproductive Justice Agenda, Center for American Progress, National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, All* Above All, and Center for Reproductive Rights. Full text of the legislation is available HERE. Last year, Murphy released statements after Senate Republicans blocked the Reproductive Freedom for Women Act, the Right to Contraception Act and the Right to IVF Act. In March, Murphy co-sponsored legislation to protect IVF access and other assisted reproductive technology, but passage was blocked by Senate Republicans. That month, Murphy also submitted an amicus brief calling on the Supreme Court to affirm the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) requires hospitals to provide emergency stabilizing care, including abortion care. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday joined U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and 15 of their Senate colleagues in reintroducing the No Tax Breaks for Outsourcing Act, legislation that would reverse the Trump tax law’s breaks for offshoring jobs and profits. The announcement comes as President Trump’s 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico remain under negotiation, while Republicans push to expand those offshoring incentives in their reconciliation bill. The No Tax Breaks for Outsourcing Act would level the playing field for American companies by requiring multinational corporations to pay the same tax rate on profits earned abroad as they do in
...Read more the United States. The Trump tax law created a special tax rate for offshore profits that is half the domestic rate. Since the law’s passage, studies have found that multinationals have increased foreign, rather than domestic investment. Extending the Trump tax law would mean maintaining this half-off rate, which is otherwise scheduled to slightly increase. If passed, the senators’ legislation would boost U.S. economic competitiveness by encouraging domestic investment, leveling the playing field for domestic companies, and bringing the U.S. into compliance with the global minimum tax agreement. The Joint Committee on Taxation found that large U.S. multinationals paid an average tax rate of just 7.8 percent the year after the Trump law passed, lower than their foreign competitors. They would still pay less than their competitors with a higher rate on foreign profits. Moreover, with over 140 countries moving to implement the global tax agreement, U.S. and foreign multinationals alike will be subject to the new minimum tax whether the U.S. complies or not. Failure to join, however, will mean the revenue fills foreign coffers instead of the U.S. Treasury. U.S. Senators Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) also cosponsored the legislation. The No Tax Breaks for Outsourcing Act would repeal offshoring incentives by: Equalizing the tax rate on profits earned abroad to the tax rate on profits earned here at home. The bill would end the preferential tax rate for offshore profits by eliminating the deductions for “global intangible low-tax income (GILTI)” and “foreign-derived intangible income” and applying GILTI on a per-country basis.
Repealing the 10 percent tax exemption on profits earned from certain investments made overseas. In addition to the half-off tax rate on profits earned abroad, the Trump tax law exempts from tax a 10 percent return on tangible investments made overseas, like plants and equipment. The legislation would eliminate the zero-tax rate on certain investments made overseas.
Treating “foreign” corporations that are managed and controlled in the U.S. as domestic corporations. Ugland House in the Cayman Islands is the five-story legal home of over 18,000 companies – many of them actually American companies in disguise. The bill would treat corporations worth $50 million or more and managed and controlled within the U.S. as the American entities they in fact are, and subject them to the same tax as other U.S. taxpayers.
Cracking down on inversions by tightening the definition of expatriated entity. This provision would discourage corporations from renouncing their U.S. citizenship. It would deem certain mergers between a U.S. company and a smaller foreign firm to be a U.S. taxpayer, no matter where in the world the new company claims to be headquartered. Specifically, the combined company would continue to be treated as a domestic corporation if the historic shareholders of the U.S. company own more than 50 percent of the new entity.
Combating earnings stripping by restricting the deduction for interest expense for multinational enterprises with excess domestic indebtedness. Some multinational groups reduce or eliminate their U.S. tax bills by concentrating their worldwide debt, and the resulting interest deductions, in U.S. subsidiaries. The bill would disallow interest deduction for U.S. subsidiaries of a multinational corporation where a disproportionate share of the worldwide group’s debt is located in the U.S. entity, a tactic commonly known as “earnings stripping.”
Eliminating tax break for foreign oil and gas extraction income. Oil and gas extraction income earned abroad gets an even further break on the already half-off rate other industries pay on offshore profits. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), on Thursday joined their colleagues in sending a letter to U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth calling for an investigation into whether landlords may be using property management software company RealPage’s services to price gouge military families. The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) provides servicemembers with a Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) to cover the costs of owning or renting privately managed housing, an allowance that is adjusted periodically by region to keep up with housing costs. In 2023, DoD spent $24 billion on housing allowances for servicemembers. There are long-held concerns that landlords are raising rents to pocket these BAH increases, rather than raising
...Read more rents because of market conditions. One recent study even found that it was “common for landlords to base their rent on the BAH for a particular rank,” so servicemembers see no difference in their yearly income. Services provided by RealPage may enable landlords to raise rents even more aggressively, to the detriment of military families, by allowing landlords to exchange proprietary information about lease terms and rents and to set prices using non-public information. DOJ and state attorneys generals have already alleged that RealPage contributed to excessive rental costs in several places where DoD raised housing allowances, including Houston, San Diego, Spokane, and Wilmington. Florida has also opened an investigation into whether RealPage is violating antitrust laws; notably, military housing rents increased across Florida during 2022 and 2023 including in Miami, West Palm Beach, Volusia County, and Fort Myers Beach. In addition to hurting military families, unsustainable housing prices have negative implications for recruitment and retention for our military. Increasing housing costs are forcing families to delay moves and choose housing in unsafe neighborhoods or with low-quality conditions. Unlike civilian families, military families “do not have the opportunity to stabilize their housing costs due to frequent relocation.” A recent Government Accountability Office report on military housing confirmed the negative impacts of high housing prices, including servicemembers taking on debt or commuting long distances for quality housing. “The Department of Defense has a responsibility to protect military families from predatory private housing companies and ensure that taxpayer dollars meant for military families are not being pocketed by unscrupulous landlords,” the senators wrote. The senators requested that DoD provide information on whether algorithms like RealPage’s are artificially driving up housing prices for military families by February 13, 2025. U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Secretary Hegseth: In the wake of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) recent antitrust lawsuit against RealPage, joined by ten states across the country,1 we write with significant concern about whether companies and landlords using RealPage may be price gouging military families. The Department of Defense (DoD) provides service members a Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) to cover the costs of owning or renting privately managed housing.2 But families continue to report that BAH rates are not keeping up with rising housing costs.3 In fiscal year 2023, DoD spent $24 billion on BAH.4 There are long-held concerns, however, that landlords are raising rents to pocket these BAH increases, rather than raising rents because of market conditions.5 One recent study found that it was "common for landlords to base their rent on the BAH for a particular rank."6 These findings raise significant concerns that landlords are profiteering by taking taxpayer money that is intended to support military families. Services provided by RealPage may enable landlords to raise rents even more aggressively to the detriment of military families. RealPage's services YieldStar and AIRM help landlords exchange proprietary information about lease terms and rents in order to maximize revenue.7 In August 2024, the Justice Department and attorneys general in eight states filed an antitrust lawsuit alleging that RealPage engaged in an "unlawful scheme to decrease competition among landlords in apartment pricing and to monopolize the market for commercial revenue management software that landlords use to price apartments."8 Last month, two more state attorneys general joined the suit, and the Justice Department expanded the lawsuit to six of the nation's largest landlords.9 RealPage's tactics allegedly included exerting significant pressure on landlords to accept their recommendations to increase prices, including an "auto accept" feature which automatically adjusted rents for property managers.10 If a landlord or property manager rejected a recommendation, a "pricing advisor" from RealPage allegedly reached out and pushed them to take the recommendation.11 In 2022, a vice president of RealPage credited their software for increasing apartment rents by over 14.5%.12 In 2022, DoD increased the BAH for 28 military housing areas where rental housing costs increased by an average of more than 20 percent.13 The lawsuit of DOJ and state attorneys general alleges that RealPage contributed to excessive rental costs in several of these places, including San Diego,14 Wilmington,15 and Houston.16 Similarly, in 2021, DoD selected Spokane, Washington as one of the five military housing areas to receive a temporary 20 percent BAH hike;17 the antitrust suit alleges that RealPage contributed to drastic increases in rent prices in this area, where Fairchild Air Force Base and Joint Base Lewis McChord are located.18 Florida has also opened an investigation into whether RealPage is violating antitrust laws; notably, military housing rents increased across Florida during 2022 and 2023 including in Miami, West Palm Beach, Volusia County, and Fort Myers Beach.19 In addition to harming military families, unsustainable housing prices have negative implications for recruitment and retention for the U.S. Armed Forces. Increasing housing costs have forced some families to delay permanent change of station moves and choose housing in unsafe neighborhoods or in unsatisfactory conditions. A recent military family lifestyle survey found that "housing costs remain the top contributing factor to financial stress for active-duty famil[ies]" and that "higher out-of-pocket housing costs may influence military families' likelihood to recommend military service."20 A majority of those who live in civilian housing "continue to pay well over $200 per month in housing costs out of pocket"21 on top of their BAH. These predatory housing practices are especially detrimental to military families because "unlike civilian peers, military families do not have the opportunity to stabilize their housing costs due to frequent relocation."22 A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on military housing confirmed the negative impacts of high housing prices on military families, finding that "some service members reported having to take on debt or commute long distances to afford quality housing."23 GAO determined that existing DoD guidance is "insufficient to address military population effects on local housing market."24 "GAO's statistical analyses found that counties with higher military populations were associated with having higher median rents and rent-to-income ratios."25 Local government officials also acknowledged the largely insufficient housing supply and issues with affordability.26 In its report, GAO recommended that DoD develop a comprehensive list of critical housing areas, regularly update said list, obtain and use feedback on the financial and quality-of- life effects of limited supply or unaffordable housing on service members, develop a plan for DoD to respond to and address those effects, and clearly define the roles and responsibilities of installation commanders and military housing offices in addressing housing needs.27 The Department of Defense has a responsibility to protect military families from predatory private housing companies and ensure that taxpayer dollars meant for military families are not being pocketed by unscrupulous landlords. We seek information that DoD may have on whether algorithms such as those used by RealPage are artificially driving up housing prices for military families, as well as members of the community who do not receive BAH.28 We are also interested in DoD's broader strategy to ensure landlords are not using RealPage's services to price gouge military families. Therefore, we ask that you provide answers to the following questions by February 17, 2025. How effective have DoD's targeted BAH temporary hikes been at ensuring that military families have access to safe, clean, and affordable housing?
How many reports has DoD received, if any, involving landlords increasing rents in response to BAH increases?
Has DoD conducted any assessments or made any determinations regarding whether landlords in military communities are using RealPage's YieldStar or AIRM products to price gouge military families?
If so, what have these assessments found?
How many military families rent from landlords who use YieldStar or AIRM products?
Have these products contributed to rent increases for these families?
What information or data has DoD collected to determine the impact of rent-setting algorithms on BAH rates?
What information or notifications has DoD provided to service members or military families in these communities to help prevent them from being gouged by landlords using these algorithms?
If not, why not?
What language, if any, does DoD include in its housing agreements with private companies to ensure programs like RealPage's YieldStar or AIRM products are not used to influence their rent prices?
Does DoD policy allow private military housing companies to collect data on renters and share it with other landlords, whether through RealPage or through other means?
How does DoD protect military families' personal information from being disclosed by private housing companies who provide military housing? Thank you for your attention to this important matter. ### Read less Laying out his plans to fight what he called a “power grab,” U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said Wednesday he will not vote for any nominee proposed by the Trump administration during what he defined as a “constitutional crisis.” That strategy — the refusal to move any nominee forward — is what Murphy posted on the social media site X as a “starting point” for “real opposition.” “Democrats need to act like our democracy is weeks away from disintegrating — because it is,” he said on X, the site formerly known as Twitter. Murphy laid out his opposition plans during a Wednesday morning appearance on MSNBC. “We should not be moving forward nominees or legislation in the United States. Senate Democrats should not be giving votes to nominees or to legislation in the
...Read more United States Senate until Republicans get serious about this crisis,” Murphy said. “Democrats should not help Republicans raise the debt ceiling in order to pass their massive tax cut for billionaires and millionaires.” Billionaire Elon Musk, presumably at the behest of President Donald Trump, took control this week of U.S. Treasury data and began dismantling the United States Agency for International Development, which Murphy and other Democrats said was illegal in a letter to newly named U.S. Attorney General Marco Rubio. On Wednesday's television appearance, Murphy called Musk’s actions a “billionaire power grab.” “I think Elon Musk is trying to steal our money, is trying to steal our data,” he said on MSNBC. “I think Elon Musk is shutting down the USAID because he wants to do deals with China and make more money.” Senate Democrats, Murphy said, should act like “a true opposition party,” by “using our tools to make life difficult for complicit Republicans.” The next step, Murphy said, is to lead “public engagement.” Murphy led a rally Monday outside USAID’s Washington headquarters “USAID chases China all around the world, making sure that China doesn't monopolize contracts for critical minerals and port infrastructure all around the world. It supports freedom fighters everywhere in this world, up until yesterday, delivering firewood, for instance, to the brave Ukrainian defenders on the Eastern Front,” Murphy told the crowd at the rally. “This is all a smoke screen, a shell game in order to turn this government over to a handful of unelected billionaires and corporate interests.” Murphy was later asked on MSNBC his thoughts on Trump’s proposal this week to “take over Gaza.” Murphy said it would never actually happen. “The impact is to try to distract Americans from the real story,” he said. “We're not going to invade and occupy Gaza. We're not going to invade Greenland. We're not taking back the Panama Canal, but Donald Trump is really good at this campaign of distraction.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and 14 of their Senate colleagues in reintroducing the Keep Our Promise to America’s Children and Teachers (PACT) Act, legislation to put Congress on a fiscally responsible path to fully fund Title I and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) on a mandatory basis. These programs, which support public education for children in low-income areas and education for individuals with learning disabilities, respectively, have been chronically underfunded since their inception, leaving our public schools, students, and teachers at a disadvantage. “For too long, poor students and
...Read more kids with disabilities have gotten shortchanged because Congress has failed to fully fund the programs that help them succeed in our schools. The Keep Our PACT Act would finally fulfill the promises we made when we signed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act into law. These investments are common sense and give every student in this country access to the education and resources they deserve,” said Murphy. “Our nation’s children deserve comprehensive, quality education and a stable environment to learn and grow. By bolstering Title I and IDEA and providing access for key resources, the Keep Our PACT Act ensures that America’s most vulnerable students are able to achieve their fullest potential. This critical legislation prioritizes students and helps create a meaningful classroom experience—setting students up on the path for success,” said Blumenthal. Title I, which gives assistance to America’s highest-need schools, is a critical tool to ensure that every child, no matter their zip code, has access to a quality education. However, it has been deeply underfunded, disadvantaging the most vulnerable students. According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the Title I funding gap for school year 2024-2025 was $35.9 billion. Similarly, IDEA calls on the federal government to fund 40 percent of the cost of special education, but Congress has never fully funded the law. According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), IDEA state grants are funded at less than 12 percent. The Keep Our PACT Act would create a 10-year mandatory glide path to fully fund both Title I and IDEA, ensuring that education is a priority in the federal budget. U.S. Senators Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also cosponsored the legislation. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON— U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, on Tuesday joined Democratic members of Congress outside the U.S. Treasury Department to call out Elon Musk’s alleged illegal takeover of the Treasury’s payment systems. Murphy blasted Musk for conspiring with Donald Trump and his billionaire cronies to hijack the federal government for the ultra-rich—putting Social Security, tax refunds, and other essential programs millions of Americans depend on at risk. A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “So it feels like the people of America have woken up. We are wide awake to the fraud that is being perpetuated on this country inside this building, and we are not going to stand for it. And I don't know about you, but
...Read more I think the United States Senate shouldn’t vote for a single nominee that’s going to participate in this fraud. “When we open up the Senate every single morning, we don’t pledge allegiance to the billionaires. We don't pledge allegiance to Elon Musk. We don't pledge allegiance to the creepy twenty-two-year-olds working for Elon Musk. We pledge allegiance to the United States of America. I want to make sure that my mother gets her Social Security check, not because she pledges allegiance to Elon, but because she pledges allegiance to the United States of America. I want to make sure your neighbor gets their tax refund, not because they pledge allegiance to the billionaire class, but because they pledge allegiance to the United States of America. “And so we have work to do right now. Every single one of us has a responsibility to stand up to this fraud. And it is true, we have to reach out to everyone in this country –conservatives, liberals, Republicans, Democrats – and tell them that we have not months, we have not weeks, but we have days to stop the destruction of our democracy. We have work to do. “And so we will fight. We will fight with you to make sure that in this country, it is the people that rule. It is the people that rule, not the billionaires. We are taking back this country from Elon Musk. Thank you, everybody.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 35 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio expressing their deep concern regarding the growing chaos and dysfunction at the U.S. Department of State and the Trump Administration’s illegal attempt to destroy the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). USAID is a critical pillar of U.S. national security strategy, providing lifesaving aid and development support around the world to help ensure stability. Yesterday, personnel at USAID were not permitted to enter the agency’s headquarters, and Elon Musk announced that President Donald Trump agreed to close the agency and move it under the State
...Read more Department – which Trump has no legal authority to do. The Trump Administration, led by Musk, has also furloughed thousands of senior career civil servants, including two top security officials who denied Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency access to classified documents and systems. “…We are deeply concerned by reports of not only growing chaos and dysfunction at the Department of State, but the Administration’s brazen and illegal attempts to destroy the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Mass personnel furloughs of dubious legality and abrupt, blanket stop-work orders without regard to relevant appropriations laws are causing immediate harm to U.S. national security, placing U.S. citizens at risk, disrupting life-saving work and breaking the U.S. government’s contractual obligations to private sector partners,” the senators wrote. The senators continued, “The Administration’s failure to consult with Congress prior to taking these steps violates the law and impedes Congress’s constitutional duty to conduct oversight of funding, personnel and the nation’s foreign policy. The Administration’s failure to expend funds appropriated on a bipartisan basis by Congress would violate the Impoundment Control Act.” “Foreign assistance is critical to supporting U.S. strategic interests around the world. Foreign assistance protects U.S. national security, advances U.S. values, and ensures the U.S. is the partner of choice for everything from defense procurement to cutting edge scientific research. China, Russia and Iran are already moving rapidly to exploit the vacuum and instability left by the U.S.’s sudden global retreat,” the senators added. They continued, “Every Administration has the right to review and adjust ongoing assistance programming. However, attempting to arbitrarily turn off core functions of a critical U.S. national security agency, without Congressional consideration or any metric-based review and absent legal authority to do so, is unprecedented and deeply disturbing.” U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Angus S. King (I-Maine), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Mark R. Warner (D-Va.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) also signed the letters. Full text of the letter is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.) introduced the Stop Sports Blackouts Act, legislation that would make cable companies refund customers who aren’t able to watch the channels they already pay for during television blackouts. For over four weeks, due to a dispute between Optimum and MSG Network, over a million customers in the Tri-State area have been unable to watch the Knicks, Rangers, Islanders, and Devils, while a separate blackout left Optimum customers unable to watch Judy Justice and local news for over 10 days. Tens of millions of Americans per year are victim to blackouts – with no requirement that they receive compensation. “Blackouts are a slap in the face to every customer paying their hard-earned money for TV shows they
...Read more can’t even watch,” said Murphy. “It’s ridiculous the rest of us get stuck in the crossfire of negotiations between cable and broadcast companies. Our bill is simple: if cable companies can’t provide the service you’re paying for, they owe you a refund.” “It’s outrageous that millions of folks couldn’t watch the Knicks, Judy Justice, or dozens of other programs for weeks because of blackouts. And it’s even more ridiculous that we’re all still paying for the right to stare at black screens! I don’t see why this is even a debate – cable companies simply should not be able to advertise and charge for services they are not providing,” said Ryan. “On behalf of fans across the country, we’re putting down a marker: everyone will get their money back when a blackout stops them from watching TV, no questions asked. That means dollars back in your pockets, and, equally importantly, it provides a hell of an incentive to these billion dollar corporations to make sure these blackouts don’t happen in the future. They have teams of lobbyists looking out for them – I’m introducing this legislation because I fight for YOU.” This type of TV blackout occurs when distributors, including cable and satellite TV companies, are unable to reach an agreement with broadcasters over the rights to distribute their content. Until an agreement is reached, subscribers are unable to view the content they had paid for as part of their cable or satellite package. On January 1, 2025, Optimum and MSG Network announced that they were unable to renew their distribution agreement, leaving subscribers unable to watch NBA and NHL games in the middle of the season. On January 10, Optimum subscribers were subjected to an additional blackout when the company announced it had failed to come to an agreement with Nexstar Media, which owns WTNH, the syndication rights to popular show “Judy Justice,” starring Judge Judy Sheindlin, and the NewsNation network. The Stop Sports Blackouts Act would direct the Federal Communications Commission to require television distributors to provide rebates to subscribers for television blackouts that occur as a result of carriage disputes. Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON— U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday joined a press conference in front of the shuttered United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to raise the alarm about how President Trump’s decision - at the behest of Elon Musk - to illegally shut down the agency will have disastrous impacts on national security while strengthening China and Russia. Murphy highlighted USAID's crucial role in global security and support for democracy: “USAID fights terrorist groups all across this world making sure that we address the underlying causes that lead to terrorism. USAID chases China all around the world, making sure China doesn't monopolize contracts for critical minerals and port infrastructure all around the
...Read more world. It supports freedom fighters everywhere in this world, up until yesterday, delivering firewood, for instance, to the brave Ukrainian defenders on the eastern front.” Murphy called out Trump’s closure of USAID as a play by Elon Musk and the billionaire class to hijack U.S. foreign policy for profit: “Elon Musk makes billions of dollars based off of his business with China. And China is cheering at this action today. There is no question that the billionaire class trying to take over our government right now is doing it based on self-interest–their belief that if they can make us weaker in the world, if they can elevate their business partners all around the world, that they will gain the benefit.” Murphy continued: “They are shuttering agencies and sending employees home in order to create the illusion that they are saving money in order to do what? Pass a giant tax cut for billionaires and corporations, right? This is all a smokescreen, a shell game, in order to turn this government over to a handful of unelected billionaires and corporate interests, and we are not going to let them do that.” Murphy concluded: “So we will use every power that we have in our disposal in the United States Senate. My colleagues will do the same thing in the House. This is a constitutional crisis that we are in today. Let's call it what it is. The people get to decide how we defend the United States of America. The people get to decide how their taxpayer money is spent. Elon Musk does not get to decide. We are weaker today than we were yesterday. China sees that, Russia sees that, and they will take advantage. Our job, and your job together, is to raise our voices, raise the alarm, so that this crisis, this emboldening of our enemies, doesn't last a second longer than it has to.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “So, Elon Musk has been floating all sorts of awful, terrible conspiracy theories about what happens at USAID. Let's make it very clear that every single day America is safer because of what happens at USAID. “USAID fights terrorist groups all across this world making sure that we address the underlying causes that lead to terrorism. USAID chases China all around the world, making sure China doesn't monopolize contracts for critical minerals and port infrastructure all around the world. It supports freedom fighters everywhere in this world, up until yesterday, delivering firewood, for instance, to the brave Ukrainian defenders on the eastern front. “But let's not pull any punches about why this is happening. Elon Musk makes billions of dollars based off of his business with China. And China is cheering at this action today. There is no question that the billionaire class trying to take over our government right now is doing it based on self-interest–their belief that if they can make us weaker in the world, if they can elevate their business partners all around the world, that they will gain the benefit. “But there is another reason this is happening. They are shuttering agencies and sending employees home in order to create the illusion that they are saving money in order to do what? Pass a giant tax cut for billionaires and corporations, right? This is all a smokescreen, a shell game, in order to turn this government over to a handful of unelected billionaires and corporate interests, and we are not going to let them do that. “So we will use every power that we have in our disposal in the United States Senate. My colleagues will do the same thing in the House. This is a constitutional crisis that we are in today. Let's call it what it is. The people get to decide how we defend the United States of America. The people get to decide how their taxpayer money is spent. Elon Musk does not get to decide. “We are weaker today than we were yesterday. China sees that, Russia sees that, and they will take advantage. Our job, and your job together, is to raise our voices, raise the alarm, so that this crisis, this emboldening of our enemies, doesn't last a second longer than it has to. Thank you everybody for being here today. Really, really important.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Sunday joined Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and his Democratic colleagues on the Committee in sending a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio declaring that any effort to merge USAID into the State Department requires Congressional approval, as well as demanding an explanation of recent developments at the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), including reports that individuals who identified themselves as working for the "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE) accessed USAID’s main headquarters, American citizens’ data and classified spaces. “Congress established the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) as an independent
...Read more agency, separate from the Department of State, to ensure that we can deploy development expertise and U.S. foreign assistance quickly, particularly in times of crisis, to meet our national security goals,” wrote the lawmakers. “For this reason, any effort to merge or fold USAID into the Department of State should be, and by law must be, previewed, discussed, and approved by Congress.” “We received reports that individuals who identified themselves as working for the ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ (DOGE) accessed USAID’s main headquarters, including classified spaces,” continued the lawmakers. “The potential access of sensitive, even classified, files which may include the personally identifiable information (PII) of Americans working with USAID, and this incident as a whole raises deep concerns about the protection and safeguarding of matters related to U.S. national security.” “We request an immediate update about the access of USAID’s headquarters, including whether the individuals who accessed the headquarters were authorized to be there and by whom, whether all individuals who accessed classified spaces have active security clearances at the appropriate level, what they were seeking to access, if any PII of American citizens was breached, and whether any review is underway regarding potential unauthorized access to sensitive personnel information and classified materials,” concluded the lawmakers. U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and provided below. Dear Secretary Rubio: Congress established the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) as an independent agency, separate from the Department of State, to ensure that we can deploy development expertise and U.S. foreign assistance quickly, particularly in times of crisis, to meet our national security goals. For this reason, any effort to merge or fold USAID into the Department of State should be, and by law must be, previewed, discussed, and approved by Congress. Congress has also made clear that any attempt to reorganize or redesign USAID requires advance consultation with, and notification to, Congress. Consistent with past precedent, we expect and welcome the Department of State’s and USAID’s engagement on any proposed organizational reforms, and other matters implicating congressional requirements While we continue to welcome such engagement, we write with deep concern about this weekend’s developments at USAID’s headquarters. We received reports that individuals who identified themselves as working for the “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) accessed USAID’s main headquarters, including classified spaces. While some of the individuals purported to have security clearances, it is unclear whether those who accessed secure classified facilities had proper clearance or what they were seeking to access. We understand that the security guards present at the facility were threatened when they raised questions. As members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, we had not been notified of any such visit to USAID by DOGE or other agency officials. Following this incident, the senior management of the Office of Security, which secures USAID personnel and facilities and safeguards national security information, were placed on administrative leave. The potential access of sensitive, even classified, files, which may include the personally identifiable information (PII) of Americans working with USAID, and this incident as a whole, raises deep concerns about the protection and safeguarding of matters related to U.S. national security. We request an immediate update about the access of USAID’s headquarters, including whether the individuals who accessed the headquarters were authorized to be there and by whom, whether all individuals who accessed classified spaces have active security clearances at the appropriate level, what they were seeking to access, if any PII of American citizens was breached, and whether any review is underway regarding potential unauthorized access to sensitive personnel information and classified materials. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senators Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) in reintroducing the Withstanding Extreme Agricultural Threats by Harvesting Economic Resilience (WEATHER) Act, legislation that calls for the development of an index-based insurance policy more responsive to crop and income losses faced by farmers as a result of extreme weather. This would be especially beneficial to small farmers in Connecticut following unprecedented floods in July 2023 and July 2024. “Farmers in Connecticut are increasingly dealing with more extreme weather, and we need to make sure they don’t face extra burdens when the next disaster strikes,” said Murphy. “The
...Read more WEATHER Act would simplify the recovery process by using weather data to trigger automatic insurance payouts, helping farmers get back on their feet quickly with less red tape.” “A new normal of thousand-year storms every year has caused chaos for farmers across the country—ruining crops and destroying land—and in recent years, Connecticut farms have been devastated by extreme weather events, including severe flooding and unprecedented droughts. With this essential legislation, we work to improve our farm safety nets for producers in order to make sure they receive the support they need to weather the storm and keep their farms thriving,” said Blumenthal. Unpredictable weather events exacerbate risks associated with farming, necessitating responsive crop insurance policies. However, producers often opt out of crop insurance due to administrative burdens, high premiums, and low payouts. The WEATHER Act works to better support farmers facing income losses after extreme weather events by reducing administrative hurdles and ensuring that insurance payouts are based on agricultural income losses. The legislation would direct the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to use its insurance research and development authority to research the possibility of developing an index-based insurance program that: Creates a multi-peril index insurance product for farmers based on weather indices correlated to agricultural income losses using data from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), satellites, climate models, and other data sources.
Pays out within 30 days in the event of indices exceeding any of the pre-determined county-level thresholds for the following events: High winds, excessive moisture and flooding, extreme heat, abnormal freeze conditions, hail, wildfires, drought, and other perils the Secretary determines appropriate. A one-pager is available HERE. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less A pair of Democratic lawmakers are introducing a bill that would require cable companies to pay back customers for programming blackouts, Axios has learned. Why it matters: The bill is part of a broader push by Democrats to crack down on what they say is corporate gouging of consumers through practices like junk fees and monopolization. Driving the news: The three-page "Stop Sports Blackout Act," introduced by Rep. Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), would require cable providers to offer customers a rebate when programming covered by their subscription is made unavailable. Such blackouts come about often as a result of TV distribution contract disputes between networks and cable providers.
The bill was spurred on by a recent fight between
...Read more Optimum and MSG Networks that has denied customers in the New York Metro Area to basketball and hockey games. What they're saying: "It's outrageous that millions of folks couldn't watch the Knicks, Judy Justice, or dozens of other programs for weeks because of blackouts. And it's even more ridiculous that we're all still paying for the right to stare at black screens," Ryan said in a statement. In addition to customers being reimbursed, Ryan said the bill would provide "a hell of an incentive to these billion dollar corporations to make sure these blackouts don't happen in the future."
Murphy said in a statement: ""Blackouts are a slap in the face to every customer paying their hard-earned money for TV shows they can't even watch. It's ridiculous the rest of us get stuck in the crossfire of negotiations between cable and broadcast companies." Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (HELP), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 17 of their Senate colleagues in releasing the following statement on the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DoD) rescission of a policy that allowed service members to get reimbursed for travel and transportation for non-covered reproductive care. A memo that updates the Joint Travel Regulations to rescind this policy was issued earlier this week. “This decision strips away service members’ ability to access the reproductive care they need, which is nothing short of abhorrent. It runs contrary to a core goal of the Department of Defense – to ensure the health and wellbeing of all our service members so that our force
...Read more remains ready at all times to protect Americans and keep this nation safe. “U.S. service members have no control over where they are stationed and what state laws may govern their bodies. The policy that the Department of Defense took away from our servicewomen and military families provided them the ability to travel to another state to seek out the care they need. Rescinding that does nothing to enhance military readiness. “At a time when we are already facing military recruitment and retention challenges, we should do all we can to assure those who answer the call to serve America that we will do everything in our power to support them and their families. Instead, this extreme action does the opposite and sends a message to servicewomen—who make up more than 17 percent of our military's active duty—that they are not as valuable as their male counterparts. “We will do everything in our power to mitigate the impact that this extreme decision will have on members of our military and ensure their health and safety comes first.” The statement was led by U.S. Senator Shaheen (D-NH) and also joined by U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Angus King (I-Maine), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.). ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Thursday questioned Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at a hearing on his nomination for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Murphy challenged Kennedy’s credibility and pressed him on past statements comparing America’s vaccine program to the Holocaust and the Catholic Church’s pedophilia scandal. Murphy argued that Kennedy’s long history of spreading misinformation about vaccines raises serious concerns about his ability to lead HHS, emphasizing the need for a Secretary who prioritizes science and public trust. A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Kennedy can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Kennedy, thank you for joining us here
...Read more today. Listen, credibility matters so much when you lead the most important health agency in the world. The Secretary of HHS has got to be trusted that he's telling the truth, that he cares about science, [and] has no political agenda. “Mr. Kennedy, I want to go back to some of your testimony yesterday, before the Finance Committee, when you either feigned ignorance about some very clear statements that you have made in the past, or you outright denied saying things about the vaccine program that you have undoubtedly said. “So with a day’s hindsight, I want to give you another chance to be honest about the things you have said. Senator Warnock asked you yesterday if you had compared America's vaccine program to the Catholic Church’s pedophilia scandal. You said you never said that. Now I’m not asking you to explain what you said.” KENNEDY: “I didn’t say I never said that. I did not say that I hadn’t said that, Senator. I said [I didn’t say] the other question he asked me, about the Nazi death camps.” MURPHY: “That’s fine, you’re doubling down on that. Senator Warnock also asked you if you compared America’s vaccine campaign to the Nazi death camps and the Holocaust. Again, you said yesterday you didn’t say that.” KENNEDY: “I did not say that.” MURPHY: “Senator Bennett asked you yesterday if you had made an allegation that AIDS is a different disease in Africa than it is in America. On that one you said you didn’t recall. Having had a day to think about it, do you recall saying that AIDS is a different disease in Africa than it is in the United States?” KENNEDY: “I looked up that passage in my book and found that indeed the diagnostics for AIDS are very different in Africa and the United States– that the list of symptoms is almost completely different.” MURPHY: “So let me just– I’ll submit this for the record, but having denied the first two statements, let me just read what you said. You said in 2013, ‘Is it hyperbole to say that the people who run our vaccine program should be in jail? They should be in jail. To me, this is like Nazi death camps. Look at what it does to the families [who participate in the vaccine program]. I can't tell why somebody would do something like that. I can’t tell you why ordinary Germans participated in the Holocaust. I can't tell you what was going on in their minds.’ “With respect to the pedophilia scandal, you said: ‘The pedophilia scandal in the Catholic Church is a perfect metaphor for what's happening in the United States. The vaccine program– it’s the same reason we had a pedophilia scandal in the Catholic Church. It’s because people were able to convince themselves that the institution of the church was more important than these little boys and girls who were being raped. “I don't disagree with Senator Mullin. I don’t want a HHS Secretary that’s not going to question science. I think it's important to question science. But you’re not questioning science– you've made up your mind. You have spent your entire career undermining America's vaccine program. You make these purposeful comparisons to those that are administering the vaccine program to the Nazi executioners, to the people who covered up the Catholic Church’s pedophilia scandal, because you have made a decision that there is a comparison; that there is evil in the vaccine program as there was evil in the pedophilia scandal and the Nazi death camps. “You aren’t exploring science, you have made up your mind. You have spent your entire career trying to undermine these programs. The reason that these statements–these incredibly aggressive, over-the-top statements–matter to us is because it just isn’t believable that when you become secretary, you are all of a sudden going to be consistent with science. People who have spent their career saying these kinds of things, running the kinds of campaigns that you have run, don't all of a sudden change their stripes. So Mr. Chairman, I will submit these statements into the record.” KENNEDY: “Can I respond to that, Senator? My statement about the Catholic Church is almost identical to the findings of the Government Oversight Investigation Committee that investigated the CDC’s vaccine program in 2003. Senator Burr was Chairman of that committee. And he said that the certain individuals in that program had written off a generation of kids because of ‘misplaced institutional loyalty to the CDC’ and because of ‘entanglements with the drug companies.’” MURPHY: “You equate pedophilia to the administration of vaccines?” KENNEDY: “It wasn’t pedophilia.” MURPHY: “You said it was a perfect metaphor.” KENNEDY: “If you have one in 36 kids who has neurological injuries, and if that is linked, that should be studied.” MURPHY: “Is it a perfect metaphor?” KENNEDY: “It’s not a perfect metaphor, but there’s no metaphor that’s perfect. I am pro-vaccine. I am going to support the vaccine program. I want kids to be healthy, and I’m coming in here to get rid of the conflicts of interest within the agency and make sure that we have gold standard, evidence-based science. And if you show me where I’m wrong on this, show me a single statement I’ve made about science that is erroneous.” MURPHY: “Thank you.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday announced his Committee assignments for the 119th Congress. In addition to maintaining his positions on the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Murphy will serve as the Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security and the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation. Murphy is the first U.S. Senator from Connecticut to serve on the Appropriations Committee since 1987. As a member of the Appropriations Committee and Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee, Murphy will continue working to secure funding to create
...Read more good-paying jobs, combat the fentanyl crisis, and support communities in Connecticut. As a member of the HELP and Foreign Relations Committees, Murphy will also continue advocating to invest in mental health care, stand up for workers, improve school safety, advocate for anti-gun violence programs, and support U.S. diplomatic efforts abroad. ### Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) likened President Trump’s onslaught of executive action to a “blitzkrieg” whose ultimate goal is to “collapse our democracy.” “The freezing of federal grants, the firing of all inspector generals, the immunization of political violence — does everybody not see what’s happening?” Murphy wrote in a post on X on Tuesday. “In a blitzkrieg, Trump is trying to collapse our democracy — and probably our economy — and seize control. Call it what it is,” Murphy added, referencing a form of warfare characterized by its sudden, forceful and swift nature. The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment. In just over a week, Trump has taken various bold steps that have sparked concern among Democrats and other critics. A memo issued
...Read more late Monday by Matthew Vaeth, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), directed federal agencies to temporarily pause “all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance.” “This temporary pause will provide the Administration time to review agency programs and determine the best uses of the funding for those programs consistent with the law and the President’s priorities,” the memo read. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) lambasted the move immediately in a statement, saying the pause on federal disbursements “blatantly disobeys the law” and expressing skepticism that it is just a temporary hold. Murphy also pointed to Trump’s move Friday night to fire at least 17 inspectors general at various government agencies. The move compelled Democrats to write a letter to the president on Saturday, pointing to a law that requires the president to give Congress 30 days’ notice of watchdog terminations, a step Trump did not take. “We write to express our grave concern about your recent attempt to unlawfully and arbitrarily remove more than a dozen independent, nonpartisan inspectors general without notice to Congress or the public and in the dead of night,” House Democrats wrote in a Saturday letter to the president. “Your actions violate the law, attack our democracy, and undermine the safety of the American people,” they added. On his first day in office, Trump pardoned nearly all Jan. 6 defendants. Trump granted roughly 1,500 “full, complete and unconditional pardons” for rioters charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack. There have been 1,583 total defendants charged. Republicans have been broadly supportive of Trump’s moves, pointing out his election victory gives him latitude for change. But many have been left surprised by the sweeping nature of executive actions and firings, with some GOP senators asking for specifics on funding and saying the most violent Jan. 6 defendants should not have been pardoned. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) joined Senate Democrats at a press conference on Tuesday raising the alarm about the Trump administration’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memo directing agencies to freeze federal funding. Full transcript of Murphy’s remarks: “This is an attempt by Donald Trump to seize power. It sounds like a provocative thing to say, but how else do you describe what we have watched happen over the last week? The broad immunization of political violence, the illegal firing of inspectors general there to make sure that the money of the taxpayers isn't stolen, and today, the illegal and unconstitutional decision to put the President of the United States, and no one else, in charge of who gets federal money and who doesn't. “What President Trump is
...Read more doing is seizing control of the federal budget and deciding by himself who gets money and who doesn't for two reasons. One, he wants to bank money so that he can afford his massive tax cut for billionaires and corporations, but second, so that he can hand out money to his friends, to the companies that are run by his billionaire donors, to states that voted for him, to congressional districts with members of Congress who are loyal to him, and so that he can deny money to any organization run by Democrats, to companies that are competitors to his billionaire friends, to congressional districts represented by his political opponents. “This what a king does. This is not how a democracy works. One man does not decide how taxpayers’ money is spent so that it only gets sent to the President's political friends, and it gets used to punish his political enemies. “The scope of the damage that will be done is enormous to poor kids who rely on Head Start programs, to families who desperately need that cancer research done, to veterans who, if they miss one or two appointments, their life falls apart suddenly overnight. “We have to understand what is happening in context. The President wants you to be distracted by the day-to-day announcements, but put together, the pardoning of the violent rioters, the firing of the inspectors general, and today, the stoppage of federal funding, leaving the decision only to the political whims of President Trump, represents the gravest, most serious constitutional crisis of our lifetime, and one that threatens to undermine the very premise of American democracy.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to condemn President Trump’s recent actions—including pardoning violent January 6th rioters and announcing a sweeping freeze on federal grants and loans—as a direct threat to democracy and public safety. Murphy warned these moves send a dangerous signal that political violence will be excused if it serves Trump’s interests, undermining the rule of law and putting the country’s democratic institutions at risk. “Today you are fundamentally less likely to be attacked, to be murdered, by a neighbor, by somebody that you have a contest with, than you were centuries ago. Donald Trump is throwing that out the window,” said Murphy. “Donald Trump is throwing out the window the idea that we only advance
...Read more ourselves politically or economically or socially through nonviolent means. Because what happened last week is that Donald Trump said to this country, ‘If you use violence on my behalf, you're off the hook. If you beat the hell out of police officers, if you pound them over the head with metal poles, if you yank them by the neck and drag them into a crowd, hold them down so that people can stomp on them, if you taser police officers to the point that they suffer a heart attack, as long as you are doing that to advance my political power, you're off the hook.’” Murphy slammed Trump’s illegal freeze on federal grants and loans as a corrupt attack on American democracy: “What happened last night is part of a story. The president can't be the only person in charge of who gets money or not in this country. That's corrupt because then the president can dole out money to his political friends or the friends of his billionaire friends, can dole out money to states with senators that are loyal to him and can punish companies that are competitors with his billionaire friends or punish states represented by people who are disloyal to him. That's not how our democracy works. We're in charge of making sure that taxpayer money is spread out evenly, that it has nothing to do with loyalty or disloyalty to the leader.” He continued: “A couple of days ago, all the inspectors general got fired. That's illegal, but they all got fired. Why? Because if you're going to engage in corruption inside these agencies, you don't want anybody to be watching. And so you've got to put this next to each other. You've got to understand the story. If you're trying to transition our democracy to a government in which only one person is in charge, you permit people to engage in violence on your behalf so as to intimidate the opposition into being silent, and I'm just going to tell you, if you don't believe this, there are a lot of folks who don't support Donald Trump who are not going to show up to rallies, who are not going to participate in politics because they just learned that if they do and somebody hurts them, that person might be let off the hook. You excuse violence, you arrange government so that you can operate in darkness, and you rig the rules so that nobody is in charge of dispensing money except for you. Violence is a legitimate tool of politics. One person in charge of doling out money. Government decisions made in secret. That's not a democracy. That is a recipe for corruption.” Murphy concluded: “And so, yes, I am fuming mad about how my Republican colleagues talk about law and order and then mostly, with a few exceptions, either remain silent when the most violent January 6 protesters get pardoned or celebrate those pardons. But I also want to be clear that it stands in a context, a context of actions taken during this first week, that are undermining our democracy to the point of putting it on the brink of possible extinction as a means for fundamental corruption to take place inside our government. That should be unacceptable. That is unacceptable. And I'm thankful to Senator Murray and others for bringing us down to the floor to raise this alarm bell. I yield the floor.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you Mr. President. You know, the murder rate in the United States, the global murder rate, today, is infinitesimal; a fraction of what it was 200 years ago, 400 years ago, 600 years ago; a fraction of what it likely was in the bronze age or in the days when native tribes patrolled this land. What we've seen over the course of global history is that human beings have decided that instead of advancing our social power or our economic power or our political power through violence, instead we are going to have law and order. We're going to have economies that reward merit. We're going to punish people who disobey those laws to protect the rest of us. “And that served us really, really well. Today you are fundamentally less likely to be attacked, to be murdered, by a neighbor, by somebody that you have a contest with, than you were centuries ago. Donald Trump is throwing that out the window. Donald Trump is throwing out the window the idea that we only advance ourselves politically or economically or socially through nonviolent means. Because what happened last week is that Donald Trump said to this country, ‘If you use violence on my behalf, you're off the hook. If you beat the hell out of police officers, if you pound them over the head with metal poles, if you yank them by the neck and drag them into a crowd, hold them down so that people can stomp on them, if you taser police officers to the point that they suffer a heart attack, as long as you are doing that to advance my political power, you're off the hook.’ “The people that walked out of jail last week were convicted of viciously violent crimes. And, yes, there were plenty of people who were convicted who didn't engage in that horrific violence, but I was here in this chamber that day. I remember all of my Republican colleagues running out the door just like Democrats did. I don't remember any of my Republican colleagues staying in the chamber to greet the tourists. Everybody knew that our safety was in jeopardy. Democrats certainly knew our safety was in jeopardy because as we found out, many of those protesters were looking for Democrats. One of the most violent protesters who was let out of jail last week in the middle of his sentence, after he had beaten up police officers, went to the gallows, went to the noose that was constructed, and posted on social media, “Too bad no Democrats here.’ “If you beat up a police officer for reasons other than perpetuating Donald Trump's power, you're still in jail. The only people who beat up police officers in the year 2021 that got let out of jail last week—the only ones—were the ones that beat up police officers to help Donald Trump. That sends a clear signal: that your violence is excused if it's for Donald Trump's political purposes. And that puts all of our lives in jeopardy. That puts our democracy in jeopardy, when violence is excused. “What we are learning in the days following that unconscionable executive order, pardoning the rioters— not some of the rioters, everybody— is that it's part of a plan. Listen, I have done a lot of work across the aisle. I have such respect for my Republican colleagues. I spent hours, weeks, days sitting in rooms negotiating immigration bills and voting bills and public safety bills. But, man, you are watching this president try to seize power right now, try to make us irrelevant, try to suppress political dissent. “What happened last night is part of a story. The president can't be the only person in charge of who gets money or not in this country. That's corrupt because then the president can dole out money to his political friends or the friends of his billionaire friends, can dole out money to states with senators that are loyal to him and can punish companies that are competitors with his billionaire friends or punish states represented by people who are disloyal to him. “That's not how our democracy works. We're in charge of making sure that taxpayer money is spread out evenly, that it has nothing to do with loyalty or disloyalty to the leader. A couple of days ago, all the inspectors general got fired. That's illegal, but they all got fired. Why? Because if you're going to engage in corruption inside these agencies, you don't want anybody to be watching. And so you've got to put this next to each other. You've got to understand the story. If you're trying to transition our democracy to a government in which only one person is in charge, you permit people to engage in violence on your behalf so as to intimidate the opposition into being silent, and I'm just going to tell you, if you don't believe this, there are a lot of folks who don't support Donald Trump who are not going to show up to rallies, who are not going to participate in politics because they just learned that if they do and somebody hurts them, that person might be let off the hook. “You excuse violence, you arrange government so that you can operate in darkness, and you rig the rules so that nobody is in charge of dispensing money except for you. Violence is a legitimate tool of politics. One person in charge of doling out money. Government decisions made in secret. That's not a democracy. That is a recipe for corruption. For corruption. “And so, yes, I am fuming mad about how my Republican colleagues talk about law and order and then mostly, with a few exceptions, either remain silent when the most violent January 6 protesters get pardoned or celebrate those pardons. But I also want to be clear that it stands in a context, a context of actions taken during this first week, that are undermining our democracy to the point of putting it on the brink of possible extinction as a means for fundamental corruption to take place inside our government. That should be unacceptable. That is unacceptable. And I'm thankful to Senator Murray and others for bringing us down to the floor to raise this alarm bell. I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Andy Kim (D-N.J.) on Monday led a group of 47 senators, including U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), in introducing a new resolution condemning the pardons of individuals who were found guilty of assaulting Capitol Police Officers. The resolution follows the move by President Trump, on the first day of his second term, to grant full, complete, and unconditional pardons to over 1,500 people charged with committing crimes in the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, and to commute the sentences of 14 others, including leaders of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers— far-right militias. Among those pardoned by Trump were 169 people who pled guilty to assaulting police officers on
...Read more January 6th. During the siege of the Capitol that day, over 80 U.S. Capitol Police Officers were assaulted, as well as over 60 officers from the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department. The senators’ resolution, Condemning the pardons for individuals who were found guilty of assaulting Capitol Police Officers, simply states: “Resolved, That the Senate disapproves of any pardons for individuals who were found guilty of assaulting Capitol Police officers.” Murphy and Blumenthal will seek unanimous consent on the Senate floor to pass the resolution. “Trump's pardons of January 6th rioters who viciously assaulted law enforcement officers send a dangerous message: if you're willing to commit violence in his name, there are no consequences,” said Murphy. “This endorsement of political violence not only undermines our justice system, but it also makes our nation less safe and emboldens those who would attack our democracy." “President Trump’s blanket pardons of armed insurrectionists, who were convicted by juries of everyday Americans, is the ultimate disrespect for police officers who were brutally assaulted on January 6,” said Blumenthal. “These sickening pardons are a clear endorsement of political violence and discredit justice and the rule of law. I urge my Republican colleagues who were protected that terrible day—and who now stay silent—to join in condemning the violence that occurred and standing with the officers who put their lives on the line for their safety.” U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cosponsored the resolution. In total, 46 senators signed onto the resolution. Full text of the resolution is available HERE. According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, approximately 1,572 defendants have been federally charged with crimes associated with the attack of the U.S. Capitol on January 6th. This includes approximately 598 charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding law enforcement agents or officers or obstructing those officers during a civil disorder, including approximately 171 defendants charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer. As proven in court, the weapons used and carried on Capitol grounds during the January 6th attack include firearms; OC spray; tasers; edged weapons, including a sword, axes, hatchets, and knives; and makeshift weapons, such as destroyed office furniture, fencing, bike racks, stolen riot shields, baseball bats, hockey sticks, flagpoles, PVC piping, and reinforced knuckle gloves. Among others, the individuals who assaulted law enforcement officers and were granted full, unconditional pardons by President Trump this week include: Taylor James Johnatakis, of Kingston, Washington, was convicted of three felonies in November 2023, including assaulting officers. Prosecutors said that he “coordinated a violent assault on a line of police officers defending” the Capitol and that video shows he “used a metal barricade to attack officers head on and grabbed one officer to prevent him from defending himself against other attacking rioters.”
Julian Khater, who assaulted a U.S. police office—Brian Sicknick—and later pled guilty to assaulting a police officer with a dangerous weapon.
Robert Palmer, who attacked police with a fire extinguisher, a wooden plank, and a pole.
Tyler Bradley Dykes of Bluffton, South Carolina, who was sentenced to 57 months in federal prison for stealing a police riot shield and twice using it against officers. He pleaded guilty to two felony counts of assaulting, resisting or impeding officers.
Devlyn Thompson, who hit a police officer with a metal baton.
Andrew Taake, of Houston, Texas, who was sentenced to a little more than six years for assaulting law enforcement officers with bear spray and a metal whip.
Christopher Quaglin, who federal prosecutors said “viciously assaulted numerous officers” and was one of the most violent rioters, was sentenced to 12 years in federal prison.
David Dempsey, who, according to prosecutors, “was one of the most violent rioters,” and received 20 years in prison. Prosecutors also said Dempsey had a “very significant history of arrests and convictions” prior to the January 6th attack.
Daniel Rodriguez, of Fontana, California, who plunged a stun gun into the neck of Washington Police Officer Michael Fanone multiple times.
Ryan Nichols, of Longview, Texas, who assaulted officers with pepper spray, and later on Jan. 6, at his hotel room, he called for additional violence.
Howard Richardson, of King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, who struck a police officer three times with a flagpole, hard enough to break the flagpole.
Robert Sanford, from Chester, Pennsylvania, who hit two police officers in the head with a fire extinguisher and threw a traffic cone at another officer.
Jonathan Munafo, of Albany, New York, who punched a police officer, stole the officer's riot shield, and struck a Capitol office window with two poles. ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Friday released a statement on the Trump administration terminating the Federal School Safety Clearinghouse Advisory Board, a 26-person committee created by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act: “President Trump doesn’t care about keeping our kids safe from gun violence. First, he shuttered the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention. Now, he has terminated all 26 members – from the parents of school shooting victims to directors of widely trusted school safety organizations– currently serving on a nonpartisan board created by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to make classrooms safer. This board is enshrined in law and to remove these members without
...Read more any reason shows how little he cares about our kids and the challenge school leaders face in keeping them safe. President Trump should reinstate these members immediately and stop playing politics with our children's safety.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to oppose the confirmation of Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense. Murphy called on Republicans to reconsider advancing Hegseth’s nomination in light of serious unanswered questions about his character and conduct, troubling past statements and positions, and inadequate experience for this demanding and critical job. “It is not hyperbole to say that we have never seen a candidate, at least in modern times, to lead our soldiers and our troops, who is as dangerously and woefully unqualified as Pete Hegseth,” said Murphy. “I think his history of personal misconduct in and of itself is disqualifying. It is just an embarrassment to the country at a moment when we want to win more friends and allies. It’s
...Read more just the wrong match for a department that oversees the moral and professional development of young men and women, to have someone with that kind of history leading the agency. But it is also important [to consider] the views that he has expressed on how he would run the Department of Defense, because I fear he will run it into the ground.” Murphy warned that Hegseth’s commitment to advancing Donald Trump’s ‘war on woke’ would sow mistrust, paranoia, and instability within the military: “He has promised to fire top-end military leaders who are engaged in his nebulous ‘war on woke.’ So if you care about making sure that you've got troops from different backgrounds and different parts of the country, maybe that's a ‘war on woke.’ If you promote a woman, maybe that's a ‘war on woke.’ If you care about making sure that your troops don't engage in unethical conduct, maybe that's a ‘war on woke.’ If you contract with a local business that may not be aligned with Donald Trump, maybe that's part of the ‘war on woke.’ We have no idea. And so what will happen inside the Department of Defense is just a constant sense of paranoia, a constant looking over your shoulder, a grinding to a halt of business-as-normal because nobody knows what is a fireable offense and what isn't. How do I stay on the good side of Pete Hegseth? What gets me on the bad side?” On Hegseth’s comments in his book, ‘We need moms, but not in the military. Especially in combat units,’ Murphy said: “What an insulting thing to say. What a disgusting thing to believe. ‘Dads push us to take risks, moms put the training wheels on our bikes.’ My mom taught me to take risks. My dad told me to take risks, too. But is there a single United States senator here who believes that our mothers, the women in our lives, aren't risk takers? That they didn't push us to be better? Pete Hegseth believes–he just believes this–that women hold us back. That women hold men back. That women hold their sons back. And it just doesn't matter that he has walked back these statements. Magically, he had a conversion on the issue of women in the military. Magically, he started saying less offensive things about women, right after he was nominated to be Secretary of Defense. Nobody believes this conversion. This is a conversion for political reasons only. It does not mask the fact that this is what Pete Hegseth believes. That he believes that women are inferior to men.” Murphy added: “Many have pointed out the real impacts [Hegseth’s] ideas will have surrounding women in combat, and what those comments could mean for our more general readiness. Why? Because there are 360,000 women serving in the U.S. military today, in a variety of capacities. They are essential to keeping this nation safe. And now every single one of them knows that the man taking over the Department of Defense doesn't think they are worthy to serve, and that their prospects for advancement upon his elevation in the Department of Defense are compromised. Their ability to get fair treatment inside the Department of Defense has been compromised. And it won't shock anybody if we see many of those women leave the service, and if we see many fewer women sign up to protect this country. That would come at an enormous cost–an enormous cost to the security of this nation.” Murphy pointed to Hegseth’s dismissal of concerns about extremism within the military, warning of the risks posed by failing to address the issue: “Hegseth has said that this issue of whether the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys have influence inside the military–and there are plenty of reports that there are lots of active channels of communication and recruitment between these right-wing groups and the military–he says that that problem is fake, it's fake. Now, I don't know the extent of this problem, but I know it's something we should talk about, and I'm very, very worried to have a Secretary of Defense who doesn't believe it's a problem even worth mentioning.” On Hegseth’s blatant disregard for international law and military justice processes , Murphy said: “Lastly, madam president, I want to talk about what I maybe think is the most dangerous part of Pete Hegseth's views on the military, and that is his history of support for war criminals, his low regard for the code of military justice, and his disbelief, his nonbelief, in the concept of international law and the laws of war…He is interested in obliterating the rules of engagement. He doesn't want any constraints on our soldiers. And while it is true that many of the enemies that we fight don't follow any rules at all, it is not good for the United States’ security more broadly to give up on international law, the rules of war and the rules of engagement, and just accept a race to the bottom.” Murphy concluded: “These questions about women in combat, about the political campaigns that will be run inside the department that will breed a sense of paranoia, about taking seriously small but growing real threats to us, like extremism in the military, and then this bigger question of making sure that we have fealty to the laws of war and prohibitions against torture, I think all of those really concerning views of this nominee– even if the misconduct didn't exist–would be enough for us to say, find somebody else. Find somebody else who is just going to do the job, instead of trying to bring these political agendas, whether it's misogyny or anti-wokeism or anti-multilateralism, into a job that really should be pretty simple. Lead our troops, protect the nation, lift up America's standing in the world. I know the cake may be baked at this point, but I just want to make one more plea to my Republican colleagues to reconsider their decision to confirm to lead the Department of Defense somebody who seems just hell-bent mostly on pursuing a political, not military, agenda, that I truly believe is certain to weaken our armed forces and threaten our national security.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement after voting against the confirmation of Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense:
“Pete Hegseth is woefully unqualified to serve as the Secretary of Defense. His history of misconduct is disqualifying on its own, and his personal beliefs on the role of women in combat and the laws of war are an insult to our men and women in uniform. Pete Hegseth’s main qualification for this job is his commitment to pursuing a brazenly political agenda at the behest of President Trump and his confirmation will come at a serious cost to U.S. national security.”
###
HARTFORD—In honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Thursday the 15 winners of his ninth annual ‘Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Essay Contest.’ This year, Murphy received close to 1600 entries from elementary, middle, and high school students from across Connecticut reflecting on Dr. King’s dream and their own aspirations. “Reflecting on Dr. King’s work reminds us of the courage and determination needed to build a more just world. Every year, I’m moved by the essays from students across our state who show not only their understanding of his legacy but their commitment to carrying it forward. Their thoughtful reflections give me hope and remind us all of the incredible potential of young people to lead us toward a better future,” said
...Read more Murphy. 1st Congressional District Winners: Greta AveLallemant, John Wallace Middle School Anhadhveer Singh, John F. Kennedy School Alexis Mair, University H.S. of Science and Engineering 2nd Congressional District Winners: Nicole O'Dell, Northeast Academy Arts Magnet School Nataly Antunez, Westbrook Middle School Matayo Swepson, Griswold High School 3rd Congressional District Winners: Vaasvik Narayanam, Norton Elementary School Adorah Gilles, Davis Street Arts & Academics Magnet School Ethan Greenwood, Xavier High School 4th Congressional District Winners: Denver Smalls, Kendall Elementary School Isabel Bui, St. Luke’s School Jamia Laude, Fairchild Wheeler Interdistrict Magnet High School 5th Congressional District Winners: Emily Munoz, Linden Street School Elijah Dickey, Sherman School Elena Agban, Farmington High School ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) led 45 members of Congress in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court concerning the ongoing Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. et al., v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos case urging the Supreme Court to hold gun manufacturers accountable for their role in the illegal trafficking of firearms to Mexico. In Smith & Wesson, Mexico is suing U.S. gun manufacturers and a distributor for allegedly aiding and abetting illegal arms trafficking. Smith & Wesson Brands will be a critical case for victims and survivors of gun violence hoping to hold the gun industry accountable for its actions in years to come. As lawmakers whose constituents have been harmed by gun violence or the threat of it, Murphy and Blumenthal argue
...Read more that the gun industry should not be insulated from liability for its own unlawful conduct. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments in this case on March 4, 2025. “PLCAA has largely shielded gun manufacturers from being held accountable for the senseless and preventable loss of lives by their weapons, but Congress did include important exceptions in PLCAA. We need to repeal this law altogether, but until we can do that, we’re hopeful that the Supreme Court doesn’t render the exceptions meaningless,” said Murphy. “For too long, the American firearms industry has profited from sales to Mexican drug cartels— allowing these viciously criminal groups to terrorize Mexican society. This brief rejects the gun manufacturers’ position claiming a right to fuel violence and chaos. I’m proud to continue my work stopping dangerous gun industry practices,” said Blumenthal. U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the brief. They were joined in the U.S. House of Representatives by U.S. Representatives Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn.), Gabe Amo (D-R.I.), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Julia Brownley (D-Calif.), André Carson (D-Ind.), Sean Casten (D-Ill.), Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.), Bill Foster (D-Ill.), Valerie P. Foushee (D-N.C.), Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), Glenn Ivey (D-Md.), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson Jr. (D-Ga.), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.), Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), James P. McGovern (D-Mass.), Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Mike Thompson (D-Calif.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaii), Paul D. Tonko (D-N.Y.), and Maxine Waters (D-Calif.). The amicus brief is supported by GIFFORDS Law Center. The lawmakers’ amicus brief to the Supreme Court can be read in full HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 12 of their Senate colleagues in reintroducing legislation to reinvigorate America’s antitrust laws and restore competition to American markets. The Competition and Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act will give federal enforcers the resources they need to do their jobs, strengthen prohibitions on anticompetitive conduct and mergers, and make additional reforms to improve enforcement. “A few major companies control almost every aspect of our lives, driving up costs and stifling innovation. This legislation will help enforcers break up concentrated power and help wrestle control back from the corporate giants that are to blame for so many of our daily indignities,” said Murphy. “Antitrust laws
...Read more protect consumers, workers, and businesses, leading to innovation and better products. Federal agencies need more resources and stronger laws to effectively police and punish illegal practices. That’s why I’m proud to cosponsor this legislation that will restore competition and protect against the collusion and market dominance that stifle innovation and harm Americans,” said Blumenthal. U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cosponsored the legislation. Many industries are consolidating as large mergers and acquisitions increase. Big companies are buying out upstart rivals before they can become a competitive threat. Harmful exclusionary practices by dominant companies – such as refusals to deal with rivals, restrictive contracting, and predatory pricing – squelch competition. U.S. antitrust law enforcement against powerful firms has lagged behind efforts in other developed countries, particularly when it comes to enforcement against the dominant digital platforms and other large corporations. To remedy these longstanding issues, the Competition and Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act will: 1. Increase Enforcement Resources For years, enforcement budgets at the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division and Federal Trade Commission have failed to keep pace with the growth of the economy, the steady increase in merger filings, and increasing demands on the agency's resources. To enable the agencies to fulfill their missions and protect competition by bringing enforcement actions against the richest, most sophisticated companies in the world, this bill would authorize increases to each agency’s annual budget and ensure enforcers retain all fees generated from mergers for enforcement work. 2. Strengthen Prohibitions Against Anticompetitive Mergers The bill would restore the original intent of Section 7 of the Clayton Act, which was designed to stop anticompetitive mergers in order to address competitive problems in their “incipiency” before they ripen and cause harm. As the law has been interpreted today, enforcers can block only the most egregious acquisitions, which has allowed many harmful mergers to escape scrutiny. To remedy this, the Competition and Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act will: Update the legal standard for permissible mergers. The bill amends the Clayton Act to forbid mergers that “create an appreciable risk of materially lessening competition” rather than mergers that “substantially lessen competition,” where “materially” is defined as “more than a de minimus amount.” By adding a risk-based standard and clarifying the amount of likely harm the government must prove, enforcers can more effectively stop anticompetitive mergers. The bill also clarifies that mergers that create a monopsony (the power to unfairly lower the prices a company it pays or wages it offers) violate the statute.
Shift the burden to the merging parties to prove their merger will not violate the law. Certain categories of mergers pose significant risks to competition, but are still difficult and costly for the government to challenge in court. For those mergers, the bill shifts the legal burden from the government to the merging companies, which would have to prove that the merger does not create an appreciable risk of materially lessening competition or tends to create a monopoly or monopsony. These categories include:
Mergers that significantly increase market concentration
Acquisitions of competitors or nascent competitors by a dominant firm (defined a 50% market share or possession of significant market power)
Mega-mergers valued at more than $5 billion 3. Prevent Harmful Dominant Firm Conduct Decades of flawed court decisions have weakened the effectiveness of Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act to prevent anticompetitive conduct by dominant companies. The bill creates a new provision under the Clayton Act to prohibit “exclusionary conduct” (conduct that materially disadvantages competitors or limits their opportunity to compete) that presents an “appreciable risk of harming competition.” 4. The legislation would establish a new FTC division to conduct market studies and merger retrospectives. 5. Implement Additional Reforms to Enhance Antitrust Enforcement The Competition and Antitrust Law Enforcement Reform Act will also implement a series of reforms to seek civil fines for antitrust violations, study the effect of past mergers, strengthen whistleblower protections, forbid forced arbitration in class action lawsuits, and more. This legislation is endorsed by the American Antitrust Institute, Consumer Reports, Open Markets Institute, Public Knowledge, and COSAL. It is also endorsed by antitrust scholars including, Professor (emeritus) Jonathan Baker of American University Washington College of Law; Professor Nancy Rose of Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Professor (emeritus) Steven Salop of Georgetown University Law Center; Professor Fiona Scott Morton of the Yale University School of Management; Bill Baer, former Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust; Gene Kimmelman, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust; Professor John Newman Professor of Law, University of Miami and former Deputy Director of the FTC Bureau of Competition; and Professor Martin Gaynor and former Director of the FTC Bureau of Economics. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday released the following statement after voting to block Republican legislation to politicize abortion care and criminalize doctors:
“Putting politicians in charge of women’s health care decisions and threatening doctors with criminal penalties is a terrible solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. All this bill would do is put the lives of women at risk and make it harder for doctors to do their jobs. Republicans won’t stop until they pass a nationwide abortion ban, and I will keep fighting to make sure they never succeed.”
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to call out Republicans’ hypocrisy on U.S. national security. As Republicans try to expedite the confirmation of John Ratcliffe as CIA Director on the basis of national security, Murphy called out their silence on President Donald Trump’s endorsement of political violence with the pardoning of hundreds of convicted violent January 6th rioters. Murphy called out Republicans for pretending to care about national security while President Trump pardoned and set free hundreds of violent January 6th rioters: “I hear Republicans claiming that my decision to ask for one day of debate on a controversial nominee to lead the CIA somehow compromises our national security. So let me say this:
...Read more spare me. Two days ago, President Donald Trump pardoned 1500 rioters–including the most violent rioters–who stormed this building four years ago, brutally beat law enforcement over the head with poles, tried to crush the heads of Capitol Police officers, walked around here with zip ties looking to do God-knows-what to any Democratic congressmen or senators they found. They assembled gallows and a noose outside the Capitol to chants of ‘hang Mike Pence.’” Murphy continued: “All my Republican colleagues were here when a Capitol Police officer burst through that door to rush us to safety before the mob attacked us. And Republicans all of a sudden claim that law and order is a priority, and we have to rush through nominees, and yet they stand by a president who just threw law and order out the window by pardoning not some of the rioters, but all of them. Political violence in this country just became mainstream. It is now a fact of life in America. If you commit an act of horrific violence in the name of the president of the United States, that president will make sure that you get away with it. That is fundamentally un-American, and it makes this country less safe. Let me guarantee you, a one-day delay, a one-day debate on the confirmation of a CIA Director does no damage to our nation's security compared to the decision to pardon every single January 6 rioter charged and convicted of crimes, and to let out of jail some of the most violent rioters.” “So, here's the message: if you beat up a police officer in this country, you're going to jail for a long time–with one exception. You don't go to jail if you beat the hell out of a police officer in the service of Donald Trump. If you're engaged in violence to further Donald Trump's political career, then you face no consequences. What happened this week is that political violence got mainstreamed in America,” Murphy added. Murphy concluded: “There are still a lot of radical, dangerous people out there in this world, and they now know that if they carry out violence in the name of Donald Trump—if they beat up police officers, if they attack Democratic officials and they're doing it to support Donald Trump—they are likely immune. That puts this nation's security in jeopardy. That puts our lives in jeopardy. And I’m just going to say it– it puts Democrats' lives in jeopardy in particular. Remember, D.J. Rodriguez went to the gallows and said, ‘No Democrats here, unfortunately.’ Where is the broad, righteous indignation from my Republican colleagues about that? Yes, a few of my Republican colleagues have criticized the pardons. I am thankful to them. But it's a minority. It is a small handful. Most Senate Republicans are silent. The wholesale endorsement of political violence is a grave national security threat to this nation. Having a one-day debate on the nomination of CIA director is not.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you Mr. President. Mr. President, I want to address some concerns that my Republican colleagues have raised about my decision to insist on a one-day debate on the nomination of John Ratcliffe to be the Director of the CIA. “Plain and simple, I think that we should take some time – one day – to consider one of the most important, sensitive national security posts in this new administration. I do not think it makes sense to ram through Mr. Ratcliffe's nomination with only 120 minutes of debate, as was the suggestion last night. Many people here have raised serious concerns about his qualifications. “For instance, during his short tenure as Director of National Intelligence, Mr. Ratcliffe showed a very troubling propensity to play politics with sensitive intelligence. Most notoriously, just one month before the 2020 election, on the day of the debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden, Mr. Ratcliffe chose to declassify a cherry-picked CIA memo from four years earlier that outlined Russian claims that Hillary Clinton had approved a plan to tie Trump to Russia's hack of the DNC so that Trump could use that in the debate. “These were unverified Russian intelligence claims, and Mr. Ratcliffe's decision went against explicit warnings by CIA personnel that its release would put in jeopardy CIA sources, methods, and personnel. But he did it anyway on the day of the debate, a month before the election, because its release would help Donald Trump's reelection campaign. “Now, it's true during this day of debate that we are having before we vote, likely tomorrow, senators may not be coming to the floor to give lengthy speeches on Mr. Ratcliffe's nomination. But this debate time, this day, gives all of my colleagues the time to carefully review the record and consider whether Mr. Ratcliffe is qualified. “Now maybe members of the Senate Intelligence Committee have had the time to do a full study, but the full Senate has not. So it's not too much to ask, given the very real concerns about this nominee's politicization of intelligence, for us to take a day. Not a week, not two weeks. A day, for senators to take the time to consider the record. “But I want to make a broader point. I hear Republicans claiming that my decision to ask for one day of debate on a controversial nominee to lead the CIA somehow compromises our national security. “So let me say this: spare me. “Two days ago, President Donald Trump pardoned 1500 rioters–including the most violent rioters–who stormed this building four years ago, brutally beat law enforcement over the head with poles, tried to crush the heads of Capitol Police officers, walked around here with zip ties looking to do God-knows-what to any Democratic congressmen or senators they found. They assembled gallows and a noose outside the Capitol to chants of ‘hang Mike Pence.’ “All my Republican colleagues were here when a Capitol Police officer burst through that door to rush us to safety before the mob attacked us. And Republicans all of a sudden claim that law and order is a priority, and we have to rush through nominees, and yet they stand by a president who just threw law and order out the window by pardoning not some of the rioters, but all of them. “Political violence in this country just became mainstream. It is now a fact of life in America. If you commit an act of horrific violence in the name of the president of the United States, that president will make sure that you get away with it. That is fundamentally un-American, and it makes this country less safe. “Let me guarantee you, a one-day delay, a one-day debate on the confirmation of a CIA Director does no damage to our nation's security, compared to the decision to pardon every single January 6 rioter charged and convicted of crimes, and to let out of jail some of the most violent rioters. And just to hammer home the point, if you don't believe me, let me explain to you who Donald Trump let out of jail yesterday. “This is David Dempsey. He gave an interview in front of the gallows that had been built and fitted with a noose. He said he was at the Capitol that day–January 6th–because Nancy Pelosi, James Comey, the Obamas and the Clintons need to hang. At the Capitol, he climbed to the front of the mob and immediately began attacking law enforcement officers who were trying to protect us. He used his hands, feet, flag poles, crutches, broken pieces of furniture and anything else he could find as a weapon to attack police officers. “At around 4:00pm that day, Dempsey pepper sprayed DC Detective Phuson Nguyen, as another rioter yanked off the detective’s gas mask. The spray burned Detective Nguyen’s lungs, throat, eyes– it left him gasping for breath, fearing that he might lose consciousness and be overwhelmed by the mob. “Moments later, because Dempsey wasn’t done, he hit Sergeant Jason Mastony over the head with a metal crutch. He struck him with so much force that it cracked the shield of his gas mask, causing Sergeant Mastony to collapse as his ears started ringing. Dempsey wasn't done, though. He was thorough, he was vicious. He kept going. He sprayed chemical agents at officers, he stomped on their heads, he hit them repeatedly with metal and wooden poles. Dempsey’s violence reached such extremes that at one point he actually attacked another rioter who was trying to stop him. He was sentenced by a jury of his peers to significant jail time for his litany of brutal attacks, as anyone in this country would. He walked out of jail last night in the middle of his sentence because Donald Trump pardoned him. “That's D.J. Rodriguez. He didn't make any bones about what he was coming to the Capitol to do. The night before the insurrection, D.J. Rodriguez posted on Telegram, ‘There will be blood. Welcome to the revolution.’ For weeks, he and members of his violent right-wing group had been organizing and planning what they were going to do. He encouraged members of the group to get a large knife [and] told them where they could buy bear spray. He said he highly recommended to wear goggles with breath holes, told them where they could get an axe handle. He was prepping for war. He began rather innocently, just spraying a fire extinguisher at a line of officers. When that didn't work, he found a long wooden pole to attack the officers. He wasn't done. Thirty-seven minutes of repeated frantic attempts to breach the Capitol, and he finally got to the mouth of the tunnel in the lower West Terrace. He grabbed an officer by the neck, dragged him into the mob. He takes a taser and tases the officer in the head. The officer screams in pain, recoils from the shock, jerks back his head. Rodriguez isn't done, because he wants this guy dead. He strikes him again directly in the neck. The officer yells out, but it’s over, the officer collapses, unconscious, and another officer has to drag his lifeless body away from the mob. The officer suffered a heart attack. His law enforcement career is over. “Later that day, Rodriguez went to those gallows, took a picture, and posted: ‘No Democrats, unfortunately.’ After being convicted of beating a police officer by a jury of his peers, D.J. Rodriguez was pardoned by Donald Trump. “This is Thomas Webster. He traveled to D.C. ready for battle with a bulletproof vest. He carried a large metal flagpole with him to the riot at the Capitol. He led the charge against the police line. He spent eight minutes elbowing his way through the crowd so that he could be at the front of the mob. He used that pole to repeatedly attack police officers. He slammed it so hard the metal pole broke in half. So then he just charged directly at one officer, tackling him to the ground. He grabbed the officer by the helmet, dragged him and pinned him to the ground, as Webster tried to rip off the officer's gas mask. The officer began to struggle for breath because he was being choked by the chinstrap. And as he gasped for air, Webster held him down on the ground and other rioters kicked him repeatedly. After that Webster was so fired up, he posted a live video. He pleaded, ‘Send more patriots, we need some help.’ “He was convicted of all six counts of his indictment, including assaulting a police officer, like anybody would be in this country if they did what Thomas Webster did. He walked out of jail in the middle of his sentence Monday night, pardoned by Donald Trump. “So here's the message: if you beat up a police officer in this country, you're going to jail for a long time–with one exception. You don't go to jail if you beat the hell out of a police officer in the service of Donald Trump. If you're engaged in violence to further Donald Trump's political career, then you face no consequences. What happened this week is that political violence got mainstreamed in America. “There are still a lot of radical, dangerous people out there in this world, and they now know that if they carry out violence in the name of Donald Trump—if they beat up police officers, if they attack Democratic officials and they're doing it to support Donald Trump—they are likely immune. That puts this nation's security in jeopardy. That puts our lives in jeopardy. And I’m just going to say it– it puts Democrats' lives in jeopardy in particular. Remember, D.J. Rodriguez went to the gallows and said, ‘No Democrats here, unfortunately.’ Where is the broad, righteous indignation from my Republican colleagues about that? Yes, a few of my Republican colleagues have criticized the pardons. I am thankful to them. But it's a minority. It is a small handful. Most Senate Republicans are silent. The wholesale endorsement of political violence is a grave national security threat to this nation. Having a one-day debate on the nomination of CIA director is not. I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday questioned U.S. Representative Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) at a hearing on her nomination to be the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Murphy pressed Stefanik for her reaction to Elon Musk’s Nazi salutes at President Trump’s inauguration rally on Monday. He also asked Stefanik how the Trump administration plans to sustain U.S. leadership in global public health following its decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO). Murphy highlighted disturbing reactions from neo-Nazi extremist groups following Elon Musk's two ‘heil Hitler’ salutes at President Trump's rally: “Let me share with you what a few Americans have said about it. Evan Kilgore, a right-wing
...Read more political commentator, wrote on X: ‘Holy crap … did Elon Musk just Heil Hitler at the Trump Inauguration Rally in Washington DC… This is incredible. We are so back.’ Andrew Torba, who is the founder of the right-wing Christian-nationalist social platform Gab, said: ‘Incredible things are happening’ as he amplified the visual. The Proud Boys chapter in Ohio posted the clip on a Telegram channel with the text, ‘Heil Trump.’ A chapter of the white-nationalist group White Lives Matter posted it on Telegram: ‘Thanks for hearing us, Elon. The White Flame will rise again.’ I could keep going.” Murphy continued: “Over and over last night, white supremacist groups and neo-Nazi groups in this country rallied around that visual. Does it concern you that those elements of the neo-Nazi and white supremacist element in the United States believe that what they saw last night was a neo-Nazi salute?” On maintaining America’s influence in shaping global health standards, Murphy said: “The decision to leave the WHO I think is a mistake, but I think you would agree that we are going to need to still find a way to play a role internationally in global public health standards. We do not want to let the Chinese essentially set those rules for us, because ultimately pandemics will find a way to us. Can you commit to this committee, notwithstanding the decision to leave the WHO, that you are going to make sure we find a way to have impact on the global stage when it comes to global public health rules?” A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Stefanik can be found below: MURPHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much Representative for your commitment to the country and your willingness to serve. I deeply appreciate the work that you have done to combat antisemitism. I appreciate your commitment to bring that work to the United Nations. I think it is a cancer, both domestically and internationally. You and I worked together over the last year and a half to dramatically increase funding for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program that sends money to synagogues and Jewish community centers to invest in security upgrades. I'm heartbroken that we need to do that, but it is an important moment to support those communities. “I agree that it’s a problem you will confront at the U.N. It is also a problem, as you have raised, domestically, both on the right and the left. I think antisemitism work is best when we call out what is happening on both sides of the aisle. What do you think of Elon Musk, perhaps the President's most visible advisor, doing two ‘heil Hitler’ salutes last night at the President’s televised rally?” STEFANIK: “No, Elon Musk did not do those salutes. I was not at the rally, but I can tell you I’ve been at many rallies with Elon Musk, who loves to cheer when President Trump says we need to send our U.S. space program to Mars. Elon Musk is a visionary. I’m looking forward to his work in DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency, and I look forward to seeing how we can be more efficient and effective. But that is simply not the case, and to say so is– the American people are smart. They see through it. They support Elon Musk. We are proud to be the country of such successful entrepreneurs. That is one of our greatest strengths as Americans.” MURPHY: “Let me share with you what a few Americans have said about it. Evan Kilgore, a right-wing political commentator, wrote on X: ‘Holy crap … did Elon Musk just Heil Hitler at the Trump Inauguration Rally in Washington DC… This is incredible. We are so back.’ Andrew Torba, who is the founder of the right-wing Christian-nationalist social platform Gab, said: ‘Incredible, things are happening’ as he amplified the visual. The Proud Boys chapter in Ohio posted the clip on a Telegram channel with the text, ‘Heil Trump.’ A chapter of the white-nationalist group White Lives Matter posted it on Telegram: ‘Thanks for hearing us, Elon. The White Flame will rise again.’ I could keep going. Over and over last night, white supremacist groups and neo-Nazi groups in this country rallied around that visual. Does it concern you that those elements of the neo-Nazi and white supremacist element in the United States believe that what they saw last night was a neo-Nazi salute?” STEFANIK: “What concerns me is these are the questions you believe are most important to ask to the U.N. Ambassador. I have a very strong record when it comes to combating antisemitism. We just had a historic election where President Trump earned historic support from American voters because of his strong leadership combating antisemitism, which has been a scourge across the country, skyrocketing since October 7th. So, I intend to bring moral clarity to this position and continue to speak out as a voice, as a beacon of light, condemning antisemitism at the United Nations, which is representative of President Trump's record and President Trump's promises that he made on the campaign trail.” MURPHY: “You are right, these are the questions I choose to ask because I think that your work and the administration’s work on antisemitism only comes with real impact and credibility if it holds both right and left accountable. I simply don't believe that if a member of the ‘Squad’ made that same gesture last night, that there wouldn’t be commentary from you and others. So, I want to make sure our work has credibility, and credibility comes with calling antisemitism and antisemitism behavior out when it comes from both the right and the left.” “Let me just turn to one issue that has come up several times and ask you for a quick response. The decision to leave the WHO I think is a mistake, but I think you would agree that we are going to need to still find a way to play a role internationally in global public health standards. We do not want to let the Chinese essentially set those rules for us, because ultimately pandemics will find a way to us. Can you commit to this committee, notwithstanding the decision to leave the WHO, that you are going to make sure we find a way to have impact on the global stage when it comes to global public health rules?” STEFANIK: “I support President Trump’s decision to leave WHO, I have a record of that. But yes, I think we need to be the leader in terms of global health. I think that is very important and there are programs within the U.N. that are very committed to global health. We are the leader when it comes to global health, and we need to absolutely continue to be so.” MURPHY: “Thank you, Mr. Chairman.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday released the following statement after voting against final passage of the Laken Riley Act:
“This bill comes with an astronomical price tag and will create more problems than it solves. It will make our immigration system more chaotic and our country less safe. Under this bill, people charged with serious crimes will be released because detention centers will be forced to detain a child who stole a pack of gum from a gas station instead. It is fitting that President Trump’s first Executive Actions and the first bill he signs into law won’t do anything to fix our immigration system or make our country safer.”
###
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Thursday released the following statement after meeting with former U.S. Representative Lori Chavez-DeRemer, nominee for U.S. Secretary of Labor: “Fighting for workers must be the north star for any Secretary of Labor. As one of the only Republicans to cosponsor the PRO Act, Representative Chavez-DeRemer recognizes the importance of strengthening unions, and we met today to discuss her vision for the Department. I pressed her on how she plans to strengthen protections for workers and raise wages while serving in an administration that has repeatedly prioritized billionaires and corporations at the expense of working people. If confirmed, I’m hopeful we can
...Read more work together to create more jobs in Connecticut and defeat efforts to roll back the progress we’ve made in the past four years.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Wednesday questioned U.S. Senator Marco Rubio at a hearing on his nomination for U.S. Secretary of State. Murphy voiced concerns about the Trump family’s foreign business dealings and challenged Rubio on how he would navigate corruption, national security priorities, and America’s standing as a global leader. He also pressed Rubio on his plans for addressing competition with China, promoting Middle East security, and combatting foreign disinformation to safeguard democracy and human rights around the world. A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Rubio can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. That is, indeed, good news. Senator Rubio, I want to talk
...Read more to you about a topic that I think is going to be real trouble for you and for U.S. national security interests, at least for the first few minutes of my time, and that’s the growing personal financial entanglement of President Trump, his family, and Middle East governments. I’ll give you an example of what I’m talking about. “For nearly eight years, the Trump Organization has been pursuing a real estate deal to build a hotel complex in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. During President Trump’s first term, the Trump Organization actually voluntarily committed to refrain from pursuing real estate deals with foreign companies, especially those that are backed by foreign governments. So the deal didn’t go through. And then it remained stalled for the entirety of the Biden administration. And then, magically, 30 days after the November election, Saudi Arabia’s biggest construction company, that’s affiliated with the government, announced that the deal was going forward, alongside an additional $200 million deal for a Trump property in Oman. “Now, it used to be that somebody with these big financial business interests would come into government and take actions, like setting up a blind trust or divestment, in order to make sure there was no connection between their personal financial interests and the business they were conducting in government. But President Trump has just done the opposite. “Over the last eight years, while he was in office and since he’s been out of office, he and his family have become more deeply dependent on revenue from governments in the Middle East. During his last presidency, Middle East interests sent around $10 million to Trump properties. After he left office, Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who was his primary Middle East envoy, was handed $2 billion in investment by the Saudis, even though a Saudi investment board said the investment was a bad business decision. That investment actually comes up for renewal in 2026, giving the Saudis massive leverage over the Trump family. “And then to make matters worse, right after the election, the Trump Organization said that in this term – the president-elect’s second term – it would drop its previous prohibition on doing new deals in the Middle East with private foreign companies aligned with foreign governments. So, the Trump Organization is going to be signing new business deals in the Middle East with private companies that have connections to foreign governments at the very moment that you are going to be conducting sensitive diplomacy in these countries. “That’s just extraordinary. Never before in the history of this country has a president been literally receiving cash from foreign governments, and from foreign companies that are backed by foreign governments in the middle of their term. If you or I had done this as Senators, we would be in violent violation of Senate ethics rules. That’s not permitted on the Foreign Relations Committee. “So I guess my question to you is a pretty simple one. Do you see how this fundamentally compromises your diplomatic efforts? Do you have an issue, or will you raise an issue with the President, about his growing financial connection with the governments that you are going to be negotiating with?” RUBIO: “Well first of all, I am neither authorized nor in any position to give you any insights into any of these arrangements you pointed out. You mentioned Jared Kushner as an example. He is a private citizen, happens to be a Floridian. I don't know what if any engagement he has in the work that’s going on now. I can tell you what I know – obviously I’m not at the State Department yet – but I can tell you as an example, the President's envoy to that region, Steve Witkoff, who was charged with being an envoy towards reaching an accommodation between the Israelis and the Saudis, has been working cooperatively and together with the Biden administration. And, in fact, I dare to say that all involved deserve credit for the ceasefire that the Chairman’s just announced, but Steve Witkoff has been a critical component of it, and he has been involved in it from day one. “I think the broader consideration about whether we want to see a Saudi-Israeli mutual recognition and relationship would be one of the most historic developments in the history of the region for all of the factors we discussed here today. It would be – and one of the impediments to it has been this conflict and the ongoing conflict, and the lack of a ceasefire. I also think it’s going to be important for the Saudis and others to be participants in post-conflict stabilization efforts in Gaza and beyond. So, all I can tell you is what I have said from the very beginning, from my opening statement, and that is our foreign policy is going to be driven – as the President has made abundantly clear – by whether some action is in the interest of the United States and our national security. And that is what it is going to be driven by, and that’s how all these policies should be judged by, and that’s certainly the job that I have been tasked with executing on.” MURPHY: “Well let me then simply ask you this question: Do you believe that the President should refrain from doing new business deals with Middle East governments during his term in office?” RUBIO: “The President doesn't manage that company. His family members do, and they have a right to be in the business. That’s the business that they are in. They’re in the real estate business. They’ve been for a very long time, both domestically and abroad. They have properties in multiple countries. So at the end of the day, his family is entitled to continue to operate their business. The fundamental question is not whether his family’s involved in business, the fundamental question is whether that is in any way impacting the conduct of our foreign policy in a way that’s counter to our national interests. And the President has made it abundantly clear that every decision he makes and every decision we are to make at the State Department should be driven by whether or not it serves the core national interests of the United States. And that is how I hope our policies will be judged by, not what business his family is conducting while the President is here in Washington working, not on his business, but from the Oval Office.” MURPHY: “You are correct, that is the fundamental question, whether or not a policy is being pursued in U.S. national security interests or due to the President's personal financial interest. That is the reason why, as United States Senators, we are not allowed to have complicated existing financial arrangements with foreign governments, because you do not want to create the impression that there is a conflict of motivation, and I just wished that this President applied to this incoming administration the same rules that we hold ourselves to as United States Senators. “Senator Rubio, in the time I have remaining, I just want to tackle two other topics. One that I know is of mutual concern to you and I, and that’s the need to confront China in non-military ways as they try to exert influence around the world. Last time President Trump was in office, he was calling for pretty massive cuts to the State Department's budget. But as you know, China uses all sorts of non-kinetic tools, like misinformation, economic diplomacy, around the world, to exert influence. I am hopeful that you are going to be an active voice to try to make sure that you have the tools, including when it comes to combating Russian and Chinese misinformation, to be able to confront all of the ways, many of them asymmetric, that China in particular, but Russia as well, presents challenges to U.S. interests. Just wanted to get your commitment to make sure to build that full comprehensive foreign policy toolkit.” RUBIO: “Not only have I been so concerned about foreign disinformation, I’ve been the target of it, from multiple nation-states. And I have learned over time that the best way to confront disinformation is through a flood of free speech that allows the counter points of view to be heard and understood. I think where we get ourselves into trouble – and we have learned this now, and I think multiple U.S. companies are now admitting [this] – is when we get ourselves into a position of determining what is true and what is not, and then using the tools of government to go after them, particularly when it implicates domestic entities. But yes, it is one of the tools that they have in their toolbox. “By the way, it’s not just disinformation. It is flat out influencing nation-states’ views of the United States writ large by promoting conspiracy theories internally and [in] other countries that undermine us, and that undermine our standing, whether it is in Africa – and increasingly you see it in the Western Hemisphere as well. One of the best ways to combat that is to be present, to be there, to show what we do and to brag about what we do. One of the things that frustrates me the most is there are literally programs within USAID where they do not allow us to label it as ‘made in America’ or ‘a gift of the American people’ because it might offend someone locally. I think it’s important for the world to know what the United States is doing to help their societies. We do not do a good enough job of promoting what we have done historically, and continue to do, to help our fellow man around the world.” MURPHY: “Yeah, China is spending $10 billion per year on that propaganda and misinformation operation. They celebrate when budgets get sent up to the Hill that propose big increases in military spending and giant decreases in the kind of tools that are available to you, so I do look forward to working with you to make sure that we’ve given you that full suite of tools necessary to confront our adversaries.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Wednesday released the following statement after meeting with U.S. Representative Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (U.N.): “I had a frank discussion today with Rep. Elise Stefanik about my concerns with President-elect Trump’s disdain for participating in important— albeit imperfect— international institutions. If we want to compete with countries like China, we have to be engaged, because when the United States voluntarily gives up our seat at the table, it’s Beijing who writes the rules. I pressed her on the need to invest in nonmilitary tools as a means of countering our adversaries, including the important work of the State Department in
...Read more fighting foreign propaganda and misinformation. I have many more questions about how she will represent our interests at the U.N., and I plan to discuss those further at her confirmation hearing next week.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to call out Republicans' proposed tax plan, which would disproportionately benefit the top 1% at the expense of working-class American families. Murphy warned that the plan would be financed by deep cuts to essential services like Medicare and Medicaid, with 80% of the benefits going to corporations and the wealthiest taxpayers. “The tax cut we're talking about extending gives a tax cut for the top 1% of earners in this country. That isn't ten times bigger than working families at the bottom of the income scale. It's not 100 times bigger. It's not 500 times bigger. Taxpayers in the top 1% will get a tax cut 852 times larger than working families at the bottom of the income thresholds. Eight
...Read more hundred fifty-two times bigger," said Murphy. Murphy continued: “What we have seen coming out of the pandemic is that while the broad middle of the country has been struggling, the wealthy have gotten richer and richer and richer. We have more billionaires than ever before in this country. The folks that don't rely on salaries, that can just plow their income and their earnings into the capital markets, have reaped huge, huge rewards. The very, very wealthy in this country right now, at this moment in time, don't need any more help. And yet the average family that is in that top 1% bracket is going to get a tax cut, on average, of $70,000. Well, if you make $30,000 in this country, you're going to get about $100 back in your pocket.” Murphy emphasized that to pay for their tax bill, Republicans will make devastating cuts to essential programs: “At the end of last year, as a means of passing the continuing resolution, there was a deal apparently cut–this was reported in the press–in which there was a promise made to finance the tax cut with $2 trillion of cuts to Medicaid and Medicare. Medicaid: poor kids, poor families. Medicare: seniors in this country. Two trillion dollars is a hard number to get your head wrapped around. But there's no way to enact $2 trillion, $2 trillion, a “T,” worth of cuts in Medicare and Medicaid without hundreds of thousands of people, senior citizens and poor kids, losing access to care. Two trillion dollars in cuts means the nursing homes are shut down. People are put out on the streets. It means that poor kids don't get access to mental health services. And so, what happened eight years ago was cruel. A tax cut put on the American public's credit card. 80% of the benefits going to the very, very richest, none of it trickling down.” Murphy concluded: “This version that Republicans are talking about passing in a matter of weeks is even more cruel. Because it is the same balance, the benefit going to the very, very wealthy – President-elect Trump's friends who pay to get in and out of Mar-A-Lago – but financed immediately by cuts that are going to be devastating for the people in this country who get up every day relying on programs like Medicare and Medicaid. So, I agree with my friend from Hawaii: we've got to be down on the floor talking about this every single day. Folks thought it was an inevitability eight years ago when Republicans made it a priority to steal health insurance from 20 million Americans, and by the skin of our teeth, we were able to save health insurance for 20 million Americans. Maybe, if we raise enough of a fuss about this massive transfer of wealth from the middle class and the poor to the very, very wealthy, we can stop this egregious policy as well.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Senator. I just can't believe we're talking about something that nobody wants. That's what this comes down to. The number one priority for Republicans is extending, and likely expanding, a tax cut that benefits the wealthiest 1%, 0.1%, in this country at a rate that dwarfs – dwarfs – the help for anyone else. “The tax cut we're talking about extending gives a tax cut for the top 1% of earners in this country. That isn't ten times bigger than working families at the bottom of the income scale. It's not 100 times bigger. It's not 500 times bigger. Taxpayers in the top 1% will get a tax cut 852 times larger than working families at the bottom of the income thresholds. Eight hundred fifty-two times bigger. “And what we have seen coming out of the pandemic is that while the broad middle of the country has been struggling, the wealthy have gotten richer and richer and richer. We have more billionaires than ever before in this country. The folks that don't rely on salaries, that can just plow their income and their earnings into the capital markets, have reaped huge, huge rewards. “And so, the very, very wealthy in this country right now, at this moment in time, don't need any more help. And yet the average family that is in that top 1% bracket is going to get a tax cut, on average, of $70,000. Well, if you make $30,000 in this country, you're going to get about $100 back in your pocket. “And of course the theory is that if you just layer on tax cuts for corporations and for billionaires and millionaires, that money will eventually trickle down to everybody else. That's a lie. That's not true. That's a fraud. It's never been true. It's been perpetuated on the American public because it's a great way to rationalize giving the bulk of tax cuts to the very, very wealthy. The idea is that somehow that will make it down to the rest of us. “Go on to any main street of this country, go into any subdivision in your state, you won't find many of your constituents who make $50,000 or $100,000 or even $200,000 that have had much of that trickle down to them. “And to Senator Schatz' point, eight years ago when the tax cut was first put into place, it was egregious not because of the balance only, but also because the whole thing was borrowed. All that money was just put on the American credit card, a credit card that comes due and ends up getting paid by middle-class families one way or the other. “This time around, I guess the good news is they're talking about paying for it, not borrowing to give a huge tax cut to corporations and to billionaires and millionaires. Instead, they're talking about immediately taking money out of the pockets of working families and seniors and poor people. Instead of borrowing money and have the bill come due for middle-class families later, this new tax cut for billionaires and corporations is going to be financed by an immediate cut to services and benefits to some of the most vulnerable people in this country. “At the end of last year, as a means of passing the continuing resolution, there was a deal apparently cut–this was reported in the press–in which there was a promise made to finance the tax cut with $2 trillion of cuts to Medicaid and Medicare. Medicaid: poor kids, poor families. Medicare: seniors in this country. Two trillion dollars is a hard number to get your head wrapped around. But there's no way to enact $2 trillion, $2 trillion, a “T,” worth of cuts in Medicare and Medicaid without hundreds of thousands of people, senior citizens and poor kids, losing access to care. “Two trillion dollars in cuts means the nursing homes are shut down. People are put out on the streets. It means that poor kids don't get access to mental health services. And so, what happened eight years ago was cruel. A tax cut put on the American public's credit card, 80% of the benefits going to the very, very richest, none of it trickling down. “This version that Republicans are talking about passing in a matter of weeks is even more cruel. Because it is the same balance, the benefit going to the very, very wealthy – President-elect Trump's friends who pay to get in and out of Mar-A-Lago – but financed immediately by cuts that are going to be devastating for the people in this country who get up every day relying on programs like Medicare and Medicaid. So, I agree with my friend from Hawaii: we've got to be down on the floor talking about this every single day. Folks thought it was an inevitability eight years ago when Republicans made it a priority to steal health insurance from 20 million Americans, and by the skin of our teeth, we were able to save health insurance for 20 million Americans. Maybe, if we raise enough of a fuss about this massive transfer of wealth from the middle class and the poor to the very, very wealthy, we can stop this egregious policy as well.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Tuesday released the following statement after meeting with Linda McMahon, nominee for U.S. Secretary of Education:
“President-elect Trump has made no secret his plans to eliminate the Department of Education, and I appreciated the opportunity to share with Linda McMahon why that would be a disaster for students in Connecticut and across the country. Millions of kids rely on our public schools for their education, and I also pressed her on her support for sending taxpayer dollars to private schools. I look forward to further discussion at the HELP Committee hearing.”
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) on Monday in urging farmers in Connecticut to report losses from extreme weathers events in 2023 and 2024 to the Connecticut Department of Agriculture (CT DoAg). Farmers can report losses here. The Farm Recovery and Support Block Grant, created by Representative DeLauro and championed by members of Connecticut’s congressional delegation, provides $220 million to states in New England, Alaska, and Hawaii to help small and medium-sized farmers receive agricultural relief or aid for losses they experienced in 2023 and 2024 from any
...Read more weather event. This block grant does not require farmers have crop insurance or a national disaster declaration to receive aid. This ensures that farmers left out of our farm safety net and those who suffer losses due to an extreme and localized weather event are able to recoup their losses. "We strongly encourage farmers in Connecticut to participate in the CT DoAg survey on weather-related losses from 2023 and 2024,” the delegation said. “This is a critical opportunity to ensure your needs are accounted for as the state prepares to distribute disaster funding for farmers. The Farm Recovery and Support Block Grant provided $220 million in disaster relief funding for farmers impacted by extreme weather events in 2023 and 2024 and is intended to help affected farmers recoup their losses from these unexpected disasters. Farmers sharing the challenges they faced—whether it’s production losses, infrastructure damage, or increased costs due to invasive species—can help CT DoAg understand the scope of the need to address it as best as they can as soon as funding is ready. Please fill out the survey if you experienced these losses – help will soon be available.” The survey will help the CT DoAg collect information from farmers regarding weather-related losses incurred in 2024 and 2024, as well as losses related to long-term stresses worsened by weather conditions during these two years. The data will help CT DoAg fully understand the scope of the losses so they can quickly divide and disburse funding when it is available. The deadline to complete the survey is Sunday, January 19, 2025. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and U.S. Representative Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), on Monday applauded the U.S. Navy’s decision to name the third Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine, the largest and most capable submarine built by the United States, the “USS GROTON” after Groton, Connecticut. The USS GROTON is scheduled for delivery in 2032. U.S. Secretary of the Navy, Carlos Del Toro, also announced that Cynthia Blumenthal will serve as the sponsor of the future USS Groton. Sponsors are selected by the Secretary of the Navy and hold a unique role by maintaining a lifelong relationship with the ship and crew. “It’s only fitting the U.S. Navy is naming our next Columbia Class submarine after Groton, Connecticut— the Submarine Capital
...Read more of the World,” said Murphy. “This is a well-deserved recognition of Groton’s rich history as a global leader in submarine technology and innovation, and a home to the thousands of Electric Boat workers and small businesses who power our nation’s naval defense. I will continue to use my seat on the Senate Appropriations Committee to make sure the next administration advances our submarine programs quickly and cost-effectively, supports our maritime industrial workforce, and ensures the full and timely delivery of the cutting-edge submarines we need to uphold our national security.” “Naming the USS GROTON recognizes this iconic Connecticut town as the submarine capitol of the world— honoring the unsurpassed skill and dedication of men and women who work there. Groton has a rich shipbuilding legacy, and proven commitment to our national defense— manufacturing and maintaining vital weapons platforms, and sustaining our undersea superiority. It is a proud community of hard workers, veterans, patriots, and public servants, and this honor celebrates them. I am proud that my wife, Cynthia, will be the sponsor of the USS GROTON and serve as a bond between the vessel, her crew, and our nation – an honor and privilege Cynthia is perfectly qualified to take on,” said Blumenthal. “Today’s decision by the US Navy to honor Groton, Connecticut as the name of its next submarine is welcome news. Groton is the birthplace of the modern nuclear-powered Navy under Admiral Hyman G. Rickover and home to our nation’s oldest submarine base, as well as the Electric Boat shipyard whose talented shipbuilders have played a leading role since World War II where they constructed 74 submarines to fight the Axis powers. The naming of the third Columbia class submarine as the future USS GROTON is a well-deserved badge of honor that rightly acknowledges our community’s historic role in the United States submarine force,” said Courtney. Groton, Connecticut is commonly referred to as the “Submarine Capital of the World” and is home to the United States Naval Submarine Base, General Dynamics Electric Boat, and the historic USS Nautilus and Submarine Force Museum. Groton is a leader in the country in designing, manufacturing, and sustaining the U.S. Navy’s submarine fleet. Groton became known as the “Submarine Capital of the World” when the Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics delivered 74 diesel submarines to the Navy in World War II. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative John B. Larson (D-Conn.-01) on Monday joined Governor Ned Lamont, CTDOT Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto, and Hartford Mayor Arunan Arulampalam to announce $2 million in federal funding for the Connecticut Department of Transportation for the City Link – Reconnecting North Hartford planning study. The federal funding comes from the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. "This project is about more than just rebuilding roads in Hartford—it’s about unlocking opportunities for local communities and creating a more connected future,” said Murphy. “This $2 million in federal funding will help improve traffic flow on I-84 and enhance
...Read more safety for pedestrians and cyclists, while opening up space for affordable housing and strengthening our neighborhoods' resilience to climate change for generations to come," said Murphy. “This $2 million in federal funding is a significant milestone for North Hartford, signaling strong support to reconnect a neighborhood that has for far too long been disconnected and divided. This investment supports a collaborative and inclusive vision that will revitalize the community, create good-paying jobs, and provide relief for residents. I’m proud to have fought for this funding and will continue to work to deliver federal resources that encourage economic development across our state,” said Blumenthal. “With its focus on reconnecting communities, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law we passed in Congress has created an opportunity to end the racial isolation in North Hartford and build a transportation system that connects residents across the Capitol Region,” said Larson. “By funding engineering efforts to realign and cap Interstate 84 in Hartford, this $2 million federal investment will move us one step close to finally fixing the egregious design flaws that have robbed our communities of their potential for far too long. Revitalization will not happen overnight, and it remains one of my top priorities to correct the injustices of the past by securing funding to modernize infrastructure and promote economic opportunity for the residents of North Hartford,” said Larson. “As we are making necessary upgrades to our infrastructure, we should use this as an opportunity to review how our highways are impacting the local host communities and make adjustments that think ahead for long-term improvements with an eye toward economic growth for people who live in these neighborhoods. Our interstates have divided Hartford’s North End from the rest of the city for generations now, and this study will give those who live in the area a voice in how we can improve these roads so they work for everyone,” said Lamont. “Funding for this study will help us advance the recommendations in the Greater Hartford Mobility Study as we look to reconnect the North End of Hartford to downtown, and undo some of the disruptions caused by the current highway system. Thank you to USDOT, Secretary Buttigieg, and our Congressional Delegation for the ongoing support on this project,” said Eucalitto. "The City Link project represents a critical opportunity to heal historical divides in North Hartford. By reimagining our infrastructure, we're not just rebuilding roads, but reconnecting communities and creating pathways for economic opportunity. This $2 million federal investment will help us address long-standing inequities and give North Hartford residents a voice in shaping their neighborhood's future," said Arulampalam. The City Link – Reconnecting North Hartford planning study would complete collaborative visioning and analysis and preliminary engineering for the realignment, lowering and capping of Interstate 84 and the Hartford Line rail corridor in Hartford. The surrounding neighborhoods have long experienced historic disinvestment and are home to disadvantaged communities that have borne the brunt of the negative effects associated with the construction of the original highway in the mid-20th century. ### Read less BRIDGEPORT—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04) joined Bridgeport Mayor Joe Ganim to announce that Bridgeport was selected by the U.S. Department of Transportation to receive a $24.6 million Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) grant to fund the construction of a new Congress Street Bridge spanning the Pequonnock River. “This project has been a long time coming, and our delegation has been fighting to get the federal funding it needs to be successful. Replacing the Congress Street bridge will make it easier for people living on the East Side to get to downtown, saving them time and reconnecting the two communities,” said Murphy. “This over $24 million federal
...Read more investment to replace Congress Street Bridge will provide tremendous relief to Bridgeport residents after years of advocacy,” said Blumenthal. “Today’s announcement marks the first step toward improving connectivity, safety, and accessibility in Bridgeport – literally bridging communities. I’ll continue to work with the Connecticut delegation and the city of Bridgeport to ensure that this project is realized quickly and efficiently.” “Since my election in 2008, I have worked tirelessly on the reconstruction of the Congress Street Bridge- a project that would reconnect Bridgeport’s downtown with the East Side. We have met many bureaucratic barriers throughout this frustrating process, but I hope that this grant will finally deliver the results the people of Bridgeport have waited on for so long. They deserve to be able to move about their city freely, and I will continue pushing until we see this bridge rebuilt in full,” said Himes. “I want to thank Congressman Jim Himes, Senator Chris Murphy, and Senator Richard Blumenthal for their steadfast advocacy to secure final funding for this project,” said Ganim. “After thirty years, the Congress Street Bridge will finally reconnect the bustling East Side and Downtown neighborhoods and will increase public safety response times. The City of Bridgeport is prepared to get to work and ensure this project is completed expeditiously." The $24.6 million included in this RAISE grant brings the total federal funding delivered by Murphy, Blumenthal and Himes to $26.9 million, including $2.3 million federal dollars to demolish the bridge in 2010. The federal delegation passed legislation in 2018 to approve reconstruction over the Pequonnock river, and supported the City of Bridgeport, CTDOT, and local partners in securing an additional $24 million for the replacement of the bridge in 2019. The RAISE program allows project sponsors, including state and local governments, to pursue multi-modal and multi-jurisdictional projects that are more difficult to fund through other grant programs. RAISE grants are awarded to eligible surface transportation projects that will have a significant local or regional impact. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Friday released the following statement on the inauguration of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro:
“The Venezuelan people decisively elected Edmundo González, and yet it’s Nicolas Maduro who was inaugurated today. For months, Maduro has cracked down on his opposition by jailing protestors, forcing others into exile, and yesterday, arresting opposition leader Marina Corina Machado. The United States must stand with the people of Venezuela in their fight for democracy, and I urge the incoming administration to hold the Venezuelan government’s feet to the fire,” said Murphy.
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Tuesday released the following statement after the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced new rules to prevent credit reports from reflecting overdue medical bills and prohibit companies from using unpaid medical debts to assess creditworthiness. The CFPB estimates that these rules will benefit about 15 million Americans, many of whom have struggled to secure jobs, apartments, or credit due to their medical debts despite often having some form of health insurance. "It’s absurd that getting sick and then being unable to afford your medical care can ruin your credit score and make it that much harder to rent a home or secure a loan. This new CFPB rule will
...Read more ensure millions of Americans involuntarily saddled with medical debt are protected from exploitative debt collection practices. It’s one of the many things the CFPB has done to help low- and middle-income people, so it’s no surprise that Trump and his cronies want to gut the agency and repeal all of its rules.” Murphy applauded the CFPB’s rulemaking process to remove medical debt from Americans’ credit reports in September 2023. Last Congress, Murphy introduced bipartisan legislation to strengthen consumer protections and improve transparency for medical debt practices. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Monday released the following statement on enactment of the Social Security Fairness Act. Murphy co-sponsored the legislation.
“This is a big win for working people who have dedicated their lives to serving their communities. Retired teachers, firefighters, postal workers, police officers, and other public servants should never have been getting unfairly shortchanged on their Social Security benefits. I’ve heard from thousands of hardworking people in Connecticut who will have more money in their pockets because of this legislation. It rights a 40-year-old wrong and will make sure every American gets the benefits they earned.”
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Monday released a statement on the Biden administration’s decision to issue waivers to aid groups and companies providing humanitarian aid and essential services to Syrians: “Easing restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian aid will help provide relief to millions of Syrians facing hunger and displacement as a result of the civil war and al-Assad’s brutal regime. I’m glad to see the Biden administration taking this small but proactive step to support the Syrian people during this period of transition. The U.S. should continue to carefully monitor the actions of Syria’s new leadership as it begins
...Read more the process of standing up a transitional government, but I urge the administration to take additional steps to suspend outdated sanctions that are hindering Syria’s ability to rebuild its economy and provide more stability for the Syrian people.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement after he was sworn in for his third term representing Connecticut in the U.S. Senate:
“I am so humbled to have been sworn in for my third term today. This is a deadly serious moment for American democracy, and though I'm proud to have accomplished so much for Connecticut in my first two terms, I know the biggest test for the Senate is about to come. There won't be one single day when I take this responsibility that our state has given me lightly. I'm ready to fight and get to work.”
Murphy will continue to serve on the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
###
WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Friday released the following statement on Connecticut’s selection for a Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic (CCBHC) Planning Grant totaling $977,000, which will allow Connecticut to build out a more comprehensive care model for mental health services. Murphy’s Bipartisan Safer Communities Act expanded the CCBHC program to give more people across the country access to mental health and substance use disorder treatment. CCBHCs provide crisis services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and serve anyone who requests care for mental health or substance use, regardless of their ability to pay. “Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics help everyone access
...Read more and afford the mental health care they need. When we wrote the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, expanding access to mental health services was a big priority, and I’m thrilled that Connecticut continues to reap the benefits of this legislation. This funding sets the groundwork for establishing a statewide CCBHC model in our state, and I’ll keep pushing to make sure it gets the federal support it needs to be successful.” ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday released his End of Year Report outlining the work he’s done for the people of Connecticut during 2024. The report details Murphy’s legislative priorities this year, including continuing to implement the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, building more social connection, fighting for workers, making housing more affordable, and more. Murphy also helped deliver billions of federal dollars from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act to create good-paying jobs in Connecticut. This year, Murphy and his office: Introduced or co-sponsored 367 pieces of legislation, including 68 bills or resolutions as the lead sponsor.
Completed his eighth Walk Across Connecticut:
...Read more four days, 64 miles, 16 towns, and hundreds of people along the way.
Traveled across the state, hosting 117 roundtables, listening sessions and more with Connecticut residents.
Responded and reached out to Connecticut residents through over 383,000 calls, emails, and letters.
Returned nearly $2 million to constituents, including owed Social Security payments, veterans’ benefits, tax refunds, and other savings from federal agencies.
Helped over 3,300 constituents work through federal issues and get their owed benefits. Click here to download Senator Murphy’s 2024 End of Year Report. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement on the death of President Jimmy Carter: “Few people have modeled what it means to live a life dedicated to the service of others more than President Jimmy Carter. He led with compassion, humility, and moral clarity even when it came at a political cost. Helping others was his calling, and President Carter didn’t need the White House to change millions of lives. From his work at the Carter Center to volunteering with Habitat for Humanity, he worked every day to build a more just world. “In a 1979 speech, President Carter warned the nation we have two paths to choose from – one toward fragmentation and self-interest and another toward common purpose. It’s a warning that rings true still today. “My heart is with
...Read more the Carter family as the nation mourns the loss of a giant.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement after voting for a short-term deal to keep the government open and deliver disaster aid to impacted communities in Connecticut and across the country. “The government almost shut down because the only thing co-presidents Elon Musk and Donald Trump care about is making themselves and their billionaire friends richer – it’s that simple. The past 48 hours were a hostage-taking exercise that put millions of families in the lurch just days before Christmas, all in the name of raising the debt ceiling so Trump can finance a giant tax break for billionaires in January. And now that Trump and Musk didn’t get their way, they’ve hatched an even more shameful plan to cut Medicare, Medicaid, and veterans benefits by $2.5
...Read more trillion instead. This ‘Billionaire First’ agenda is what we have to look forward to next year.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to call out President-elect Trump’s ongoing plan to crush political dissent and lay the groundwork to transition American democracy into an oligarchy – all before he is even sworn in. This week alone, House Republicans recommended former Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) be criminally investigated for her work on the Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, Trump sued Iowa pollster Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register for publishing a poll he didn’t like, and ABC News settled Trump’s bogus defamation lawsuit for $15 million. In his speech, Murphy laid out how these attacks on free speech and the free press, coupled with Trump and his billionaire friends demanding a Christmas government shutdown in
...Read more exchange for their demands, threaten American democracy as we know it. Murphy laid out the stakes: “America has been for almost all of our history a functioning, robust democracy where the party or individual in power changes regularly because people hold all the tools necessary to choose their leaders. But that could change in a heartbeat, so quickly, but without any one galvanizing moment that the transition might just be missed by all of us. You could just wake up one day and find out that the rules of democracy have been so rigged that Republicans or the Trump family never, ever lose again, and billionaires get to steal from all of us without any accountability.” “But I think it's also equally important to talk about why Donald Trump and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy and all of his billionaire friends are engaged in this very coordinated early attack, even before he's sworn in, to try to intimidate his political opposition and bully the press. And the reason they are doing this, the reason that they are trying to suppress dissent is because they are preparing to steal from us. Donald Trump and his billionaire buddies want to be in charge of government so that they can make themselves more wealthy at our expense. They want government contracts. They want to privatize government programs. They want to get bigger regulatory breaks. They want lower taxes,” he added. “Donald Trump and his billionaire cronies want government to serve them, but they know the only way they get away with that is if no one holds them accountable. So in order to steal from us, they have to silence political opposition, intimidate activists into submission, and try to get the press to fold. If they do that, then they can get away with using government as a mechanism to enrich themselves. He exposed why Trump wants to shut down the government if Congress doesn’t raise the debt ceiling: “Why do they want to raise the debt ceiling? It's easy. They want to pass a huge tax cut for the billionaires in charge of Donald Trump's government. That's their agenda. Big, big tax cut for billionaires and corporations. But the only way you can do that is if the debt ceiling is raised. The only way you can get away with that is if you can borrow more money on the backs of ordinary, average, everyday people in order to pay for that tax cut. So we're seeing the agenda of the Trump administration before they're even sworn in in front of our eyes. Rig rules in order to make the billionaires richer and telegraph that as your number one priority to Congress.” Murphy concluded: ““The survival of our 240-year experiment is facing, right now, one of its most severe tests. I just think it's time that everybody woke up to that and pulled their heads out of the sand.” A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “Mr. President, I'm on the floor today to talk to my colleagues about something that is happening right in front of our eyes. It's a set of events that aren't random, they’re connected to one another, that threaten to destroy this country that we love. Everybody can see it. But for some reason, maybe the exhaustion of the aftermath of a brutal election, maybe the distraction of the Christmas season, maybe just an instinct to flee instead of fight, there are far too many people that are denying to themselves what they are seeing. “What is happening right now is that Donald Trump and his billionaire advisors are unfolding for the country in real time, a plan to transition this country from a democracy to a restrictive oligarchy where political opposition is silenced, where the media isn't free, and where government just exists to enrich a small cabal of elites that surround the man in charge. “I know a lot of my colleagues do see how these dots exist and how they connect, and I know in your gut, a lot of you see the specter of the disaster that is coming. But if you don't, I want to spend just a few minutes laying it out. And to make things simple, I'm just going to focus on three events that happened in the last seven days: the recommendation by House Republicans that Trump critic Liz Cheney be subject to criminal prosecution, the lawsuit filed by Trump against an Iowa pollster at an Iowa newspaper, and the decision by ABC to pay Trump $15 million to get rid of a bogus lawsuit. “First, the recommendation from House Republicans that Liz Cheney be prosecuted. Liz Cheney was a member of the January 6 commission that tried to find some accountability for the assault on this Capitol that resulted in people dying, that resulted in an officer with blood running down his face running into this chamber to rescue us before the violent rioters got a hold of us. “Donald Trump did not like that narrative that he had something to do with, that he inspired the January 6 riot. He doesn't even like the narrative that January 6 was a riot. His events are opened by the January 6 choir in commemoration of the events of that day. “What happened this week is that Donald Trump made good on his promise. He said during the campaign that he was going to use the military, law enforcement, the National Guard to deal with the enemy within. And when asked who the enemy within was, he said Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Democrats. Now people laughed it off during the campaign because that doesn't happen in America. We don't use law enforcement to lock up your political opposition, but that's exactly what's being recommended when it comes to Liz Cheney. Liz Cheney did nothing criminal. There's not even a whiff of a criminal allegation. She was just in charge of a commission that Donald Trump opposed, but House Republicans, taking orders from Donald Trump, just recommended that the next administration, the next Department of Justice criminally prosecute Liz Cheney. And by the way, Liz Cheney won't be the last. There will be other political opponents of Donald Trump who are referred for prosecution. “Now that would be laughable today, under an FBI and a Department of Justice that doesn't lock up people for political reasons, but Donald Trump is changing the guard at the FBI. He's putting in someone loyal to him as the next Attorney General, the person he's going to put in at the FBI wrote a book about how important it was to eliminate from government anybody that doesn't line up with the political priorities of the president. He has said that the people who ran fair elections in 2020 should go to jail because if you didn't run an election that resulted in Donald Trump being elected, then you did something wrong. “This week, the House recommended Liz Cheney for criminal prosecution. Donald Trump cheered that recommendation, and we are getting ready to vote on an Attorney General and a Director of the FBI who have made clear they are ready to eagerly prosecute Trump's political opponents. “This is really important to talk about because this is one of the key ways that democracies fall all around the world. It frankly doesn't take hundreds of political prosecutions. It only takes a handful before ordinary, average Americans just decide that they would be better off staying quiet instead of facing potential harassment or intimidation or a jail sentence for speaking out the way that Liz Cheney did. “The second thing that happened in this last week was that Donald Trump filed a lawsuit against a pollster in Iowa. The grounds of the lawsuit are simple. He didn't like the results of the poll. The poll said the Iowa race was close. The poll ended up being wrong, but he is suing the pollster and the newspaper because he was upset that that poll helped galvanize opposition to him. That poll, which suggested that race was close, got a lot of people to donate to his political opponent, gave people in Iowa some hope that maybe a Democrat could win. That's not allowed in Donald Trump's world. It's not allowed in Donald Trump's world for anything to be in service of his political opposition. So he's filing a lawsuit that has no chance of succeeding because he wants to try to intimidate journalists and the press into submission. “Whether we like it or not, it just is true that maybe in the future, a pollster who has a poll in front of them that shows a race closing, shows a race that's favorable to Democrats won't publicize that poll out of fear of a lawsuit. “And connected to that lawsuit is the third thing I want to talk about, the decision by ABC to pay Donald Trump $15 million to settle a bogus lawsuit, a bogus defamation lawsuit that would have never succeeded in court, but ABC, for whatever reason, decided it would be better for them to just pay Donald Trump to make it go away. “And you are seeing repeated decisions by people in the media to just go along with Donald Trump rather than risk his ire, rather than potentially put their profits at risk if Donald Trump and his regulatory agencies turn against them. You saw Jeff Bezos tell his newspapers not to endorse Kamala Harris. You have seen an effort by Comcast to divest itself from MSNBC. You've seen ABC pay off Donald Trump $15 million. Over and over and over again, you see members of the press starting to decide it's just better not to fight him. “These three things taken together show you the playbook. Threaten political opposition with jail, throw a few of them into jail to show you're serious, sue and intimidate and harass anybody that does anything that is helpful to your political opposition, and intimidate and harass the media in the hopes that they will just go away and stop criticizing you. “I don't think it's a coincidence that during this period of media harassment by Donald Trump, when Liz Cheney was referred for criminal prosecution, all of the headlines played it totally straight. None of the headlines suggested that the criminal prosecution was bogus, was built on lies, was built on no understanding of the law. The headlines just said ‘Liz Cheney referred for criminal prosecution.’ “I think it's really important that we lay out what's happening here because this is how a democracy vanishes. But I think it's also equally important to talk about why Donald Trump and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy and all of his billionaire friends are engaged in this very coordinated early attack, even before he's sworn in, to try to intimidate his political opposition and bully the press. And the reason they are doing this, the reason that they are trying to suppress dissent is because they are preparing to steal from us. Donald Trump and his billionaire buddies want to be in charge of government so that they can make themselves more wealthy at our expense. They want government contracts. They want to privatize government programs. They want to get bigger regulatory breaks. They want lower taxes. “Donald Trump and his billionaire cronies want government to serve them, but they know the only way they get away with that is if no one holds them accountable. So in order to steal from us, they have to silence political opposition, intimidate activists into submission, and try to get the press to fold. If they do that, then they can get away with using government as a mechanism to enrich themselves. “And if you want further proof of their agenda, look what's happening right now today, as we speak, Republicans and Democrats had a deal to keep the government open and operating, to fund much needed disaster assistance, and it was killed yesterday by the two billionaires closest to Donald Trump. And when asked as to what their alternative was, they said raise the debt ceiling. Donald Trump said raise the debt ceiling. You'll have my support for a continuing resolution if you raise the debt ceiling. “Why do they want to raise the debt ceiling? It's easy. They want to pass a huge tax cut for the billionaires in charge of Donald Trump's government. That's their agenda. Big, big tax cut for billionaires and corporations. But the only way you can do that is if the debt ceiling is raised. The only way you can get away with that is if you can borrow more money on the backs of ordinary, average, everyday people in order to pay for that tax cut. So we're seeing the agenda of the Trump administration before they're even sworn in in front of our eyes. Rig rules in order to make the billionaires richer and telegraph that as your number one priority to Congress. “Listen, there aren't just democracies and dictatorships in the world. There are dozens of countries that occupy a gray zone in between those poles. Countries where there are still elections, but the media and the political opposition are so weak, weak because they've been beaten into submission by the regime, that the people actually have no power. There are elections, but the same group, the same man, the same family, wins every time. “America has been for almost all of our history a functioning, robust democracy where the party or individual in power changes regularly because people hold all the tools necessary to choose their leaders. But that could change in a heartbeat, so quickly, but without any one galvanizing moment that the transition might just be missed by all of us. You could just wake up one day and find out that the rules of democracy have been so rigged that Republicans or the Trump family never ever lose again, and billionaires get to steal from all of us without any accountability. “I know that that sounds hard to believe. I admit that I might be wrong about all of this. America's democracy, it is the longest existing democracy in the history of the world. It has proven to be resilient. It's filled with grit. It has survived challenges before. But like every one of us eventually disappears from this planet, so does every democracy. Every democracy has a last day. And if you look around the world, the steps that lead to the termination of a democracy, the end of self-governance, are shockingly similar from country to country. “The wealthy people who control the media and the economy fold into the regime. Better to join than to fight. The citizens get scared of joining up with the opposition movement because they're fearful of harassment. Better to stay quiet than fight. If we don't speak out more loudly and more boldly about the events of the last week, and the way that we are seeing a purposeful, detailed road map constructed by Donald Trump and his billionaire friends to transition democracy to an oligarchy. If we don't fight like hell against these nominees, especially those going to the Department of Justice that will execute this assault on democracy, then our nation very soon could easily befall the same as these other destructed democracies. “The survival of our 240-year experiment is facing right now one of its most severe tests. I just think it's time that everybody woke up to that and pulled their heads out of the sand. I yield back.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), and Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), and U.S. Representatives Mike Flood (R-Neb.) and Ami Bera (D-Calif.), sent a bipartisan, bicameral letter to U.S. Comptroller General Gene Dodaro requesting the Government Accountability Office (GAO) conduct a study on federal programs monitoring loneliness and social isolation. In their letter, the lawmakers underscore the alarming increase in loneliness across the United States and call for standardized data collection and a coordinated approach to address the growing health risks associated with social isolation. “The United States is experiencing a crisis of social connection, isolation, and loneliness,” the members wrote. “Today, approximately half of US adults report experiencing loneliness. In 1990, 3% of
...Read more Americans reported having no close friends; by 2021 that figure had climbed to 12%. The average American spent 8% more time alone in 2019 than they did in 2003. These data points, combined with other research and scholarship, led the Surgeon General to issue a public health advisory on the growing epidemic of loneliness and social isolation.” “Despite the growing acknowledgement that loneliness and social isolation are a problem, there are still no standardized metrics that allows us to monitor these trends,” the members added. “The lack of standardization in data collection is largely due to the diversity of definitions that are found in scientific literature, which leads to inconsistencies in how loneliness and isolation are understood and measured. This variety in data collection methods across studies leads to fragmented data that makes it difficult to draw reliable comparisons. Lacking centralized and uniform definitions and protocols to monitor these metrics limits our ability to effectively address and monitor these important public health issues.” The full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Comptroller General Dodaro: We write to request the Government Accountability Office (GAO) conduct a study to identify which federal programs monitor loneliness and social isolation and how those programs collect and utilize this information. While growing research shows that loneliness is an increasingly common experience with negative effects for individual and societal health, we have a limited understanding of which federal programs are working to address loneliness, how the federal government defines and monitors the prevalence of loneliness, and what strategies agencies are already employing to combat the harmful effects of loneliness. The United States is experiencing a crisis of social connection, isolation, and loneliness. Today, approximately half of US adults report experiencing loneliness. In 1990, 3% of Americans reported having no close friends; by 2021 that figure had climbed to 12%. The average American spent 8% more time alone in 2019 than they did in 2003. These data points, combined with other research and scholarship, led the Surgeon General to issue a public health advisory on the growing epidemic of loneliness and social isolation. Healthy social relationships are the foundation of human happiness, and a lack of social connection can be devastating. The Surgeon General’s advisory outlines the serious health effects associated with disconnection. Studies show that isolation and loneliness increase the risk of heart disease and stroke by 29% and 32% respectively, while also increasing the risk of developing dementia by 50% among older adults. Despite the growing acknowledgement that loneliness and social isolation are a problem, there are still no standardized metrics that allows us to monitor these trends. The lack of standardization in data collection is largely due to the diversity of definitions that are found in scientific literature, which leads to inconsistencies in how loneliness and isolation are understood and measured. This variety in data collection methods across studies leads to fragmented data that makes it difficult to draw reliable comparisons. Lacking centralized and uniform definitions and protocols to monitor these metrics limits our ability to effectively address and monitor these important public health issues. To better understand how the federal government can address the crisis of social isolation, we ask that the GAO to answer the following questions: Which federal programs, if any, monitor loneliness and isolation?
How do these programs define or measure loneliness and isolation, and in what ways do these definitions and measurements vary across programs?
How do these programs use the information they collect on loneliness and isolation to address these problems or otherwise improve the services they provide?
What steps can Congress take to improve the work of agencies in addressing social isolation and loneliness? We request answers to these questions by May 1, 2025. Thank you for your attention to this issue. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) in sending a letter to the Founder and CEO of EasyKnock—a real estate company that bought people’s homes and turned them into renters—probing the company’s allegedly deceptive and predatory business practices and their impacts on customers, after the company abruptly closed its doors on December 5, 2024. The letter was also signed by Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.). Before its recent closure, EasyKnock purchased homes from financially distressed homeowners through its “Sell & Stay” program, promising they would “[r]eceive 100% of [their] home’s value without having to move.” However, consumer lawsuits and
...Read more multiple state attorneys general have alleged that EasyKnock’s deceptive advertising and business practices often left former homeowners far worse off than they were before the company found them, causing homeowners to lose cherished family homes and much of the equity they originally had in them. “We are deeply concerned about EasyKnock’s lasting impact on vulnerable homeowners, including homeowners with pending residential sale-leaseback agreements with your company, and the extent to which the company will be handling these agreements in the wake of its abrupt closure earlier this month,” wrote the lawmakers. According to reports, EasyKnock customers rarely received anything close to the full market values of their homes, and the company employed predatory tactics, such as consistent rent increases in spite of a lack of improvements to properties, placing customers in financial positions where they could no longer repurchase their homes. “Across America, the allegations against EasyKnock followed a similar pattern: EasyKnock made misleading statements about services to entrap vulnerable homeowners only to break its promises at the expense of working families,” continued the lawmakers. In March 2024, the Connecticut Attorney General’s Office launched an investigation into EasyKnock, Inc. over potentially deceptive home sale-leaseback deals. This month, EasyKnock abruptly shut down. According to public reports, customers, shocked and confused by the news, were given little explanation of the closure, with one customer reporting that she was notified that a company called NESE Property Management now manages her home. “EasyKnock’s decision to ‘shut down’ raises even more questions about how it will handle ongoing agreements and properly compensate homeowners who were negatively affected by the company’s actions,” concluded the lawmakers. The senators are requesting information about EasyKnock’s past business practices and its abrupt closure by December 30, 2024. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 19 of their colleagues in introducing an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2025 to remove language that would strip away servicemembers’ parental rights to access medically necessary health care for their transgender children. The U.S. House of Representatives-passed NDAA includes language that bans health care for transgender kids and TRICARE patients under the age of 18. “Parents – not politicians – are the only people who should be making health care decisions for their children. This amendment would ensure military families have the same rights as every other family to make sure their kids get the care they need. It is unbelievable that in pushing their hateful, anti-
...Read more LGBTQ agenda, House Republicans want to punish parents serving our country,” said Murphy. “I have supported and worked hard on the NDAA and its many provisions to enhance and protect our national security as well as Connecticut’s defense industrial base. I have opposed limits on healthcare for families of military personnel. I support this amendment to protect rights of service members and their families to make their own healthcare decisions,” said Blumenthal. Every major medical and mental health association in the U.S., representing more than 1.3 million U.S. doctors, supports access to this medically necessary, evidence-based health care for transgender people. If the House-passed NDAA becomes law, it is estimated that 6,000 – 7,000 transgender children of servicemembers would not be able to access the health care that their parents had approved. The amendment to the FY2025 NDAA would strike Sec. 708 of the House-passed NDAA, which would ban TRICARE from offering medically sound health care for our youngest transgender servicemembers and to transgender military children under 18. The amendment, led by Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), is also co-sponsored by Senators Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.). A full version of the amendment is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) and 14 of their Senate colleagues in reintroducing the End the Threat of Default Act, legislation that would permanently remove the threat of a default by repealing the national debt ceiling, an arbitrary limit restricting the amount that the United States Treasury can borrow to pay its debts. In June 2023, the president signed legislation that suspended the statutory debt ceiling until January 2, 2025. “No one should have to lose sleep wondering if their Social Security check or military pay will arrive on time just because Congress can’t get its act together,” said Murphy. “But every time we have to debate raising the debt ceiling, we take an unnecessary gamble
...Read more with those benefits and with people’s lives. It’s time we put a stop to the political games and bring an end to the debt ceiling once and for all.” “Failure to increase an arbitrary debt ceiling would lead to a disruption of critical Social Security and Medicare payments, soaring unemployment, and overall economic catastrophe largely impacting vulnerable populations. I’m proud to support the End the Threat of Default Act, which would repeal the national debt ceiling and permanently remove this threat,” said Blumenthal. “Defaulting on our national debt would be an economic catastrophe for everyone, especially families, veterans, and seniors. Congress has the chance to debate federal spending, and it’s well before the bill comes due,” said Schatz. “We need to stop playing this dangerous game with the nation’s economy and get rid of the debt ceiling for good.” A default would be catastrophic and would likely trigger a recession. Military pay, Social Security and Medicare payments, and Treasury bond yields would all be disrupted. In practice, the debt limit has no impact on government spending, which is authorized and approved through the federal budget and appropriations process. Instead, the ceiling restricts the U.S. Treasury from paying for expenditures already approved by Congress therefore requiring Congress to constantly raise the ceiling before it is reached. In recent years, this has become a politicized procedure that often leads to threats of defaulting on the government’s obligation to pay its bills. The United States is one of only two democratic countries with a statutory debt ceiling, and the only one that could single-handedly cause a global recession. Since 1960, Congress has acted more than 75 times to raise, temporarily extend, or revise the definition of the debt limit. In 2011, the crisis surrounding raising the debt ceiling led credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s to downgrade the U.S. government’s credit rating for the first time ever. Fitch downgraded the U.S. government’s credit rating following debt limit brinksmanship in 2023. U.S. Senators Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawai‘i), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Angus King (I-Maine), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) also cosponsored the legislation. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chair of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Monday released the following statement supporting a plan for the U.S. to lift sanctions on Syria: “Since the collapse of the Assad regime, events are moving quickly to shape the new reality in Syria, and the United States cannot be left on the sideline. Syria's path forward should be determined and led by the Syrian people, but the United States should be actively and directly engaging with the new leadership to help ensure a successful transition and protect key U.S. national security interests. “The U.S. troop presence on the ground in Syria and our sanctions are
...Read more important points of leverage that require us to be at the table. Decisions in Damascus will be made quickly, and too often other powers act as the U.S. wrings it hands over what to do. If it is in our interest to support the goals of the new government, the U.S. should not be stubbornly reluctant to lift decades-old sanctions that were constructed to put pressure on a government that is no longer in power. Most immediately, the U.S. should temporarily suspend sanctions that hamper the much-needed surge in humanitarian assistance and reconstruction that will be necessary to help support the Syrian people in the short term. “Officials within HTS have publicly stated their intent to govern inclusively, and Syrians and the world will be watching over the coming months ahead to see whether they intend to follow through on that commitment.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, and U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) led 7 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas urging the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to finalize intergovernmental support agreement (IGSA) authority for the U.S. Coast Guard. Granting this authority will allow the Coast Guard to pursue more efficient, cost-saving service contracts through partnerships with local government entities – a practice all other military services have been taking advantage of for over a decade. Since 2013, all military services except for the Coast Guard have been entering IGSAs and coordinating with local and state
...Read more governments to secure lower-cost contracts for higher-quality services, like waste removal, childcare, and road maintenance. These agreements have delivered millions of dollars in savings, reduced administrative burdens, and improved community relations at military installations across the country – including Naval Submarine Base New London. Despite a 2023 determination that the Coast Guard is also eligible to use IGSA authority, DHS has yet to issue the formal guidance necessary for Coast Guard facilities, like the Coast Guard Academy, to take advantage of these local contracting agreements and to unlock their many benefits. “We appreciate DHS’s attention to IGSA authority and the benefits it can deliver the Coast Guard and local communities, including expanded educational offerings for local children, increased employment options for military spouses, and greater opportunities for small businesses,” the senators wrote. “However, we are concerned by the delay in issuing IGSA guidance and procedures for the Coast Guard, and we worry that unless DHS leadership quickly addresses this disparity, our Coast Guard communities could be left waiting to see these agreements’ benefits for years more. While DHS has many competing demands and procedures that differ from the DOD, we feel strongly that the department should prioritize finalizing the IGSA authority that promises to deliver the Coast Guard enhanced mission effectiveness, efficiencies, or economies of scale – especially at a moment when arbitrary budget constraints and increasing global threats are forcing the service to do more with less.” “With this in mind, we urge you and your department to act quickly in the weeks ahead to incorporate best practices from other services using IGSAs, to formalize effective internal approval processes with all necessary safeguards, and to equip the Coast Guard and local governments to take full advantage of these agreements wherever mutually beneficial,” the senators continued. The senators concluded: “Based on the successful use of IGSAs by other military services, we believe that the Coast Guard and local communities stand to benefit greatly from the cost savings, administrative efficiency, and improved local relationships that these agreements can deliver. Our constituents, inside and outside the service, look forward to swift action by DHS in issuing IGSA authority and unlocking the improved installation services, cost efficiency, and business opportunities that Coast Guard communities are asking for and deserve.” U.S. Senators Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Angus King (I-Maine), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HEREand below: Dear Secretary Mayorkas, We write today to urge your department to move expeditiously to equip the U.S. Coast Guard to enter cost-effective, mutually beneficial intergovernmental support agreements (IGSAs) with state and local governments. We understand the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been assessing Coast Guard IGSA authority for years now, and while we appreciate the need to deliberate and set clear, effective procedures, we encourage DHS to complete this process as soon as possible and unlock the enhanced cost savings, mission effectiveness, and local relations that IGSAs can deliver Coast Guard installations and their neighboring communities. In 2013, Congress authorized military services to enter into IGSAs with local and state governments to support installation services, as long as these sole-source agreements provided financial benefits or improved mission effectiveness. This FY 2013 NDAA-passed provision (10 U.S. Code § 2679) aimed to rein in the military’s installation support costs, and it has delivered clear successes: using thorough vetting processes, services have approved over 170 IGSAs across nearly 100 installations for services ranging from waste removal to public transportation to fire response to animal control.[i] A 2018 GAO report studied eight IGSAs and found just those agreements generating financial benefits of at least $9 million – not to mention the less tangible benefits of reduced administrative time, increased service efficiency and quality, and improved relationships with surrounding communities. While the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, and Navy have benefited from IGSA benefits, the Coast Guard has unfortunately yet to receive the guidance from DHS needed to approve these agreements and unlock key cost savings, improved efficiency, and higher-quality services. We understand that DHS and Coast Guard leadership agree that 10 U.S. Code § 2679 offered the Coast Guard IGSA authority, as it did the other services in 2013, but DHS has gone slower than DOD in issuing the guidelines and approval processes required to initiate IGSAs. We appreciate DHS’s attention to IGSA authority and the benefits it can deliver the Coast Guard and local communities, including expanded educational offerings for local children, increased employment options for military spouses, and greater opportunities for small businesses. However, we are concerned by the delay in issuing IGSA guidance and procedures for the Coast Guard, and we worry that unless DHS leadership decides to act fast, our Coast Guard communities could be left waiting to see these agreements’ benefits for years more. While DHS has many competing demands and procedures that differ from DOD, we feel strongly that the department should prioritize finalizing the IGSA authority that promises to deliver the Coast Guard enhanced mission effectiveness, efficiencies, or economies of scale – especially at a moment when budget constraints and increasing global threats are forcing the service to do more with less. As part of the IGSA implementation effort, we also expect that you will ensure the FY26 budget request reflects an increase to the Coast Guard’s Operations & Support budget. We view this as essential to not create another unfunded task for the Coast Guard which would compound the disparities that exist between the Coast Guard and other branches of the military. With this in mind, we urge you and your department to act quickly in the weeks ahead to incorporate best practices from other services using IGSAs, to formalize effective internal approval processes with all necessary safeguards, and to equip the Coast Guard and local governments to take full advantage of these agreements wherever mutually beneficial. We also request answers to the questions below no later than 21 days from the date of this letter: What specific constraints is DHS facing in finalizing and issuing IGSA authority for the Coast Guard, if any?
What specific benefits does DHS expect IGSA authority to deliver to the Coast Guard?
What concerns, if any, does DHS have about issuing IGSA authority to the Coast Guard?
For what specific types of services does DHS expect the Coast Guard to use IGSAs?
How is DHS engaging the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and DHS agencies to learn from their experiences with IGSAs and to develop guidance and approval processes based on their successes and lessons learned?
What guardrails is DHS planning to incorporate into its IGSA guidance and internal approval processes to ensure such agreements prioritize Coast Guard installations’ enhanced mission effectiveness, efficiencies, or economies of scale?
How is DHS and the Coast Guard planning to collect and monitor information on the financial and nonfinancial benefits of implemented IGSAs, in order to ensure accountability and improvement of procedures over time? Based on the successful use of IGSAs by other military services, we believe that the Coast Guard and local communities stand to benefit greatly from the cost savings, administrative efficiency, and improved local relationships that these agreements can deliver. Our constituents, inside and outside the service, look forward to swift action by DHS in issuing IGSA authority and unlocking the improved installation services, cost efficiency, and business opportunities that Coast Guard communities are asking for and deserve. We appreciate your close attention to this matter and look forward to your response. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, along with U.S. Senators Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), released the following statement condemning the Maduro regime’s ongoing campaign of intimidation against opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, her family, and peaceful protestors across Venezuela: “On July 28, despite arbitrary candidate bans, rampant censorship, and organized intimidation, Nicolas Maduro suffered a resounding electoral defeat by the people of Venezuela. Their overwhelming support for Edmundo González Urrutia sent a clear message to
...Read more Maduro, Diosdado Cabello, Padrino Lopez, and all his enablers: state-sponsored violence and disinformation will never silence Venezuela’s cry for freedom. The world has heard this cry, and we will not ignore it. “We call on the Maduro regime to immediately release the thousands of political prisoners unjustly held in its custody – peaceful protestors, women, and children included. The relentless harassment and intimidation of opposition leader Maria Corina Machado and her family are shameless acts of desperation. Maduro must uphold international law, honor Venezuela’s obligations under the Vienna Convention, and end threats to opposition figures who have sought refuge in the Argentine Embassy in Caracas, under the protection of the Brazilian government. “The Maduro regime must respect the results of the July 28 election and conduct a peaceful transfer of power to the democratic opposition. While last week’s announcement of a UN Human Rights Council probe into Maduro’s efforts to subvert Venezuela’s election is a welcome step forward, this alone is not enough. The Biden administration and incoming Trump administration must intensify efforts to address the Maduro regime’s abuses, as true accountability and lasting justice are only possible through sustained action. The U.S. Congress remains firmly dedicated to championing policies to support the Venezuelan people in their enduring pursuit of democracy – a dedication that will never waver.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) introduced the Vision Lab Choice Act of 2024, legislation to allow clinicians to use the medical labs of their choosing and lower costs for both patients and doctors. There are currently just two Vision Benefit Managers (VBMs) that dominate the vision insurance market, providing coverage to two-thirds of Americans with vision benefits. These VBMs often own the frame and lens manufacturers and control which labs an optometrist can use – a dynamic that has resulted in less autonomy for providers and more limited choices for their patients. The Vision Lab Choice Act of 2024 would amend Title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act to allow optometrists to choose the best labs and suppliers for their
...Read more practice, ensuring patients receive high-quality, personalized vision care. “Right now, VBMs control practically every part of the vision industry – the insurance plans, the manufacturers for frames and lenses, the vision labs – and they use that power to eliminate choice and drive up costs for doctors and patients,” said Murphy. “This bill would solve a small piece of that problem by making sure optometrists aren’t forced to use a VBMs preferred vision lab. Instead, they’ll have the freedom to choose labs that lower costs and cut wait times for patients.” “Vision Benefit Managers are often a hurdle to optometrists and eye care specialists providing the best care to their patients,” said Cramer. “Expanding consumer choice benefits patients when service is improved. I joined Senator Murphy in introducing the bipartisan Vision Lab Choice Act of 2024, so doctors will have more autonomy over which labs they work with and where they source their materials.” Specifically, the Vision Lab Choice Act of 2024 would: Limit contracts between vision care providers (e.g., optometrists) and insurers for limited-scope vision benefits to two-year terms; and
Prohibit health plans from restricting or limiting doctors’ choice of laboratories and sources or suppliers of vision materials provided to patients The bill is endorsed by the American Optometric Association, National Consumers League, Patients Rising, and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) Global Policy Initiative. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less As Congress moves to increase scrutiny of vision benefit managers (VBMs) for what it considers to be anti-patient and anti-competitive practices, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) has proposed a bill seeking to address a part of the issue. The bill, shared exclusively with Hartford Business Journal, is called the Vision Lab Choice Act of 2024 and would prohibit insurance plans from requiring doctors to use labs owned by the insurer. That would give optometrists freedom to choose the lab they use, potentially lowering costs for both the patient and provider, Murphy said. He noted that there are two dominant VBMs nationally that provide two-thirds of Americans with vision benefits: VSP Vision Care and EyeMed Vision Care. The American Optometrists Association (AOA) says approximately 200 million
...Read more Americans have a vision benefits plan that provides preventive eye exams and materials such as glasses or contacts. “Right now, VBMs control practically every part of the vision industry — the insurance plans, the manufacturers for frames and lenses, the vision labs — and they use that power to eliminate choice and drive up costs for doctors and patients,” Murphy said. “This bill would solve a small piece of that problem by making sure optometrists aren’t forced to use a VBM’s preferred vision lab.” In November, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding documents from the Department of Justice to evaluate the effect on patients of the consolidation among VBMs and their vertical integration with manufacturers and retailers. The AOA is also seeking to reduce the power of VBMs, backing broader bills proposed in the House by Reps. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) and Yvette Clarke, (D-N.Y.), and in the Senate by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), that also seek to address the controlling practices of VBMs. “Special legal treatment for and a lack of competition among vision benefit managers has led to costly, choice-limiting mandates being forced on patients and their doctors — leading to higher prices and less access to care for patients, while doctors face the tough choice of providing needed care to neighbors or keeping their practices viable,” the AOA said. An aide to Murphy said the senator is aware of the other bills, but that his is a more “tailored piece” of legislation that is narrower in scope to specifically address the vertical integration of VBMs in the hope that it will be included in an end-of-year package in Congress. The National Association of Vision Care Plans (NAVCP), which has 33 members, including VSP and EyeMEd, who combined insure approximately 66% (218 million) of all Americans in all 50 states and Puerto Rico, say their benefit plans “drive healthy vision behavior, including regular eye tests and up-to-date vision correction,” while helping to identify serious eye and chronic disease, such as diabetes and high blood pressure, ensuring a healthier workforce. The NAVCP states on its website that its members’ benefits plans also control costs, “assuring its quality, both for the plan beneficiaries and the payor (typically, the employer or group).” NAVCP declined to comment Friday on Murphy’s bill. Dr. Brian Lynch, an optometrist in Branford, says the vision coverage market is “broken.” "Two large, vertically integrated (VBMs) now dominate the market in our state and across the country — and they use that dominance to set prices and force doctors and patients to buy the goods they make and use the services they own, including optical laboratories,” Lynch said. He added that the Vision Lab Choice Act is based on a law that already exists in Connecticut, and will ensure that “that VBMs regulated at the federal level can no longer sidestep our state protections." According to the AOA, while 45 states have enacted legislation addressing vision and/or dental plan abuses, roughly one-third to one-half of plans operating in any given state are able to sidestep state laws because they are federally regulated. “That is why a federal effort is now needed,” the AOA said. Lynch supports Murphy’s bill, which he said will “prevent abusive VBMs from forcing patients and their doctors to use the optical labs owned by the VBM itself — helping to ease costs, significantly lessen wait times for finished prescription eyeglasses, and giving patients and their doctors the freedom to choose the lab that works best for them.” Read less A week after Donald Trump won the presidency again, I sat across from Chris Murphy in his minimalist but well-appointed D.C. office. The Connecticut senator sounded like a man who had done a speedrun through all five stages of grief and was ready to talk about what comes next: how his party could learn from its loss and win over—or win back—voters in 2026 and 2028. “I have thought for a long time that there’s a race between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party,” Murphy told me. “And the question is: Does the Republican Party become more economically populist in a genuine way before the Democratic Party opens itself up to people who don’t agree with us on 100 percent of our social and cultural issues?” Murphy is onto something. The politics of the average American are
...Read more not well represented by either party right now. On economic issues, large majorities of the electorate support progressive positions: They say that making sure everyone has health-care coverage is the government’s responsibility (62 percent), support raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour (62 percent), strongly or somewhat support free public college (63 percent), and are in favor of federal investment in paid family and medical leave (73 percent). They also support more government regulation of a variety of industries including banking (53 percent), social media (60 percent), pharmaceuticals (68 percent), and artificial intelligence (72 percent). Yet large majorities of this same American public also take conservative positions on social issues: They think the Supreme Court was right to overturn affirmative action (68 percent), agree that trans athletes should compete only on teams that match their gender assigned at birth (69 percent), believe that third-trimester abortions should be illegal in most circumstances (70 percent), and are at least somewhat concerned about the number of undocumented immigrants entering the country (79 percent). These facts are not especially convenient for either Democrats or Republicans, which is no doubt why both sides have failed to put forward platforms that represent these views. But lately, more political insiders from both parties have been willing to acknowledge the problem and admit that it’s time to move on from neoliberalism, the political ideology that champions market solutions, deregulation, the privatization of public services, and a general laissez-faire approach to the economy. Substantial obstacles confront populists on both the left and right. Democrats must contend with a college-educated base and party establishment that embraces maximalist positions on social issues, while Republicans must contend with substantial libertarian cliques. But whichever party figures out how to advance a meaningful post-neoliberal platform could unlock a winning and durable political coalition. Murphy is doing his best to make sure that his side of the aisle beats the Republicans, but he seems far from certain that it will. In an MSNBC interview after the election, the senator sketched out something of a road map for Democrats: “We should return to the party we were in the ’70s and ’80s, when we had economics as the tent pole and then we let in people who thought differently than us on other social and cultural issues.” Murphy was quick to add that this reinvention—or rather, reversion—will be challenging to pull off. “That’s a difficult thing for the Democratic Party to do, because we’ve applied a lot of litmus tests over the years,” he observed. “Those litmus tests have added up to a party that is pretty exclusionary and is shrinking, not growing.” In the days and weeks after the election, I spoke with post-neoliberal economists, academics, and leaders of major political nonprofits on the left and the right. Almost all of those I interviewed shared Murphy’s view that America’s political parties are in an arms race to capture what the senator called, in a 2022 essay for The New Republic, the “silent majority of Americans who want more economic control, more social connection, and more moral markets.” It is a race that some worry the Republicans are winning. Although few on the populist right view Trump as the genuine article—they tend to politely describe the president-elect as a “transitional figure”—he has nominated post-neoliberal and populist sympathizers to major positions in his second administration: Senator Marco Rubio, an industrial-policy aficionado, for secretary of state; the pro-union Representative Lori Chavez-DeRemer for labor secretary; the Big Tech skeptic Gail Slater to lead the Justice Department’s antitrust division; and, of course, J. D. Vance, whose rise to vice president–elect was greeted with trepidation by Wall Street despite his tech-venture-capital background. Still, most of those I interviewed shared the view that Trump will likely squander his populist goodwill with tax cuts for billionaires and other anti-populist agenda items during his term. This should produce an opening for the populist left, but there remains a deeper and perhaps more intractable problem: The GOP appears to be locking into place a multiracial coalition of the non-college-educated. These are voters who may prove easier for liberals to lose than to win back. If the Democrats have any hope of once again being the party of the working class, Murphy and others believe, they need to recognize that Americans are desperate for meaning and community. The language Murphy used in his New Republic essay—invoking morality, self-worth, and social connection—is omnipresent in post-neoliberal discourse. The movement’s chief exponents believe that neoliberalism has not only created an economic disaster, but its emphasis on ruthless individualism has also created a crisis of political and social meaning. In the view of Murphy and others, any post-neoliberal politics must cultivate a new social ethic rooted in dignified and fairly remunerated labor. Many of these prominent post-neoliberals, some of them affiliated with the same think tanks and nonprofits that once helped establish the neoliberal consensus, seem convinced that there’s a massive voting bloc waiting to be activated: Americans who are moderate or even small-c conservative on social issues, but who also favor a more aggressive, rabble-rousing attack on the country’s existing economic system. “We have not convinced voters in this country that we are serious about redistributing power from people who have it to people who don’t have it,” Murphy lamented to me. “The solutions we’ve proposed are largely small-ball, largely adjustments to the existing market. We don’t talk about power in the way that Republicans talk about power.” Others agreed. Although many observed that Joe Biden has been arguably the most pro-labor president in decades and has often broken with neoliberal orthodoxy in areas such as industrial policy, they also felt that he never quite captured the narrative or claimed credit for his substantial accomplishments. In other words: There was a widespread sense among the people I spoke with that Biden had working-class policies without working-class politics. “The Democratic Party didn’t show that it was really backing the concerns of ordinary people strongly enough, and wasn’t identifying well enough with how they saw the world,” Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize–winning economist and longtime critic of neoliberalism, told me. For many (though not all) post-neoliberals, the heart of their economic vision is “pre-distribution,” a concept popularized by the political scientist Jacob Hacker. Whereas center-left neoliberals tend to favor redistributive tax-and-transfer policies—allowing an unchained market to generate robust growth, and then blunting resulting economic disparities by taking some of the gains from the system’s winners and redistributing them to the system’s working-class “losers,” reducing inequality after the fact—post-neoliberals generally believe that it is better to avoid generating such inequalities in the first place. “The moral of this story,” Hacker explains in a 2011 paper, “is that progressive reformers need to focus on market reforms that encourage a more equal distribution of economic power and rewards even before government collects taxes or pays out benefits.” As Hacker (perhaps accidentally) implies with his invocation of the story’s “moral,” pre-distribution advocates often justify this strategy in ethical or even spiritual terms: Empowering workers to secure better pay and working conditions—say, through unions and sectoral bargaining—is about restoring dignity and revitalizing labor-based forms of community. “Most people don’t want a handout,” Chris Murphy recently posted on social media. “They want the rules unrigged so they can succeed on their own.” Although some on the left (not unreasonably) disliked the way the senator described certain redistributionist policies as “handouts,” these vocabulary complaints distract from Murphy’s deeper point. Honest labor is a source of pride, and populists should want an economy where most Americans are paid fairly for work they feel good about rather than suffering poverty wages and waiting for cash floats that keep them above water. “Most people need opportunities for meaningful work and social recognition in order to feel that their goals in life are worthwhile,” the philosopher Daniel Chandler observed in his recent book Free and Equal, which received coverage in both mainstream liberal and left-wing media. “By focusing on increasing market incomes, especially from employment, predistribution helps to maintain the healthy connection between contribution and reward that might be lost if we relied too heavily on redistribution. At the same time, it takes seriously the importance of work for people’s sense of self-respect.” As Chandler and others see it, many Democrats’ inability to grasp the fact that it matters to people not only that they have financial resources but how they acquire them has left the party unable to understand why voters don’t reward them for their largesse. Larry Kramer, a former president of the Hewlett Foundation and the current president of the London School of Economics, echoed this view. He insisted to me that reaching the working class is about more than just material conditions: “It’s not economic. It’s political economy.” In his telling, liberals get so wrapped up debating how the economy should be organized that we forget to ask what moral and political ends—that is, what vision of the good life and what kinds of values—markets are supposed to secure in the first place. Many Democratic insiders believe that post-neoliberal economic policies alone are not sufficient to win back American workers. Social issues will also need to be reconsidered. Stiglitz pointed to immigration as one place where Democrats may need to compromise, a view he shares with others in his post-neoliberal cohort. Murphy helped write a defeated bipartisan border-security bill that would have added Border Patrol officers and made asylum standards more stringent; some critics characterized it as “hard-right.” Last year, a hotly discussed book by the socialist journalist John B. Judis and the liberal political scientist Ruy Teixeira likewise packaged a withering critique of neoliberalism with a call to embrace more conservative positions on immigration. Chandler’s Free and Equal also quietly endorsed claims that increased immigration depresses wages for low earners and strains public resources. As Chandler argues, “High levels of immigration can make it more difficult to create a stable sense of political community and national identity.” Gun control is another area where flexibility may be prudent in order to be competitive in certain parts of the country. Democrats will have to accommodate people like Dan Osborn, the independent who, though he lost his bid to represent Nebraska in the Senate, outperformed Kamala Harris while combining a vocal defense of the Second Amendment with proudly pro-union politics. Teixeira and Judis flagged a third topic, gender identity, where Democrats ought to respond to the public’s concerns. That begins by making room for conversations that don’t involve accusations of bigotry, or insisting that the very act of asking questions about terms such as people with the capacity for pregnancy is tantamount to challenging the right of trans Americans to exist or exposing them to harm. For Judis and Teixeira, that requires making more granular distinctions between culture-war battles such as fairness in sports—where good-faith disagreement is possible—and important efforts to provide trans Americans the kind of universalist safeguards won in earlier civil-rights movements. LGBTQ groups’ effort to “protect transgender people from discrimination in housing, employment, and school admission falls well within America’s democratic tradition,” they write. But they also warn that activist demands outside this scope are “attempt[s] to impose a new social conformity based on a dubious notion of gender.” More than anything, liberals need to understand that many Americans—especially those in the working class—feel unheard. Their trust will be won back not through quick fixes, but by treating those without a college education or with more conservative social views as equal participants in our national dialogue. “The debate is still alive inside our party. But the post-neoliberals are clearly ascendant,” Murphy told me. He argued that his fellow Democrats need to be more open to dissenting viewpoints, and that expanding the tent will involve a fight: “I am not making an argument that the core Democratic Party do a left turn and reorient our position on choice, climate, or guns. I am arguing that we allow people into the tent … so that we have a little bit more robust conversation, and potentially a little bit more diversity on those issues inside the coalition.” The soul-searching that is before the Democrats will require liberals to engage with views they find discomfiting, and to reckon with the fact that their social values are out of keeping with the working-class majorities they profess to represent. Democrats must figure out where there is room to compromise. And where compromise is not possible—or truly unjust—they must begin the slow-grinding work of persuasion. “We cannot successfully engage with people whose inner lives we do not even try to understand,” a recent report from the stalwartly liberal think tank the Roosevelt Institute concludes. Whether left-wing liberals are open to doing this remains to be seen. “It’s not clear that if we blow it in two or four years time that there’s another shot at this apple for Dems,” Jennifer Harris, a Hewlett Foundation director and former Biden-administration official, suggested when describing the Democratic Party’s need for a post-neoliberal makeover. In her view, the prize for such a transformation may prove to be not just a near-term political victory, but a Franklin D. Roosevelt–style stranglehold on the electorate: “There is potentially a lot of political spoils.” Spoils indeed. Many on the left and right agree that the stakes are high, the reward prodigious, and the path forward obvious: Whichever party can credibly combine economic populism with moderate social positions will win elections. There is no mystery here. The problem is not the absence of a political solution but a deficit in political willpower. And the next election, and the elections to come, may well hinge on which party can muster the resolve to finally deliver real populism to the people. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (HELP), applauded the passage of the National Resource Center for Engaging Older Adults Act, legislation Murphy introduced to reduce loneliness and improve quality of life for older adults. The National Resource Center for Engaging Older Adults is an effort to increase the social engagement of older adults, people with disabilities, and caregivers by expanding and enhancing services that promote social connection. Murphy’s legislation would support the Center’s work to provide resources and programming to Area Agencies on Aging and community-based organizations like libraries and senior centers. The bill passed the Senate unanimously as part of a
...Read more reauthorization of the Older Americans Act and passed the HELP Committee by a bipartisan vote earlier this year. “The National Resource Center for Engaging Older Adults helps places like local libraries and senior centers reach out to two of the most socially isolated groups — adults with disabilities and seniors. Nothing is more important for finding happiness and fulfillment in life than having quality relationships with other people. I’m proud we got this done, and I’ll continue to look for ways the federal government can support local places that build community,” said Murphy. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, along with U.S. Senators Tina Smith (D-Minn.) and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) on Thursday reintroduced the Parity Enforcement Act, legislation to hold insurance companies accountable and give the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) the authority to assess civil monetary penalties for violations of mental health parity requirements. This new authority would incentivize compliance and strengthen the protections of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act. “Despite the fact that insurance companies are required by law to cover mental health the same way they cover physical health, insurers continue to find new ways to dodge compliance and
...Read more deny coverage of care so they can pad their profits. This is a simple bill to give the Department of Labor the power to enforce mental health parity laws and help ensure patients get the mental health care they need,” said Murphy. “We need to treat mental health with the same urgency we treat physical health, and that means making sure everyone has access to the care they need,” said Smith. “By law, insurance companies are required to provide mental health care as they provide physical health care, yet they continue to find ways to dodge compliance and deny coverage. This bill gives the federal government the teeth they need to hold insurance companies accountable when they don’t follow the law and bring us one step closer to ensuring that everyone has access to quality, affordable mental health care.” "Mental health treatment deserves the same seriousness that physical injury demands. The law demands it and yet far too many Americans go without mental health and behavioral health care because there is not parity for these essential services,” said Luján. “Enforcing mental health parity laws is crucial to holding insurance providers accountable and ensuring compliance. I’m proud to join Senators Murphy and Smith in reintroducing this legislation to strengthen mental health parity enforcement, empower the Department of Labor to address violations, and expand access to life-saving treatments." The bill is endorsed by the American Society of Addiction Medicine, the American Psychiatric Association, Inseparable, and the Kennedy Forum. “Ending discriminatory insurer practices is critical to increasing access to evidence-based treatment for substance use disorders and co-occurring mental health conditions. The American Society of Addiction Medicine fully supports the Parity Enforcement Act of 2024, which would provide much-needed enforcement of existing federal parity law and help more Americans access the comprehensive addiction care they need,” said Dr. Brian Hurley, president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM). "Every American should have the ability to access high-quality and effective mental health and substance use disorder care," said Marketa M. Wills, M.D., M.B.A., CEO and Medical Director of the American Psychiatric Association (APA). "APA applauds Senator Murphy’s work to ensure access to care by empowering the Department of Labor to enforce mental health parity law and impose civil monetary penalties on health plans and insurers in violation." "We commend Senator Chris Murphy for introducing the Parity Enforcement Act," said Laurel Stine, J.D., M.A., Executive Vice President and Chief Policy Officer of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. "This much-needed bill will help prevent suicide by supporting enforcement of existing mental health parity laws, making mental health care and substance use treatment more affordable and accessible for all." Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02) on Wednesday celebrated the unanimous passage of H.R. 8753 by the U.S. House of Representatives. The bipartisan legislation includes a provision requiring the U.S. Postal Service to assign a single ZIP code to the town of Scotland, Connecticut. Scotland, a town of just 600 residences, has six zip-codes, often leading to misplaced packages, difficulty requesting mail-in ballots, and uncertainty about where to send students to school. In March, Murphy and Courtney joined forces to introduce bicameral legislation (H.R. 7800 and S. 4052) to direct the USPS to assign Scotland a single zip code. On November 21st, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform approved the House bill, 40-
...Read more 0, as part of a larger package (H.R. 8753), sponsored by Rep. Boebert (R-CO), to address zip-code issues for Americans in 45 towns nationwide. “The people of Scotland have suffered long enough from the logistical nightmare of having six zip codes for one town. It’s great news the House passed this bill, and I’m doing everything I can to make sure the Senate does the same,” said Murphy. “With passage of this bill, the voices of Scotland residents have been heard loud and clear in Washington and we are one step closer to once and for all solving this Monty Python-esque absurdity. Senator Murphy and I will continue working together to get this bill through the Senate and to the President’s desk for signature. The hardworking, taxpaying citizens of Scotland deserve to get the same level of postal service as every other community,” said Courtney. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01) and Jim Himes (D-Conn-04) joined Governor Ned Lamont and the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) to announce that the cities of Bridgeport, Bristol, and Stamford will receive more than $9.8 million in competitive federal funding to benefit four municipal park development projects in each city. The funds are provided through the Land and Water Conservation Fund – Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership grants program (LWCF-ORLP), a nationally competitive program that provides matching grants to cities for park projects in underserved communities. “Public parks are one of the few places where people in the
...Read more community can come together, spend time outdoors, and connect with friends and neighbors,” said Murphy. “This $9 million in federal funding will help create a new park in Bridgeport and support upgrades to Rockwell, Boccuzzi, and Cummings Parks in Bristol and Stamford, giving Connecticut families more opportunities to enjoy fun outdoor activities like hiking, picnicking, and kayaking for years to come.” “Connecticut families should have access to high-quality parks where they can come together, stay active, and enjoy the outdoors, regardless of where they live,” said Blumenthal. “This $9.8 million in federal funding expands access to parks in Bridgeport, Bristol, and Stamford, and I will continue fighting for federal investments to reinvigorate and develop Connecticut’s outdoor spaces.” “I am glad to see nearly $2 million coming to Bristol through the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund to make long overdue repairs and improvements to Rockwell Park,” said Larson. “This funding will modernize amenities, upgrade facilities, expand park hours, and improve access. I will continue to work with the entire Connecticut delegation and our partners at the state and local levels to secure investments like these that preserve access to outdoor spaces and offer new recreational opportunities for residents.” “Investing in urban parks is a no brainer,” said Himes. “They provide places for families to gather and children to play, as well as help improve air quality and lower temperatures in our cities. This nearly $8 million investment will tangibly impact people’s lives in Stamford and Bridgeport by transforming these public lands into beautiful, accessible areas of recreation where communities can come together and rejoice in all the outdoors has to offer.” “Great parks and safe outdoor places for our communities enhances the great quality of life we have here in Connecticut,” said Lamont. “I thank our Congressional delegation and federal agency partners for their efforts to secure this important funding for our state. This is a great example of federal, state, and local governments working together to accomplish big things for the residents of our state.” Bridgeport receives $1 million for Sliver by the River Bridgeport is receiving $1,062,454 for its project called Sliver by the River that will transform a vacant lot into a three-acre riverside park. The park will feature a kayak launch, fishing pier, playscape, shade pavilion, terraced lawn with seating, lighting, and native plantings. This is the pilot project for Bridgeport’s initiative to create an interconnected series of waterfront parks and amenities along the 22 miles of riverfront area within the city. The city’s application was developed through a partnership with the City of Bridgeport and the Trust for Public Land, with initial input and technical support from the National Park Service’s Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance group (RTCA). Bristol receives $1.9 million for Rockwell Park Bristol is receiving $1,930,000 for long-overdue improvements to modernize Rockwell Park, often considered the crown jewel of the City of Bristol system of parks. Significant renovations have not been made to the park in almost 20 years, and currently many of the facilities incur massive maintenance costs to keep safe for the public. Some facilities are even on the verge of being unusable. With this award, the city will renovate popular and heavily utilized amenities within the 105-acre park, including the splash park, playgrounds, outdoor pool, and bathhouse. The award will also allow for ADA improvements on existing trails and Fraser Field, new basketball court lighting, installation of a new fitness track, and improvements to the existing 18-hole disc golf course. These improvements will modernize existing park amenities, improve visitor experiences and expand park hours and accessibility in Bristol’s most heavily visited park. Stamford receives $6.8 million for Boccuzzi Park, Cummings Park, West Beach Stamford will receive funding for two separate projects. For improvements to Boccuzzi Park, it will receive $1,811,075. Improvements will include the addition of a splash pad, the creation of a new multi-use field and event space, as well as a new dog park and basketball court. The city will also upgrade its existing children’s playground, create additional parking and install new landscaping throughout the park. For improvements at Cummings Park and West Beach, Stamford will receive $5,000,000. The city will resurface and expand parking lots, renovate restrooms and park maintenance facilities, install tennis/pickleball courts, a softball field and convert an unused parking lot into a playscape area. Many of these repairs are needed from damage created by Superstorm Sandy. The city will also add a scour wall to protect facilities from future storms, replace the eroded beach promenade, and renovate outdoor showers as well as a lifeguard storage area. The improvements will also include landscaping with native plants throughout both facilities. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chair of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Sunday released a statement following reports that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad resigned and fled the country after armed rebels took control of the capital city of Damascus: “For more than two decades, the regime of Bashar al-Assad, and of his father who ruled before him, has relied on brutality and oppression to cling to power, torturing and jailing activists and political dissidents, mercilessly killing hundreds of thousands of Syrians, and forcing millions more to flee their homes and country. The toppling of his regime represents a watershed moment for the Syrian people, who now have an
...Read more opportunity to shape a better future. We know that too often, hopeful revolutions have given way to new power struggles, and there are serious concerns about the nature of some of the groups who have swept into power. Decisions by the new de facto authorities and the willingness of the international community to play a constructive role in Syria will be critical going forward. I urge all parties to support an inclusive political process that protects the rights of all Syrian communities and works towards a free, secure democratic future.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Friday released the following statement on the need to expand the Darfur arms embargo during the United States’ presidency of the UN Security Council: “As the United States assumes the Presidency of the UN Security Council this month, I strongly support Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield’s commitment to using our role to shine a spotlight on the humanitarian catastrophe in Sudan. While our Mission works with partners to set the Council’s agenda for December, we must make it a priority to enforce the Darfur arms embargo and further expand it to cover the entirety of Sudan. While I am grateful the Security Council recently unanimously decided to extend the embargo until September 2025,
...Read more combatants on both sides of the conflict continue to receive a steady flow of weapons and ammunition from all corners of the country. In turn, both the RSF and SAF use these weapons to continue their brutal campaigns and terrorize innocent civilians. The foreign governments and businesses responsible for violating the embargo, including the United Arab Emirates and Russia, are directly responsible for perpetuating the horrific conflict, which has killed tens of thousands of civilians and become the most severe displacement crisis in the world. The Security Council must step up to expand the embargo and take the necessary steps to hold those responsible for violating it accountable. With December’s presidency, I hope the United States will use all leverage at our disposal to end the bloodshed and bring this devastating conflict to a close.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday joined U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03) in calling on the U.S. Department of Education to discharge student loan debt for hundreds of thousands of students who were defrauded by predatory schools. During the first Trump administration, defrauded borrowers’ applications for debt relief were left to languish for years, and if reviewed, were often denied. In their letter today, the lawmakers called for the Department to use its authority to immediately discharge debt. Since 2022, the Department has announced group discharges for more than
...Read more 1.2 million individuals who attended schools that engaged in documented fraud and misconduct, including ITT Technical Institute and Corinthian Colleges. Yet, hundreds of thousands of borrowers are still awaiting their discharges. Many additional borrowers are eligible for borrower defense group discharge because they attended schools for which the Department possesses evidence of fraud and misconduct; 400,000 borrowers have submitted individual applications for borrower defense discharges that the Department has yet to process. “The Biden administration has demonstrated a commitment to supporting student borrowers and mitigating the devastating impact of student loan debt, including issuing targeted debt relief to hundreds of thousands of borrowers defrauded by predatory higher education institutions,” the lawmakers wrote. The lawmakers continued: “We urge the Department of Education to follow through on its commitment by immediately processing debt discharges for borrowers already approved for relief; issuing additional discharges for students who attended institutions with documented histories of predatory practices; and processing any outstanding borrower defense applications.” U.S. Senators Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), and Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.) also signed the letter. In the House of Representatives, U.S. Representatives Maxine Waters (D-Calif.-43), André Carson (D-Ind.-07), Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.-07), Robin L. Kelly (D-Ill.-02), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.-09), Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.-15), Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.-13), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.-07), Julia Brownley (D-Calif.-26), Erica Lee Carter (D-Texas-18), Gwen S. Moore (D-Wis.-04), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.-12), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas-20), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.-05), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12), Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.-02), Alma S. Adams Ph.D. (D-N.C.-12), Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.-20), Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.-15), Cori Bush (D-Mo.-01), Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.-06), Greg Casar (D-Texas-35), Mark Takano (D-Calif.-39), Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.-10), Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.-10), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.-07), Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.-03), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.-14), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.-12), Nydia M. Velázquez (D-N.Y.-07), Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.-24), Lucy McBath (D-Ga.-07), Jesús G. “Chuy” García (D-Ill.-04), Summer L. Lee (D-Pa.-12), Yvette D. Clarke (D-N.Y.-09), Al Green (D-Texas-09), Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.-14), Dwight Evans (D-Pa.-03), Frederica S. Wilson (D-Fla.-17), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.-04), Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.-01), Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.-14), LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.-10), Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.-07), Adam Smith (D-Wash.-09), Sylvia R. Garcia (D-Texas-29), Nanette Diaz Barragán (D-Calif.-44), Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio-03), Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.-13), Jennifer L. McClellan (D-Va.-04), Sean Casten (D-Ill.-06), Grace Meng (D-N.Y.-06), Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.-34), Nikema Williams (D-Ga.-05), and Robert Garcia (D-Calif.-42) also signed the letter. The full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Cardona, The Biden administration has demonstrated a commitment to supporting student borrowers and mitigating the devastating impact of student loan debt, including issuing targeted debt relief to hundreds of thousands of borrowers defrauded by predatory higher education institutions. We urge the Department of Education (Department) to follow through on its commitment by immediately processing debt discharges for borrowers already approved for relief; issuing additional discharges for students who attended institutions with documented histories of predatory practices; and processing any outstanding borrower defense applications. Too many student borrowers have been preyed on by predatory schools, most of which are for-profit colleges. These for-profit colleges have a long history of disproportionately enrolling veterans, low-income students, students of color, homeless students, and first-generation college students and falsely promising high-quality jobs after graduation. Unfortunately, too many of these borrowers were saddled with debilitating debt, often without a degree to show for it. Debt has forced many of these borrowers to put their economic lives on hold, forgoing buying homes and starting families. The Department must take three concrete steps to help these student borrowers. First, the Department must immediately discharge the student loans for the hundreds of thousands of students who the Department has already committed to providing borrower defense debt relief. Since 2022, the Department has announced group discharges for more than 1.2 million individuals who attended schools that engaged in documented fraud and misconduct, including: Art Institutes – 317,000 students (May 2024)
Phoenix University – 1,200 students (September 2023)
Ashford University – 2,300 students (August 2023)
CollegeAmerica – 7,400 students (July 2023)
Westwood College – 79,000 students (August 2022)
ITT Technical Institute – 208,000 students (August 2022)
Kaplan Career Institute – 100 students (August 2022)
Corinthian Colleges – 560,000 students (June 2022)
Marinello Schools of Beauty – 28,200 students (April 2022)
DeVry University – 1,800 students (February 2022)
Minnesota School of Business/Globe University – 270 students (July 2021) However, according to recent court filings, hundreds of thousands of these borrowers still await relief. For example, as of October 31, 2024, more than 25 percent of Corinthian Colleges’ borrowers await their discharges, and many others await promised refunds of amounts previously paid. The Department must immediately process debt relief for these borrowers. Second, the Department must use its authority under the Higher Education Act to issue group discharges for the millions of borrowers who attended other institutions with documented histories of predatory practices. These institutions are included in the appendix. The Department should promptly issue findings and utilize its authority to fully discharge the student loan balances of borrowers who attended the schools listed. Substantial evidence of misconduct already exists for each of these schools. Defrauded students should not be left holding the bag for institutions that no longer exist. Third, the Department must process any remaining applications for borrower defense discharge. These borrowers completed an onerous application to demonstrate that they were victims of fraud, but the Department has yet to act. Though the Department has not shared its number with Congress or the public, an estimated 400,000 borrowers have pending applications for borrower defense discharge. By processing existing group discharges and issuing findings for additional group discharges, the Department will eliminate much of the backlog in remaining borrower defense applications, efficiently delivering relief. Additionally, the Department must process any remaining borrower defense applications as soon as possible. Under the previous Trump Administration, borrowers’ applications were allowed to languish for years. If their application was reviewed, borrowers often were denied and granted no relief. Then-Education Secretary DeVos denied nearly 130,000 borrower defense applications. It is imperative that the Department provide immediate relief to borrowers. Borrowers who attended fraudulent schools and have struggled with debt for years, or even decades, cannot afford to wait any longer. We thank you for your attention to this urgent issue and look forward to working together to ensure that all students who were victims of predatory practices receive relief. Sincerely, ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Wednesday that Koster Keunen, based in Watertown, was named “Innovator of the Month” for its leadership in natural wax production and technology. Founded in 1852, Koster Keunen specializes in the ethical development, processing, and manufacturing of wax ingredients and derivatives. The company pioneered the world’s first certified, 100% sustainably sourced beeswax and operates its Watertown facility with a 660kW solar array, offsetting nearly 900 tons of carbon emissions each year. “Koster Keunen’s innovation and commitment to sustainability highlights the power of Connecticut businesses to lead on a global scale. I’m proud to recognize this family-owned business for its pioneering efforts to create ethical, environmentally
...Read more friendly solutions and pave the way for better working conditions around the world,” said Murphy. “This award is a testament to the values that have guided my family and our company for five generations. It's a recognition of our deep-rooted commitment to sustainability, community empowerment, and ethical business practices. To be acknowledged on a global stage for these efforts is truly humbling,” said John Koster, President of Koster Keunen. “At Koster Keunen, we believe innovation is the driving force behind sustainability and creating positive global impact. We are proud to be a Connecticut-based company, contributing to the state's rich legacy of ingenuity and environmental stewardship.” Koster Keunen was awarded the 2024 U.S. Secretary of State Award for Corporate Excellence in Innovation to Strengthen Communities, which recognizes U.S. companies that uphold high standards of ethical conduct, promote human rights and community development, and demonstrate environmental and social responsibility in their overseas operations. The recognition shines a spotlight on the positive impact Koster Keunen has made all over the world, where the company has partnered with local communities to empower local entrepreneurs and promote sustainable beekeeping practices. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced the Fair Ball Act, legislation that would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to ensure minor league baseball players receive minimum wage and overtime protections, unless they are already protected under a collective bargaining agreement. The bill seeks to repeal provisions of the 2018 Save America’s Pastime Act, which exempted teams from adhering to federal minimum wage and overtime requirements, while encouraging MLB to uphold collective bargaining agreements and ensuring those exemptions cannot be used as leverage in future negotiations. “Connecticut fans know how much minor league teams like the Hartford Yard Goats mean to our communities,” said Murphy. “But for years, the athletes who
...Read more work hard to make it all possible have been left behind by outdated and unfair labor laws. The Fair Ball Act is about righting a wrong and making sure minor league players get the fair pay and protections they deserve.” “Minor League Baseball players deserve to be fairly compensated when their determination, diligence, and discipline drive millions in revenue for MLB owners,” said Blumenthal. “Unfortunately, MLB has worked vigorously to lobby for loopholes to avoid paying a minimum wage. I’m proud to support the Fair Ball Act which will shore up protections for Minor League Baseball players ensuring they receive fair compensation and that they’re able to continue fighting for increased wages and benefits.” In 2018, Major League Baseball successfully lobbied for legislation to shield itself from a class-action lawsuit alleging the league and its teams violated federal and state wage and hour laws. The league argued that 2018 legislation would protect Minor League teams from being contracted only to contract dozens of Minor League Baseball teams just two years later. The new Fair Ball Act would help protect Minor League players and the gains they have made to earn a living wage as a result of their historic unionization under the Major League Baseball Players Association in 2022 and subsequent collective bargaining agreement with Major League Baseball. U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Peter Welch (D-Vt), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) also cosponsored the legislation. The legislation is endorsed by the Major League Baseball Players Association, American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, and the National Employment Law Project. The text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) applauded Senate passage of the bipartisan Slow Down, Move Over resolution, which raises awareness of Slow Down, Move Over state laws to reduce struck-by-vehicle injuries and fatalities and to recognize the important role fire and rescue personnel, emergency medical services personnel, law enforcement officers, tow truck operators, and transportation workers play in road safety. The resolution is inspired by Corey Iodice, a tow truck operator, who was tragically struck and killed on the Merritt Parkway in Connecticut in 2020 while assisting a driver. “When I walk across the state every year, I see firsthand how reckless driving endangers everyone on the road, especially our law enforcement, emergency
...Read more personnel, and transportation workers,” said Murphy. “With roadway deaths on the rise in Connecticut, this bipartisan resolution is a reminder of why Slow Down, Move Over laws are so important to helping prevent the tragedies that have already taken far too many lives.” “This year, State Trooper First Class Aaron Pelletier, Andrew DiDomenico, Jose Diaz Nieves, and Corey Iodice will be absent from family holiday dinner tables. They tragically lost their lives on Connecticut roads, and so many other preventable deaths and injuries occur on our roadways every year,” said Blumenthal. “Today, I’m proud that the Senate has passed this bipartisan resolution to promote greater adherence and stronger enforcement of Slow Down, Move Over laws to prevent these tragic deaths.” All 50 states have Slow Down, Move Over laws that direct motorists to reduce speed or change lanes for stopped emergency and maintenance vehicles. Still, many motorists are unaware of them and roadside fatalities and injuries continue. In 2023, 45 traffic incident management responders were killed in the United States due to roadside collisions. U.S. Senators Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) also cosponsored the resolution. The resolution is also supported by a number of organizations, including Towing and Recovery Association of America (TRAA), American Automobile Association (AAA), American Association of State Troopers, American Driver and Traffic Safety Education Association, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, Connecticut Department of Transportation, Eastern Transportation Coalition, Governors Highway Safety Association, International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), National Association of Police Organizations, National Association of State EMS Officials, National Safety Council, and Flagman. The text of the resolution is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday released the following statement after the Senate Democratic caucus voted to appoint him to the position of Deputy Conference Secretary within the Senate Democratic leadership team.
“I’m grateful to have a seat at the table as we chart the path forward for our party. In no uncertain terms, the American people sent us a message in November. If we want to win back working-class voters, we need to change how we fight and how we communicate. I look forward to working with Leader Schumer and the rest of the leadership team as we work to build a coalition to fight back against Trump's billionaire agenda in the upcoming Congress.”
###
WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday released the following statement on the developments in South Korea:
“President Yoon’s decision to declare martial law and deploy troops to the parliament was extraordinarily misguided and the National Assembly was right to quickly vote to reverse it. In declaring martial law, President Yoon aimed to bypass democratic processes and crush political dissent. South Korea has long been one of our most important allies, but this was a deeply troubling move by President Yoon, and I am glad the country’s institutions moved quickly to condemn it.”
###
WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined NBC News’s Meet the Press with Kristen Welker to discuss President-elect Donald Trump’s cabinet nominations. Murphy also discussed the path forward for the Democratic Party and the importance of shifting power away from billionaires and corporations and back to the American people. On President-elect Trump’s nomination of Kash Patel to serve as Director of the FBI, Murphy said: “I will vote no, and I will organize not just my colleagues, but the American public to understand what's happening here. Donald Trump told the American public during the campaign that he was going to turn the Department of Justice into a political operation, an arm of the White House, to destroy his political opponents, right. He said that the
...Read more greatest threat to America is the enemy within. And who he said was the enemy within was us – was journalists, were his political opponents. Kash Patel’s only qualification is [that] he agrees with Donald Trump that the Department of Justice should serve to punish, lock up, and intimidate Donald Trump's political opponents. Murphy continued: “The cost to the American public is pretty simple. The Department of Justice and the FBI [are] supposed to be there to go after drug traffickers, gun smugglers, to go after corrupt Wall Street financiers. Instead, the Department of Justice is going to serve Donald Trump's political interests. That's what Kash Patel has said he thinks the Department of Justice and the FBI should do, and that's why Republicans and Democrats should be examining how damaging this nomination could be to American democracy.” Murphy highlighted the fact that Trump is using his cabinet nominations to help enrich his billionaire friends: “What worries me about this cabinet is that it is essentially putting the billionaire class in charge of American government. The net worth of Donald Trump's nominees is greater than 169 countries. The folks that are being nominated to run the Department of Commerce, Treasury, Education, they don't understand what regular people are going through. All they see government as good for is enriching themselves and their billionaire friends, and so that is what the story of this cabinet is. It’s Donald Trump and the billionaire class taking over government to enrich themselves and screw everybody else in this country.” On Donald Trump’s threats to levy tariffs against China and Canada: “What we know is that Donald Trump has no idea how to use tariffs in order to create American jobs. He did impose tariffs during his four years in office, and we lost manufacturing jobs. Joe Biden knew how to use tariffs in coordination with subsidies and incentives for domestic manufacturing, such that while he was president, we grew manufacturing jobs. The headline here is that Donald Trump's entire economic policy is going to be about a massive tax break for those billionaires that are in charge of his cabinet. The tariffs are a distraction from what the real agenda is going to be - to be able to use government in order to dramatically increase the wealth of his Cabinet and the friends of that cabinet. Those tariffs, if they're not used properly, are just going to raise costs on ordinary Americans, while the billionaires get off scot-free.” On a memo Murphy recently published calling on Democrats to embrace a more populist agenda, he said: “I think we have to talk about power – who has it and who doesn't have it. I think some of the most important things that Joe Biden did were taking on the big corporations, going after their monopoly power, helping consumers with some of the really egregious fees and gimmicks that those companies used to hurt us… I think Democrats need to be much more aggressive in making this case that that power has been concentrated, and it needs to be returned to regular Americans. And that we need to be able to invite a lot of different Americans into that conversation, regardless of whether they line up with Democrats on every single social and cultural issue. Let's build a bigger tent.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chair of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Wednesday released the following statement on the Israeli and Lebanese governments’ approval of a ceasefire agreement. “Ending the hostilities between Israel and Lebanon is an important and necessary step toward de-escalating tensions in the Middle East and putting the region back on a path to stability. This agreement will cease the fighting in Lebanon, allow hundreds of thousands of displaced Israeli and Lebanese civilians to return to their homes, and secure Israel from the threat of Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations operating from Lebanon. The U.S. and France must continue working with our partners in both
...Read more Israel and Lebanon to ensure the agreement is implemented, the Lebanese Armed Forces are supported, and peace is restored on both sides of the border. Today’s announcement is a diplomatic breakthrough, and the U.S. must capitalize on this moment and push for a permanent ceasefire to end the war in Gaza.” ### Read less NORWICH–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02) on Friday applauded the decision of the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform to unanimously approve a bipartisan package which included their provision to mandate a single zip-code for the town of Scotland, Connecticut. Scotland has 600-plus residencies, but six zip-codes, leading to misplaced packages, difficulty requesting mail-in ballots, and uncertainty about where to send students to school. In March, Murphy and Courtney joined forces to introduce bicameral legislation (S. 4052 and H.R. 7800) to direct the USPS to assign Scotland a single zip code. On Wednesday, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform approved the House bill as part of a larger package (H.R. 8753),
...Read more sponsored by Rep. Boebert (R-CO), to address zip-code issues for Americans in 31 towns nationwide. “This is a simple bill to fix a complicated problem that would make a world of difference for the people of Scotland. I’m glad to see it advance in the House, and I’m pushing hard to get it done in the Senate,” said Murphy. “Tangible progress for the Town of Scotland, who has sought a solution to its nonsensical zip code plight that has festered for too long. By favorably reporting this legislation out of the House committee that has jurisdiction over the Postal Service, the voice of the people of Scotland is finally being heard in Washington,” said Courtney. “The Postal Service – who the town has worked with to seek relief to no avail – needs to pay attention to this bipartisan action that demonstrates small, rural communities – who depend on functional postal service – are serious about fixing zip code anomalies. Hopefully, Speaker Johnson will bring this measure to the full house for swift passage in the final days of 118th Congress.” “The members of the Scotland, CT Board of Selectmen are pleased to learn that H.R.8753 – ‘To direct the United States Postal Service to designate single, unique ZIP Codes for certain communities’—has been favorably reported out of the House Committee on Oversight, without opposition,” said Scotland First Selectman Dana Barrow Jr. and the Board of Selectmen. “We know that the legislative process is lengthy and there are many hurdles ahead, but this news is heartening after many years of futile efforts to solve a serious problem for the people of Scotland. Scotland residents face daily frustration with packages being misdelivered, service providers being unable to find their properties, and on-line ordering or registration systems refusing to accept their address information. But the issue goes beyond inconvenience. People have paid taxes to the wrong town and sent their children to the wrong schools. Town party committees and voluntary associations cannot effectively reach residents by mail. Public health statistics seriously understate the burden of disease in our town, and other survey data also misrepresent us. The situation is damaging to us individually and as a community. We want to thank Joe Courtney and his team for working to fix the problem, and all members of Congress who we trust will ultimately pass the legislation.” ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) on Friday announced $2.8 million in funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to lower costs, expand access to clean energy, and strengthen Connecticut’s small farms and rural small businesses. The funds are awarded through the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), a program that enables agricultural producers and rural small business owners to expand their use of wind, solar, geothermal and small hydropower energy and make energy efficiency improvements. “Delivering clean, reliable energy to our rural communities doesn’t just help us tackle climate change—it cuts household costs and improves public health. This $2.
...Read more 8 million in federal funding will make it more affordable for small farms and local businesses in rural areas to invest in energy-efficient upgrades like solar panels and battery retrofits, lowering energy bills for Connecticut families, reducing air and water pollution, and protecting our environment for generations to come,” said Murphy. “This $2.8 million in federal funding will bolster energy efficiency, lower costs, and support our farms and small businesses – a critical investment in our state’s environment and economy. I will continue fighting for federal support that strengthens Connecticut’s farmers and small business owners and allows them to grow and succeed,” said Blumenthal. "Eastern Connecticut is home to outstanding farmers, producers, and rural small businesses who rely on Congress to provide support and a level playing field to succeed. This new federal funding, made possible by the Inflation Reduction Act, will help CT farmers and rural businesses lower their operating costs by transitioning to cleaner energy systems. Kudos to the organizations who put forth competitive applications to secure this highly sought-after funding,” said Courtney. The funding announced today will support the following local projects: $787,413 for Commercial Sewing Inc. for the purchase and installation of a roof mounted photovoltaic (PV) solar system
$752,981 for Goldi-Locks Solar for the purchase and installation of a roof mounted PV solar system
$460,231 for Aider LLC for the purchase and installation of a roof and ground mounted PV solar system
$318,826 for Geissler’s Supermarkets Inc. for the purchase and installation of a roof mounted PV solar system
$249,900 for CSFS LLC for the purchase and installation of a roof mounted PV solar system
$168,250 for Geissler’s Supermarkets Inc. for energy efficient building upgrades
$50,000 for Howling Flats Farm LLC for the retrofitting of a battery energy storage system
$19,163 to Select Seeds Co Inc. for the purchase and installation of a more energy-efficient under-bench heating system
$14,654 for Full Heart Farm for the purchase and installation of a roof mounted PV solar system
$13,621 for Halfinger Farms for the purchase and installation of a ground mounted PV solar system REAP is a part of President Biden’s Justice40 Initiative which sets a goal that 40% of the benefits from certain federal investments go to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02) and John Larson (D-Conn.-01) on Friday led 18 Members of Congress in pushing for new legislation to improve the health and safety of military housing. In 2023, the Army found mold in more than 2,000 of its facilities after a service-wide inspection. That same year, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that service members in all twelve groups that the GAO interviewed considered mold to be a problem in barracks. For example, one servicemember that the GAO interviewed reported having had three visits to the emergency room due to respiratory issues attributed to the presence of mold in their barracks. The lawmakers’ bill, Healthy at Home on Base
...Read more Act, would support servicemembers living in military housing – as well as their families – by improving research on toxic mold in military housing on base. The bill would also create habitability standards for mold on military installations. Lastly, the bill would instate construction requirements for new housing on military installations so that servicemembers and their families are not becoming sick from preventable causes like toxic mold. “Ensuring the brave men and women who serve our country have a safe, healthy place to live is the least we can do. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation would take important steps to address toxic mold and ensure military housing meets the standards our servicemembers and their families deserve,” said Murphy. “We have a duty to our servicemembers and their families to ensure they have access to safe and healthy living conditions. Too many of our nation’s servicemembers—who make sacrifices every day in service to our country—have been subject to toxic mold and other dangerous conditions in military housing, often leading to preventable illnesses. With the Healthy at Home on Base Act, we make critical strides to improve the safety of military housing, making sure that the brave men and women who protect our nation are able to reside in healthy and hospitable housing,” said Blumenthal. “The Healthy at Home on Base Act directly contributes to our efforts on the House Armed Services Committee to make generational improvements to servicemembers’ quality of life,” said Courtney. “Far too many servicemembers and their families are living in barracks and military housing with toxic mold that poses serious health concerns. Our bipartisan, bicameral bill will provide the structural changes to rehab and prevent unhealthy conditions. I urge my colleagues in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees to include this measure in the final defense bill.” This measure was included in the House-passed FY25 National Defense Authorization Act. Earlier this month, lawmakers sent a letter to defense leaders in the House and Senate urging them to maintain the measure in the final, negotiated NDAA, which is expected to come before the Congress next month. U.S. Representatives James Moylan (R-Guam), Jen Kiggans (R-Va.), Nikema Williams (R-Ga.), Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), Gabe Amo (D-R.I.), Blake Moore (R-Utah), Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Neal Dunn (R-Fla.), Morgan McGarvey (D-Ky.), Greg Murphy (R-N.C.), Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaii), Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.), Buddy Carter (R-Ga.), Ed Case (D-Hawaii), Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.), Jason Crow (D-Colo.), and Mike Turner (R-Ohio) also cosponsored the legislation. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released the following statement on the passing of former Connecticut Governor Jodi Rell:
“Governor Rell was a public servant who could never be defined by traditional party lines. She led by example and helped restore trust in government, leaving behind a legacy guided by the values of integrity, responsibility, and civility in politics. Whether it be Connecticut's landmark clean elections system or our work to find breakthrough stem cell cures, so many great things about Connecticut have Governor Rell's fingerprints all over. Connecticut will miss her, and my thoughts are with her children, Mike and Meredith, and her entire family.”
###
When Vice-President Kamala Harris lost the election to Donald Trump, it was clear that her economic message failed to break through with most voters. Still reeling from the effects of inflation and a cost-of-living crisis, Americans did not believe a Democratic president would deliver the change they sought. Five days later, Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, posted a postmortem of sorts to X. “Time to rebuild the left,” read one post in part. “We are out of touch with the crisis of meaning/purpose fueling MAGA. We refuse to pick big fights. Our tent is too small.” The left, he added, “has never fully grappled with the wreckage of fifty years of neoliberalism,” and should become “less judgmental,” he concluded. Elected to the House in 2006, then to
...Read more the Senate in 2012, the liberal Murphy was an early supporter of the Affordable Care Act and stronger gun laws following the Sandy Hook elementary-school shooting in Newtown. Over the past several years, he’s also fashioned another identity as a critic of the neoliberal consensus. In a 2022 piece for The Atlantic, he wrote that Democrats must “do the work that would make us the natural favorite for Americans who want government to act in their interests — not merely as the facilitator of some dreamy neoliberal ideal.” I spoke with Murphy this week about neoliberalism in crisis, the failures of Democratic rhetoric, and how he thinks the party should expand its big tent. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. Over the last several years, you’ve often warned that the postwar neoliberal order is breaking down, and I was curious to know how you define neoliberalism and how you’ve reached that conclusion.
Neoliberalism is a belief that markets and in particular global markets will work for the benefit of the common good with light adjustments here or there by the government. I think neoliberalism is also about the belief in the individual as the hero of every story as opposed to the community or the collective. And so as a result, both Democrats and Republicans have been very reluctant over the past 40 years to do anything to disrupt existing markets, in particular international markets, and have sort of let society and culture and our economy slide away from a focus on the common good, instead believing that we should just align incentives so that each individual is able to have a shot at material wealth. So that to me is kind of the definition that I use in my head. Many would argue that neoliberalism has become a core tenet of Democratic Party politics and remains so today. Do you think that’s true? And if so, why did you decide to become so critical of it?
I think there’s a fight inside the Democratic Party today about whether or not neoliberalism has permanently failed. There are still plenty of market believers and market fundamentalists inside the Democratic Party, but I would argue Joe Biden made a pretty material break from neoliberal orthodoxy. His unabashed public support for labor unions, his revitalization of industrial policy, albeit targeted industrial policy, and his work to rebuild American antitrust power was all a recognition that we needed to move beyond our neoliberal failures. And one of my frustrations is that President Biden and Vice-President Harris didn’t lead their economic messaging by talking about their break with neoliberalism, their belief in the need to break up corporate power, their belief in the need to revitalize labor unions. So the policy was really good. I just don’t think the rhetoric always matched the policy. You’ve also written of “a very real epidemic of American unhappiness.” When did you first conclude that there was such an epidemic, and how does that epidemic manifest itself?
There was no ignoring the fact that all of our traditional public policy metrics were heading in the right direction in 2022 and 2023. GDP was growing, inflation was coming down, unemployment was at a near structural low, crime was dropping, and yet people were just as if not more pessimistic about the direction of the country. And self-reported rates of happiness were plummeting. So clearly, we have made this assumption that having a job and national GDP growing would lead to happier people, and that wasn’t turning out to be true. And I think it’s because we fundamentally misunderstand what makes people happy. A job is important and income is important, but material success is not actually what is most relevant to people’s sense of fulfillment. Connection is really important, and connection’s harder today than ever before because of decisions that the government has made. People want to feel power over the arc of their lives, and the concentration of corporate power has eroded people’s personal economic agency. And then people want to feel like they’re part of something unique. They want to have a unique national identity or a unique local identity. Our borders started to get erased and our culture started to become flattened, and we all belong to the exact same transnational economy. Life began to feel very empty and hollow and far too homogenous for a lot of Americans. So that’s a hard conversation for government to have about the lack of connection, lack of life power, lack of meaning and purpose. But I think that’s the story as to why people were feeling pretty shaky, even amidst the economic data telling people that they should feel good. How does the government go about addressing that? Is it something that government’s even fully capable of addressing?
Well, listen, I don’t think government is ever responsible for delivering the last mile of happiness. But I do think we’re supposed to create a foundation in which happiness is a little bit easier to find. Actually, that’s what the Declaration of Independence says. And so, yeah, we should be consciously thinking about social connection policy. How do we make it easier for people to be in communion with each other? If we were thinking more aggressively about the importance of social connection policy, we would’ve regulated social media the minute they started to dominate our family’s lives. We would’ve not allowed our downtowns to become stripped bare and our entire economy to move online. We would’ve pushed people back into in-person employment much more quickly instead of allowing the entire economy to be run from people’s kitchen tables. So yes, I think that … I’m talking about this narrow issue of people’s lack of connection, but that’s an example of a feeling that people are having social isolation and loneliness that government can play a role in helping to address. I sometimes cover labor, and one thing that I’ve thought about quite a lot is how the decline in union density in this country is maybe contributing to this sort of loneliness or this spiritual crisis that you’ve talked about. Do you think there’s something to that?
Well, let me broaden it out a bit more. We are living at a moment where lots of institutions are in crisis, and many people who found their purpose and meaning through affiliation with an institution are losing those connections. So I don’t think it’s a coincidence that both church membership and union membership are going down and people are feeling much more unhappy. Churches and unions are places where you find connection and companionship to people who believe the same things you do, but they’re also places where you learn selflessness, where you live for others. And so I think government needs to have a conversation about how to make institutions healthier. Now, again, the reasons that unions have become less powerful and the reason that people have left church are complicated, and government doesn’t hold all the answers, but we’re not impotent. We could certainly choose to shift organizing rules so that there’s an unlevel playing field that tilts toward workers joining unions, and we could choose to spend some amount of government money to help churches become more financially sound and able to do additional outreach to communities at a time when it’s pretty hard to make a church budget work. After Vice-President Harris lost the election, you tweeted, “Real economic populism should be our tent pole.” And I was curious to know what, in practical terms, does that look like?
So I think there’s a rhetorical and policy aspect to that answer. First, I just think we need to talk about power more. We are so in love with our solutions that we spend 80 percent of our time talking about the policy solution and only 20 percent of the time identifying with the way that people are getting screwed. Take prescription-drug pricing, for instance. I’m all in on bulk negotiation of drug prices, but that seems pretty small ball to a lot of Americans who just think we should cap the price of prescription drugs without some super-elaborate scheme attached to it. Our solutions can be simpler. And we can also decide when talking about prescription drugs to spend 80 percent of our time talking about how the drug companies are screwing people and 20 percent of our time talking about the solutions, instead of what we do today, which is the exact opposite. I think the other critique I would have is that people are not terribly inspired by handouts. I’m a supporter of the child tax credit. I didn’t mind forgiving people’s student loans. I like the elevated Obamacare subsidies, but those three things didn’t win as many votes. Because people know that the rules of the economy are rigged. And while they appreciate a little extra money in their pocket, they would much rather the rules get unrigged so that if you wanted to start a bookstore, you wouldn’t be run out of business by Amazon within hours of opening your doors. Families want to know that if one parent wants to stay home to raise the kids for five years, their economy allows for one income at least temporarily, to be enough for a family to live on. And they don’t want that solved just by the government writing them a check. So I think that those are my true critiques that we have to talk about power. We have to argue for simpler, more powerful solutions. We need to spend time critiquing the problem, not just explaining the solution. And we need to focus on unrigging the rules rather than just writing checks to people that make it look as if we’re papering over the rigged rules. You also tweeted that Democrats “need to let people into the tent who aren’t 100% on board with us on every social and cultural issue or issues like guns or climate.” The big-tent strategy isn’t new to the Democratic Party, so I was curious if you could clarify what you meant and explain why it’s important for Democrats to turn to this now.
I worry that we have become a party with a dozen litmus tests. And that in all sorts of ways we telegraph, maybe not through official party policy, but through informal control mechanisms that we don’t really want you at the table if you aren’t with us on abortion, gay rights, guns, climate, and a host of other really important issues. And I saw this a year and a half ago when I listened to this guy, Oliver Anthony, sing the song about “Rich Men North of Richmond.” I heard him talk about the soullessness of modern work. I heard him rail against the corporate and billionaire class, and I publicly knew that we should be in a conversation with the people who are listening to his song and finding it so compelling. But the song also had some kind of nasty conservative tropes. It referenced at least one QAnon conspiracy. And the reaction to my suggestion was pretty universal condemnation from the conventional online left who wanted to label Anthony and his followers as racists and not even worthy of a conversation. They’re maybe backwater racists, right? And so to me, that’s the signaling that we send, and here’s why it’s important. You’re much more likely to convert somebody if they’re inside the tent than outside the tent. Especially today when we have these cordoned-off information ecosystems. You have virtually no chance to convince somebody who is anti-choice to rethink their positioning if they are not inside your tent because they’re listening to people who only agree with them. There is plenty of evidence to show that when our tent was much bigger and more diverse, we were actually able to make pretty significant progress on issues, even on the issues where we had inside disagreements. Even though our coalition wasn’t universally focused on environmental protection during the ’70s and ’80s, we were able to pass significant legislation protecting the environment. So I think from a coalition, from a political coalition-building standpoint, it’s criminal to not grow your tent. But I also am not convinced that we wouldn’t be better off when it comes to winning on the issues we care about if we had some people who disagreed with us inside. Abortion rights and rights for trans people are both poised to be uniquely threatened by the Trump administration. How do we let more people into the tent without making vulnerable people more vulnerable in the end?
I don’t see a lot of evidence that we are winning those people over by not speaking to them. So I think we’ve got to put ourselves in rooms with conservative people and talk to them about why gay kids and trans kids are no threat to them. But also invite them to come into a conversation with us over our mutual agreement on populist economics. And then once we are in that conversation, I’ve just got a much better chance of convincing them that biological girls playing in boys’ sports is not the existential threat to America that the right makes you think it is. But you got to be talking to people to confirm. And we’ve lived in this world in which we just think shaming people who disagree with us is eventually going to win the argument. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chair of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Wednesday released the following statement after voting in support of the Joint Resolutions of Disapproval on offensive weapons transfers to the Netanyahu government. “I continue to support Israel’s right to defend itself in the wake of the horrific attacks of October 7th. Since last October, I have consistently supported sending Israel the military aid it needs, totaling more than $18 billion, to ensure that Hamas cannot launch another similar attack. But that funding cannot and should not be a blank check. As with aid to all U.S. partners, there are rules that Israel must comply with – especially
...Read more regarding the protection of innocent civilians and provision of humanitarian aid. We should make sure that our military aid is being used to pursue a goal shared by the U.S. and Israel – the destruction of Hamas’ military capability – and not a goal that is contrary to U.S. security interests – the destruction of a path to a future Palestinian state. “The October 13th letter from Secretary of State Blinken and Secretary of Defense Austin to their Israeli counterparts detailed over a dozen steps Israel needs to take to stay in compliance with U.S. law. Since October 13th, little progress has been made on any of those items, and many observers note that the humanitarian conditions in Gaza have gotten worse, not better. We should hold Israel to the same standard we hold all our partners. I have consistently called for limitations on arms transfers to other regional partners – like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt – that have not acted in accordance with U.S. law. I do not hold Israel to a different standard. I expect all our aid to be used in accordance with our laws and our security interests. “Importantly, our joint security objectives – decimating Hamas so that they cannot launch another attack similar to October 7th and the elimination of Hamas leadership – have been achieved. It is not in our shared interest to support military operations that simply feed recruitment material for Hamas to rebuild or serve the interests of those who wish for Gaza to be eliminated as a Palestinian territory. “I will never cease being a strong friend of Israel and will continue to support many arms transfers, including defensive systems like Iron Dome. The war aims have been achieved, but innocent people are still dying in Gaza and Lebanon and more than 100 people are still being held hostage so, at this moment, the focus should be on ending the war. Instead, the war continues, suffering increases, and plans are being laid for the permanent end to a two-state future. We must send a message that our laws need to be respected, the wars should come to an end, and a two-state future must be preserved.” ### Read less HARTFORD – U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Tuesday joined U.S. Representative Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) in announcing $320,000 in funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to support two traffic safety projects in Connecticut. The funds are awarded through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grant program established to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. "Every single life lost on our roads is one too many. Thanks to the Biden-Harris administration, this $320,000 in federal funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will help New Milford and Bethel develop targeted action plans that prevent crashes, save lives, and make sure everyone on the road, whether they walk, bike, or drive,
...Read more feels safe on our streets," said Murphy. “This $320,000 in federal support will help prevent roadway deaths and injuries in New Milford and Bethel. Traffic crashes are entirely preventable, yet there have been more than 250 motor vehicle-related deaths in Connecticut this year alone. I am proud that federal funding will support planning for safer traffic measures and upgrades aimed at protecting drivers, passengers, bicyclists, and pedestrians, and I will continue fighting to deliver federal investments for safer roads,” said Blumenthal. The funding announced today will support the following local projects: $160,000 to the Town of New Milford for the New Milford Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility Projects
$160,000 to the Town of Bethel for the Bethel Safe Streets Initiative The municipalities will use the funding to analyze road and pedestrian hazards and develop initiatives to reduce injuries and deaths on roadways in their communities. The SS4A program supports the Department of Transportation’s goal of zero deaths and serious injuries on our nation’s roadways. This comes at a time where traffic fatalities are at the highest level in decades. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday joined U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) in calling for immediate and long-term aid to help farmers recoup losses after severe weather events. In two letters sent to Congressional leaders and administration officials, the Members called for immediate emergency relief funding through the appropriations process as well as inclusion of their Save Our Small Farms Act in the upcoming Farm Bill Reauthorization. “Farmers in Connecticut faced extreme flooding and droughts in recent years and need immediate relief included in any bill we pass before this the end of Congress. Farms are
...Read more the core of our rural communities, but since they’re often small operations, they deal with some unique challenges. That’s why we should also use reauthorization of the Farm Bill to pass our bill, the Save Our Small Farms Act, which would expand crop insurance coverage and disaster assistance programs to ensure Connecticut farmers have the support they need to weather future storms,” said Murphy. “Eastern Connecticut is the most rural part of Connecticut, with a healthy, sizeable cross section of producers and farmers. I’ve heard from many of them on the consequences of damaging weather events over the last several years that have impacted their livelihoods and caused many farms to go under. My friends and colleagues from the delegation are pushing in the final weeks of this Congress to deliver immediate aid to our farmers; while also working to ensure they have affordable, reliable crop insurance and safety net programs through the U.S. Department of Agriculture,” said Courtney. “Connecticut’s small farms are critical to our culture, environment, and economy, but too often, they face barrier after barrier when seeking support to recover losses from extreme weather events. After talking to a countless number of farm owners about how we can provide a stronger safety net, I introduced legislation to make coverage and assistance more accessible and affordable. I will continue fighting for swift, long-term solutions for our farmers, as I push for disaster relief funding and inclusion of the SOS Farms Act in any farm bill negotiations,” said Blumenthal. “After dozens of farms in the Connecticut River Valley lost hundreds of acres of crops and millions of dollars in revenue due to extreme weather, our federal safety-net failed to properly compensate them for their losses. I joined the entire Connecticut delegation urging Congressional leadership to ensure direct relief for our farmers is included in must-pass legislation before we adjourn for the year, and to work with us to pass common-sense reforms, like our Save Our Small Farms Act, so more farmers can be easily and accurately enrolled in affordable crop insurance. We will not stop fighting until our farmers get the short-term and long-term support they deserve from their government,” said Larson. “It is clear from recent hurricanes in the South, droughts across New England, and extreme weather events across the country that we must do more to bolster disaster aid available to small farmers,” said DeLauro. “Will DellaCamera, a small farmer in my district, lost nearly all of his crops during an August hailstorm. Because of an inadequate safety net, Will was only able to recoup a small amount of his losses. This is unacceptable. I am joining my colleagues in urging conference negotiators of the Farm Bill Reauthorization to prioritize bolstering our farm safety net so that farmers like Will can get the full support they deserve.” "Federal aid is rarely enough to cover losses to farmers after severe weather events. After hearing from farmers in my district, I led the introduction of the Save Our Small Farms Act and joined the call for emergency relief for small farms,” said Hayes. "The Farm Bill must support small and medium-sized farms. As a Member of the Agriculture Committee, I will continue to advocate for resources to strengthen Connecticut farmers.” “This summer’s storms demonstrated that our government’s emergency relief and insurance programs are not meeting the needs of those impacted by increasingly devastating weather events. Connecticut’s small farmers routinely endure the dual burdens of crushing crop insurance premiums and woefully insufficient federal assistance. In the closing weeks of the 118th Congress, let’s deliver our farmers the recovery resources they need and pass the reforms that will allow their farms to thrive for years to come,” said Himes. From extreme flooding in Connecticut to devastating hurricanes along the coast, producers have not been able to recover from one catastrophe before another hits. The scale and frequency of these weather events demand robust emergency relief now, particularly because Congress has not enacted disaster assistance for losses since 2022. The need for emergency relief funding is also a result of failed farm safety net and crop insurance programs. The Members called for agricultural leaders in Congress to change the status quo by including their Save Our Small Farms Act in the upcoming Farm Bill Reauthorization. Their bill would expand the number of farms eligible to purchase crop insurance, lower the cost of coverage for small farmers, and direct the USDA to develop more responsive coverage options for farmers during future extreme weather events. The full text of the letter urging appropriators to provide emergency relief is available HERE. U.S. Senators Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Margaret Hassan (D-N.H.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. They were joined by U.S. Representatives David Scott (D-Ga.), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Jared Golden (D-Maine), Chris Pappas (D-N.H.), Troy Carter (D-La.), Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.), James McGovern (D-Mass.), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.), Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), Alma Adams (D-N.C.), Darren Soto (D-Fla.), Patrick Ryan (D-N.Y.), Eric Sorensen (D-Ill.), Timothy Kennedy (D-N.Y.), Ann Kuster (D-N.H.), Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-N.M.), Robin Kelly (D-Ill.), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), Richard Neal (D-Mass.), John Garamendi (D-Calif.), Mike Thompson (D-Calif.), Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.), Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), Julia Brownley (D-Calif.), and Del. James Moylan (R-Guam). The full text of the letter urging Farm Bill negotiators to include the SOS Farms Act is available HERE. U.S. Senators Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also signed the letter. They were joined by U.S. Representatives James McGovern (D-Mass.), Richard Neal (D-Mass.), Alma Adams (D-N.C.), Gabe Amo (D-R.I.), Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), Timothy Kennedy (D-N.Y.), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.), Terri Sewell (D-Ala.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.). ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Monday that Aspira Women’s Health, a bio-analytical company based in Shelton, was named “Innovator of the Month” for its leadership in the development of blood tests that aid in the detection of ovarian cancer. The company’s flagship products, OvaWatch and Ova1Plus, employ AI technology towards effective ovarian cancer risk assessment and drive higher standard of care for women with ovarian masses. Last month, Aspira was awarded $10 million in federal funding to develop a non-invasive blood test to detect endometriosis, which is currently diagnosed through invasive surgery. “For decades, underinvestment in women’s health has meant that women and girls simply aren’t getting access to the treatments and care they deserve. I’m
...Read more proud to see Aspira’s cutting-edge biomedical research positioning Connecticut as a leader in women’s healthcare and improving lives through earlier risk assessment, more accurate diagnoses, and innovative, personalized care,” said Murphy. “We are honored to be Innovator of the Month and proud to represent Connecticut on the national women’s healthcare stage. For far too long, women have been forced to resort to surgical interventions for diagnosis of gynecologic diseases. Aspira aims to change that. We believe all women deserve the opportunity to make healthcare decisions based on facts instead of fear,” said Nicole Sandford, CEO of Aspira Women’s Health. “Endometriosis is a chronic condition that impacts as many as six million women in the United States alone. It alters nearly every facet of a patient’s life, many of whom must wait years for a diagnosis. We believe Aspira is uniquely qualified to solve this problem. Our diagnostic solutions focus on a data-driven approach and powerful AI-enabled algorithms that offer noninvasive alternatives to aid in the detection of gynecologic disease. Our suite of blood tests to assess ovarian cancer risk in women with masses which have been ordered by healthcare providers more than 200,000 times. We believe this experience and experience is critical for the development of a noninvasive endometriosis test.” Aspira Women’s Health Inc. is dedicated to the discovery, development, and commercialization of noninvasive, AI-powered tests to aid in the diagnosis of gynecologic diseases. OvaWatch® and Ova1Plus® are offered to clinicians as OvaSuiteSM. Together, they provide the only comprehensive portfolio of blood tests to aid in the detection of ovarian cancer risk for the 1.2+ million American women diagnosed with an adnexal mass each year. OvaWatch provides a negative predictive value of 99% and is used to assess ovarian cancer risk for women where initial clinical assessment indicates the mass is indeterminate or benign, and thus surgery may be premature or unnecessary. Ova1Plus is a reflex process of two FDA-cleared tests, Ova1® and Overa®, to assess the risk of ovarian malignancy in women with an adnexal mass planned for surgery. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less Windsor Locks, CONN – November 4, 2024 – The Connecticut Airport Authority (CAA) is pleased to announce that $6 million of federal funding has been secured for a major improvement project at Bradley International Airport (BDL). The funding will be used for the ongoing construction of an 80,000 square foot inline baggage screening facility behind the Sheraton Hotel, which is one of two construction projects currently underway at BDL. Once complete, baggage will be sent from the airline ticket counters along a mile-long conveyor belt to the new facility for screening. Current explosive-detection machines located in the terminal lobby will be relocated once the new screening facility is operational, which will open additional space for current and future airline growth. The
...Read more facility will also entail the construction of three new gates. “The CAA is grateful for this new infusion of federal funding as we continue construction on major projects to enhance the passenger experience at Bradley International Airport. We also want to particularly thank Governor Lamont, Connecticut’s federal delegation, and the Connecticut Business and Industry Association for working hard to secure this funding,” said CAA Executive Director Kevin A. Dillon, A.A.E. The designated funding for Bradley International Airport comes from a total $970 million in grant funding from the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) FY25 Airport Terminal Program, which was established by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). Through a competitive grant process, the FAA is providing funding to 125 airports across the country this fiscal year to focus on terminal reconstruction, development, accessibility, energy efficiency, and more. Prior to today’s announcement, BDL has been awarded over $31 million of grant funds from prior years of the Airport Terminal Program, which is a subset of the total $99 million in federal grants that BDL has received for its major terminal enhancement projects. The CAA has successfully applied for funds in each year that the highly competitive grant program has been offered. “Over the last several years, Bradley has implemented many major improvements that have resulted in this airport being ranked among the best in the nation,” said Governor Ned Lamont. “This funding will enable Bradley to continue making upgrades that will strengthen its reputation as one of the best and most convenient airports available.” “As a frequent flyer – from Bradley back and forth weekly to DC – I know very personally what a great airport it is, and how much greater it could be. In fact, with this $6 million federal funding boost, it will be on a flight path to become one of the nation’s premier air travel hubs. Streamlined, upgraded, and expanded, its services will be speedier and safer than ever. I’ll continue fighting for even more federal support,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal. “Investing in Connecticut’s airports isn’t just good for travelers—it also creates lots of good-paying jobs and draws new businesses to our state,” said Senator Chris Murphy. “This $6 million for a new baggage handling system will help open up space for more flight options and keep flyers safe, making the travel experience even more convenient and ensuring Bradley continues to be recognized as one of the top airports in the country.” “This $6 million in funding for Bradley International Airport builds on the progress that’s been made to improve passenger experience, modernize baggage screening, expand flight options, and create good-paying jobs,” said Representative John B. Larson. “I am proud to have worked with the delegation to deliver millions of dollars in funding for Bradley through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. We will continue to work with our partners at the state, including the CAA, to advance our airport’s infrastructure and ensure a positive experience for travelers.” “Bradley Airport is a critical piece of Connecticut’s economy,” said CBIA President and CEO Chris DiPentima. “Businesses and their workforces need to be able to move around the state and the rest of the country to attract businesses and individuals to the state. These improvements will help make Bradley, and Connecticut, an even more desirable destination.” “The CAA wants to thank our elected officials, particularly Governor Lamont, Senator Blumenthal, Senator Murphy, and Congressman Larson, for their unwavering support of Bradley International Airport in our pursuit of federal funding for these critical projects. Due to their hard work, Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill funds continue to be put to work in our state to modernize the airport,” said CAA Board Chair Tony Sheridan. The total cost of the inline baggage screening facility project is estimated at $188 million. In addition to the federal funding, the construction of the facility will be funded through a combination of passenger facility charges and airport revenue. ### About Bradley International Airport Bradley International Airport (BDL) is New England’s second-largest airport. Recognized nationally by leading travel publications for its ease of travel, Bradley International Airport is ready to welcome you with new nonstops and expanded services. The award-winning airport is operated by the Connecticut Airport Authority, and its operations are entirely self-funded. The airport contributes nearly $3.6 billion to the regional economy. For more info, visit www.bradleyairport.com. About The Connecticut Airport Authority The CAA was established in 2011 to develop, improve, and operate Bradley International Airport and the state’s five general aviation airports (Danielson, Groton-New London, Hartford-Brainard, Waterbury-Oxford, and Windham). The CAA Board consists of 11 members with a broad spectrum of experience in aviation-related and other industries, as well as government. The goal of the CAA is to make Connecticut’s airports more attractive to new airlines, bring in new routes, and support Connecticut’s overall economic development and growth strategy. For more info, visit www.ctairports.org Read less EAST HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03) announced the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CT DEEP) has been selected to receive $250,000 in federal grants to provide technical assistance to help Connecticut businesses develop and adopt pollution prevention practices in local communities. CT DEEP will partner with the Toxic Use Reduction Institute at University of Massachusetts Lowell to identify safer cleaning and sanitizing products for craft beverage manufacturers in Connecticutto reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions, solid and hazardous waste, water pollution and toxic chemicals. CT DEEP will also continue to work with other
...Read more New England states to offer the BetterBev recognition program, which incentivizes businesses to carry out pollution reduction measures. Facilities in or adjacent to communities with environmental justice concerns will be prioritized. “We won’t achieve our climate goals unless everybody is involved in the fight, but small businesses often face greater barriers to making the upfront investments for cleaner practices. By providing direct technical support to Connecticut’s local craft beverage manufacturers, this $250,000 in federal funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will help small business owners across our state adopt more sustainable, cost-effective practices that reduce harmful emissions, strengthen our economy, and safeguard the health of our communities for generations to come,” said Murphy. “This investment in greener craft breweries and wineries will help them be even more successful as environmental stewards. With greater technical aid, beverage businesses can expand consumer appeal by reducing pollution and protecting natural resources. It’s a boost for our economy and environment,” said Blumenthal. “Addressing pollution at the source is key to protecting community health and taking on the threat of climate change,” said Larson. “I have been proud to work with the entire Connecticut Congressional delegation to deliver federal funding for projects to combat pollution and ensure all communities have access to clean air and water. This funding will support ongoing work at the state and local level to invest in innovative solutions that protect our environment, combat pollution, and help reduce energy bills.” "Thanks to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, CT DEEP can bolster its work with businesses across our state to reduce pollution,” said DeLauro. “These funds will help drive economic growth and ensure Connecticut leads the way in combatting pollution. The climate crisis is here, and it is an existential threat. We must do all we can to reduce pollution and protect our planet for generations to come.” “Every community deserves clean air, safe water, and a healthy environment—and pollution prevention grants help achieve that by reducing waste at the source. By adopting smarter and innovative practices that limit the use of toxic materials and conserve resources, these investments are helping our partners to support New England businesses to cut costs, grow sustainably, and protect the environment,” said EPA Regional Administrator David W. Cash. “Thanks to the Biden-Harris Administration, together we’re creating lasting benefits for local economies and ensuring that environmental progress and economic growth go hand in hand and reach all communities, including those that need it most. That's Investing in America.” EPA’s Pollution Prevention Grant Program advances President Biden’s Justice40 Initiative, which set a goal to deliver 40% of the overall benefits from certain federal investments to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. In total, EPA has announced 48 selectees across the country that will collectively receive nearly $19 million in grants to support states, Tribal Nations, and U.S. territories in providing technical assistance to businesses to develop and adopt pollution prevention (P2) practices in local communities. This includes any practice that reduces, eliminates, or prevents pollution at its source prior to recycling, treatment, or disposal. Thanks to President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, nearly half of the funds awarded this year were made available with no cost share/match requirement. Between 2011-2022, EPA’s Pollution Prevention program issued over 500 grants totaling more than $54 million, which have helped businesses identify, develop, and adopt P2 approaches. These approaches have resulted in 31.9 billion kWh in energy savings, eliminated 20.8 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, saved 52 billion gallons of water, reduced 1 billion pounds of hazardous materials, and saved businesses more than $2.3 billion. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday joined U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) to announce Connecticut will receive $77,834,656 from the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) to help reduce heating costs for low-income families in Connecticut ahead of the winter season. This is the first allocation of LIHEAP dollars this season. “For too many families in Connecticut, falling temperatures mean having to choose between heating your home or putting food on the table. This $77.8 million in LIHEAP funding will help ease that burden
...Read more for households feeling the strain of rising energy costs this winter, and as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I’ll keep working with our delegation to ensure Connecticut families continue to have the support they need so they don’t have to make those difficult choices,” said Murphy. “This home heating aid is desperately needed by families who face a frigid winter without fuel for basic warmth,” said Blumenthal. “With $77.8 million, many families will be assured this basic necessity. Every day, I see and speak to people struggling to make ends meet and worrying about financial hardships and challenges. I’ll fight for more federal support for LIHEAP and other programs that help them with essential needs.” “As we approach the winter months, we must ensure all families are able to heat their homes without breaking the bank,” said Larson. “Thanks to the steadfast leadership of Rep. Rosa DeLauro on the Appropriations Committee, I am thrilled to join the entire Connecticut delegation to announce $77.8 million in new funding to help families afford their energy bills. We will continue to work together to ensure Connecticut residents can get the assistance they need this season.” “There’s no question high energy costs are pinching homeowners’ wallets. As we head into the colder months, this $77 million federal investment in heating and energy assistance will bring welcomed relief to Connecticut residents," said Courtney. “High costs are spreading families thin,” said DeLauro. “No family should have to choose between keeping their home warm during the colder months, keeping their lights on, or putting food on the table. As Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Committee, I secured $77.8 million for the program to help Connecticut’s families keep warm this season. Every family deserves warmth. I am committed to ensuring no household goes cold this winter.” “Too many families have to worry about rising energy costs that make it increasingly difficult to pay their heating bills and keep their children warm in the coming months,” said Himes. “LIHEAP offers a lifeline to struggling Americans to ensure every home offers a reprieve from our cold New England winter. I am proud to help deliver nearly $78 million to Connecticut in federal funding, including over $4 million from President Biden’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.” “LIHEAP is a lifeline for many families faced with rising heating costs. I am delighted $77.8 million is coming back to Connecticut to help families stay warm this winter,” said Hayes. “This assistance will help to ease the burden of high heating costs. In Congress, I will continue to advocate for additional funding for this vital resource, which lowers utility costs and prevents shut offs across Connecticut.” The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), through the Office of Community Services (OCS) at the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), announced the release of $3.6 billion in LIHEAP funding to all 50 states, the District of Columbia, three territories, and more than 125 tribes. This amount includes the regular block grant appropriation and an additional $100.1 million appropriated from President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). Connecticut was awarded a total of $77,834,656 to assist low-income families ahead of the winter season. This includes: $73,556,784 from the regular LIHEAP block grant funding
$4,273,891 in funding appropriated for FY2025 from IIJA and $3,981 in LIHEAP dollars the state returned in FY23 ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday joined U.S. Representatives Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03) to announce that the Connecticut Port Authority and Gateway Terminal, in partnership with the New Haven Port Authority, have been selected to receive nearly $40 million in total through EPA’s Clean Ports Program to support the deployment of zero-emission port equipment and infrastructure. “Our ports are the driving force behind Connecticut’s blue economy, but the diesel-powered equipment we use to move goods through them is polluting nearby communities and taking a toll on public health. By replacing aging, polluting equipment with cleaner, zero-
...Read more emission alternatives, this $39 million in federal funding will help keep ports in New Haven and New London running smoothly while improving quality of life, creating good-paying jobs, and moving us closer to achieving our climate goals,” said Murphy. “This milestone investment will make our ports cleaner and healthier – using zero-emission equipment. Stopping air pollution while modernizing and enhancing port facilities is a gigantic win for both our environment and economy. Communities around the ports will have better air and jobs,” said Blumenthal. “The redevelopment and modernization of State Pier New London in 2019 dramatically increased its square footage and weight bearing capacity, with an eye to both increased cargo activity, as well as wind turbine assembly. With this $5 million new federal investment funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, the pier can now install zero-emission power equipment so that docked ships can power onboard services. This upgrade will keep New London State Pier competitive with the maritime industry and protect water quality in the Thames River,” said Courtney. “I am pleased to announce that Gateway Terminals and the Connecticut Port Authority will receive vital grant funding that will reduce diesel emissions, lower health risks and noise pollution for port workers and near-port communities, and decrease pollution in the Long Island Sound," said DeLauro. “In New Haven, Gateway Terminal will be using this funding to replace four aging diesel-powered cranes with all-electric machines, deploy 10 all-electric tractors for terminal drayage services, and install solar infrastructure. These efforts will reduce their reliance on the electric grid and the need for fossil fuel dependency while greatly improving air quality for residents of the City.” The grants are funded by President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act and will advance environmental justice by reducing diesel air pollution from U.S. ports and near surrounding communities while promoting good-paying and union jobs that help America’s ports thrive. The Connecticut Port Authority has been selected to receive an anticipated $5,357,103 to acquire a mobile shore power unit and install supporting shore power infrastructure at the New London State Pier. The project will reduce diesel emissions by providing power to vessels at berth, enabling docked marine vessels to connect to the local electric grid to power onboard services instead of running their diesel engines, thereby decreasing health risks and noise pollution for port workers and the near-port communities. The State Pier was recently upgraded to enable it to serve as a marshalling port for offshore wind facility operations. CPA will engage stakeholders in New London to increase public awareness education, and ongoing communication. A workforce training program developed in coordination with unions and other stakeholders will help prepare the local labor force to fill high-quality jobs created by this project.
Enstructure New Haven Holdings’ Gateway Terminal, in partnership with the New Haven Port Authority in Connecticut, has been selected to receive an anticipated $34,032,340 for the purchase and deployment of zero-emission cargo handling equipment with supporting charging infrastructure, as well as rooftop solar generation and battery energy storage systems to supplement grid power for the mobile equipment. The project also includes scrapping several pieces of diesel-powered cargo handling equipment to reduce air pollution at the port and in the surrounding area. Training on the all-electric equipment will be provided to the existing workforce, and the community will be engaged in project implementation and in sourcing workers for new good-paying jobs. Gateway recently joined Green Marine, a voluntary environmental benchmarking and continuous improvement program, which requires participants to annually measure, certify and publish their performance indicators, including emissions reduction and community relations. EPA’s Clean Ports Program advances President Biden’s Justice40 Initiative, which aims to deliver 40% of the overall benefits of certain federal investments to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. Disadvantaged communities will benefit from cleaner air and access to high quality jobs that will be created to operate zero emissions technologies at ports. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday authored an op-ed for the Financial Times arguing that American foreign and domestic policies must align to break up concentrated economic power and revitalize local communities. Pointing to the Biden-Harris administration’s work to break up corporate monopolies, rebuild local economies, and create a new industrial policy, Murphy called for America’s foreign policy to be similarly reshaped. Murphy described how the Biden-Harris Administration’s decision at the World Trade Organization to block new data transit rules reflects a larger effort to combat the consequences of neoliberalism: “They saw the negotiations through the prism of America’s twin crises of alienation and the
...Read more concentration of economic power. While all the key economic indicators point to a country that has bounced back from the pandemic, rates of addiction, self-harm and political extremism continue to rise as more Americans report feeling unhappy and disconnected from their communities. This alienation is the wreckage left in the wake of a half century of shared, bipartisan faith in economic neoliberalism — the doctrine that unrestricted free trade and market forces would best uphold the public good. The unchecked gobbling up of economic power by a few large corporations has left us with broken supply chains and uncompetitive markets.” Murphy underscored the need for a post-neoliberal foreign policy that aims to break up concentrated global economic power, protect fair trade, and breathe life back into local communities: “Trade agreements should be put to a simple test: will the terms concentrate or distribute private economic power? When new rules clearly give large global companies too much power over workers and citizens in individual nation states, then the answer must be to rewrite or reject them, as demonstrated by Tai. A post-neoliberal foreign policy must also challenge the ability of state-run economies to rig the rules of the global marketplace. Too often US foreign policy is focused on military threats. Yes, China and Russia present conventional military threats to global order; but America must expend equal effort on confronting our adversaries’ growing economic influence. This should involve speeding up renewable energy adoption to weaken the power of Russia and other petro-dictatorships and continued work to contest Chinese dominance of critical supply chains for products such as solar panels or advanced batteries.” “Our foreign policy must also buttress growing bipartisan efforts to create a new industrial and commercial approach rooted in localism,” Murphy continued. “Americans do not want to be part of a homogenized, flattened global economy. They want vibrant local economies where worker power is prioritized over shareholder power, community wellness prevails over the cult of efficiency, and values such as generosity and fairness matter more than greed and excess. Through carefully constructed tariffs and subsidies for domestic manufacturing and research and development, foreign and trade policy can be the vehicle for this change.” Murphy concluded: “Americans will continue to lose faith in their country’s democracy if we do not marry foreign and domestic policy in an effort to prioritize the common good over shameless profit-seeking. That decision at the WTO to rethink global data rules offers proof that the Biden-Harris administration understands the scale of the crisis the America faces and that it has laid the foundations of a coherent way forward for US foreign policy. The next generation of national security leaders must now build on and finish this work.” Read the full op-ed here. ### Read less More than 30% of American election workers say they’ve been threatened and harassed on the job, according to a survey from the Brennan Center for Justice. U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) wants to ban the open carry of firearms at polling places and official election centers. He has proposed amending the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which outlawed discriminatory voting practices—like literacy tests and poll taxes—to expand the right to vote. “Voters, as well as ballot officials, should be spared the intimidation and harassment of people walking up to the line to cast their votes with a firearm visibly present,” Blumenthal said. U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) also co-sponsored the legislation. Joanne Moore, who leads the Connecticut League of Women Voters, supports
...Read more the measure. “Threats of violence inhibit people from coming to the polls, and it inhibits our ability to get people to work at the polls,” Moore said. “All of this impairs our democracy.” Connecticut already does not allow open carry. A proposal to completely ban weapons at polling places in the state failed this legislative session. It faced an uphill battle in the Senate and was taken off the table. Government Administration and Elections Committee member Sen. Rob Sampson (R-Wolcott) said he was concerned the bill would only keep gun owners from exercising their 2nd Amendment right to carry a firearm. “I do take issue with the bill and the assertion that folks are somehow not worthy of their constitutional protections because they’re near a polling location or even inside of one,” Sampson said. “The way I look at it is, somebody who is a bad actor intent on harming, they’re not going to care about the law one iota.” Read less In the midst of a spirited game of Bingo among a group of senior citizens at The Shack, there was an interruption. It was U.S. Senator Chris Murphy stopping by?—?to get an up-close look at what makes the West Hills community center work so well. That Friday afternoon stop was one of multiple by Murphy, who is running for re-election against Republican challenger Matthew Corey, Green Party candidate Justin Paglino, and Cheaper Gas Groceries Party candidate Robert Hyde. Murphy came to New Haven on Friday for stops at MakeHaven and ClimateHaven on Chapel Street downtown before heading out to the Shack, all less than two weeks before election day on Nov. 5. Early voting has already begun. The Shack is a 333 Valley St. intergenerational community center
...Read more resurrected by the visionary West Hills Alder Honda Smith and her team of neighbors starting in 2021. The result is a place for everyone to play, work, eat, sleep, commune?—?all toward, as Smith has said, ?“giving our youth?—?giving everybody?—?a chance at a future.” “We have a small, dedicated senior group here and we have activities that we enjoy every day,” senior program coordinator Dr. Carolyn Kinder, who had been calling out Bingo numbers, told the senator. ?“We feel fellowship with one another and if we feel lonely, when we get together, we all kind of cure that problem. Plus we interact a lot with the young people.” The junior senator from Connecticut toured the laundry facilities where kids without access to a washing machine or dryer learn to wash their clothes; the food pantry stocked with community donations; and the 59-bed United States Department of Agriculture-licensed urban farm with kale, tomatoes, and strawberries, among other crops, that feed both the denizens of The Shack and the larger community. He stopped at a classroom?–?the setting for EMT training programs and financial literacy workshops, according to Smith?–?where ninth grader Leyah Morrison told him about the one-on-one tutoring in algebra she gets from a retired math teacher twice a week. He met David Coardes, an artist who painted a mural of Honda Smith on a front wall, and spoke with Jamire Casteel and Isaiah Clark in the recording studio about their musical interests. Following the tour, Murphy and his modest entourage headed for the Shack Cafe, where an animated group of 40 awaited. Initially, Smith told him, they envisioned the cafe for snacks. That shifted to meals when it became clear that the youth weren’t getting the sustenance they needed at home. The senator asked the kids why they liked coming to The Shack. “I get fed, of course, but they also have classes for kids to go to,” said Cayden Brooks. There are courses in cooking, coding, and art, as well as in media production, life skills, and the Code Red program?–?led by Westville Alder and Majority Leader Richard Furlow?–?which prepares kids for the real world. ?“If you need help with your homework, they got tutors, math tutors, English tutors.” “I think The Shack is really welcoming,” said Mi’Love Salmond. ?“It’s like a safe space. Miss Honda looks out for us.” Nevaeh James agreed. ?“Not just Miss Honda,” she said. ?“You got friends looking out for you, adults looking out for you.” Another boy highlighted the isolation exacted by the pandemic. ?“A lot of kids didn’t know how to act with each other,” he said. ?“This helps us in that.” Murphy slid out his phone. ?“It’s also these, right? It’s what pulls kids away from socializing with each other, and that’s why these centers are even more important today.” After a pause, Smith asked the group to tell Murphy the rule regarding phones at The Shack. “No phones out while we’re working,” they chorused. “I’ve heard about The Shack, but to see it in person, see the seniors and the kids all enjoying their activities and learning from one another, it’s inspiring,” said Murphy, as he was leaving. ?“We should have more of these in the city, throughout the state. It’s a model.” New Haven State Rep. Toni Walker echoed his take. ?“This is the formula for a community center right here,” she said. ?“It’s showing that all ages have something to contribute to the community, and it goes back to the centers we used to have, where it’s ours, and not something someone gave to us.” Former Mayor Toni Harp sounded a similar refrain. ?“Especially in the West Hills community, our neighborhoods are shells of themselves,” she said. ?“I like the development downtown but it doesn’t help these neighborhoods. “It’s Honda’s ability to collaborate with everybody and to stay focused on what’s needed for this community,” she added, as the sound of Kinder calling out Bingo numbers drifted in from the activities room. ?“That’s what has The Shack emerging as a vibrant place for seniors, kids, for everybody.” Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) on Friday led a bipartisan group of their Senate colleagues in asking the Biden Administration to address funding shortfalls for submarine programs as they consider funding levels for Fiscal Year 2025. In two separate letters to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Shalanda Young and Department of the Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro, the lawmakers also urged the Administration to carefully assess the merits of the proposed Shipbuilder Accountability and Workforce Support (SAWS) agreement—which would restructure how the Navy pays for submarines—as a potential solution to address delays and get the programs back on track. While Congress has invested over $2.3 billion between 2018 and
...Read more 2023 and an additional $3 billion this year as part of a national security supplemental in the nation’s submarine industrial base, the Virginia-class and Columbia-class submarine programs face significant delays and are expected to be over budget. The on-time completion of Virginia-class submarines, which are built in Virginia and Connecticut, is especially critical to the fulfillment of the Australia-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) trilateral partnership, through which the United States will sell at least two submarines to Australia to bolster security in the Indo-Pacific. “The United States’ submarine programs provide our nation an undersea advantage that is critical to our national security,” the members wrote. “Based on the information available so far, the Shipbuilder Accountability and Workforce Support (SAWS) agreement strikes us as a promising approach to ensure our submarine industrial base rises to the occasion, accelerates submarine production, and fully meets the critical and building demand on U.S. shipyards… We request that you give all due consideration to this initiative, while ensuring it includes the accountability and leverage measures necessary to ensure our federal investments in submarine production go as far as possible in getting these critical programs on track.” The members continued: “It is our understanding that over months of conversation Pentagon leadership, the Navy, and industry reached an agreement to maximize use of taxpayer funding for construction of the next tranche of Columbia-class and Virginia-class submarines – including by raising wages to attract and retain America’s skilled and organized shipyard workforce, addressing rising costs, and advancing much-needed infrastructure investments, all to improve program reliability and schedule.” “We therefore urge more consistent communication with Congress and with OMB so that all parties clearly understand the Navy’s position on SAWS and overall plans to get our nation’s submarine production on track,” the members concluded. “It is critical that our submarine programs be on schedule and on budget.” U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Angus King (I-Maine), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), and Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) also signed the letter. The letter to OMB is available here. The letter to the Navy is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 31 other members of Congress in sending a letter to President Joe Biden applauding his actions to confront the housing crisis and proposing additional executive actions to lower the cost of housing. “Under your leadership, the Biden-Harris Administration has taken important steps to protect renters from predatory corporate landlords and to make home purchases and refinancing more affordable,” the members wrote. “But there is even more that can be done using executive agencies’ existing statutory authority.” The lawmakers recommend the Administration and federal agencies take the following actions: Price Gouging Protections: In order to safeguard tenants from rising rents at the hands of
...Read more corporate landlords who have been caught price gouging their tenants, FHFA can condition all Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac multifamily loans on a set of price gouging protections, source of income protections, anti-eviction regulations, and habitability and accessibility improvements.
Tackle Junk Fees: To address the hidden junk fees that can create thousands of dollars in additional costs for renters and homeowners, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) should finalize its proposed rule to ban junk fees and continue to investigate unfair and deceptive practices by corporate landlords. Additionally, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) should address anticompetitive closing costs and junk fees, lowering closing costs for home mortgages and making homeownership more accessible.
Lower Credit Report Costs: As the Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) enjoys a near monopoly in the credit scoring market, the Department of Justice (DOJ) should investigate whether the company is violating antitrust law, and the CFPB should explore potential remedies to exploding credit reporting costs, including a cap on fees that credit reporting agencies can charge and interoperability requirements that would allow consumers to move their credit scores without new fees.
Promote Housing Development on Federal Property: Federal agencies can work to reform Title V of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance program so that federal property can more easily be leased by affordable housing providers who are serving people experiencing homelessness. The United States is facing a severe affordable housing crisis, with an estimated gap of 7.3 million housing units affordable and available to the lowest-income households. Already, the Biden-Harris Administration has taken bold steps to protect tenants from predatory corporate landlords, including the Blueprint for a Renters Bill of Rights, rent-hike protections in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit properties, and support for anti-price-gouging measures in properties owned by corporate landlords. The Administration has also worked to increase housing supply, including through grants to incentivize the production of affordable housing and more. “We strongly encourage you to cement your legacy by addressing one of the most pressing economic issues of our time and take swift action to create more housing and lower housing costs for Americans everywhere,” the members concluded. U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) also signed the letter. U.S. Representatives Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), Katie Porter (D-Calif.), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Alma Adams (D-N.C.), Nikema Williams (D-Ga.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Sylvia R. Garcia (D-Texas), Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.), Jesús G. "Chuy" García (D-Ill.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Mark Takano (D-Calif.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Greg Casar (D-Texas), André Carson (D-Ind.), Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.), Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.), and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) also signed the letter. The letter was endorsed by the Tenant Union Federation, National Housing Law Project, National Low Income Housing Coalition, National Homelessness Law Center, and Americans for Financial Reform. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear President Biden, We write today to thank you for your historic work to expand tenant protections and lower the cost of housing and to encourage you to take further action before your term ends. Under your leadership, the Biden-Harris Administration has taken important steps to protect renters from predatory corporate landlords and to make home purchases and refinancing more affordable. But there is even more that can be done using executive agencies’ existing statutory authority. We offer the following recommendations to address the high cost of housing felt by millions of Americans. The United States is facing a severe affordable housing crisis, with an estimated gap of 7.3 million housing units affordable and available to the lowest-income households. Currently, there are fewer than four affordable rental homes for every ten extremely low-income renters. Housing costs continue to be the largest budget item for many American households each month, burdening renters and making homeownership unaffordable for too many. We applaud the Biden-Harris Administration’s bold steps to protect tenants from predatory corporate landlords including the Blueprint for a Renters Bill of Rights, rent-hike protections in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit properties, and support for anti-price-gouging measures in properties owned by corporate landlords. The Administration and independent agencies have also taken significant strides toward increasing housing supply and lowering housing costs for all Americans. We support the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s (FHFA) pilot program to waive title insurance on certain refinances, which could save thousands of homeowners up to $1,500, lower upfront fees, and make refinancing more accessible. We also appreciate the Administration’s robust support for the Pathways to Removing Obstacles to Housing program and the PRICE Program, important grant programs to incentivize the production of affordable housing in communities across the country. In the remaining months of your Administration, we urge you to take additional actions, including in the four areas outlined below, to reduce housing costs for American families. Price Gouging Protections According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, rents have risen 26 percent nationally since early 2020. A limited patchwork of tenants’ rights at the local, state, and federal levels leaves tenants with very few protections in the face of rising rents, while corporate landlords have been caught hiking rents well beyond the pace of inflation. While you have called for anti-price-gouging measures for corporate landlords, there are additional steps FHFA can take to tackle rent hikes. FHFA has the authority to condition all Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac multifamily loans on a set of price gouging protections, source of income protections, anti-eviction regulations, and habitability and accessibility improvements. Senate and House leaders – including Senate Majority Leader Schumer, Senator Brown, and Representative Waters – have called on FHFA to protect renters, and these policy ideas have been further endorsed by economists, local elected officials, policy experts, labor unions and civil rights advocates. Tackling Junk Fees Hidden junk fees can create thousands of dollars in additional costs for renters and homeowners, adding significant stress to households. Junk fees can increase a tenant’s risk of eviction for nonpayment of rent and the likelihood that tenants accumulate rental debt, hindering their ability to obtain housing in the future. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) should finalize its proposed rule to ban junk fees and continue to investigate unfair and deceptive practices by corporate landlords. This work would build upon the FTC’s recent efforts to fight algorithmic price fixing and collusion by landlords in the rental market. In particular, the FTC should include rental housing businesses in the definition of “business” as part of its junk fees rule so that renters are protected from the rental housing junk fees that landlords arbitrarily impose. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) should also continue its work to tackle junk fees in the housing market. Already, the CFPB has taken an important step forward by launching an inquiry into junk fees that are increasing mortgage closing costs. A CFPB analysis found that median total loan closing costs for home mortgages increased by over 36% between 2021 and 2023. Upon the conclusion of its inquiry, the CFPB should pursue rulemaking based on its findings to address anticompetitive closing costs and junk fees, lowering closing costs for home mortgages and making homeownership more accessible. Lowering Credit Report Costs When someone in America wants to buy a home, a mortgage lender must purchase a credit score to evaluate the consumer’s creditworthiness. When renters apply for housing, landlords use credit scores to evaluate whether to extend a lease to the household. Today, there is one company that enjoys a near monopoly in the credit scoring market: the Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO). Since 2022, the cost to obtain a score from FICO has increased by as much as 400%, a cost that is often passed on to consumers. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and CFPB should address anti-competitive behavior in the credit scoring market that jacks up prices for consumers. The DOJ should investigate whether FICO and others are engaging in behavior that violates federal antitrust law. And the CFPB should explore potential remedies to exploding credit reporting costs, including a cap on fees that credit reporting agencies can charge and interoperability requirements that would allow consumers to move their credit scores without new fees. FHFA has already taken action to promote competition among the credit bureaus and increase accuracy in credit scoring by transitioning to a “bi-merge” system that requires two, instead of three, credit reports from the nationwide credit reporting agencies. But the Administration can and should do more to lower credit reporting costs for everyday Americans. Promoting Housing Development on Federal Property Title V of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance program was designed to direct surplus federal property to affordable housing providers serving people experiencing homelessness. Yet, between 2016 and 2023, only 11 properties were leased to nonprofits under this authority, and two in three applications were denied by the federal government. To address these problems, the General Services Administration, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Department of Health and Human Services should finalize proposed reforms to Title V without delay. In particular, we recommend that the agencies end the practice of requiring an affordable housing provider demonstrate full funding for a project before a Title V lease can be approved. Because the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) requires applicants to prove they have site control before approving funding, affordable housing providers reliant on LIHTC are often functionally excluded from Title V leases. To help Title V achieve its full potential, we urge the agencies to abandon the full-funding requirement for Title V leases and permit letters of intent or financing commitments as sufficient evidence of an applicant’s ability to obtain financing if applying under a program such as LIHTC. * * * We strongly encourage you to cement your legacy by addressing one of the most pressing economic issues of our time and take swift action to create more housing and lower housing costs for Americans everywhere. We thank you for your attention to this important matter. Sincerely, ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) joined Governor Ned Lamont on Monday to announce that the major disaster declaration President Joe Biden approved for Fairfield County, Litchfield County, and New Haven County as a result of the historic rainfall and extreme flooding on August 18, 2024 has been amended to include the governor’s request for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Public Assistance Program. Approval of this program means that municipal governments within those three counties, as well as Connecticut state government and certain nonprofit organizations, are now eligible to apply for federal reimbursement of 75% of the
...Read more costs associated with repairing and rebuilding uninsured damage to public infrastructure caused by the storm – such as roads, bridges, rail lines, schools, parks, and other facilities – and the costs associated with their emergency response and protective measures. Previously, the declaration was approved to include the Individual Assistance Program – which makes federal disaster funding available to individuals to cover the costs of uninsured damage to private property and other related emergency actions – and the Hazard Mitigation Program, which supports state and local governments with the costs of taking actions that can reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural disasters. The initial declaration also brought Small Business Administration loan assistance to eligible businesses and individuals. In his application to FEMA, Governor Lamont estimated that state and local governments in these counties experienced roughly $14.3 million in damage to public infrastructure from this storm, with much of the damage impacting the transportation system, such as state and local roads and bridges, as well as the Waterbury Branch Line of Metro-North Railroad’s New Haven Line. “This announcement is good news for so many in Connecticut still recovering from the devastation caused by the August flooding. No amount of money will undo the damage done, but these federal dollars will help ease the burden placed on our communities and provide assistance to towns working to restore roads, bridges, rail and other essential infrastructure across our state. I’m grateful to the Biden-Harris Administration and Governor Lamont for their swift action and dedication to supporting our communities during this challenging time,” said Murphy. “Approval of this program will be a relief to many towns that experienced significant damage to public infrastructure from this storm, especially to roads and bridges that were completely destroyed and needed swift rebuilding to ensure that residents who live in these areas have access to critical routes. The Biden-Harris administration has been extremely helpful in their response to this unprecedented flooding event, and I thank FEMA and the Small Business Administration for their on-the-ground actions in Connecticut to help our residents and businesses recover. I also thank the members of Connecticut’s Congressional delegation for helping our state secure this declaration and the associated resources it provides,” said Lamont. “We’ve been holding our breath for this decision. In my multiple visits to towns hard hit by catastrophic flooding, I’ve seen the huge costs and consequences of rebuilding that such historic federal aid will support. It will enable public assets like roads and bridges to be rebuilt – better and stronger for the new weather normal – sparing Connecticut taxpayers most of the fiscal burden. It’s a day well worth the wait. Our state will be more resilient with less financial burden,” said Blumenthal. “The inclusion of the Public Assistance Program in this disaster declaration is a crucial step in helping Connecticut communities recover and rebuild. With this, local governments can now access federal support to cover the costs of restoring essential public infrastructure damaged by the storm. Roads, bridges, and other critical public infrastructure connect us to our workplaces, schools, and our families. Rebuilding them is key to our recovery. This support from FEMA means that our towns won’t have to bear the financial strain alone. I will continue to fight to ensure our communities receive the resources they need to recover,” said DeLauro. “So many in southwest Connecticut are still rebuilding from August’s devastating flooding. I was glad to help bring federal disaster relief to repair the damage and support families in need of assistance, and I’m thrilled that the program has been expanded to offer additional aid without raising property taxes. With this change, our towns will have access to the resources they need to restore roads, bridges, and other critical public infrastructure that Connecticut’s families depend on. Thank you to the Biden-Harris administration, Governor Lamont, and my Congressional colleagues for their continued efforts to support this disaster recovery effort,” said Himes. “Amending the major disaster declaration will unlock federal reimbursement resources for municipalities, state government and eligible nonprofits – reducing the financial burden in addition to restoring critical infrastructure. When Connecticut was impacted by record flooding, we received swift support from our federal partners. I remain grateful to the Biden-Harris administration for the continued support our residents, businesses, and communities have received to rebuild and recover,” said Hayes. So far under this declaration, FEMA has approved more than $8 million in federal disaster assistance to Connecticut residents through the Individual Assistance Program. The deadline for residents to apply for the Individual Assistance Program is November 19, 2024. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 257 Democratic members of Congress in submitting an amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States, two consolidated cases concerning the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) under consideration by the en banc Ninth Circuit. EMTALA is a federal law that requires hospitals that receive Medicare funding to provide necessary “stabilizing treatment” to patients experiencing medical emergencies, which can include abortion care. After the Dobbs decision in 2022, a draconian anti-abortion law in Idaho went into effect that makes it a felony for a doctor to terminate a patient’s pregnancy
...Read more unless it is “necessary” to prevent the patient’s death. The United States sued the State of Idaho, arguing that the state’s law is preempted by EMTALA in those circumstances in which abortion may not be necessary to prevent imminent death, but still constitutes the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient’s emergency medical condition. The district court agreed; it held that in those limited, but critically important situations, EMTALA requires Medicare-participating hospitals to provide abortion as an emergency medical treatment. Idaho Republicans appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court, which lifted the injunction and took the case in January—in March, Murphy and Blumenthal joined 256 other members of Congress in filing an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to affirm the district court decision. In June, the Supreme Court dismissed the case but without a ruling on the merits, sending the case back to the Ninth Circuit Court and reinstating the district court’s injunction. In their brief in support of the Justice Department, the lawmakers ask the Ninth Circuit to uphold the district court’s ruling. They argue that the congressional intent, text, and history of EMTALA make clear that covered hospitals must provide abortion care when it is the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient’s emergency medical condition, and that EMTALA preempts Idaho’s abortion ban in emergency situations that present a serious threat to a patient’s health. “Respecting the supremacy of federal law is about more than just protecting our system of government; it is about protecting people’s lives,” the members wrote. “If this Court allows Idaho’s near-total abortion ban to supersede federal law, pregnant patients in Idaho will continue to be denied appropriate medical treatment, placing them at heightened risk for medical complications and severe adverse health outcomes… And health care providers, unwilling to let Idaho’s law override their medical judgment regarding their patients’ best interests, will continue their exile from Idaho, creating maternity-care ‘deserts’ all over the state.” The members point to numerous reports of OB/GYNs leaving Idaho en masse since the state’s abortion ban went into effect—Idaho has since lost fifty-five percent of its maternal-fetal medicine specialists and three rural hospitals have shut down maternity services altogether. “These are not hypothetical scenarios. Because Idaho’s abortion ban contains no clear exceptions for the ‘emergency medical conditions’ covered by EMTALA, it forces physicians to wait until their patients are on the verge of death before providing abortion care. The result in other states with similar laws has been ‘significant maternal morbidity,’” the members continued, highlighting harrowing reports of pregnant women with severe health complications being denied necessary abortion care, including an Idaho woman who was flown to Utah for an abortion while hemorrhaging, leaking amniotic fluid, and terrified that she would not survive to care for her two other children. “Federal law does not allow Idaho to endanger the lives of its residents in this way.” In their brief, the members also clarify that the references to “unborn child” in EMTALA were intended to expand hospitals’ obligations with respect to providing stabilizing treatment—not contract them or take away the obligation to provide abortion care in certain circumstances. The members’ brief also counters an argument from Idaho and its amici that the Supremacy Clause does not apply in this case because EMTALA was passed using Spending Clause authority, and therefore acts only as a condition on Medicare funding. The members make clear that all laws passed by Congress are entitled to preemption—regardless of their source of constitutional authority—and states cannot pass laws that make it impossible for private parties to accept federal funding, inhibiting the purpose of the federal law. “EMTALA requires abortion when necessary to stabilize a patient with an emergency medical condition, Idaho’s near-total abortion ban is preempted to the extent that it prevents doctors from providing that care,” the members added. “This Court should reject Appellants’ novel theory that EMTALA is not entitled to preemptive effect because it was enacted pursuant to Congress’s spending power. Under the Supremacy Clause, all ‘the constitutional laws enacted by congress,’ constitute ‘the supreme Law of the Land,’. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly held, the principle of federal supremacy applies to laws passed pursuant to Congress’s spending authority no less than it does to laws effectuating other enumerated powers.” The members conclude by asking the Ninth Circuit to affirm the district court’s decision that EMTALA requires Medicare-participating hospitals to provide abortion care when it is necessary as emergency medical treatment. U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Bob Casey Jr. (D-Pa.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Paul Helmy (D-Calif.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King Jr. (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also signed the amicus brief. In the House, the brief was signed by 211 U.S. Representatives. The members’ amicus brief to the Supreme Court can be read in full HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders and 20 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to Stellantis—the giant automotive manufacturer responsible for common car brands like Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep. In their letter, the senators called on Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares to honor the collective bargaining agreement signed last year with the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the promises the company made to strengthen and expand good-paying union jobs in America. “We are writing to express our growing concerns about the failure of Stellantis, under your leadership, to honor the commitments it made to the United
...Read more Auto Workers (UAW) in last year’s collective bargaining agreement…” the senators wrote. “We urge Stellantis not to renege on the promises it made to American autoworkers and to provide details on the timelines for these investments.” In the contract ratified last year, Stellantis committed to make nearly $19 billion in new investments and product commitments in the U.S., including: Re-opening the plant in Belvidere, Illinois that was “indefinitely idled” last year;
Establishing a parts and customer care Mega Hub in Belvidere;
Continuing to manufacture the Dodge Durango in Detroit through 2025; and
Manufacturing the next generation Dodge Durango in Detroit starting in 2026. Instead, Stellantis has taken actions that undermine the commitments made to the UAW and leave “behind thousands of American workers who built the company into the auto giant it is today,” the senators wrote. These actions may include moving the next generation Dodge Durango out of the U.S. and into “low-cost” countries like Mexico, as well as delaying planned investments to reopen and expand the Belvidere assembly plant. This year, Stellantis has spent over $8 billion on stock buybacks and dividends to benefit its wealthy executives and stockholders. During the first six months of this year, Stellantis has generated over $6 billion in profits, making it one of the most profitable auto companies in the world. The company has also benefited from billions of dollars in financial assistance from American taxpayers and the federal government. In July, the Department of Energy announced Stellantis would receive nearly $335 million in federal dollars to support Belvidere Assembly Plant’s conversion to electric vehicle production. “Last year, while blue collar auto workers in Belvidere were being laid off indefinitely, you were able to receive a 56 percent pay raise, boosting your total compensation to $39.5 million, which made you the highest paid executive among traditional auto companies,” the senators continued. “We believe that if Stellantis can afford to spend over $8 billion this year on stock buybacks and dividends, it can live up to the contractual commitments it made to the UAW. This is especially true given the billions of dollars in financial assistance American taxpayers have spent to support your company and the enormous sacrifices autoworkers have been forced to make over many decades.” U.S. Senators Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also signed the letter. The full letter is available HERE and below. Dear Mr. Tavares: We are writing to express our growing concerns about the failure of Stellantis, under your leadership, to honor the commitments it made to the United Auto Workers (UAW) in last year’s collective bargaining agreement. In that contract, ratified by UAW members, Stellantis committed to “establish long-term stability and job security” for its workforce. The agreement includes nearly $19 billion in new investment and product commitments in the United States, including promises to: Re-open the plant in Belvidere, Illinois that was “indefinitely idled” last year;
Establish a parts and customer care Mega Hub in Belvidere;
Continue to manufacture the Dodge Durango in Detroit through 2025; and
Manufacture the next generation Dodge Durango in Detroit starting in 2026. We are deeply concerned that Stellantis is not keeping the promises it made to strengthen and expand good-paying union jobs in America. Specifically, Stellantis is now delaying planned investments to reopen and expand the Belvidere assembly plant, leaving behind thousands of American workers who built the company into the auto giant it is today. We are also concerned with reporting that Stellantis is planning to move production of the next generation Dodge Durango out of the United States, after previously announcing layoffs that threaten the economic security and well-being of thousands of autoworkers. Moreover, Stellantis has stated publicly that it plans to source 80 percent of supply from “low-cost countries” like Mexico. By your own admission, Stellantis’s growth plan hinges on shifting “industrial production into cost competitive countries” like Mexico, where workers are making substandard wages. These actions violate the obligations Stellantis made to the UAW. We urge Stellantis not to renege on the promises it made to American autoworkers and to provide details on the timelines for these investments. This year, Stellantis has spent over $8 billion on stock buybacks and dividends to benefit its wealthy executives and stockholders. Last year, while blue collar auto workers in Belvidere were being laid off indefinitely, you were able to receive a 56 percent pay raise boosting your total compensation to $39.5 million, which made you the highest paid executive among traditional auto companies. During the first six months of this year, Stellantis has generated over $6 billion in profits, making it one of the most profitable auto companies in the world. We believe that if Stellantis can afford to spend over $8 billion this year on stock buybacks and dividends, it can live up to the contractual commitments it made to the UAW. This is especially true given the billions of dollars in financial assistance American taxpayers have spent to support your company and the enormous sacrifices autoworkers have been forced to make over many decades. For example, the Department of Energy announced in July that nearly $335 million in federal dollars would be going to supporting Belvidere Assembly Plant’s conversion to electric vehicle production. With hundreds of millions of dollars of federal support going towards ensuring strong union jobs stay in the U.S., Stellantis must honor the promises it made to UAW workers and the Belvidere community. We urge you to deliver on the commitments you made to the UAW in your 2023 national agreement without further delay. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday announced his intention to join U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Jim Risch (R-Id.) in introducing the Georgian People’s Act, legislation that would hold Georgian government officials and individuals responsible for corruption, human rights abuses, and efforts to advance the foreign influence law or facilitate its passage. The legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and U.S. Senators Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Dan Sullivan (R-Ark.), Angus King (I-Maine), Todd Young (R-Ind.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
...Read more and George Helmy (D-N.J.) have also requested to join the Senators’ Georgian People’s Act when the Senate reconvenes in November. “Russia’s use of corruption, propaganda and violence doesn’t just threaten Georgia’s future as a strong, independent nation—it puts the entire international order at risk of collapse,” said Murphy. “As Putin and his cronies try to undermine Georgia’s democracy and impose a government that will do their bidding, this bipartisan legislation makes clear the United States stands firmly with the Georgian people who overwhelmingly support democracy and a future in Europe.” “I’m pleased that a number of my Senate colleagues recognize the urgency of the situation in Georgia and have agreed to cosponsor the Georgian People’s Act in the U.S. Senate,” said Shaheen. “Together, we’re sending a strong message that there is robust bipartisan support for our legislation and our posture towards Georgia and support for the Georgian people’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations will remain unchanged no matter which party controls Washington.” “This bill sends a strong message from Congress that the U.S. is united behind the Georgian people as they pursue a future in the transatlantic community,” said Risch. “We recognize the Georgian people’s desire for European integration and are committed to making U.S. policy that supports the opportunity for them achieve it.” “The Georgian government’s embrace of pro-Russian policies and away from a Euro-Atlantic future is concerning,” said Tillis. “I am proud to co-sponsor this bill to hold the Georgian government officials accountable and reaffirm the U.S. support for the Georgian people.” “The Georgian government’s shift towards Russia’s authoritarian regime and away from its European partners is alarming,” said Cornyn. “This legislation would hold Georgia’s corrupt leaders accountable and signal to the Georgian people that the U.S. stands with them in their pursuit of a Euro-Atlantic future.” “While the Georgian people have demonstrated overwhelming support for a democratic future, their government has become increasingly under Russia’s influence—most recently passing a law to restrict civil society and free speech,” said Romney. “Our legislation would hold Georgian government officials responsible for corruption and demonstrate the United States’ commitment to the Georgian people’s fight for democracy and rule of law.” “A free, secure, sovereign Georgia, aligned with the US and its allies is in the national interest, both of Georgia and the United States,” said Sullivan. “Georgia’s apparent drift back into Russia’s orbit is bad for the stability of the region. No one understands this better than the Georgian people themselves. According to polling from the International Republican Institute, 90% of Georgians want their nation to be part of the Western, free World, not the Russian World.” “The United States stands with the Georgian people and their pursuit of a Euro-Atlantic future. The Georgian government’s recent efforts to align with Russia reject the desires of Georgians and pose a significant threat. Our bipartisan bill would hold Georgian government officials accountable for corruption and express our support for the transatlantic aspirations of the Georgian people,” said Young. Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less BOSTON (Oct. 23, 2024) – Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced $3.6 billion in new funding under the Biden-Harris Administration's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to upgrade water infrastructure and keep communities safe. Combined with $2.6 billion announced earlier this month, this $6.2 billion in investments for Fiscal Year 2025 will help communities across the country upgrade water infrastructure that is essential to safely managing wastewater, protecting local freshwater resources, and delivering safe drinking water to homes, schools, and businesses. These Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funds will flow through the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds (CWSRF and DWSRF), a long-standing federal-state water investment
...Read more partnership. This multibillion-dollar investment will fund state-run, low-interest loan programs that address key challenges in financing water infrastructure. Today's announcement includes allotments for Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Clean Water General Supplemental funds for Connecticut ($30,484,000), Emerging Contaminant funds ($2,631,000), and $7,640,000 under the Drinking Water Emerging Contaminant Fund. This funding is part of a five-year, $50 billion investment in water infrastructure through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law – the largest investment in water infrastructure in American history. To ensure investments reach communities that need them the most, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law mandates that a majority of the funding announced today must be provided to disadvantaged communities in the form of grants or loans that do not have to be repaid. "Water keeps us healthy, sustains vibrant communities and dynamic ecosystems, and supports economic opportunity. When our water infrastructure fails, it threatens people's health, peace of mind, and the environment," said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan. "With the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law's historic investment in water, EPA is working with states and local partners to upgrade infrastructure and address local challenges—from lead in drinking water, to PFAS, to water main breaks, to sewer overflows and climate resilience. Together, we are creating good-paying jobs while ensuring that all people can rely on clean and safe water." "Clean, reliable water is at the heart of every thriving community. Yet too many communities—especially those overburdened by pollution or left behind by past investments—face challenges accessing the resources they need to upgrade water infrastructure," said EPA Regional Administrator David W. Cash. "Thanks to the Biden-Harris Administration, we are delivering transformative funding to support local solutions to water issues, from fixing aging infrastructure to addressing emerging contaminants like PFAS. These investments don't just protect public health and reduce pollution in waterways; they also create good-paying jobs and help communities become more resilient for the future." "A commitment to clean water speaks volumes about a nation's values. This $40 million federal investment enables communities to improve their water infrastructure, expanding access to safe and clean drinking water, protecting our local freshwater sources, and reducing wastewater pollutants in our waterways. I am proud that the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law continues to deliver for communities across Connecticut," said U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal. "These historic investments from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will go a long way towards tackling some of Connecticut's most challenging water infrastructure projects," said U.S. Senator Chris Murphy. "From replacing aging pipes to protecting our watersheds, this $40 million in federal dollars will help ensure every community across our state has reliable access to clean, safe water for generations to come." "The nearly $41 million in federal funding announced today will help improve local water infrastructure through lead pipe replacement, wastewater management infrastructure improvements, and broken water main repairs," said U.S. Representative John B. Larson. "We passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to accomplish these goals while also creating good-paying jobs, and I will continue to work with the entire Connecticut delegation to deliver federal funding to improve our water systems and ensure everyone has access to safe drinking water." EPA is changing the odds for communities that have faced barriers to planning and accessing federal funding through its Water Technical Assistance program, which helps disadvantaged communities identify water challenges, develop infrastructure upgrade plans, and apply for funding. Communities seeking Water Technical Assistance can request support by completing the WaterTA request form. These efforts also advance the Biden-Harris Administration's Justice40 Initiative, which sets the goal that 40% of the overall benefits of certain Federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. To read stories about how unprecedented investments in water from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law are transforming communities across the country, visit EPA's Investing in America's Water Infrastructure Storymap. To read more about additional projects, see EPA's recently released Quarterly Report on Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funded Clean Water and Drinking Water SRF projects. For more information, including the state-by-state allocation of 2025 funding and a breakdown of EPA SRF funding available under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, please visit the Clean Water State Revolving Fund website and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund website. Additionally, the SRF Public Portal allows users to access data from both the Drinking Water and Clean Water SRF programs through interactive reports, dashboards, and maps. The State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs have been the foundation of water infrastructure investments for more than 30 years, providing low-cost financing for local projects across America. SRF programs are critically important programs for investing in the nation's water infrastructure. They are designed to generate significant and sustainable water quality and public health benefits across the country. Their impact is amplified by the growth inherent in a revolving loan structure, in which payments of principal and interest on loans become available to address future needs. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday joined U.S. Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Il.) in releasing a report summarizing what to expect on Election Day and encouraging voters to cast their ballot. With the general election well underway in every state across the country, Senate Democrats have a clear message for the American people, which is to vote and cast their ballot as early as possible. As significant numbers of Americans choose to vote by mail, the report explains why it’s still possible that, in some states, the outcome might not be known on November 5th, in part because states differ in whether they allow mail-in ballots to be processed ahead of Election Day and
...Read more whether ballots must be received by Election Day or postmarked by Election Day. The report also makes clear that voter intimidation is illegal and federal law prohibits coercing or threatening anyone in order to interfere with their right to vote. A copy of the report can be found HERE. “As Donald Trump bets on chaos, division, and lies to fuel his campaign and get back into the White House, it’s on us to see through his fearmongering and stand up for our democracy. So vote early, vote by mail, vote in person—but vote. The future of our country depends on us rejecting fear and misinformation and making our voices heard,” said Murphy. “The right to vote is fundamental to our democracy, and we must do everything we can to protect it and uphold the integrity of the election process. That means pushing back on efforts to sow chaos during election season. As this report explains, it also means making sure that Americans know that it is possible that the outcome in some states will not be known on November 5th. While some states have expedited their counting requirements since 2020, we should be prepared to be patient about results in places where counting ballots may take longer. Americans should keep making their voices heard at the ballot box,” said Klobuchar. “Just like 2020, Donald Trump and his allies continue to refuse to commit to accepting the results of the election if he loses while pushing dangerous and divisive rhetoric to sow discord and undermine confidence in our election process. Americans losing faith in the results of our elections doesn’t just risk another January 6th but puts our very democracy at risk,” said Schumer. “Senate Democrats remain committed to ensuring all Americans can vote without fear or intimidation.” “Former President Trump's dangerous rhetoric threatens to further divide our country and sow real potential for violence like we saw up close on January 6, 2021. Our elections are the foundation of American democracy. Protecting them should be the top priority for everyone who cares about the future of our country. Election officials, courts, and elected leaders must be accountable for upholding that principle,” said Heinrich. “There is no greater responsibility, or honor, as an American than exercising your right to vote. Our free, fair voting systems and our peaceful transitions of powers are two of the hallmarks that have separated America from authoritarianism for centuries now—and that will carry on far beyond this November, despite Donald Trump's desperate, sad attempts to sow seeds of chaos and distrust in our electoral processes. The most powerful defense against creeping autocracy in America is to make our voices heard at the ballot box—because carrying out our most sacred duty as citizens is the best way we can ensure remain a government of, by and for the people,” said Duckworth. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) joined Governor Ned Lamont and Connecticut Department of Transportation Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto to announce $125 million in federal funding from the Biden-Harris Administration’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to support Phase 3 of the construction project reconfiguring the highway interchange that connects Interstate 91, Interstate 691, and Route 15 in Meriden. This interchange is one of the most congested, outdated, and crash prone highway corridors in Connecticut, and the state leaders have been unified in working to secure federal funding that will enable the state
...Read more to complete a major reconfiguration of this area. CTDOT is currently constructing the second of the project’s three phases. The project’s overall goal is to reduce congestion and improve safety by eliminating dangerous weaving points, correcting roadway geometry, and adding multi-lane exits. Upon completion of Phase 3 in 2030, the project will see the replacement and rehabilitation of several bridges and the addition and extension of auxiliary lanes to reduce crashes and improve traffic flow. “Getting through the congestion on I-91, I-691, and Route 15 has become a daily headache for Connecticut drivers. This $125 million in federal dollars from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will help realign ramps, replace aging bridges, improve drainage, and support other long-needed infrastructure upgrades that streamline the flow of traffic, create good-paying jobs, and ensure a safer, smoother commute for thousands of people,” said Murphy. “I am proud that a historic $125 million in federal funding will support the reconfiguration of one of Connecticut’s most congested interchanges. This redesign will provide relief to the countless motorists who pass through every day and provide much-needed infrastructure upgrades. I will continue fighting to deliver federal investments to Connecticut that make our roads and highways more safe and secure,” said Blumenthal. “This is another victory for Connecticut. When my fellow Congressional members and I worked on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, we understood the law’s potential to benefit communities throughout the state. With funding now in place for Phase 3 of the reconfiguration of Interstate 91, Interstate 691, and Route 15, we are generating well-paying jobs, fixing bridges, expanding traffic lanes on I-91, making our roads safer, and enhancing road conditions,” said DeLauro. “Reconfiguring the I-91, I-691, Route 15 interchange will reduce traffic and increase safety for drivers. I am delighted to see another federal investment awarded to move this project forward. Investing in modernizing infrastructure benefits communities, and I will continue to work with my Congressional colleagues to prioritize more projects that deliver for Connecticut,” said Hayes. “Connecticut has some of the most congested and dangerous highways and interchanges in America. I worked with the entire Connecticut Congressional delegation to pass the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law so we can cut down on traffic congestion, repair aging roads and bridges, and support good-paying union jobs. I applaud Governor Lamont and Commissioner Eucalitto for their ongoing commitment to improving our infrastructure and revitalizing our communities, and I look forward to continuing to work with them to support projects across the state, including the Greater Hartford area, that accomplish those goals,” said Larson. “This area of highway is one of the most heavily congested in Connecticut and our administration has made its reconfiguration a priority because it’s about time that we do something about the backups, crashes, and delays that this oddly designed section of roadway causes nearly every day. This is a major reconfiguration of a very heavily traveled area and it’s going to take some time to complete, but ultimately central Connecticut will benefit from finally easing the congestion on these highways. We’re able to execute this project thanks to the funding released by President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and I applaud Connecticut’s outstanding Congressional delegation for not only helping to get this law passed but also working to ensure that our state benefits from it in a major way. I thank the Biden-Harris administration and the U.S. Department of Transportation for working with our administration to secure the funding for this important project,” said Lamont. “Improving safety is our number one priority at CTDOT and it is the number one goal of this project. Without federal support from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, projects like this can sit idle for decades while Connecticut pays the price. We are thankful to Governor Lamont and the state legislature for ensuring we had matching funds to secure this grant, appreciative of our Congressional delegation for its steadfast advocacy, and grateful to our partners at USDOT who allow us to dream big once again,” said Eucalitto. The cost of the project’s first phase totaled $80 million and was entirely funded by the state. The second phase is supported by a combination of $50 million in state funding and $200 million federal funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The third phase will be supported by the $125 million federal grant announced today, as well as additional state funding. Combined, the expenditure for all three phases is anticipated to be more than $500 million. This project includes a project labor agreement with the building trades, providing good-paying jobs and workforce development training for the next generation of workers. The first phase began in early 2023 and is aimed at repairing bridges, adding a lane of traffic to I-91, and making related road improvements. This includes: Realigning and reconfiguring the ramp from I-691 eastbound to I-91 northbound (Exit 1A old Exit 11) to two lanes to meet traffic demand.
Bridge replacement due to the proposed ramp realignment.
Adding an auxiliary lane on I-91 northbound to relieve congestion and improve safety caused by a steep uphill grade. This second phase began in June and includes: Adding a new two-lane exit ramp from Route 15 northbound to I-91 northbound to reduce traffic congestion on the Exit 68 N-E ramp.
Closing the existing Exit 17 ramp from I-91 northbound to Route 15 northbound and re-routing traffic to Exit 16 to provide a two-lane exit ramp with a right-side traffic merge onto Route 15 northbound.
Reconfiguring the existing Exit 68W ramp from Route 15 northbound to I-691 westbound to two lanes.
Reconfiguring the acceleration and deceleration lanes to provide adequate traffic weaving distances to improve safety. The third phase will include: A new two-lane exit ramp from Route 15 southbound to I-91 southbound to reduce traffic congestion on the existing Exit 67 ramp.
A new two-lane I-91 southbound ramp to Route 15 southbound to reduce traffic congestion on the existing Exit 17 ramp.
Reconfiguring the ramp from I-691 eastbound to Route 15 southbound (Exit 10) to two lanes.
Reconfiguring the ramp from I-91 southbound to I-691 westbound (Exit 18) to two lanes. Learn more about the project, get the latest updates, and subscribe to construction alerts by visiting the project’s website HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, and U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), released the following joint statement regarding the deteriorating situation in Lebanon: “Over the past few weeks, there has been a concerning escalation of violence in Lebanon, which has resulted in the deaths of hundreds, the displacement of over one million civilians and unacceptable attacks on United Nations peacekeepers. “There is no question that Israel has a right to defend itself from terrorism on its northern border and that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization whose actions have led to Lebanese, American
...Read more and Israeli deaths. By preventing the formation of a functioning government, Hezbollah has exacerbated an economic crisis and perpetuated the suffering of everyday Lebanese citizens. We also assert firmly that Iran must be stopped from supplying Hezbollah with resources and weapons, which is essential to securing peace on the border and ensuring that Israelis in the north can return safely to their homes. “At the same time, the Israel Defense Forces have an obligation to conduct their operations in a way that limits civilian harm and does not impede humanitarian access. We also strongly condemn the attacks against United Nations peacekeepers who operate in Lebanon under UN Security Council resolutions 1701 and 2749. Peacekeepers must be allowed to fulfill their mission of ensuring peace along the Blue Line. “We must work towards de-escalation and implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 in Lebanon while also urging all parties involved to secure a ceasefire in Gaza and hostage release deal. We must do all we can to prevent further civilian casualties, dangerous destabilization and expansion of this conflict into a full-out war.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.), members of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday led 6 of their Senate colleagues in sending a bipartisan letter to President Biden expressing concerns about the security of the global network of undersea communications and energy cables upon which American workers and businesses rely. More than 95% of international internet traffic travels via these undersea cables, resulting in trillions of dollars in financial transactions each day. The locations of these cables are often openly published to prevent accidental damage. As American companies look to expand and invest in this critical infrastructure, it is imperative that the United States has a complete understanding of existing
...Read more vulnerabilities, especially those that impact our economic and national security. “America’s adversaries have been developing their capabilities to attack or disrupt critical undersea infrastructure. There is a long tradition, dating back well over a century, of belligerents attacking their opponents’ underwater communications lines in the first phase of a conflict,” the senators wrote. “Given these threats and challenges, it is imperative that the United States undertake a review of existing vulnerabilities to global undersea cable infrastructure, including the threat of sabotage by Russia as well as the growing role of the People’s Republic of China in cable laying and repair. If we are truly to deepen vital commercial and security relationships with willing partners and allies, this must be a national priority.” U.S. Senators Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Mr. President: We write to you to express our concern about the security of global undersea communications and energy cables, especially those that impact America’s economic and national security and that of our allies and partners. As you are well aware, more than 95% of international internet traffic travels via undersea cables, including trillions of dollars in financial transactions each day. Moreover, the exact locations of most of these cables are openly published in order to reduce the likelihood of accidental damage from ships’ anchors or fishing activities. Internet and telecommunications providers, including American firms, intend to invest billions of dollars in expanding the global network of undersea communications cables. Additionally, energy transmission cables are proliferating as governments look to new sources of electricity generation. America’s adversaries have been developing their capabilities to attack or disrupt critical undersea infrastructure. There is a long tradition, dating back well over a century, of belligerents attacking their opponents’ underwater communications lines in the first phase of a conflict. For example, in both World Wars, Britain’s first naval actions were to cut the telegraph cables connecting Germany to the Americas, and in 1918 a German U-boat severed lines connecting New York to both Nova Scotia and Panama. In addition to this kind of overt, kinetic attack, the nature of undersea infrastructure increases the feasibility of gray zone actions with plausible deniability. It is difficult to distinguish between an accident and a deliberate action on the seabed, and more difficult still to confirm who conducted such an action. On top of this, because this infrastructure is privately owned by commercial enterprises, repairs are the responsibility of these private companies, which are likely not prepared to maintain them under wartime conditions and are likely to seek the most cost-effective repair and maintenance options—even if that option is owned or operated by a foreign adversary or strategic competitor. Given these threats and challenges, it is imperative that the United States undertake a review of existing vulnerabilities to global undersea cable infrastructure, including the threat of sabotage by Russia as well as the growing role of the People’s Republic of China in cable laying and repair. If we are truly to deepen vital commercial and security relationships with willing partners and allies, this must be a national priority. We respectfully request that you provide responses to the following questions and direct senior administration officials to brief Members of Congress, including members of relevant committees of jurisdiction, on your plans and the resources and authorities needed to carry them out. What is your Administration’s overall strategy to guarantee the security of America’s undersea infrastructure and to promote the security of that of our allies and partners?
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 established the Cable Security Fleet (CSF). If authorized and sufficiently funded, what would be your assessment of the ideal size of the U.S.-flagged and -operated cable laying and repair vessel fleet to ensure sufficient cable repair capacity during a conflict or national emergency? How can the United States work with trusted allies and partners for additional capacity to support the expansion and repair of trusted undersea cable networks?
What is the Administration’s strategy to encourage other nations to choose trusted suppliers in their selection of undersea cable manufacturers, particularly in any nation of concern or which may be vulnerable to coercion or covert action by America’s adversaries?
How is the Administration working with the private sector to ensure that commercial enterprises’ investments in undersea cables align with U.S. national security priorities?
How do you intend to protect the physical security of undersea cables in the open ocean, including through any interpretation of customary international law?
How is the Administration working multilaterally to collectively enhance security and monitor potential threats to undersea infrastructure, including through NATO, the Quad, and the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity? Thank you for your prompt attention to this request. As Congress works to continue its oversight of national security, it is vital that we understand the current state of the information backbone of our economy and efforts to protect it. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Thursday released the following statement on the death of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.
“Yahya Sinwar was a brutal U.S.-designated terrorist and the mastermind of the October 7th terror attacks. His death provides an important measure of justice for the 1,200 innocent Israelis murdered that day, their families, and the more than 100 hostages still being held in Gaza. With Sinwar’s death, Hamas’s military command structure has been decimated and the group no longer has the capability to stage another attack like October 7th. It is time to redouble efforts to secure an agreement to end this war and bring home all of the hostages.”
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Tuesday released a statement following reports that no food aid has entered northern Gaza in more than two weeks, putting one million displaced Palestinians at risk of starvation. On Sunday, the Biden Administration sent a letter to senior Israeli officials warning that if conditions in Gaza do not improve within 30 days, the U.S. may consider restricting military assistance to Israel. “I am deeply disturbed by the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and it is vital for Israel to take immediate steps to improve these nightmarish conditions. Despite some improvements by Israeli authorities earlier this year,
...Read more the amount of humanitarian aid reaching desperate Palestinians has fallen to new lows at a time when needs are higher than ever. After more than a year of conflict, the actions required to surge humanitarian aid into Gaza are both known and achievable – as demonstrated by the recent successful campaign to vaccinate more than half a million Palestinian children against polio. The way Israel conducts this war matters, and the Israeli government has to do more to guarantee the safety of humanitarian aid workers and ensure sufficient aid is reaching Palestinians across all parts of Gaza. Israel, along with every other recipient of U.S. military aid, is required to abide by international humanitarian law for that assistance to continue. The Biden-Harris Administration took the right step this week by laying out clear changes that Israel must make in the next 30 days to stay in compliance with U.S. law.” ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg asking for details on the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) efforts to improve roadway safety. Murphy referenced the recent tragic deaths of Connecticut Trooper First Class Aaron Pelletier and ConnDOT worker Andrew DiDomenico, as well as his own Walk Across Connecticut, where he saw dangerous driving conditions firsthand. Expressing concern over rising traffic fatalities in Connecticut, Murphy requested additional information on specific measures being implemented, strategies to address dangerous driving behaviors, and how federal and state governments can collaborate to enhance roadway safety. “There were 169 traffic fatalities in Connecticut during the first half
...Read more of 2024,” Murphy wrote. “This year, Connecticut has also been devastated by several high-profile roadway fatalities. In May, Connecticut Trooper First Class Aaron Pelletier was struck and killed in the line of duty while working at a traffic stop on Interstate 84. In July, a Connecticut Department of Transportation worker, Andrew DiDomenico, died after being struck by a vehicle on Interstate 91. While these two accidents garnered significant attention across the state, there are many more families dealing with the pain of losing a loved one in a traffic accident.” Murphy continued: “My office and I regularly hear from constituents about roadway safety. The primary issues identified are drivers traveling at high speed, ignoring traffic signs, and driving while distracted. During my annual walk across Connecticut, I spoke with a group of road construction workers who told me that they are noticing an uptick in dangerous driving behavior. I also regularly meet with a group of middle school children who advise me on a range of policy issues, and in our conversations these students regularly who tell me how reckless driving can make their walk to school scary and more dangerous. While I understand there is no perfect policy solution or initiative that will eliminate traffic accidents completely, I am writing to inquire what more can be done to protect people on our roadways and seek your Department’s expert opinion on best practices to decrease roadway fatalities.” Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Buttigieg, I am writing to inquire about the Department of Transportation’s work on highway safety. Unfortunately, as you are aware, there were 169 traffic fatalities in Connecticut during the first half of 2024. This year, Connecticut has also been devastated by several high-profile roadway fatalities. In May, Connecticut Trooper First Class Aaron Pelletier was struck and killed in the line of duty while working at a traffic stop on Interstate 84. In July, a Connecticut Department of Transportation worker, Andrew DiDomenico, died after being struck by a vehicle on Interstate 91. While these two accidents garnered significant attention across the state, there are many more families dealing with the pain of losing a loved one in a traffic accident. My office and I regularly hear from constituents about roadway safety. The primary issues identified are drivers traveling at high speed, ignoring traffic signs, and driving while distracted. During my annual walk across Connecticut, I spoke with a group of road construction workers who told me that they are noticing an uptick in dangerous driving behavior. I also regularly meet with a group of middle school children who advise me on a range of policy issues, and in our conversations these students regularly who tell me how reckless driving can make their walk to school scary and more dangerous. While I understand there is no perfect policy solution or initiative that will eliminate traffic accidents completely, I am writing to inquire what more can be done to protect people on our roadways and seek your Department’s expert opinion on best practices to decrease roadway fatalities. To that end, I am requesting your answers and input on the following questions: What specific measures is the Department of Transportation implementing under the National Roadway Safety Strategy to address the alarming rise in traffic fatalities, particularly in Northeast states like Connecticut?
What strategies are being developed to combat issues such as high-speed driving, ignoring traffic signs, and distracted driving? Are there any new initiatives on these issues forthcoming?
Has there been an increase in accidents involving young or less experienced drivers? What targeted programs or campaigns does the Department plan to introduce to improve their safety on the roads?
How is the Department of Transportation engaging with local communities, such as schools and construction sites, to gather insights on roadway safety concerns and to promote safer driving practices?
How can state governments like Connecticut better collaborate with the federal government to enhance roadway safety and address specific local concerns?
What additional actions can Congress take to better enable your agency to address this issue? Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I look forward to continuing to work with you to build safer roadways that improve safety and the travel experience for the American people. Sincerely, ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) on Wednesday announced over $16 million in funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to protect children under the age of six years old from lead poisoning. The funds are awarded through HUD’s Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Grant Program. “Investing in lead paint removal will protect our communities from the lifelong, devastating effects of lead poisoning. This $16 million in funding will help mitigate lead-based paint hazards in older homes, maintain affordable housing, and provide resources to ensure families in Bridgeport, Norwich, and Waterbury can address other health
...Read more and safety concerns. There is no safe level of lead exposure, and I will keep fighting to ensure everyone in our state has a safe and healthy place to call home,” said Murphy. “Over $16 million will protect families across Connecticut from exposure to the pernicious poison that is lead in their homes. Lead poisoning causes detrimental and irreversible damage, especially to children. Currently, more than 1,000 Connecticut children are affected by lead each year and I am proud that federal funding will work to address this dire crisis,” said Blumenthal. “My office and I were pleased to lead the federal effort to advocate on the City of Norwich’s behalf and bring the federal funding home to ensure less children are exposed to the serious dangers of lead paint. The federal funding award is a clear testament to the outstanding work executed by the City, Wayne Sharkey, and his team, and the hours and hours they spent on this application to continue their live-saving work,” said Courtney. “Many New England homes and apartments were constructed well before we knew how dangerous lead paint exposure can be, especially for young children. The over $6 million in federal funding Bridgeport will receive will allow the city to expand its remediation efforts and help ensure children are no longer exposed to lead paint’s harmful effects. When coupled with the Governor’s Lead Free CT Campaign, this investment brings us closer to eliminating lead contaminants in Connecticut once and for all,” said Himes. The federal funding announced today will address lead-based paint hazards in the following municipalities: The City of Waterbury will receive $7,000,000.
The City of Bridgeport will receive $6,006,105.
The City of Norwich will receive $3,157,991. The Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Grant Program helps transform communities by fixing older housing, preserving affordable housing, and improving communities and the health of children and families in these communities. In addition to addressing lead-based paint hazards, HUD also offers healthy homes supplemental funding to address other housing related health and safety issues while addressing the lead-based paint. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Tuesday that Kibu, a disability provider platform based in Stamford, was named “Innovator of the Month.” Kibu provides high-impact online content to support and empower people with disabilities, including classes in fitness, life skills, community engagement and professional development. The company also connects disability providers with tools for data management, note taking, and attendance. “Our communities are strongest when every person has the resources to achieve their full potential. Kibu’s online platform is transforming lives by breaking down barriers for people with disabilities, helping people become more independent, and giving service providers the tools they need to make a real impact. I’m proud to recognize
...Read more Kibu’s important contributions to fostering a more inclusive future for our state, and I look forward to seeing all that they accomplish,” said Murphy. “Kibu is built on the belief that innovation starts with understanding the unique challenges that people with intellectual and developmental disabilities face every day. By providing tools that empower both individuals and organizations, we’re helping to create a future where technology closes gaps, rather than creating them. It’s exciting to be innovating right here in Connecticut, where the community and ecosystem truly support the growth of businesses that make an impact,” said Daniel Caridi, CEO of Kibu. Daniel Caridi began volunteering for this community shortly after graduating college in 2019, formally launching the Kibu platform in 2022. Today, Kibu works with disability providers across 26 states. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less HARTFORD — Curtailing gun violence, and violence in general, is an endeavor that U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy says he is working on in while in the nation's capital. The "youth ambassadors" from the Brother Carl Hardrick Institute have been working to do the same while in Connecticut's capital, and on Friday the two got together to talk about the issue. Murphy sat down with the ambassadors for a roundtable discussion at the Wilson-Gray YMCA Youth & Family Center to discuss what changes need to made for the betterment of Connecticut students and to aid in the reduction of violence. "I've learned the best way to know what I'm supposed to work on in Washington is to listen to the kids and students that are growing up in the neighborhoods. Nothing matters more to me
...Read more than your success," Murphy said Friday. "It's really the young people who have the most important voices as far as I'm concerned." The local institute is named after Carl Hardrick, a Hartford resident who has been an advocate for ending violence since the 1990's. Officials from the group that bears his name say he has been trying reduce violence through community outreach, trainings, and programs such as a youth ambassadors mentoring program, and an art therapy program. "Brother Carl has been doing this work for over 40 years. He's helped create this idea of reducing violence through those relationships within the schools, police, hospitals," said Leonard Epps, president of the Brother Carl Hardrick Institute. "Brother Carl was the model, the prototype of what we want individuals to be like." The ambassadors, ranging in age from 6th-graders to college seniors, told Murphy that they need to see more role models in their communities, and noted that guns seem to be very accessible to young people these days. A college student ambassador advocated for more background checks being done for firearm purchases. There was also discussion of how mental health plays a role in violence, and how mental health services should be made more available. "The same way we have a physical health course, we need a mental one too," one ambassador said. The ambassadors also mentioned how a person's home life and upbringing can also be a catalyst for choosing violence. "A lot of us are reaping what our parents sowed," an ambassador said. Murphy serves on the Senate's Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (HELP), so a portion of Friday's discussion centered around ways to improve the school systems. Hartford Public High senior, Christina Jackson, 17, said all the school systems in the state are not the same. "The standards are different compared to other towns like West Hartford and Wethersfield," Jackson said. "In our schools, teachers say all you need is a 60 to pass. That's all you need. Just pass." An East Hartford High School student echoed Jackson's sentiments. "It lets the kids fail in front of your eyes instead of pushing them to do better," the student said. Jackson also said that there isn't enough funding available to have after-school programs, and she's sees it as "a vicious cycle." Often, Jackson says, because students don't have the transportation to get to the programs, they don't participate in them, and then they never happen because "they're not going to waste money on the programs." "I'm hearing you loud and clear," Murphy said to the ambassadors. "We can change your experience, we can change your future. There's no limits to what you can do." The ambassadors also were able to talk with State Sen. Doug McCrory (D-Windsor). "Violence is relatively uniform throughout," McCrory said. "Unfortunately when we talk about violence, it's about killing or robbing, but I look at violence in another way," McCrory said. "I think it's violent when young people do not have enough money to go to school. I think it's violent when you don't have healthcare." Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Monday released the following statement on the one-year anniversary of Hamas’ terrorist attack on Israel. “One year ago today, on the 50th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War, Hamas terrorists launched a brutal attack on Israel, mercilessly killing 1,195 people and taking 251 others hostage. What happened on October 7th was unconscionable, and Hamas must be held accountable. My heart remains with those grieving the loss of their family members and friends, and those still waiting for their loved ones’ return, as well as every member of the Jewish community, which has faced a disgusting rise in antisemitism over the past
...Read more year. The United States will always stand with the people of Israel against any and all threats. The path to long-term security for the Israeli people remains a diplomatic solution that ensures the safe return of the hostages, an end to this war, and a two-state future.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Monday released the following statement on the results of the presidential election in Tunisia. “For years, President Saied has systematically dismantled Tunisia’s democracy by gutting independent checks and balances and rigging the rules to prevent any real competition. The outcome of this election was determined a long time ago and marks the completion of his plan to restore dictatorship to Tunisia. Today’s “victory” – with a dismal 29% voter turnout - shows just how disenchanted the Tunisian people are with Saied’s rule and his unwillingness to meaningfully address the country’s spiraling economy. The United States should
...Read more continue its support of the Tunisian people, civil society, and independent media in hopes for a brighter future.” In June, Murphy chaired a hearing on President Biden’s FY25 funding request for the Middle East and North Africa, where he raised questions on U.S. policy towards Tunisia and urged support for civil society groups. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, on Thursday released a statement on the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) complaint against Amazon accusing the company of illegally refusing to negotiate with Teamsters representing delivery drivers employed by one of its Delivery Service Partners (DSP). In its complaint, the NLRB claims Amazon violated its responsibility as a joint employer of its delivery drivers by taking retaliatory and threatening action against employees and terminating its contract with the DSP after the drivers unionized. "Amazon has made billions on the backs of the hard-working drivers who deliver their packages, but when those drivers tried to organize for better wages and working
...Read more conditions, the company refused to negotiate and eventually fired them. For years, Amazon has hidden behind this absurd claim that drivers delivering Amazon packages in Amazon-branded vans—even wearing Amazon-branded vests— aren’t Amazon employees in order to avoid being held responsible for their safety and well-being. The NLRB has already determined that Amazon is a joint-employer of these drivers, and this complaint is a really important step in holding Amazon and other greedy corporations accountable and protecting workers’ right to negotiate for the fair pay, safe conditions, and dignified employment they deserve,” said Murphy. In August, Murphy released a statement applauding the NLRB’s finding that Amazon is a joint employer of its delivery drivers. In January, Murphy led a bipartisan letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy demanding information about the Delivery Service Partner (DSP) program, including Amazon’s justification for refusing to bargain with union representatives of DSP employees and requiring DSPs to sign non-poaching agreements. After receiving a response from Amazon that was unresponsive to the questions asked, at odds with publicly available data and reporting, and apparently self-contradictory, Murphy led 33 of his colleagues in calling on Amazon to provide the information requested by the members. In early August, Murphy and Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.-12) led 25 of their colleagues in Congress in sending a letter to the NLRB encouraging the Board to reach a decision in several key cases of unfair labor practices brought against Amazon by delivery drivers across the country. ### Read less WASHINGTON — A bipartisan trio of senators are seeking information from the White House about the impacts the new trilateral security agreement ICE Pact will have on the American shipbuilding industry and what changes may be necessary from Congress to move it forward, according to a letter obtained by Breaking Defense. The new letter, signed by Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.; Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.; and Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss., applauded the security agreement announced earlier this summer during the NATO Summit in Washington, DC. The need for cooperation on the construction of heavy icebreakers capable of freely navigating the High North is particularly urgent given increasing Russian and Chinese activities in the region, the senators wrote. “In response to the changing
...Read more physical environment and growing international pressure following its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has significantly built up its military footprint in the Arctic and re-opened several Soviet-era military bases,” according to the letter. “China, often in close coordination with Russia, has made critical investments to enable exploitation of natural resources above the Arctic Circle.” The senators also cited the three dozen icebreaking ships in Russia’s fleet compared to the United States’ two operational icebreakers . Breaking Defense in August took an in-depth look at the new race for dominance in the north, finding that while the American defense industrial base is large, the specific skill sets and capabilities needed to produce heavy icebreakers have atrophied in recent history. For at least part of the summer, the American icebreaker fleet — consisting of the Polar Star (WAGB-10) and the Healy (WAGB-20) — was completely unable to patrol the Arctic, with one ship tied up in maintenance while the other was being assessed for damage from a fire. The ability of the US and allies to continually be present in the Arctic, the senators wrote, is “critical.” That kind of shortfall is in part why the Biden administration chose to partner with allies Canada and Finland, both of whom have significant experience in this niche sector of shipbuilding. When the leaders of the three nations announced ICE Pact during the NATO Summit, they promised further details would be released in a memorandum of understanding to be published later this year. In their letter, the senators said they were interested in information that would inform Congress’ work in helping facilitate the pact’s execution. Their questions include: How will the United States’ participation in the pact improve American shipbuilding efficiency through working with allies?
How will ICE Pact impact the Coast Guard’s major icebreaker construction program the Polar Security Cutter?
How does the pact align with NATO’s current icebreaker capabilities?
And what regulatory or statutory changes should Congress pursue to enable the administration to participate in the agreement? “Year-round presence and situational awareness in these areas is critical to enforcing the rules-based order in the high-latitudes, protecting freedom of navigation, and ensuring that natural resource extraction abides by environmental rules and regulations,” the senators wrote. “A reliable icebreaker fleet operated by the U.S. and our allies is critical to achieving these strategic objectives, especially in the Arctic Circle.” “By combining American industrial strength with the icebreaker design and shipbuilding experience of Finnish and Canadian partners, we see great potential in ICE Pact to bolster international collaboration in the Arctic and Antarctic broadly,” the letter continued. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Wednesday joined U.S. Senators Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) in sending a bipartisan letter to President Biden expressing support for robust, thoughtful, and timely implementation of the recently announced Icebreaker Collaboration Effort, or ICE Pact—a trilateral partnership with Finland and Canada to work together on the production of polar icebreakers and other capabilities. In their letter, the senators underscored the strategic importance of deepening cooperation with America’s allies, strengthening the domestic shipbuilding industry, and addressing mounting Russian and Chinese activity in the Arctic and Antarctic regions. The senators
...Read more welcomed initial steps taken by the Biden-Harris Administration and NATO to take on these challenges and urged collaboration with Congress to ensure the entire federal government is coordinating to maximize the success of ICE Pact. The senators pointed to the threat posed by Russia and China’s growing presence in the region: “In response to the changing physical environment and growing international pressure following its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has significantly built up its military footprint in the Arctic and re-opened several Soviet-era military bases. China, often in close coordination with Russia, has made critical investments to enable exploitation of natural resources above the Arctic Circle. In 2018, China put forth its own ambitious Arctic Policy and subsequently referenced the Arctic in its Five-Year Plan released in 2021 for the first time. Chinese fishing fleets have also repeatedly engaged in illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing off the coast of Alaska, which must be deterred to preserve local ecosystems critical to domestic communities.” The senators emphasized the importance of working with allies and partners to build domestic shipbuilding capacity and ensure regional stability: “In this moment of geopolitical upheaval, it is critical for the United States and our allies to be proactive in rising together to meet difficult challenges in the Arctic and Antarctic. Year-round presence and situational awareness in these areas is critical to enforcing the rules-based order in the high-latitudes, protecting freedom of navigation, and ensuring that natural resource extraction abides by environmental rules and regulations. A reliable icebreaker fleet operated by the U.S. and our allies is critical to achieving these strategic objectives, especially in the Arctic Circle.” The senators continued: “By combining American industrial strength with the icebreaker design and shipbuilding experience of Finnish and Canadian partners, we see great potential in ICE Pact to bolster international collaboration in the Arctic and Antarctic broadly. The Pact holds promise for better meeting U.S. and NATO maritime security needs in the Arctic and polar regions, especially as efforts to produce the Polar Security Cutter fleet continue. Increased NATO icebreaker presence has the potential to free up maritime assets assigned to patrols near the Arctic and allow U.S. cutters and ships to support additional missions below the Arctic Circle – including scientific research, search and rescue, and protection of maritime resources. If executed properly, the Pact will allow us to avoid being outpaced by foreign adversaries in icebreaker capabilities, and to enhance the industrial, scientific, and maritime heft of the United States and our allies.” Full text of the letter is available HEREand below: President Biden, We write to express our support for a robust, thoughtful, and timely implementation of the Icebreaker Collaboration Effort, or ICE Pact, announced at the Washington NATO summit in July. This trilateral partnership with Canada and Finland has great potential to deepen cooperation with key allies, to strengthen our domestic shipbuilding industry and workforce, and to advance U.S. and allied security interests and international law in the Arctic and polar regions. We hope to work with your Administration to ensure the entire federal government is organized behind maximizing the success of ICE Pact. As areas increasingly impacted by mounting Russian and Chinese activity, the Arctic and Antarctic regions’ strategic importance to the United States is growing. Warming temperatures are significantly altering the physical landscapes at the North and South Poles, opening new maritime lanes for international traffic, impacting seasons for recreational travel, and disrupting native wildlife habitats. In response to the changing physical environment and growing international pressure following its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has significantly built up its military footprint in the Arctic and re-opened several Soviet-era military bases. China, often in close coordination with Russia, has made critical investments to enable exploitation of natural resources above the Arctic Circle. In 2018, China put forth its own ambitious Arctic Policy and subsequently referenced the Arctic in its Five-Year Plan released in 2021 for the first time. Chinese fishing fleets have also repeatedly engaged in illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing off the coast of Alaska, which must be deterred to preserve local ecosystems critical to domestic communities. In this moment of geopolitical upheaval, it is critical for the United States and our allies to be proactive in rising together to meet difficult challenges in the Arctic and Antarctic. Year-round presence and situational awareness in these areas is critical to enforcing the rules-based order in the high-latitudes, protecting freedom of navigation, and ensuring that natural resource extraction abides by environmental rules and regulations. A reliable icebreaker fleet operated by the U.S. and our allies is critical to achieving these strategic objectives, especially in the Arctic Circle. We welcome initial steps taken by your Administration and NATO to address these challenges and pressing needs. The Department of Defense’s 2024 Arctic Strategy laid out a useful roadmap for enhancing U.S. and allied capabilities and preserving stability in the Arctic region – and was conveniently released just after Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO brought 7 of 8 Arctic countries into the Alliance. ICE Pact was then rolled out on July 11, 2024, and built on that strategy, seizing the new opportunities brought by NATO’s enhanced Arctic presence and tapping into the expertise of our partners. ICE Pact has the potential to build upon this foundation and become a key trilateral partnership between the United States, Canada, and Finland that deepens collaboration on national security matters in the polar and Arctic regions. As laid out in its announcement, the Pact’s central focus will be a joint effort to build top-of-the-line polar icebreakers by pooling and sharing expertise. The partnership aims to strengthen the shipbuilding industry of each country and to generate good jobs at shipyards and related businesses all over, while meeting key national security needs in which the United States and NATO allies have been lagging. According to U.S. Coast Guard data, Russia currently possesses 36 government-owned and operated icebreakers while China – despite not being an Arctic nation – has a fleet of four. By comparison, the United States has just two operational polar icebreakers and has been far too slow in advancing our polar icebreaker recapitalization. Without sufficient icebreaker capacity, the U.S. Coast Guard is often forced to divert assets needed elsewhere to meet Arctic mission needs. By combining American industrial strength with the icebreaker design and shipbuilding experience of Finnish and Canadian partners, we see great potential in ICE Pact to bolster international collaboration in the Arctic and Antarctic broadly. The Pact holds promise for better meeting U.S. and NATO maritime security needs in the Arctic and polar regions, especially as efforts to produce the Polar Security Cutter fleet continue. Increased NATO icebreaker presence has the potential to free up maritime assets assigned to patrols near the Arctic and allow U.S. cutters and ships to support additional missions below the Arctic Circle – including scientific research, search and rescue, and protection of maritime resources. If executed properly, the Pact will allow us to avoid being outpaced by foreign adversaries in icebreaker capabilities, and to enhance the industrial, scientific, and maritime heft of the United States and our allies. As work is underway with Canadian and Finnish counterparts to flesh out the Pact’s details, we want to ensure the initiative achieves its fullest potential – with strong coordination across the U.S. federal government. To this end, we respectfully request responses to the following questions no later than 45 days from today to inform Congress’s work on related authorization and funding issues: What is the Pact’s anticipated long-term impact to U.S. shipbuilding capacity and how will collaboration with Canadian and Finnish shipbuilders improve the efficiency and resiliency of our shipbuilding industrial base?
How will ICE Pact impact the procurement plan and construction timeline for the Polar Security Cutter program, as well as other U.S. Coast Guard shipbuilding programs? What are the potential benefits of ICE Pact to furthering existing and future Coast Guard shipbuilding efforts?
How will the ICE Pact initiative align with NATO’s current icebreaker capability requirements, and will it be necessary to revise these targets in future budget cycles to encourage Allies and partners to purchase icebreakers built in American, Canadian, or Finnish shipyards?
What is the Administration’s plan to solicit and incorporate feedback from all relevant stakeholders – including but not limited to the U.S. shipbuilding industry, workforce representatives, the Coast Guard-Navy Integrated Program Office, the Coast Guard, and the Department of Homeland Security – throughout negotiations over ICE Pact implementation?
What, if any, regulatory and statutory changes does the Administration anticipate will be needed to support ICE Pact’s implementation – particularly in its workforce development and information sharing components? Thank you again for your Administration’s close attention to Arctic and polar security. We look forward to reviewing your prompt responses and to working with you on the ICE Pact’s implementation in the months and years ahead. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday authored an op-ed for Foreign Policy arguing that countering Russian and Chinese influence in countries like Kenya will require the U.S. to dedicate more resources to fighting corruption and promoting good governance. Murphy made the case that the U.S. risks undermining the effectiveness of other forms of assistance, including humanitarian aid, investments in economic development, and security assistance, if we fail to support the people and institutions dedicated to ensuring their government is accountable to its people. As a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Murphy traveled to Kenya in August to engage with key stakeholders on issues related to the U.S.’ relationships on the African continent, including deepening
...Read more economic partnerships, U.S. support for humanitarian aid, and the Kenyan-led Multilateral Security Support mission in Haiti. “I traveled to Kenya amid the demonstrations this summer with CARE, an international humanitarian agency that delivers emergency relief and executes long-term international development projects,” Murphy wrote. “We felt Kenyans’ frustration everywhere we traveled. Nearly every conversation found its way back to the issue of governance. This sentiment was especially noticeable among young people. According to the Ichikowitz Family Foundation’s 2024 African Youth Survey, nearly 60 percent of young Africans want to leave their home countries, one of the main reasons being corruption. Even in Kenya—which has a good democratic tradition, political stability, and impressive economic growth—people we spoke to described how too many of the country’s resources are lost, stolen, or wasted by corrupt or incompetent government officials.” Murphy outlined how U.S. adversaries have exploited the corruption and poor governance in Kenya, leaving the country with failed foreign-funded projects and crippling debt: “Over the last 15 years, leaders in Kenya have financed major infrastructure projects by taking out loans from Chinese banks to pay Chinese construction companies. Many of the projects were of poor quality. Some never even materialized, such as a nearly $5 billion rail project that has become the target of criminal corruption investigations and remains unfinished seven years after construction began. The deals often included payoffs to government officials, who continued taking on more loans from China, the World Bank, and others to finance payments on the original debt. Kenya’s debt liability has since ballooned to $80 billion, and China is now the country’s largest bilateral creditor.” Murphy argued for more resources and personnel to help the United States better support efforts to eliminate graft and bribery in Kenya and across Africa: “It’s time to get serious about fighting corruption in every country—whether it is a democratic nation, an authoritarian state, or something in between. If you total the amount of money the U.S. State Department spends annually on protecting democracy and fighting corruption abroad, it’s about $3 billion—which is what the Defense Department spends every two days. And, frankly, that $3 billion pales in comparison to the billions of dollars China, Russia, and other adversaries spend every year to undermine these fragile democracies. To tackle corruption more effectively, the United States must do two things. First, we need to increase our budget for democracy programs from $3 billion to at least $5 billion so we have more resources focused on governance. Second, we need to create a new category of foreign service officers dedicated to fighting corruption abroad so that every embassy has at least one staffer dedicated to protecting the rule of law from attack.” Murphy concluded: “On a continent as dynamic as Africa, U.S. funding priorities are inevitably pulled in many directions. But we risk undermining the long-term effectiveness of other parts of our assistance packages if we fail to prioritize programs to support good governance and combat corruption. Corrupt environments stall economic growth and feed instability. Achieving key U.S. foreign-policy objectives such as checking the influence of China and Russia, expanding our network of global partners, and serving U.S. small businesses and workers is impossible if we don’t do a better job helping partners such as Kenya to strengthen their governance structures.” Read the full op-ed HERE. ### Read less California's new law directing school districts to limit student cell phone use during teaching hours may sound controversial, but it is a big win for child and adolescent public health - and a potentially important step in helping America's students improve their mental well-being. The data is clear: Teenagers spend 40 hours on their screens every week. This time spiked during the COVID-19 outbreak when devices became essential learning tools for isolated students. Since returning to the classroom, however, screen usage has remained constant while K-12 schools continue to see "achievement gaps" in math and reading - disparities that haven’t recovered since the pandemic. To help students learn, we need to remove the distraction of
...Read more phones in the classroom. Nearly 100 percent of middle and high school students admit to using their devices during school hours, and most high school teachers say it’s a "major problem." Restricting these devices during the school day is one way states can help teachers and administrators keep students focused and engaged socially and academically. California is the latest among a growing number of states that have taken steps to address this problem. School cell phone policies are gaining traction: As of June, at least 15 states have banned or restricted student cell phone use during school hours. Other states can follow their lead and adopt similar measures to help students focus on their academic work and not their phones throughout the school day. Teenagers spend upwards of five hours a day on social media, something Surgeon General Vivek Murthy warns can compromise their mental health. "Adolescents who spend more than three hours a day on social media face double the?risk?of anxiety and depression symptoms," he says, adding that "nearly half of adolescents?say social media makes them feel worse about their bodies." Murthy is pushing for warning labels on social media platforms as part of his campaign to combat loneliness, which he calls a public health "crisis." Research shows cell phone addiction can actually fuel loneliness; limiting access to social media, even for a little while, can improve adolescent mental health and develop stronger student connections. There’s evidence these restrictions can lead to positive student outcomes. Norway limited cell phone use in hundreds of middle schools years ago, and it reduced bullying (for both boys and girls) by over 40 percent. Student visits to psychology specialists dropped an astonishing 60 percent while overall grade point averages increased. Not surprisingly, students are often reflexively opposed to these proposed limitations as they’ve grown accustomed to having immediate access to their devices. But schools that have already implemented phone restrictions in the U.S. have seen encouraging academic and behavioral results in a short period of time. A high school in the Bronx that instituted a cell phone ban saw Advanced Placement test scores increase — and overall academic performance improve within a year. Attendance at after-hours sporting events rose, too. Some students even thanked the school’s principal for the ban saying it helped them focus more during school hours. At another high school in upstate New York, classroom engagement improved — and an increase in student socialization took place, evidenced by a louder lunchroom as students could no longer sit and scroll in silence. The school’s principal said, "In our classrooms, when you would actually speak to them, you had their attention." Experts concur that banning cell phones in schools can have a powerful impact on improving student mental health. "Kids are feeling isolated, lonely, disconnected. They’re also performing poorly in schools," says Zach Rausch, lead researcher for the book, "The Anxious Generation." "A large reason for both of these problems [is] the infusion of addictive tech in schools." This summer, Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Mitt Romney (R-Utah) introduced the Smart Kids Not Smartphones Act to recognize schools that implement classroom cell phone restrictions. In announcing the bill, Murphy noted how Connecticut’s efforts to reduce cell phones in schools have positively impacted mental health — adding to the chorus of other states that have seen similar results. Limiting cell phones at K-12 schools across the country can strengthen teen health, advance student learning and build better school communities. America could use a healthy dose of all of the above. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Tuesday released the following statement on the escalation in hostilities across the Middle East. “I am deeply concerned about the rapid escalation in hostilities across the Middle East. Iran’s reprehensible missile barrage against Israel today was a further act of terror that put millions of innocent lives in danger. Israel has the right to defend itself and protect Israeli civilians from incoming attacks from both Iran and Hezbollah. “The way in which Israel conducts counterterrorism operations inside Lebanon matters. An expansive air and ground war risks repeating the mistakes of the past and causing
...Read more further civilian destruction in Lebanon without achieving a sustainable resolution to Israel’s legitimate security concerns. The best way to protect Israel’s security in the long-term and prevent all-out war in the region is by prioritizing the safety of Lebanese civilians and reaching a lasting diplomatic solution that allows civilian populations on both sides to safely return home.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Chairman of the U.S. Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, on Monday joined the U.S. Presidential Delegation to travel to Mexico City for the Inauguration of Claudia Sheinbaum, President-Elect of Mexico. “I’m proud to join First Lady Jill Biden on the Presidential Delegation attending the historic inauguration of Claudia Sheinbaum. The U.S. and Mexico share deep cultural and economic ties, and the strength of the U.S.-Mexico partnership directly impacts our ability to stop the flow of fentanyl into our country, combat gun trafficking, and humanely manage migration to our southern border. I look forward to working with President-elect Sheinbaum to advance our shared interests,
...Read more deepen our economic cooperation, and reinforce our commitment to regional security.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security and a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 61 other members of Congress in sending a letter to the Departments of State (State), Homeland Security (DHS), Commerce (Commerce), and Justice (DOJ), urging them to strengthen steps to prevent the flow of illegal firearms from the United States into Haiti. Since the assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moïse in 2021, armed gangs have consolidated power in Haiti fueled in-part by an influx of guns trafficked into Haiti. Though the country itself does not manufacture guns, there are an estimated 500,000 firearms in the country,
...Read more and the United States is the number one source of these guns, often making their way through Florida. As a result, gangs have outgunned and overpowered the Haitian National Police and other security forces, leading to the displacement of over 300,000 Haitians and created a widespread humanitarian crisis. “The escalation of firepower contributes to gangs’ capacity to terrorize civilians (including through systematic sexual violence), contributes to internal displacement, and directly impedes efforts by security forces working to regain control of the country,” the members wrote. The lawmakers are pushing five recommendations to strengthen the administration’s current efforts, including increased staffing and stricter screening of packages going to Haiti and other parts of the Caribbean. The lawmakers also recommend the DOJ’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) implement a strategy to increase the number of firearms recovered in Haiti that are submitted for tracing in order to identify gun traffickers and dealers who sell to them. The lawmakers are also calling for an expansion of the “Demand Letter 3” program, which requires federal firearms licensees in certain states to notify ATF if they sell someone multiple semi-automatic rifles in a five-day period. This letter calls for expanding the program to include key states where Haiti’s trafficked assault weapons originate — including Florida. “Cracking down on the flow of illegal weapons that are facilitating rampant gang violence in Haiti advances U.S. security. It is also a moral imperative,” the members continued. U.S. Senators Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also signed the letter. The full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Blinken, Secretary Mayorkas, Secretary Raimondo, and Attorney General Garland: Haiti remains a key destination for firearms and ammunition trafficked illegally from the United States. The alarming inflow exacerbates the humanitarian, political, and security crisis in Haiti, undermining U.S. security assistance to a country that faces one of the world’s most dire security and humanitarian emergencies. Since the assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moïse in 2021, armed gangs have consolidated power in Haiti. Around 200 gangs operate nationwide, and a handful control about 90 percent of the capital city Port-au-Prince, while several fan out across the country. Meanwhile, roughly 360,000 Haitians have been displaced over the past year alone. As violence escalated between 2021 and 2022, gun trafficking into Haiti surged. Together, Haiti’s armed groups have thousands of members, many equipped with powerful assault weapons that outgun the Haitian National Police (HNP). In this nation gripped by gun violence, American-made weapons are easy to come by, even as humanitarian aid becomes harder to deliver. The United Nations estimates that there could be as many as 500,000 guns in Haiti, though the country does not produce firearms domestically. Instead, the United States is the number one source of firearms entering Haiti today. While exporting arms to Haiti is illegal under an international arms embargo, an underground market for firearms has thrived. Guns that would typically sell for $400-500 in the United States can sell for as much as $10,000 in Haiti, incentivizing traffickers to evade U.S arms export controls. Often, “straw purchaser” intermediaries and traffickers obtain firearms in U.S. states with comparatively lenient gun laws — including Florida, Texas, Louisiana, Arizona and Georgia— and send them to South Florida. There, the weapons are concealed and shipped through the Miami River to Haiti, most often via freight containers, but sometimes via small secretive boats and even planes. Some U.S. firearms also make their way into Haiti through middlemen in other parts of the Caribbean.14 Overall, the vast majority of guns circulating in Haiti are likely illegal. We are alarmed by the rising lethality, quantity, and caliber of illicit weapons in Haiti. Increasingly, the weapons smuggled into Haiti are high-powered assault rifles, including the AK47 and AR-15 models in high demand by criminal groups. Haiti is also seeing a rise in “ghost guns” that can be assembled from machine parts at home. The escalation of firepower contributes to gangs’ capacity to terrorize civilians (including through systematic sexual violence), contributes to internal displacement, and directly impedes efforts by security forces working to regain control of the country. Following the calls of Haitian civil society groups, the Biden-Harris Administration has worked to stabilize Haiti through diplomacy and security assistance, working to advance a Multilateral Security Support (MSS) mission for Haiti, supporting Haitian-led efforts to establish a legitimate transitional government, and arming and equipping a beleaguered HNP. These efforts are laudable and demonstrate your commitment to advance stability, security, and prosperity in Haiti. However, these efforts will be undermined without more thoroughly addressing the crisis of illicit arms trafficking to Haiti. First, the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) should increase the scale of U.S. personnel and equipment dedicated to screening the contents of ships exiting ports via the Miami River — the primary starting point for firearm shipments to Haiti. Firearms are “hidden in various ways, including inside consumer products, electronic equipment, garment linings, frozen food items or even the hulls of freighters,” posing a daunting challenge for CBP and HSI. The amount of cargo going through the Miami River makes shipments notoriously difficult to search. Even with reliable information, it can take CBP and HSI “weeks to unpack and look for [smuggled weapons], and [they] still may not find [them].” As of October 2023, CBP reportedly had doubled the frequency of interdiction operations on the Miami River. Still, effectively monitoring illegal shipments of arms to Haiti will require DHS to further allocate additional resources to monitor cargo leaving South Florida, as a vital intervention to interrupt the flow of firearms to the Caribbean. Providing additional resources would assist HSI in dismantling trafficking networks and aid CBP’s other border security priorities, by helping address one of the root causes that drive Haitian asylum seekers to flee to the United States for safety. Second, the Commerce Department should ensure that adequate export control personnel are stationed at U.S. embassies in the Caribbean in order to monitor arms trafficking into Haiti and other countries of concern in the region. The Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is responsible for enforcing most export controls yet does not have personnel present in the Caribbean. BIS should dedicate more staff to focus on disrupting arms trafficking to Haiti and other parts of the Caribbean, including through dedicated personnel stationed in the region. This localized presence would facilitate better intelligence gathering and coordination with U.S., regional, and local authorities, and enhance efforts to intercept illegal arms shipments. Third, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) should implement a strategy to increase the number of firearms recovered in Haiti that are submitted for tracing. Guns recovered in crimes overseas can be submitted to the ATF for tracing, which allows U.S. investigators to link guns to the dealers who sold them and to the individuals who trafficked them. However, we are concerned that only a fraction of firearms recovered in Haiti are being submitted for tracing. For example, in 2020, only 81 guns recovered in Haiti were submitted to ATF for tracing, though likely hundreds were seized. While pervasive insecurity and threats against Haitian authorities who recover and trace firearms play a role in underreporting, it is critical that the Administration address barriers preventing regular use of ATF’s e-Trace system. The Administration can do so by: investing in training Haitian authorities and officials within the Caribbean Community’s (CARICOM) Crime Gun Intelligence Unit on firearms tracing and recovery; translating the e-Trace system into French or Haitian Creole to address language barriers preventing its use; and fostering regular coordination between Haitian officials and U.S. officials who submit tracing reports on Haitian officials’ behalf. Furthermore, as firearm traces are completed, ATF should ensure that the public has access to aggregated gun trace data on a per-dealer basis as requested previously by Members of Congress. By releasing data about each dealer that sells to traffickers, ATF can help researchers, advocates, litigants, and other members of the public better understand the supply chains that funnel American weapons into Haiti and hold accountable the small minority of gun stores that illicitly sell arms. Fourth, ATF should expand its “Demand Letter 3” program to cover states linked to arms trafficking to Haiti and other parts of the Caribbean. Under Demand Letter 3, federal firearms licensees (FFLs) must notify ATF if they sell someone multiple semi-automatic rifles in a five-day period — but only if the FFL operates in Arizona, California, New Mexico, or Texas. ATF selected those states because they are responsible for the bulk of U.S. gun trafficking into Mexico, which the program was designed to combat. ATF should similarly make Haiti a Demand Letter 3 priority, given its status as a top destination for internationally trafficked U.S. guns. The agency should require reporting of multiple semi-automatic rifle sales by FFLs located in key states where Haiti’s trafficked assault weapons originate — including Florida, which is a top origin state for illegal guns not only in Haiti but elsewhere overseas. ATF can do so while maintaining a narrow scope for the program. The increased reporting requirement would help ATF expedite the process of identifying firearm traffickers linked to gun crimes in the Caribbean. Finally, the State Department, Commerce Department, DHS, and DOJ must implement an interagency strategy to stop the illegal flow of arms, reflecting a coordinated approach to investigate, share information, and enforce laws to disrupt arms trafficking to Haiti and the wider Caribbean. As part of this effort, we ask the interagency to collect and report to Congress data about arms export trends, arms trafficking trends, and efforts to disrupt illegal firearm exports — including applicable data on the work of DOJ’s Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions, HSI’s Transnational Criminal Investigative Unit (TCIU) in Haiti, and other TCIUs in the Caribbean. This strategy development and reporting will help identify any gaps in authorities or resources needed to end the United States’ complicity in this ongoing crisis. This strategy is included in the Americas Regional Monitoring of Arms Sales (ARMAS) Act introduced in the House and Senate. But importantly, the Administration does not require legislation to move forward with developing such a strategy and should do so now, while leveraging existing authorities such as the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act’s provisions on straw purchases. Cracking down on the flow of illegal weapons that are facilitating rampant gang violence in Haiti advances U.S. security. It is also a moral imperative. After decades of failed U.S. foreign policy in Haiti, we must not allow American weapons to further fuel instability in the country. To better understand the Administration’s efforts to combat arms trafficking to Haiti, we request answers to the following questions: What steps has the Administration taken in 2024 to strengthen inter-agency coordination to address arms trafficking to Haiti, including the trafficking of ghost guns?
How has the security crisis impacted U.S. efforts to trace and recover weapons in Haiti?
Please provide details about the personnel, budget, and other resources that BIS, CBP, HSI, and ATF have dedicated to addressing arms trafficking to Haiti, as well as any plans for increasing the resources allocated to this issue.
Please describe any resource constraints affecting U.S. efforts to control and oversee arms exports and weapons transfers to Haiti, including through end-use monitoring of weapons.
How has the Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions worked to elevate and coordinate investigations and prosecutions focused on straw purchases and arms trafficking to Haiti, including in cooperation with CARICOM?
What steps is the Administration taking to monitor cargo worth less than $2,500 that passes through the Miami River?
Please describe ATF’s plans for increasing public access to gun trace data, to the maximum extent permitted under the Tiahrt Amendment. We appreciate your attention to this important matter. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Congresswoman Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) joined 31 other members of Congress in reintroducing the Student Food Security Act of 2024, bicameral legislation to address food insecurity faced by college students across America. College students often face strict limits on their ability to access and use Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits unless they meet certain conditions, such as working more than 20 hours per week or having young children. These barriers ignore the reality of the college student population, a majority of whom are students older than 25 and independent from their parents who are often juggling school,
...Read more work, and family responsibilities. The Student Food Security Act of 2024 would support students facing food insecurity by expanding eligibility for SNAP, allowing students to use SNAP benefits at on-campus dining facilities, increasing outreach by federal and state agencies to food-insecure students, and establishing an annual grant program to aid colleges and universities in better identifying and serving students with food and housing needs. According to a recent survey, nearly 40% of community college students are food insecure, over half are housing insecure, and 18% have experienced homelessness. These factors negatively impact student success and graduation rates. A 2024 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report further revealed that nearly 3.8 million college students may face food insecurity, risking their college completion and undermining federal and state investments in higher education. The GAO report found that almost 60% of potentially eligible students were not enrolled in SNAP, highlighting how current eligibility requirements are leaving food-insecure students behind. “Students aren’t learning when they’re missing meals or living without stable housing,” said Murphy. “Too often, college students, many of whom are also working or supporting a family, can’t pay rent or have to skip meals because they are trying to make ends meet while paying thousands for tuition and textbooks every semester. If we want these students to succeed, it's on us to make sure they have the basics to do so. Our legislation would expand SNAP eligibility requirements and help universities better address food and housing insecurity so students can focus on their education without having to making these unfair sacrifices.” “For too long, students at colleges and universities have suffered food insecurity without proper support from federal and state governments. As we work to end hunger, it is crucial we invest in programs that provide college students with access to healthy, nutritious meals so they can succeed in the classroom and beyond,” said Hayes. “College students in my district and nationwide have asked for our help, and it is time we delivered. The Student Food Security Act is a comprehensive proposal to address food insecurity among college students by expanding access to SNAP, investing in outreach programs to meet students where they are, and investing $1 billion annually to ensure colleges and universities have the tools they need to help house and feed students in need.” Specifically, the Student Food Security Act would: Increase the SNAP eligibility of low-income college students by expanding eligibility to students who qualify for work study, have a $0 Student Aid Index, meet the financial eligibility criteria for a maximum Pell Grant (even if they have not filed the FAFSA), or are an independent student whose household is otherwise eligible. This would make permanent an expansion of SNAP eligibility that was first enacted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Increase outreach to eligible students by directing the U.S. Department of Education to work with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and other relevant agencies to notify students they may be eligible for benefits when they file their application for federal student aid.
Require the Department of Education to collect data on food and housing insecurity.
Create a SNAP student hunger demonstration program to allow students to use their SNAP benefits at on-campus dining facilities at up to ten institutions.
Establish a $1 billion per year grant program to help institutions of higher education identify and meet the basic needs of their students, such as food, housing, childcare, etc. Grants can be used for research, planning, and implementation of strategies—educating students on federal, state, local, and tribal assistance programs. Institutions with increased numbers of Pell Grant recipients will be prioritized. At least 25% of grants must go to community colleges, and at least 25% must go to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Tribal Colleges and Universities, and other Minority-Serving Institutions. U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cosponsored the legislation in the Senate. U.S. Representatives Alma Adams (D-N.C.), Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Troy Carter (D-La.), Jasmine Crockett (D-Tex.), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-Ga.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Kevin Mullin (D-Calif.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-Ala.), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), Andrea Salinas (D-Ore.), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.), Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Jill Tokuda (D-Hawaii), David Trone (D-Md.), Nydia M. Velázquez (D-N.Y.) co-sponsored the legislation in the House. A one-pager is available HERE. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and 7 other Members of Congress on Wednesday in introducing bicameral legislation to protect voters and election workers from intimidation and threats of violence at polling locations. The Freedom from Intimidation in Elections Act would help ensure every voter and election worker has the right to cast their ballot and conduct their official duties free from fear and intimidation. The bill would update existing anti-intimidation provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to limit the presence of visible firearms at locations where voters cast their ballot or election workers perform their official duties, empowering poll workers and election officials to continue
...Read more safely administering elections. The right to vote is a central pillar of American democracy, but rising political violence against voters and poll workers threatens election security. False allegations of widespread voter fraud have further increased tensions at election centers. 38 percent of election workers have reported experiencing threats, harassment, or abuse as of May 2024. “The presence of firearms at polling places isn’t just dangerous—it’s a direct threat to our democratic process. As armed extremists fueled by rumors and conspiracy theories increasingly show up at the polls to bully voters and election workers, our message is clear: intimidation has no place at the ballot box. This legislation would take important steps to ensure every American feels safe to make their voice heard on election day,” said Murphy. “We must stop voter suppression and intimidation – threatening free, fair elections, which are the lifeblood of our democracy. Protecting election workers as well as voters from intimidation with firearms at the polls is basic democratic common sense. The growing dangers of political violence and extremist threats make this legislation all the more important,” said Blumenthal. “In no corner of America should the fear of violence prevent voters from casting their ballot or keep elections workers from showing up to work,” said Padilla. “Unfortunately, we have a long, dark history of voter suppression and intimidation in America, reignited by partisan rhetoric and false narratives about election fraud. That’s why our bicameral bill would keep visible firearms out of election centers to ensure election workers can do their jobs and all Americans feel safe exercising their right to vote.” Specifically, the Freedom from Intimidation in Elections Act would: Amend Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act to establish a rebuttable presumption that a person carrying a visible firearm while engaging in election-related activities is engaging in voter intimidation;
Provide civil remedies for individuals who experience this type of intimidation, including an emergency injunction that would allow the voter or election official to carry out their duties in peace; and
Recognize an exception for law enforcement officers acting within their official duties. U.S. Senators Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also cosponsored the bill in the Senate. U.S. Representatives Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.-17) and Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.-25) cosponsored the bill in the House of Representatives. The Freedom from Intimidation in Elections Act is endorsed by organizations including the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, GIFFORDS, Newtown Action Alliance, Brady: United Against Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, March for Our Lives, Institute for Responsive Government, League of Conservation Voters, Center for American Progress, End Citizens United Action Fund, Common Cause, Defend the Vote Action Fund, Fair Elections Center, Democracy SENTRY, League of Women Voters, Public Citizen, Faith in Public Life Action, Sierra Club, and Voto Latino. Full text of the bill is available HERE. A one-pager on the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released the following statement on the Biden-Harris administration’s executive actions to combat the emerging threats of machinegun conversion devices and unserialized, 3D-printed firearms and continue implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. “The Biden-Harris administration and the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention have been laser-focused on implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, and those efforts have undoubtedly contributed to a reduction in crime and gun violence. Today’s executive actions to crack down on dangerous conversion devices and 3D-printed firearms, as well as the continued investments in community violence intervention programs and red flag laws, will save lives. I’m proud we
...Read more have President Biden and Vice President Harris in the White House because they are leaving no stone unturned in our fight to end gun violence.” Prior to the creation of the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, Murphy and U.S. Representative Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.-10) introduced legislation to establish an Office of Gun Violence Prevention in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) and U.S. Representative Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) to introduce a resolution condemning an escalating censorship crisis that has removed and targeted thousands of books from the shelves of schools, libraries and universities across the country. The bicameral resolution, coinciding with Banned Books Week, reinforces congressional recognition of students’ First Amendment rights and affirms that the freedom to read is essential to a strong democracy. In the 2023-2024 school year alone, PEN America documented over 10,000 instances of individual books being banned, nearly triple the previous academic year. Many bans have removed books from public shelves with
...Read more characteristics that would be targeted by Project 2025, which additionally proposes labeling teachers and librarians who distribute such books as sex offenders. "Republicans’ crusade to ban books and turn libraries into cultural battlegrounds deprives students of the chance to explore new ideas, challenge their perspectives, and grow into the critical thinkers we need to lead the next generation,” said Murphy. “Instead of censorship, we should trust teachers and parents to help kids navigate new topics and learn to think for themselves.” “Book bans are nothing short of an attack on the First Amendment — a fundamental pillar of our democracy. Books are a tool for readers to learn and grow through new ideas and shared experiences, and the growing movement to remove thousands of books from library shelves is deeply disturbing. We must all stand together against this blatant censorship,” said Blumenthal. “Any attempt to ban books because someone has an ideological disagreement or doesn’t believe in capturing the full scope of history is un-American,” said Schatz. “Freedom of expression is a founding principle of our country, and it's up to all of us to stand up against these attacks on this fundamental right.” “By filling our libraries with a diversity of stories, we help our students understand new perspectives rather than suppressing their freedom to think, read and write independently,” said Raskin. “We must close this chapter of censorship and, rather than continuing to take a page from the world’s dictators and autocrats, turn our attention to the resources students need to succeed. I am grateful to Senator Schatz for his partnership on this resolution.” According to findings from PEN America and the American Library Association, targeted books include classics like To Kill A Mockingbird, 1984, and The Handmaid’s Tale. Books are also more likely to be removed if they feature content related to the LGBTQIA+ experience, race or racial injustice or stories about grief and abuse. U.S. Senators John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawai‘i), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Angus King (I-Maine), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) also cosponsored the resolution. The resolution is additionally endorsed by the American Library Association (ALA), Banned Books Week Coalition, EveryLibrary, Interfaith Alliance, JCRC of Greater Washington, Jewish Community Relations Council of Broward County (Florida), Jewish Community Relations Council of Portland, Jewish Council for Public Affairs, National Book Foundation, National Coalition Against Censorship, National Council of Jewish Women, National Council of Teachers of English, National Education Association, National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund, PEN America, PFLAG National, Red Wine and Blue Education Fund, The Sikh Coalition, Jewish Community Relations Council for Tucson & Southern Arizona, and Urban Libraries Council (ULC). ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday announced the National Park Service awarded the state of Connecticut a total of $6.9 million in federal grants to renovate recreation facilities and advance land conservation efforts. The grants are funded through the Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership (ORLP) and will provide $5 million for improvements to Cummings Park and West Beach in Stamford, and $1.9 million for Rockwell Park in Bristol. “Public parks and beaches provide an important benefit to our communities because they’re places where everyone can have fun, enjoy the outdoors, and connect with their neighbors. This $6.9 million in federal funding will help upgrade
...Read more Cummings Park and West Beach in Stamford, and Rockwell Park in Bristol, to ensure more families have the opportunity to take advantage of our state’s beaches, hiking trails, and green spaces,” said Murphy. “This $6.9 million in federal funding will modernize and upgrade facilities at two of Connecticut’s beautiful, beloved parks – Cummings Park and West Beach, and Rockwell Park. Ensuring that Connecticut residents have access to top notch outdoor spaces is vital to their health and well-being. I will continue to fight for investments in Connecticut’s treasures and expanded access to outdoor recreation,” said Blumenthal. The ORLP program provides matching grants to cities for park projects in underserved communities. These investments enable urban?communities to?create new outdoor recreation spaces, reinvigorate existing parks, and form connections between people and the outdoors. ### Read less WASHINGTON– U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) introduced two coordinated pieces of legislation to create a long-term solution for management of Plum Island and to protect the island in perpetuity. Both bills are scheduled to be considered by Senate Committees this week and advance the goal of a long-term solution for management, conservation, and preservation of Plum Island. The Plum Island Preservation Study Act requires the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) to conduct a special resource study to evaluate the national significance of Plum Island and the suitability of designating Plum Island as a unit of DOI. This legislation is set to be considered by the Senate Energy and Natural
...Read more Resources Committee on Thursday. The Plum Island Preservation Act would permanently protect Plum Island from development and convene stakeholders, including DOI, to create a management plan for the island. The legislation also requires the General Services Administration (GSA) to submit annual reports to Congress on the progress of this process. This legislation is set to be considered by the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee on Wednesday. “I am committed to protecting Plum Island, and creating a management plan is a necessary step to securing its future. These pieces of legislation are important steps that will help establish a timeline and set clear objectives to preserve Plum’s environmental, ecological, and cultural heritage,” said Murphy. “Urgent action must safeguard Plum Island—a priceless national treasure that desperately needs and deserves permanent protection. These two bills combine to preserve this threatened pristine resource—an ecological gem home to flora and fauna as well as historically significant landmarks. Expected Senate steps forward this week on the Plum Island Preservation Act and the Plum Island Preservation Study Act are monumental strides to conserve and protect Plum Island for generations to come. Failure to act now endangers this irreplaceable natural gem,” said Blumenthal. “For years, I have been fighting tooth and nail to protect and preserve the national treasure that is Plum Island,” said Schumer. “Long Islanders should have input over this natural environment, not some outside ‘high bidder.’ This legislation would take a huge step forward in ensuring this natural wonder is permanently preserved for generations to come, a true win for Long Island, the environment, its rich history, and the communities and advocates who have fought so hard to preserve Plum Island.” “Plum Island holds significant importance in our nation’s animal research and biodefense, and as this critical mission reaches its conclusion, we must protect Plum Island’s unique ecological habitat, shared cultural heritage, and history of military operations. I have worked for years alongside my colleagues and local stakeholders to achieve this vision, and I am proud to cosponsor the Plum Island Preservation Act to ensure the long-term preservation of Plum Island and its responsible management,” said Gillibrand. Situated in Long Island Sound between Connecticut and New York, Plum Island is a federally-owned 840-acre island home to several endangered and vulnerable species. The island also houses the Fort Terry and Plum Island Lighthouses, two locations on the National Register of Historic Places. The Connecticut and New York delegations have been working extensively with DOI, GSA, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to solidify the future of Plum Island, and these pieces of legislation mark landmark progress in the fight to establish a long-term management plan and to permanently preserve the island. The full text of the Plum Island Preservation Act can be found HERE, and the full text of the Plum Island Preservation Study Act can be found HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday introduced the Witness Assistance and Criminal Accountability Act, legislation to improve public safety by holding criminals accountable, encouraging witnesses of criminal activity to participate in the justice system, and ensuring noncitizens who assist police and prosecutors are not punished for their participation. Current law provides limited protections for noncitizens who witness criminal activity and wish to help law enforcement by providing credible information, testimony, or evidence. As a result, noncitizen witnesses who wish to come forward are forced to weigh their desire to help against the risk of deportation. "Our criminal justice system only works if individuals feel safe coming forward when they witness or
...Read more have information about a crime. But for many of our neighbors, participating in the justice system comes with an understandable fear of deportation, possibly resulting in some people staying silent. This legislation would make our communities safer by giving these witnesses the protections they need to help police and prosecutors hold criminals accountable without the fear of being deported for doing the right thing,” said Murphy. The Witness Assistance and Criminal Accountability Act would protect witnesses and encourage cooperation with law enforcement to help prosecute crimes. Specifically, the bill would: Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to establish a new nonimmigrant classification – the W Visa – for individuals who are in possession of critical information regarding criminal activity and who are willing to assist with law enforcement’s prosecution of eligible crimes;
Ensure noncitizens who step forward to participate in the criminal justice system have access to immigration protection; and
Facilitate communication and cooperation between state and local law enforcement and the communities they serve, by ensuring that members of the community are not afraid to participate because of their immigration status. A one-pager is available HERE. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Connecticut State Representative Jason Rojas (D-East Hartford) on Wednesday co-authored an op-ed for Hearst Connecticut arguing that Connecticut’s housing crisis requires all levels of government – local, state, and federal – to work together and take action. Murphy and Rojas lay out the scope of this nationwide problem that has acutely impacted people in Connecticut and propose a range of potential policy solutions to spur the construction of more affordable homes, help first-time home buyers, and drive down costs. “There is a housing crisis all across America today, but there’s no doubt the situation is especially dire in our state,” the members wrote. “A new report shows that Connecticut has one of the tightest rental markets in the
...Read more country, with just a 3.5 percent vacancy rate. That kind of inventory shortage does two things. First, it drives up prices. Nationally, half of all renters have to set aside more than 30 percent of their paycheck each month for housing, but in Connecticut, nearly 500,000 of our citizens are spending more than 50 percent of their income on rent. Second, it makes it very hard for renters without good credit to find any landlord who will rent to them. At the end of last year, the number of people experiencing homelessness in Connecticut hit a record high. Homeownership — the core of the American dream — is also increasingly out of reach for the people we represent. Connecticut ranks 49th in the nation in new housing construction, and the slow pace of construction combined with high interest rates means it's harder than ever for a young family to buy their first house.” Murphy and Rojas argued for more tax credits to build new affordable housing stocks – a proven policy incentive: “Vice President Kamala Harris has proposed a first-ever tax incentive for developers who build starter homes sold to first-time buyers and an expansion of existing tax credits to spur construction of more affordable rental housing. Combined these two policies could add 3 million new homes to the marketplace. We should also increase support for other existing, effective programs such as the HOME Investment Partnerships Program and National Housing Trust Fund that have been underfunded but are crucial in helping finance affordable housing projects. House Bill 5474, which passed both chambers of Connecticut's legislature in May, encourages the development of duplexes, triplexes, and similar ‘middle’ housing, with the hope of increasing affordable housing stock. Public Act 23-207 created financial incentives for the development of workforce housing aimed at Connecticut's middle class.” On getting more people into stable homes quickly, Murphy and Rojas urged greater investment in voucher programs, along with incentives to increase landlord participation and reduce waitlists: “The Choice in Affordable Housing Act would incentivize more landlords to participate in the Housing Choice Voucher Section 8 program through one-time incentive payments to landlords, security deposit payments, and bonuses to public housing agencies employing a landlord liaison. There’s no doubt we also need to increase our investment in voucher programs to get more people off waitlists and into homes. Connecticut currently boasts a waitlist of more than 6,700 applicants to its premier rental voucher program, the Rental Assistance Program (RAP), despite it not having been open for new applicants for over a decade. State and federal resources should be levied to tackle this crisis and move people into safe, stable homes.” On Connecticut’s zoning laws, Murphy and Rojas wrote: “But the reality is that no amount of incentives for developers or voucher programs can overcome Connecticut’s restrictive zoning laws. About 90 percent of the state is zoned for single-family housing. The federal government has a limited role in changing zoning rules, but the Yes In My Backyard (YIMBY) Act would encourage localities to eliminate discriminatory and burdensome zoning and land use policies to increase supply of affordable housing. It would also increase transparency around why a community is not adopting anti-discriminatory policies. The Majority Leaders' Roundtable on Affordable Housing, a group comprised of interested legislators and subject-matter experts, has held meetings since 2023 and is working toward a solution that will loosen restrictions for developers while still preserving the character of Connecticut's many unique towns.” They concluded: “Every community is different and there is no easy fix or one-size-fits-all solution for this crisis. It will require all levels of government to summon the political will and courage to engage in difficult conversations, pursue wholehearted reform, and make serious investments in affordable housing. We should be honest that sweeping progress won’t happen overnight. Driving down costs and completing construction takes time, but that makes our action — and partnership — all the more urgent.” Read the full op-ed HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, joined U.S. Senators Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), in sending a letter to Dr. Muhammad Yunus, Chief Adviser to the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, congratulating him on assuming leadership at a pivotal time for the country. The letter emphasizes the urgent need for democratic reforms and accountability in response to widespread protests demanding substantive political and institutional changes. The Senators also call for stronger law enforcement and swift action to hold accountable those responsible for attacks on vulnerable communities, including the Hindu population and Rohingya refugees
...Read more in Cox’s Bazaar. “In recent weeks, the world has witnessed how the people of Bangladesh have courageously demonstrated the transformative power of collective action,” the lawmakers wrote. “This transition presents a historic opportunity to reform institutions, protect human rights, and ensure inclusive participation in governance.” Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus, We are writing to congratulate you on becoming the interim leader of Bangladesh during this historic time. In recent weeks, the people of Bangladesh have courageously demonstrated the transformative power of collective action to their own government and the global community. When citizens unite, their voices can compel even the most entrenched and authoritarian leaders to relinquish power. But this historic moment did not come without costs. Rather than engage the legitimate grievances of the protestors, the Bangladesh security forces – including the Rapid Action Battalion – responded with brute force, killing hundreds of protestors, and arresting and injuring thousands more. We mourn the lives that were lost and urge your interim government to create a credible process to conduct an independent and impartial investigation into the security services’ human rights violations. This will be vital both as a demonstration of your commitment to respecting the rights of the protestors and signal your interim government’s intention to work in good faith to address their grievances. This transition presents a historic opportunity to reform institutions in Bangladesh, to ensure that human rights, such as freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly, are protected; to allow for inclusive participation in government representative of the diversity of the country; to support civil society and independent media; and to hold individuals accountable for the violence committed against the citizens of Bangladesh. The people of Bangladesh deserve a government that honors their voices, safeguards their rights, and upholds their dignity. While many celebrate this new chapter in Bangladesh, a concerning volume of those celebrations have turned violent, with documented reports of reprisals targeting police as well as minority Hindu communities and those perceived to be supporters of Sheikh Hasina’s government. As a result, the country has witnessed gaps in law enforcement and lack of protections for those facing violent attacks, including members of the Hindu community and Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazaar. We urge you to take these threats and incidents of violence seriously, just as we applaud your recent promise to continue supporting the million-plus Rohingya people sheltered in Bangladesh. It is only by ensuring that all communities residing in Bangladesh are protected under the law that Bangladesh can meet its promising future. Now, more than ever, it is important for Bangladeshis to unify – by coming together and by rebuilding an inclusive government, that fully harnesses Bangladesh’s tremendous potential. In a world that has recently witnessed repeated assaults on democratic ideals, Bangladesh has a rare opportunity to respond by delivering on the ‘second liberation’ many protestors have called for through the formulation of a government that respects democratic values and institutions. We stand ready to assist Bangladesh during this critical period to ensure a successful transition to a democracy truly representative of the will of the Bangladeshi people. ### Read less HARTFORD— U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, joined U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) in announcing $4.2 million for seven community health centers in Connecticut to expand mental health, behavioral health, and substance use disorder services. “For too many struggling with mental illness or substance use, lifesaving care remains out of reach because overburdened health centers are unable to meet demand. This $4.2 million in federal funding is going to give community health centers across the state the
...Read more resources to treat and work with thousands more people, and I’ll never stop fighting for expanded access to mental health services,” said Murphy. “This $4.2 million in federal funding will allow seven crucial community health centers in Connecticut to expand their lifesaving mental and behavioral health services. The need for these services has never been higher as Connecticut confronts an ongoing mental health crisis. These health centers are on the frontlines of providing care to those who need it most and I am thrilled that they will receive robust support to expand and continue this work,” said Blumenthal. “I’m thrilled to announce $600,000 in federal funding for Hartford’s Charter Oak Health Center,” said Larson. “These funds are part of a nationwide effort to expand access to mental health care and substance use prevention services. Today’s announcement means that health centers across the country, including right here in Hartford, will be able to serve more than 300,000 patients previously unable to access the care they need.” “The United Community and Family Services is an indispensable health resource in our region. I am very pleased that the Health Resources and Services Administration awarded the UCFS with a substantial federal grant to support its ongoing behavioral health services. This federal award is a reflection of the exceptional service the health care professionals and staff provide, and will help expand and improve the mental and behavioral health services that so many residents rely on,” said Courtney. "As the top Democrat on the Labor-Health and Human Services-Education subcommittee, I am proud to support this critical $4.2 million investment to combine mental health and drug use disorder treatment, which will empower our community health centers and ensure that more of our neighbors can access the care they need," said DeLauro. “This is a triumph for every person and family affected by the opioid and mental health crises, and for our Federally Qualified Health Centers who are on the frontlines. I commend the Biden-Harris Administration for prioritizing these essential services, and I will continue to support investments that will have a positive impact on our district." “With over 14,000 patients, the Norwalk Community Health Center (NCHC) is a stellar example of how to provide quality, local medical care to patients in the languages they speak for costs they can afford. The connections NCHC has built with the Norwalk community are invaluable, and will ensure that, as the medical facility expands its services with this $600,000 federal grant, its patients know they can get the help they need from medical professionals they trust,” said Himes. “Community health centers address the most urgent community needs, especially mental health and substance abuse services. Through critical investments like this, more people in Danbury, Plainville and surrounding towns will be able to seek the care they need right where they live. I am grateful to the Biden-Harris Administration for its commitment to expanding and improving access to care in Connecticut and across the country,” said Hayes. The federal funding, through the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), will support critical services at seven federally qualified community health centers in Connecticut: Charter Oak Health Center in Hartford will receive $600,000.
Connecticut Institute for Communities in Danbury will receive $600,000.
Cornell Scott Hill Health in New Haven will receive $600,000.
Fair Haven Community Health Clinic in New Haven will receive $600,000.
Norwalk Community Health Center in Norwalk will receive $600,000.
United Community and Family Services Inc. in Norwich will receive $600,000.
Wheeler Clinic Inc. in Plainville will receive $600,000. A new report from Mental Health America demonstrates the need for this important expansion of services, finding that the vast majority of people with a substance use disorder in the U.S. are not receiving treatment. One in 5 youth had at least one major depressive episode in the last year—with over half not receiving treatment, and 10 percent of adults with a mental illness are uninsured. Today, most health centers are only able to meet about 27% of the demand for mental health services and 6% of the substance use disorder treatment demand among their patients, according to HRSA. ### Read less NEW YORK–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday released the following statement after meeting with Foreign Minister of Lebanon Abdallah Bou Habib.
“This is a critical moment where the focus on the region and world must be on de-escalating the deepening conflict between Hezbollah and Israel. I spoke with Foreign Minister Bou Habib today and we exchanged views on how the United States, Lebanon and Israel can take steps to avoid the devastating consequences of a larger conflict breaking out in the Middle East. We had a candid, serious discussion about the importance of de-escalation in the immediate term, but also the need to establish a plan for the day after in Gaza and a credible path forward for a Palestinian state.”
###
NEW YORK–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday released the following statement after meeting with Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo at the United Nations General Assembly. “Thanks to President Arévalo’s reform agenda and support from Vice President Harris and the Partnership for Central America, Guatemala has made real progress in rooting out corruption and growing their economy, and I was glad to discuss with him how the U.S. can continue to support that work. President Arévalo’s early successes are in part a testament to the Biden-Harris’ strategy of targeting the heart of the issue – helping to make these countries safer, their economies more prosperous, and the region more stable. Tackling poverty,
...Read more corruption, and violence means that fewer people are forced to make the dangerous journey north to our border because their communities are safer and economic opportunities are abundant. I look forward to our continued partnership to make the Americas prosper together.” ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on President Biden’s approval of a major disaster declaration due to last month’s flooding in western Connecticut. “Last month’s flooding was catastrophic for so many towns, families, and local businesses, and it will require the might of the federal government to begin to recover and rebuild. I spoke with FEMA Administrator Criswell about the magnitude of devastation and dire challenges Connecticut would face without federal assistance, and my staff and I have stayed in contact with FEMA and the White House to make sure those who suffered losses get the support they need. I’m grateful to the Biden administration for approving a partial major disaster declaration that will begin to unlock millions of
...Read more dollars for FEMA Individual Assistance Program (IA) applicants in Fairfield, Litchfield, and New Haven Counties. My office will continue to closely monitor the Governor’s request for Public Assistance (PA) federal funding for municipalities and local businesses and work to ensure that the FEMA IA funding is released as quickly as possible.” Murphy, along with the rest of the congressional delegation, sent a letter urging President Biden to approve this declaration. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.-1) on Friday introduced a resolution designating the week of September 16 through September 20, 2024, as “Malnutrition Awareness Week.” Food insecurity and malnutrition affect over 40 million Americans, disproportionately impacting older adults, children, and other vulnerable populations. In 2023, an estimated seven million American children lived in food-insecure households. Meanwhile, disease-associated malnutrition in older adults alone costs the United States more than $51.3 billion each year. The resolution recognizes registered dietitian nutritionists and other nutrition professionals, health care providers, social workers, and advocates for their efforts to
...Read more advance awareness and prevent malnutrition. It also highlights the cyclical relationship between poverty and malnutrition and recognizes the disproportionate effect felt by communities of color. By raising awareness and promoting better access to nutritious foods and healthcare, this resolution seeks to support nationwide efforts to improve health outcomes. “Malnutrition is a public health crisis, and it disproportionately impacts communities of color and the most vulnerable amongst us—seniors, kids, and people with chronic illness. We must continue expanding access to affordable, healthy food through federal nutrition programs like the Older Americans Act, SNAP, and Meals on Wheels. I’m proud to introduce this resolution to bring awareness to this serious problem and recognize those working on frontlines to ensure every family can put nutritious food on the table,” said Murphy. “No one should go hungry because of financial distress,” said Bonamici. “Each year we recognize Malnutrition Awareness Week to draw attention to the many nutrition programs that are addressing food insecurity at all stages of life and to highlight what more can be done to finally end hunger. I’m committed to continuing to strengthen proven programs like Meals on Wheels, SNAP, and school nutrition programs.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, on Thursday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor on the role private equity has played in the commodification of health care at the expense of patients, doctors, nurses, and local communities. In his remarks, Murphy explained how private equity’s obsession with profit has no place in health care and leads to worse quality care and higher costs. “A Wall Street investment bank owning your children’s pediatrician would have sounded silly to Americans a generation ago,” Murphy said. “But today, the role of private equity and hedge funds and big banks in health care ownership is one of the most important stories in health care. And by and large, it’s bad news for
...Read more patients. Right in front of our eyes, the defining purpose of our health care system is being transformed. Our hospitals and our nursing homes, our hospice care, even our kids’ pediatric practices, now exist often for the primary purpose of making obscene amounts of money for investors. It’s not about keeping us healthy. It’s about return on investment. Murphy described how Prospect Medical Holdings purchased three hospitals in Connecticut—Rockville General, Manchester Memorial, and Waterbury Hospital— and ran them into the ground: “Two years after their purchase, the hospitals in Rockville, Manchester, and Waterbury hadn’t seen much of any improvement or investment. In fact, they were beginning to fall into greater disrepair. As the three of them entered some pretty dire financial straits, Prospect didn’t make further investments, they took out a $1.1 billion mortgage, and made these hospitals the collateral. Now, surely, they put some of that money, they used the hospitals as collateral, they raised $1.1 billion, surely they put that money back into the hospitals to pay for repairs and improve their financial situations? You know the story. They didn’t do that. In fact, half of that loan — they used the hospitals for collateral — half of that loan went to dividends to investors and executives across the country in California, where Prospect was located.” Murphy continued, calling out Prospect’s CEO for getting obscenely rich while the hospitals he bought were saddled with millions in debt and unpaid taxes: “$90 million went straight to one person, the CEO. Let me guarantee you, $90 million would have made a huge difference at Waterbury Hospital. It would have saved lives. But Waterbury Hospital was used as collateral so that Sam Lee, the CEO, could make $90 million. Next to nothing went toward a single one of the 16 hospitals that Prospect owns across the country. Prospect owes the state of Connecticut $67 million in unpaid taxes. They owe the low-income city of Waterbury — which struggles to pay its elementary school teachers — $10.5 million. None of that money went to pay the taxes they owe Connecticut and the city of Waterbury. Prospect’s CEO made $90 million while his company refused to pay taxes. But maybe, you ask, the CEO really needed the money. Well, he didn’t. It’s just greed. This guy Sam Lee, I don’t know him, but he owns not one, but two luxury homes in Los Angeles. They are worth more than $15 million combined. Each of them has its own pool, one even has its own private basketball court. They’re 11 minutes from each other. Sam Lee pillaged three Medicaid hospitals in Connecticut so he could have two mansions 11 minutes apart.” Murphy underscored how Prospect’s commodification of Connecticut’s healthcare, and Steward Health Care’s similar failures in Louisiana and Massachusetts, are emblematic of the larger, destructive impact of private equity on America’s healthcare system: “But here’s the real problem. Sam Lee isn’t the exception — he’s the rule. We just finished up a set of hearings and meetings on Steward Health Care, which used the same playbook as Prospect to run their hospitals into the ground while their out-of-state CEO also cash out. The hospitals Steward bought in Louisiana and Massachusetts were gutted. A nurse testified before our committee this month that they put dead babies in cardboard boxes because they wouldn’t pay for the kind of temporary coffin that would normally be used for a dead child. The nurses would leave during the day to go to local stores to buy basic supplies on their own dime because they didn’t have them in the hospital. The elevators in these Steward Health Care hospitals stopped working. Why? Well in this case, it’s because that CEO, Ralph de la Torre, who ignored a Congressional subpoena to appear before the HELP committee this month, could buy a $40 million, 190-foot yacht with six bedrooms that costs $4 million a year just to keep in the water. Dead babies in cardboard boxes so that a CEO could burn $80,000 a week on a crew and shrimp cocktail and champagne for his private yacht. That is obscene. That is revolting. But, that is our choice. That’s the health care system that our laws currently allow to exist. What’s happening at Prospect and Steward is happening all over the country.” Murphy concluded: “Now let’s be clear – this is not the only problem in the American health care system. We have a lot of work to do to increase quality and reduce cost. But this new phenomenon – the financialization of healthcare and the rapidly increasing ownership of healthcare institutions by private equity – has happened virtually overnight, with little public discussion, and it has made all of the failures that already existed in our healthcare system 100 times worse. It’s been a boon to the private yacht industry, but it’s been largely miserable for patients. It might feel like the train has left the station, but it has not. It’s not too late to turn it around. Congress can and should act.” Last week, Murphy spoke at a HELP hearing, “Examining the Bankruptcy of Steward Health Care: How Management Decisions Have Impacted Patient Care.” Earlier today, he voted to hold Steward Health Care CEO Ralph de la Torre in contempt of Congress. A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “When I was growing up, I had a pediatrician. His name was Dr. Cartlon. He was kind, he was reassuring. His advice and his comfort meant a lot to my parents, who were young parents and in need of a steady shoulder to lean on when their kids were born. I remember Dr. Cartlon distinctly, even though he retired when I was pretty young, and I remember that he was a really important part of our family’s support system; he was an important part of our community and family identity. “My kids don’t have a pediatrician. They have many pediatricians. That’s because the big pediatric practice that we use decided that it was inefficient and not cost effective to assign one pediatrician to every family. Every time we book an appointment, we go see a different doctor at this practice. They’re all competent. Our kids are healthy. And this ‘very efficient system’— it does mean that we probably get in to see a doctor faster than when my parents were trying to find a last-minute appointment with only a very busy Dr. Cartlon. “It’s an efficient system. But it’s hollow. I don’t know any of the doctors' names. We have no relationship with one pediatrician. It’s clinical, it’s not personal. And while we get good care, I admit it leaves you feeling a little bit empty, a little bit alone, if you’re just a number, or a name, in an appointment book. Without a Dr. Cartlon that you can count on, that experience is a little less assuring. “So, I got curious, and I looked up who owns this very competent, very efficient pediatric practice that we use. What I learned is that the primary investor in our children's pediatric practice… is Goldman Sachs. A Wall Street investment bank owning your children’s pediatrician would have sounded silly to Americans a generation ago. But today, the role of private equity and hedge funds and big banks in health care ownership is one of the most important stories in health care. And by and large, it’s bad news for patients. Right in front of our eyes, the defining purpose of our health care system is being transformed. Our hospitals and our nursing homes, our hospice care, even our kids’ pediatric practices, now exist often for the primary purpose of making obscene amounts of money for investors. It’s not about keeping us healthy. It’s about return on investment. And that’s what I want to spend a few minutes talking to my colleagues about today. “Historically, you could count on your doctor’s office and your nearest hospital to be locally owned, likely to be not-for-profit, and trust that the reason they existed was to make sure patients got the care they needed. The people that owned the health care institutions you counted on lived in your community. They didn’t answer to New York private equity firms or Los Angeles investment companies. They were accountable to you. To their neighbors. “That really mattered! It made you feel safe. It reassured you that you or your loved ones were in good hands. Because ultimately, that’s the only thing that mattered. When we’re at our most vulnerable, whether that be because of something joyous like a pregnancy or something more worrying like a difficult diagnosis, all we want to know is that the priority at that institution, that we or our loved one is at, is that we’re being taken care of. That the primary motivation of the person taking care of us is taking care of us. “But increasingly that is no longer the case. Let’s just take for today private equity firms: companies that buy up companies, extract as much rent from them as possible, and then quickly turn them over to the next highest next bidder. Over the past decade, private equity investors have spent more than $1 trillion acquiring hospitals, nursing homes, and physician practices. You can see here in this chart that private equity firms acquired six times as many medical practices in 2021 compared to just a decade earlier in 2012. The reach today of private equity in our healthcare system is enormous. Think everything from specialists, like OB-GYNs and anesthesiologists, to generalists, like primary care providers, to emergency services and urgent care. You might not even know that the new doctor you’re seeing, or the place where you’re getting your blood work done, is owned not by anybody in your community, but by a far-off private equity firm. “To understand why this is so dangerous, you just have to understand what private equity is all about — and how it makes a very small number of people a ton of money. The playbook is pretty simple: private equity firms invest in companies, largely through borrowed money, and then flip them for a quick profit to enrich themselves and their investors. It’s called buy, strip, flip. “Buy – The private equity firm uses a leveraged buyout, normally, meaning they put up a small amount of their own money and borrow all the rest, immediately saddling their new purchase with huge amounts of debt. “Strip – They comb through the balance sheets to find as many cost-cutting opportunities as possible. They lay off workers. They stop paying vendors. They even might sell the land underneath the company that they bought, giving themselves a big one-time payout, leaving the company to pay rent on the space that they used to own. “And then flip – They find a new buyer, or they get bailed out by somebody, sometimes even government, and walk away richer than before and completely insulated from any legal or moral fallout from the consequences of their actions. “Short-term profit is the priority, and in the healthcare system, that comes with real risk and downside. Because at the moment you are most vulnerable, you want to make sure the priority is taking care of you. “Let me tell you a story to give an example about how all this works. Prospect Medical Holdings is a safety net hospital operator — which means they provide health care to people who are on Medicaid and people who don’t have insurance. Prospect was acquired by a private equity firm in 2010, and currently owns 16 hospitals in this country — in Pennsylvania, California, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. Before we get into the details, let’s talk about how a private equity firm buys a hospital. They raise capital from investors, but a huge portion of the money they raised, as I mentioned before, is borrowed. So, from the start, the hospital that they’re buying is millions of dollars in debt, additional debt, and is immediately responsible for generating revenue to pay that debt. Debt that the hospital didn’t acquire. Debt that is on the hospital because the ownership company borrowed the money in order to buy the hospital. Sometimes that means taking a bad financial situation and ultimately replacing it with an even worse one. “So in 2016, this company Prospect bought three hospitals in my state — Rockville General, Manchester Memorial, and Waterbury Hospital — for a total of $150 million. Combined, these hospitals serve about 600,000 patients. They employ about 4,000 people. For most of the people who live in this area, these hospitals are their best, and sometimes their only, option. Access to emergency rooms, especially if you live in one of the more rural parts of the state, can be a matter of life and death. Many of the patients are on Medicare or Medicaid and they might not have access to transportation that would allow them to get to a hospital further away. I should note that 80% of Prospect’s revenues come from Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement — meaning this company, and the hospitals it owns, are largely funded by us, by taxpayers. “Now, these hospitals in Connecticut, I’ll admit, weren’t in great financial shape when they were bought. But they were hopeful that these new owners with lots of money at their disposal would bring an infusion of investment—that’s what was promised—and would help right the ship. Two years after their purchase, the hospitals in Rockville, Manchester, and Waterbury hadn’t seen much of any improvement or investment. In fact, they were beginning to fall into greater disrepair. As the three of them entered some pretty dire financial straits, Prospect didn’t make further investments, they took out a $1.1 billion mortgage, and made these hospitals the collateral. Now, surely, they put some of that money, they used the hospitals as collateral, they raised $1.1 billion, surely they put that money back into the hospitals to pay for repairs and improve their financial situations? “You know the story. They didn’t do that. In fact, half of that loan — they used the hospitals for collateral — half of that loan went to dividends to investors and executives across the country in California, where Prospect was located. $90 million went straight to one person, the CEO. Let me guarantee you, $90 million would have made a huge difference at Waterbury Hospital. It would have saved lives. But Waterbury Hospital was used as collateral so that Sam Lee, the CEO, could make $90 million. Next to nothing went toward a single one of the 16 hospitals that Prospect owns across the country. “Prospect owes the state of Connecticut $67 million in unpaid taxes. They owe the low-income city of Waterbury — which struggles to pay its elementary school teachers — $10.5 million. None of that money went to pay the taxes they owe Connecticut and the city of Waterbury. Prospect’s CEO made $90 million while his company refused to pay taxes. But maybe, you ask, the CEO really needed the money. Well, he didn’t. It’s just greed. This guy Sam Lee, I don’t know him, but he owns not one, but two luxury homes in Los Angeles. They are worth more than $15 million combined. Each of them has its own pool, one even has its own private basketball court. They’re 11 minutes from each other. Sam Lee pillaged three Medicaid hospitals in Connecticut so he could have two mansions 11 minutes apart. “But here’s the real problem. Sam Lee isn’t the exception — he’s the rule. We just finished up a set of hearings and meetings on Steward Health Care, which used the same playbook as Prospect to run their hospitals into the ground while their out-of-state CEO also cash out. The hospitals Steward bought in Louisiana and Massachusetts were gutted. A nurse testified before our committee this month that they put dead babies in cardboard boxes because they wouldn’t pay for the kind of temporary coffin that would normally be used for a dead child. The nurses would leave during the day to go to local stores to buy basic supplies on their own dime because they didn’t have them in the hospital. The elevators in these Steward Health Care hospitals stopped working. Why? Well in this case, it’s because that CEO, Ralph de la Torre, who ignored a Congressional subpoena to appear before the HELP committee this month, could buy a $40 million, 190-foot yacht with six bedrooms that costs $4 million a year just to keep in the water. “Dead babies in cardboard boxes so that a CEO could burn $80,000 a week on a crew and shrimp cocktail and champagne for his private yacht. That is obscene. That is revolting. But, that is our choice. That’s the health care system that our laws currently allow to exist. What’s happening at Prospect and Steward is happening all over the country. I’m not saying that every private equity firm is as rapacious as those that I’m talking about today. “And private equity firms will tell you that these hospitals or nursing homes were inefficient before they bought them. And they’ll claim that the private equity ownership increased efficiency and quality. But here’s maybe the most important thing to tell you. It’s just not true. Yes, as I explained with regard to my own pediatric practice, efficiency — profit-maximizing efficiency — is often not good for the well-being or the peace of mind of patients. My kids’ pediatrician practice is efficient, but it doesn’t deliver the same kind of satisfaction or peace of mind as it does when you have a reliable pediatrician. “But more importantly, there’s actually no evidence that private equity ownership increases quality or reduces cost. In fact, as I’m going to tell you, the evidence suggests exactly the opposite is true. A recent study from Harvard Medical School asked a simple question: Are patients at hospitals acquired by private equity receiving worse care than patients at hospitals not owned by private equity? Researchers analyzed insurance data from almost 5 million Medicare hospitalizations for ten years, and the findings were stunning, though not surprising. “After a hospital was acquired by a private equity firm, there was a 25% increase in complications for patients. Patients experienced 27% more falls, 38% more bloodstream infections. The rate of surgical site infections was double that of hospitals not owned by private equity. Those are stunning numbers. This is not patient care being 5% worse, 10% worse— you’re talking about infection rates after surgeries doubling just because a private equity firm owns it rather than the hospital being in the hands of the local community. And why? Because when private equity takes over, it is mostly not about the patient. It’s about the profit. How do you maximize profit really quickly—and you’ve got to do it really quickly because you have to start paying back those loans you took out to buy the hospital, you’ve got to start getting ready to flip the asset, you’ve got to make the CEOs even richer—what do you do? You fire employees to cut costs, you force the remaining doctors and nurses to just see more patients for less time, you cut corners on supplies and equipment, you discharge patients much more quickly if that makes you more money. “Okay that’s quality, but what about cost? It turns out that private equity ownership is driving up costs for premium payers and taxpayers. One study looked at what happens when a private equity firm engages in a roll up strategy, otherwise known as buying up lots of small doctor groups in the same market. That study found that in 8 out of 10 specialties they looked at — from oncology to primary care — the price of care went up after these private equity roll ups by as much as 16 percent. So when private equity buys up a health care practice, quality goes down, satisfaction goes down, cost to consumers and the government goes up. “This begs a larger question. How has capitalism gone so far off the rails? How have the rules of our economy become so unmoored from the common good and any conception of morality? No one in this country would endorse a health care system in which nurses at a hospital are forced to go to the local CVS because the emergency room ran out of Pedialyte just so the hospital owner could pay for the expensive upkeep of a luxury boat. Nobody in this country thinks it’s okay for a hospital CEO to refuse to pay taxes so that he can more easily make his mortgage payments on his two luxury homes 11 minutes away from each other. “These private equity CEOs, who are hurting people in order to fund their lavish lifestyles — most of them don’t think they’re doing anything wrong. They think that they are just playing by the rules, and to an extent, they’re right. Because our government — our culture, our society — has deemed it okay for people to make a fortune even when it comes at the expense of hurting other people. “Listen, there are parts of the economy where maximizing profit aligns with maximizing quality — but health care is not one of them. People are dying in these hospitals and nursing homes so that the executives can get rich. That is not right. And we don’t have to accept it. “We can build a free-market economy that has guard rails to protect against the worst kind of immoral greed and excess. I don't begrudge anyone making money. But if you’re making money off of the most sacred parts of our economy — like our Medicaid hospitals — and if you’re making money basically by funneling taxpayer dollars to your own pocketbook — there has to be a limit. And today, I’m just outlining the problem. But make no mistake — there are solutions. Congress and the President do not need to accept this trend of private equity ownership in our healthcare system — and the abuse it allows. “For instance, the Biden-Harris administration and the FTC, through Chair Lina Khan, are taking these risks seriously. They’re filing antitrust suits against private equity-backed healthcare monopolies. Here in the Senate, the Health Committee, as I just mentioned, just finished a hearing on the abuses of that one company, Steward Health Care, and we heard outrage from both Democrats and Republicans on the committee. When that CEO refused to testify, ignored the subpoena, Republicans and Democrats voted to sanction him for that illegal action. Congress can take a stand and limit or restrict private equity or investor ownership of health care institutions that receive a bulk of their revenue from federal programs like Medicare and Medicaid. “Now let’s be clear – this is not the only problem in the American health care system. We have a lot of work to do to increase quality and reduce cost. But this new phenomenon – the financialization of healthcare and the rapidly increasing ownership of healthcare institutions by private equity – has happened virtually overnight, with little public discussion, and it has made all of the failures that already existed in our healthcare system 100 times worse. It’s been a boon to the private yacht industry, but it’s been largely miserable for patients. “It might feel like the train has left the station, but it has not. It’s not too late to turn it around. Congress can and should act.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) joined CNN’s The Amanpour Hour with Christiane Amanpour to discuss the empty rhetoric from the Republican Party and how the Democratic Party can expand its coalition to deliver for working families and rebuild community. Murphy explained how the typical measures of public policy success are disconnected from how many Americans are feeling: “The economy is getting better, the unemployment rate is as low as it can be, crime is going down, GDP is rising. And yet there's still a whole bunch of people in this country who report feeling more unhappy than ever before. They report feeling disconnected from their community; levels of self-reported loneliness are through the roof; there are a lot of Americans who are employed, but who feel like they
...Read more don't have meaning and purpose every day when they wake up. And I think we've got to have a broader conversation in this country about why that is, and help give Americans access to positive meaning and identity…Sometimes we get lost by thinking that our only job is to try to increase the health of the economy. Studies show that when it really comes down to it, happiness is not just your career or how much money you're making. Happiness is the question of how good are your relationships? Do you feel part of a community, something bigger than yourself? And I think we've done a really bad job of delivering that kind of purpose and meaning to people, even as we've done a better job of making sure that people have rising wages and have jobs that they can go to every day.” Murphy continued: “People are not satisfied being part of a global economy. They want to be part of a unique American economy. Even more specifically, they want to be part of a distinct, unique place. They don't like that our culture has become flattened. They don't like that our downtowns have become eviscerated and the only place that you can buy things from are transnational retail outlets, like Amazon or Google. They want localness to matter. And Kamala Harris was on that stage the other night saying, ‘I have a plan to breathe life back into small businesses. So your downtowns come back to life. So you can feel good about belonging to a place which is where a lot of people found meaning and identity for decades and decades.’ So yes, the rhetoric, you know, is familiar because we hear it on the right, but the policy is actually being put into place right now by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.” Murphy highlighted how Democrats can deliver meaningful results for working families by broadening the coalition: “We need to expose Republicans for the frauds that they are. The only major domestic achievement of their four years in power when Donald Trump was in the White House, was a tax cut, 80 percent to 90 percent of the benefit went to the billionaires, corporations and millionaires. And so, they talk about standing up for regular working people. But they don't do a great job of it. Here's the tough part for the Democratic Party. Listen, if we want to be the party of the working class then we've got to be the party of the working class. That means expanding our tent. That means being willing to bring into our fold people who may not agree with us on every single cultural and social issue. I care deeply about the issue of gun control. I care deeply about reproductive rights, but I am willing to bring people into our coalition who might not line up with me on all those issues because if they are willing to break up consolidated power, if they are willing to support a higher minimum wage, then having them inside the coalition gives me a better chance to convince them to join us on things like climate change, or choice, or guns. That's a tough conversation for the Democratic Party, but I think it's a really important one.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to object against Republicans’ resolution attacking transgender youth. In his remarks, Murphy slammed the resolution as a hateful and divisive distraction aimed at diverting the attention of the American public away from Republicans' deeply unpopular agenda. Murphy condemned Republicans’ fear-mongering and relentless bullying of transgender kids: “This isn't an effort to solve a problem. This whole obsession with transgender kids from the right-wing is just about picking on vulnerable kids so that adults can make themselves feel big. Bullying and harassing kids because it makes adults feel powerful. As far as I'm concerned, this whole effort is shameful. It'
...Read more s important to understand that resolutions like this do not stand in isolation. It is part of a massive campaign by the right to convince Americans that they should fear immigrants, that they should fear Muslims, that they should fear gay children, that they should fear transgender athletes. The world in which Republicans want us to live is a world where the biggest problems are not low wages, or expensive health care, or addiction, or loneliness, but the threats posed to us by people who are of a different race or speak a different language or are of a different sexual orientation or gender identity.” Murphy continued, highlighting the unpopularity of the Republican party’s agenda: “[T]he Republican party's platform today is maybe the most unpopular agenda of any major political party in recent memory. Ban abortion, cut taxes for corporations and millionaires, ban books, loosen gun laws. Nobody wants any of that. So, what do you do if the things you actually want to do, if you achieve power, are super, super unpopular? You distract them with giant, gross lies like ‘immigrants are eating our pets,’ or greatly exaggerate untruths like ‘our high school sports are under assault from transgender kids.’ It is all an effort to hide the ball from the real agenda—abortion bans and millionaire tax cuts—by trying to make you believe that you should spend your entire day, that you should spend your entire life, just being afraid of people that are different from you. Murphy underscored the absurdity of Republicans’ fixation on transgender athletes, emphasizing the stark contrast between right-wing rhetoric and reality: “There are over six million kids competing in high school sports today. For the problem of transgender girls competing in girls’ sports to be a national crisis, what percentage of that six million would be transgender girls? 10%? Is that a crisis? 5%? 1%? It's none of those. More than 800,000 students in Florida participate in high school athletics. Before they enacted their ban, how many transgender athletes were in Florida of those 800,000 students? 100? Nope. 50? No. Over the course of eight years, in the entire state of Florida before their ban, there were 13 transgender high school athletes. 13. Those 13 girls were apparently waging a war against girls’ sports. That's a pretty small army to be waging a war. You're more likely to be killed by a falling object in this country than to have your daughter compete against a transgender girl in high school sports.” Murphy concluded: “I think every state and every school district should decide these questions for themselves. I don't think the federal government should get involved. But as a parent personally, I celebrate those few transgender kids who often spend their entire adolescence being shamed or marginalized by the kind of small people who push resolutions like this. I celebrate the fact that they get the experience of the camaraderie and the happiness that comes with being part of a sports team. I think that’s great, and I don't think that is a threat to my kids. I don’t think that’s a threat to my community or my nation. I teach my kids to love everybody, to include everybody, to see people who are different from them—a different race, a different religion, even a different gender identity— as potential friends, not as enemies waging war against them, to be shamed or bullied. This is an absurd resolution. It’s designed to distract Americans from Republicans' real agenda. It's designed to build a culture of fear and mistrust, a culture that I and most Americans reject. And therefore, I object.” A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “Mr. President, reserving the right to object. First of all, let me offer my thanks to the Senator from Tennessee for all the work she has done with my colleague, Senator Blumenthal, to protect our kids online. I am truly grateful for what they have done together. And although she and I have not worked closely together on legislation, I hope that we'll be able to find partnerships to work together to further protections for our kids, and I mean that sincerely. She and I may not agree on a lot – and as you will hear, we do not agree on this particular resolution – but I do hope we get the chance to work together. “I mean that, but I also mean this: with all due respect, let's be clear about what this is, Mr. President. This isn't an effort to solve a problem. This whole obsession with transgender kids from the right-wing is just about picking on vulnerable kids so that adults can make themselves feel big. Bullying and harassing kids because it makes adults feel powerful. As far as I'm concerned, this whole effort is shameful. “It's important to understand that resolutions like this do not stand in isolation. It is part of a massive campaign by the right to convince Americans that they should fear immigrants, that they should fear Muslims, that they should fear gay children, that they should fear transgender athletes. The world in which Republicans want us to live is a world where the biggest problems are not low wages, or expensive health care, or addiction, or loneliness, but the threats posed to us by people who are of a different race or speak a different language or are of a different sexual orientation or gender identity. It is a massive, coordinated attempt to marginalize people who aren't white, straight, and Christian, and it exists for a reason: to distract you. “I have a ton of close Republican friends in this chamber who I work with a lot, but let's be honest—the Republican party's platform today is maybe the most unpopular agenda of any major political party in recent memory. Ban abortion, cut taxes for corporations and millionaires, ban books, loosen gun laws. Nobody wants any of that. So, what do you do if the things you actually want to do, if you achieve power, are super, super unpopular? You distract them with giant, gross lies like ‘immigrants are eating our pets,’ or greatly exaggerate untruths like ‘our high school sports are under assault from transgender kids.’ It is all an effort to hide the ball from the real agenda—abortion bans and millionaire tax cuts—by trying to make you believe that you should spend your entire day, that you should spend your entire life, just being afraid of people that are different from you. “Let me give you the facts, not the fearmongering, about high school transgender athletes, and I'd let you decide whether this situation is worthy of hundreds of bills having been introduced by Republicans all across the country; whether it's worthy of debate continuously over and over again on the Senate floor. There are over six million kids competing in high school sports today. For the problem of transgender girls competing in girls’ sports to be a national crisis, what percentage of that six million would be transgender girls? 10%? Is that a crisis? 5%? 1%? It's none of those. “Let's take Florida as an example. More than 800,000 students in Florida participate in high school athletics. Before they enacted their ban, how many transgender athletes were in Florida of those 800,000 students? 100? Nope. 50? No. Over the course of eight years, in the entire state of Florida before their ban, there were 13 transgender high school athletes. 13. Those 13 girls were apparently waging a war against girls’ sports. That's a pretty small army to be waging a war. You're more likely to be killed by a falling object in this country than to have your daughter compete against a transgender girl in high school sports. “But what if she did? I think every state and every school district should decide these questions for themselves. I don't think the federal government should get involved. But as a parent personally, I celebrate those few transgender kids who often spend their entire adolescence being shamed or marginalized by the kind of small people who push resolutions like this. I celebrate the fact that they get the experience of the camaraderie and the happiness that comes with being part of a sports team. I think that’s great, and I don't think that is a threat to my kids. I don’t think that’s a threat to my community or my nation. I teach my kids to love everybody, to include everybody, to see people who are different from them—a different race, a different religion, even a different gender identity— as potential friends, not as enemies waging war against them, to be shamed or bullied. This is an absurd resolution. It’s designed to distract Americans from Republicans' real agenda. It's designed to build a culture of fear and mistrust, a culture that I and most Americans reject. And therefore, I object.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined five of their Senate colleagues to introduce the Tenants’ Right to Organize Act, legislation to empower tenants to organize, participate in, and operate tenant organizations without fear of retaliation or interference. The bill amends the United States Housing Act of 1937 to promote the formation of tenant organizations and provide additional funding to ensure tenants have a stronger voice in addressing their living conditions and advocating for their rights. Currently, only some tenants living in federally supported housing have a legally recognized right to organize without fear of retaliation. This unfair
...Read more distinction leaves Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) recipients and residents of federally-assisted units in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) properties without the ability to self-organize and address legitimate housing concerns. Empowering the millions of HCV and LIHTC tenants in rent-restricted units with the ability to organize can help improve housing outcomes and reduce eviction filings, promoting stronger, more robust communities. “Low-income renters using Housing Choice Vouchers or trying to find affordable housing have limited options, so when they’re facing a negligent landlord, they feel backed into a corner – either deal with poor living conditions or risk not being able to secure another affordable place to live. Giving these tenants the right to organize will allow them to hold landlords accountable and demand that issues with rent increases or living conditions be addressed. I’m proud to introduce this legislation that will empower renters and help keep them in safe, stable housing,” said Murphy. “Tenants need the tools in this measure to protect themselves against predatory landlords. Organizing together to combat exploitative practices gives them leverage and strength. They can hold landlords accountable and demand safe, affordable, secure housing— which should be the legal right of every renter. Rising rents and abusive evictions are enabled by housing shortages that need to be addressed as well,” said Blumenthal. The Tenants' Right to Organize Act would: Expand Protections for Tenant Organizing: The bill guarantees families receiving tenant-based rental assistance the right to establish and participate in legitimate tenant organizations to address issues related to their living environment, such as the terms and conditions of their tenancy and other housing and community development activities.
Prevent Retaliation and Protect Tenant Activities: The bill protects tenants from adverse actions, such as eviction or harassment, in response to their participation in legitimate tenant organizations or exercising their rights.
Ensure Accountability and Enforcement for Federal Funding Recipients: The bill requires public housing agencies and owners to recognize legitimate tenant organizations and respond meaningfully to their concerns. It also requires the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of the Treasury to establish enforcement protocols, including complaint filing processes, investigation of abuses, and regular reporting to Congress to ensure compliance.
Fund and Support Tenant Organizations: The bill provides dedicated funding to support tenant organizing and capacity building, ensuring that tenants have the resources and training needed to advocate for their rights effectively. U.S. Senators John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also cosponsored the legislation. The Tenants’ Right to Organize Act is endorsed by the National Housing Law Project (NHLP), Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC), Mobility Works, National Low-Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC), Tenant Union Representative Network (TURN.) Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Tuesday joined U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), and Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) in sending a letter to the Department of Defense (DoD) seeking an update on its pharmaceutical acquisition strategy following the decision in Acetris Health, LLC v. United States (Acetris), which loosened requirements on federal agencies to preference American-made products in purchasing decisions. The lawmakers raised concerns about the decision’s potential to increase DoD’s reliance on foreign pharmaceuticals. Federal agencies typically make decisions about acquiring medications and drugs based on the Federal
...Read more Acquisition Regulations (FAR), which prohibit federal agencies from purchasing products from a country that does not comply with the Trade Agreements Act (TAA). In Acetris, the Court considered the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) restriction on drugs manufactured by Acetris, a New Jersey-based pharmaceutical company, whose products were formed with active ingredients from India, a TAA non-compliant country. Evidence from Customs and Border Patrol showed that the Acetris manufacturing process did not substantially transform the India-sourced active ingredients, confirming “that the tablets were a product of India for purposes of U.S. government procurement ...” Despite this evidence, the Court found that Acetris’s drugs were in compliance with the FAR, thereby rendering the VA’s restriction improper. This decision poses significant risks to the military’s drug supply chain, which is already over-reliant on foreign-sourced pharmaceuticals. DoD’s interim report on Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Risks revealed that “54% of the DoD pharmaceutical supply chain is considered either high or very high risk, with dependency on non-(TAA) compliant suppliers, sourcing from China and India, or unknown.” At a hearing of the Senate Armed Services’ Subcommittee on Personnel in April 2024, Col(ret) Victor Suarez explained that as a result of this decision, “a Chinese firm could make all the [active pharmaceutical ingredients] and precursor materials for a medicine, ship it to a U.S. subsidiary that does packaging and final labeling, and still be able to label it as American made. This would be considered an American-made drug and principally illustrates this loophole.” The senators requested that DoD explain how the Acetris decision has affected its pharmaceutical acquisition strategy by September 30, 2024. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Austin, We write regarding the Department of Defense’s (DOD’s or the Department’s) pharmaceutical acquisition strategy, including whether, and if so, how, such strategy has changed due to the February 2020 Circuit Court decision in Acetris Health, LLC v. United States, which loosened Buy American requirements for federal agencies purchasing pharmaceuticals. We are concerned that the decision may be exacerbating the Department’s reliance on foreign pharmaceutical products, increasing national security risks and potentially compromising military readiness. Historically, federal agencies have made pharmaceutical acquisition decisions based on the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), which prohibits federal agencies from procuring products from a country that does not comply with the Trade Agreements Act (TAA). Accordingly, prior to the Acetris Health, LLC v. United States decision, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) placed purchasing restrictions on drug manufacturers whose products were formed with active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) from TAA non-compliant countries, typically following Customs and Border Protection (CBP) country-of-origin determinations. In Acetris Health, LLC v. United States, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the Court) considered the VA’s strategy, and specifically, the agency’s purchasing restriction on a number of drugs manufactured by Acetris, a New Jersey-based pharmaceutical company. The VA contended that Acetris’s drugs violated the FAR, given that the products were formed with a single API sourced from India – a TAA non-compliant country. In defending its policy, the VA relied on CBP’s country-of-origin determination, which found that “the manufacturing process at the [Acetris] New Jersey facility did not result in substantial transformation [of the API] in the US and that the tablets were a product of India for purposes of US government procurement under relevant CBP precedent.” Despite this evidence, the Court found that Acetris’s drugs were in compliance with the FAR, thereby rendering the VA’s restriction improper. At a hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services’ Personnel Subcommittee in April, Col(ret) Victor Suarez explained the ramifications of the decision: “Today, a Chinese firm could make all the API and precursor materials for a medicine, ship it to a U.S. subsidiary that does packaging and final labeling, and still be able to label it as American made. This would be considered an American-made drug and principally illustrates this loophole.” This decision poses significant risks to the military’s drug supply chain, which is already over reliant on foreign sourced pharmaceuticals. For example, in the DOD’s interim report on Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Risks, the Department revealed that “54% of the DoD pharmaceutical supply chain is considered either high or very high risk, with dependency on non-[TAA] compliant suppliers, sourcing from China and India, or unknown.” As witnessed by the Covid-19 pandemic, an over-reliance on foreign countries for critical materials, including pharmaceuticals, leaves the U.S. vulnerable to international supply shocks. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday released a new plan to build on the success of the Long Island Sound Investment plan he published in 2016 and address the evolving set of challenges the Sound is facing. Murphy’s plan lays out investments and policy goals to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy, improve coastal resilience, support the blue economy, and increase access to and education about the beauty of Long Island Sound. The plan was informed by feedback from environmental advocates, fishermen, oyster farmers, marine researchers, submarine manufacturers, and other stakeholders and Connecticut residents who rely on the Sound for both work and recreation. “Eight years ago, I published a comprehensive funding plan outlining the ways the federal government
...Read more should support Long Island Sound and all the people in Connecticut who rely on it. It was an ambitious vision to protect the Sound’s future, and the good news is that we’ve been able to shatter many of the goals I set in that plan. That’s why I’m releasing a new and improved version to build on our successes and tackle new challenges facing Long Island Sound and coastal communities. We need to fast-track deployment of renewable energy, invest in coastal resilience, supercharge our support for the blue economy, and ensure everyone has the opportunity to learn about and enjoy this Connecticut treasure,” said Murphy. You can read Murphy’s Long Island Sound Investment Plan 2.0 HERE. ### Read less The northern coastline of Long Island Sound is one of Connecticut’s greatest assets, drawing millions of beachgoers and recreational boaters, and nurturing a sprawling aquaculture sector, from shellfishing to kelp farming. Known collectively as the “blue economy,” these industries contribute over $5 billion annually to the state. But the Sound, like most of Earth’s natural resources, is under growing threats from floods and storms resulting from the changing climate. Excessive runoff during severe weather events streams into the sound, carrying pollutants like engine oil, tire additives, animal feces, fertilizer and discharged toxins from industrial sites. At the same time, storm surges can inundate neighborhoods and marinas, pushing upstream into rivers and tributaries, causing
...Read more billions of dollars in damage. To address those challenges — and to not only preserve but develop the state’s blue economy — Sen. Chris Murphy has laid out a plan encompassing nearly two dozen proposals for new or expanded federal investment. “Rising sea levels and temperatures combined with the more severe and frequent storms hitting the Northeast have put the Sound and those who rely on it at increased risk,” Murphy writes in the Long Island Sound Investment Plan 2.0, slated to be released this week, which advances and scales up an effort he first laid out eight years ago. “We’ve made major strides toward a cleaner, more resilient Sound in the last decade, but there’s more work to be done,” Murphy writes. “To build on that progress, we need a new vision and new goals that are aligned with the Sound’s current challenges.” Murphy’s plan highlights several proposed bills he’s cosponsored, including the Reinvesting In Shoreline Economies and Ecosystems (RISEE) Act, the Working Waterfronts Preservation Act and the Supporting Healthy Interstate Fisheries in Transition (SHIFT) Act. He also calls for hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for initiatives ranging from water monitoring and offshore wind research to disaster resiliency, aquaculture, beach protection, port infrastructure and climate education programs. Bill Lucey, who serves as the Long Island “soundkeeper” with conservation and advocacy group Save the Sound, said the health of Connecticut’s coastline — and its associated industries — has ebbed and flowed. In the 1980s and 1990s, the Sound “was in really rough shape,” he said, with poor water quality leading to the widespread dying-off of fish and lobster, particularly in the western end of the Sound. Over the last 25 years, state and federal efforts — along with billions of dollars in funding — have improved water treatment compliance, and Lucey said the water quality in the Sound has improved markedly (though the lobster population hasn’t recovered). Still, Lucey said, “We’re starting to see some backsliding.” Major rain events, and the stormwater they produce, frequently force beaches to close and shellfish operations to temporarily shut down until the polluted water dissipates. Lucey said that translates into significant losses for the tourism and aquaculture sectors. Lucey was in attendance at a roundtable event hosted by Murphy late last month in Milford, where dozens of businesses and nonprofits discussed their efforts — and their concerns — surrounding the future of the blue economy. One of those efforts, the CT Blue Economy Coalition, was established just this year to foster collaboration and sustainable growth in the sector through education, investment and advocacy. Its founding members include the Southeastern CT Enterprise Region (seCTer) and Mystic Seaport Museum, as well as business incubator ClimateHaven, ocean farming initiative GreenWave, marine data services company ThayerMahan and research organizations OceanX, Project Oceanology and UConn Avery Point. Christina Brophy, senior vice president at Mystic Seaport Museum, said the group aims to foster “thinking about alternative solutions to major global issues, where there’s not only room for profit, but there’s room for curiosity, for love of the oceans, for being able to invest in a company and still sleep well at night.” Last week, its members held a follow-up meeting with Murphy’s staff to discuss funding for their work. Over the next 12 months, the coalition is planning a series of five public workshops hosted by members from different parts of the blue economy on topics ranging from ocean exploration to aquaculture to education. Brophy said she hopes the workshops will “get the word out” about the coalition “and allow people the opportunity to meet each other, to collaborate, to accelerate and to support a sustainable blue economy in Connecticut.” Haley Lieberman, a coalition member and director of marketing at ClimateHaven, said since her business incubator launched in New Haven last year, she’s seen investor support and momentum surge. “Climate technology is finally getting the attention that it deserves,” she said. “We’re seeing so much interest in economies that are essentially decarbonizing — work that can deeply impact our shorelines, our waterways, our blue economies,” Lieberman said. These startups have the potential for exponential growth because they’re taking on massive global challenges, she added. “Each of these companies has the ability, at scale [across their broader supply chain], to employ hundreds of thousands of employees, which can stimulate billions of dollars in economic development,” Lieberman said. And it’s not just high-tech that’s got the wind in its sails. Some of the oldest techniques in blue economy development are staging a comeback. About eight years ago, Tim Macklin and a couple of friends started Collective Oyster Recycling & Restoration, a nonprofit that reclaims shucked shells from restaurants and wholesalers and distributes them back into the Sound to create a habitat for the next generation of shellfish. This year, in partnership with the state Bureau of Aquaculture, CORR planted 125,000 pounds of shells in various locations in the Sound. Next year, they anticipate that volume will grow to 300,000 pounds. That expansion is due, in large part, to a $400,000 state grant that supported the operation over the last two years. “To be successful, you have to last for as long as you possibly can,” Macklin said. “Getting state and federal funds is going to be a key component to that.” (CORR is currently seeking state funding to purchase a permanent shorefront facility in Bridgeport.) Macklin attended Murphy’s event in Milford last month, and he said he appreciated having “a seat at the table” among so many other businesses and organizations working to shore up the Sound and harbor its native industries. “I grew up around here, and I’ve seen what it was like in the ’80s and ’90s, and I’ve seen how much it’s improved. It’s going to take a huge effort to kind of continue that path,” he said. “Trying to get all these organizations that are working on Long Island Sound together to really move forward, not only individually but collectively, is extremely important. Oysters are a part of that, but there’s a lot of other problems that need to be addressed,” he said. Read less WASHINGTON–On the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released the following statement on the Biden-Harris administration’s new actions to protect domestic violence survivors. The actions include an expansion of technical assistance and federal funding opportunities for state and local law enforcement programs that remove firearms from domestic abusers who are convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence or are subject to a protective order. The new actions will also support increased education for states to enforce the provision in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to narrow the “boyfriend loophole.” “The presence of a gun makes it five times more likely a woman will be killed by her abuser.
...Read more It’s a simple fact that keeping firearms out of the hands of abusers saves lives, and the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act took a big step forward by narrowing the boyfriend loophole. I’m proud the Biden-Harris administration is announcing these steps to implement that provision and make sure state and local law enforcement are doing everything they can to enforce the law and help keep domestic violence survivors safe. The overwhelming majority of Americans agree abusers shouldn’t have access to guns, and I won’t stop fighting until we close the loophole once and for all.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, released the following statement on the Biden administration’s decision to send $225 million in U.S. aid to Egypt despite its failure to make meaningful improvements on human rights and democracy – a condition that Congress placed on the aid. “This decision waives requirements on an additional $225 million of military aid to Egypt that is tied to broader improvements on democracy and human rights. It’s no secret that Egypt remains a deeply repressive autocratic state, and I see no good reason to ignore that fact by waiving these requirements. We have previously withheld this portion of Egypt’s military aid package, while
...Read more still maintaining our strategic relationship, and we should continue to do so.” Murphy and Coons releaseda joint statement on the administration’s decision to send $95 million in U.S. aid to Egypt despite its failure to make clear and consistent progress on releasing political prisoners – another condition that Congress placed on the aid. Last week, Murphy led 9 senators in urging the Biden administration to withhold the $320 million of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Egypt that Congress made contingent upon specific human rights conditions in the FY23 Appropriations Act. Murphy discussed Egypt’s continued failure to improve human rights conditions at a committee hearing in June. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke at a U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing, “Examining the Bankruptcy of Steward Health Care: How Management Decisions Have Impacted Patient Care.” Murphy highlighted a similar case in Connecticut, explaining how Prospect Medical Holdings bought Rockville General, Manchester Memorial, and Waterbury Hospital and have since run them into the ground. In his questions to Ellen MacInnis, a nurse at St. Elizabeth’s Medical Center in Boston, Murphy argued that the corporate greed of private equity firms has subverted the purpose of healthcare by gutting services to line the pockets of billionaires. Murphy described how Prospect Medical Holdings bought three hospitals in Connecticut and prioritized
...Read more profit over patients and quality of care: “In 2016, a company called Prospect Medical Holdings, that is owned by a private equity company, Leonard Green & Partners, bought three hospitals in Connecticut. Three small hospitals: Manchester Hospital, Waterbury Hospital, Rockville Hospital. You know exactly what happened. Immediately, they started stripping services out of these hospitals. Same story you’re telling. All of a sudden, supplies started running short. All of a sudden, specialists couldn't be found because they were cutting them off of the rolls. The elevators stopped working in these hospitals. Just like they did in your hospitals.” He continued: “By 2018, these hospitals were in trouble. Everybody knew it. Prospect was looking for a new buyer to just flip the hospitals to make more money. In that year, in 2018, Leonard Green took [$457] million in fees and dividends as these three hospitals in Connecticut were essentially dying in front of our eyes. Patient quality was being compromised. John Danhakl is the Managing Partner of Leonard Green. There are various reports about how much he’s worth, but likely in the neighborhood of $1 billion.” On the life-and-death consequences of commoditizing health care, Murphy said: “How have we let American capitalism get so off the rails, so unmoored from the common good, that anybody thinks it’s okay to make a billion dollars off of degrading healthcare for poor people in Waterbury, Connecticut? (A), How do you live with yourself? But (B), Why do we accept that as a country? This is just a choice, to decide to commoditize our health care system—in Connecticut, in Louisiana, in Massachusetts, in every state across this country. And we have enough data at this point to know quality is worse, often way worse, when these private equity companies come in. And not just in hospitals. In nursing homes, the death rate in nursing homes owned by private equity firms is 10% higher than in those not owned by private equity firms. So there is no mystery as to what is going on here.” Murphy concluded: “Nobody begrudges a hospital for making decisions that allow it to make more money than it puts out. But the question is this: are you making money for the purpose of providing good health care, or are you making money for the purpose of making the owners filthy rich? And every decision that happens in a hospital is different if you are making money to provide good health care versus making money to make the owners filthy rich.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you all for being here. This is a very important hearing. It's important because while we are focused on this particular company and this set of horror stories, what is happening in your hospitals is happening all across the country. I wish this were not true, but there are hundreds of Ralph de la Torres’ who are making a disgusting fortune off of withholding health care from people in need. “So, I just want to tell you a quick story about what’s going on in Connecticut. In 2016, a company called Prospect Medical Holdings, that is owned by a private equity company, Leonard Green & Partners, bought three hospitals in Connecticut. Three small hospitals: Manchester Hospital, Waterbury Hospital, Rockville Hospital. You know exactly what happened. Immediately, they started stripping services out of these hospitals. Same story you’re telling. All of a sudden, supplies started running short. All of a sudden, specialists couldn't be found because they were cutting them off of the rolls. The elevators stopped working in these hospitals. Just like they did in your hospitals. “By 2018, these hospitals were in trouble. Everybody knew it. Prospect was looking for a new buyer to just flip the hospitals to make more money. In that year, in 2018, Leonard Green took [$457] million in fees and dividends as these three hospitals in Connecticut were essentially dying in front of our eyes. Patient quality was being compromised. John Danhakl is the Managing Partner of Leonard Green. There are various reports about how much he’s worth, but likely in the neighborhood of $1 billion. How have we let American capitalism get so off the rails, so unmoored from the common good, that anybody thinks it’s okay to make a billion dollars off of degrading healthcare for poor people in Waterbury, Connecticut? (A), How do you live with yourself? But (B), Why do we accept that as a country? This is just a choice, to decide to commoditize our health care system—in Connecticut, in Louisiana, in Massachusetts, in every state across this country. And we have enough data at this point to know quality is worse, often way worse, when these private equity companies come in. And not just in hospitals. In nursing homes, the death rate in nursing homes owned by private equity firms is 10% higher than in those not owned by private equity firms. So there is no mystery as to what is going on here. “Ms. MacInnis, I wanted to just ask you a simple question. You talked about this before, but let's acknowledge that every hospital has to make money. You have to make money in order to operate. Nobody begrudges a hospital for making decisions that allow it to make more money than it puts out. But the question is this: are you making money for the purpose of providing good health care, or are you making money for the purpose of making the owners filthy rich? And every decision that happens in a hospital is different if you are making money to provide good health care versus making money to make the owners filthy rich. You were there before and after.” MACINNIS: “Yes, I was.” MURPHY: “So just, in the remaining minute, tell us a little bit about what it was like on the ground floor before this company comes in, and then after the company comes in. Can you feel it as an employee? The difference in the value system of the owners?” MACINNIS: “Yes, it’s noticeably different. I used to work on an interim coronary care unit, and we gave the best care. We took care of some of the sickest patients outside the ICU and we gave the best care. We had a one to three, a one to four ratio. I never, ever, ever, in the 2.5 years I worked on that floor, we never had a code. And that’s because we were able to rescue our patients. We had enough eyes, enough hands, good assessments, good monitoring, enough nurses around, frankly.” MURPHY: “Because the focus was on providing good care.” MACINNIS: “Because the focus was, yes. And when things got tight, what Caritas Christi did was they let go assistant nurse managers, and then they let go other people. The very last thing that they did, and they actually never did, was get rid of staff nurses, get rid of bedside nurses. They kept us well staffed. And we took the best care of our patients. I was so proud to work at Saint Elizabeth’s. After Steward took over, it’s just axe, and axe, and just taking away everything. Violating agreements that they made with us. They laid off all the nursing assistants on the maternity floors. Imagine running a maternity floor with no—well, I can tell you as a nurse, it’s an absurd prospect. They lay off our educators. Now they’re cutting patient-facing staff. Whereas Caritas Christi absolutely prioritized that. To the point where they stopped funding our retirement plan, they took away a lot of other things before they took anything away from our patients.” MURPHY: Because the purpose is now to make as much money to make the owners filthy rich. When there’s a fundamental difference in the purpose, there’s a fundamental difference in what happens inside that hospital, and that’s just the reality. MACINNIS: “Yes.” MURPHY: “Thank you.” ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), and Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04) announced nearly $17 million in funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to support five traffic safety projects across Connecticut. The funds are awarded through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grant program established to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. “This $17 million will support major upgrades to roadways in New Haven and West Hartford with high crash rates, making some of our most dangerous roads much safer for pedestrians, bikers, and drivers. Funding will also lay the groundwork for better public
...Read more transportation and help local, regional, and Tribal communities develop action plans to target crash hot spots and reduce preventable deaths. This is all thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and I look forward to seeing their impact on our state,” said Murphy. “This federal support will help stop catastrophic crashes on our roads and streets — one of the biggest, most preventable causes of death and injury. Nearly $17 million is a solid step toward safety for pedestrians and bicyclists as well as car drivers and passengers. Just last year, there were more than 300 deaths on Connecticut roadways, and many of these deaths could have been prevented with safer traffic measures and upgrades. I am proud that this federal funding will support five major projects that will transform road and pedestrian safety so our residents are protected,” said Blumenthal. “This year, we have tragically lost more than 200 drivers, passengers, and pedestrians, to accidents on Connecticut roads. We passed the Safe Streets and Roads for All Program to improve traffic safety and reduce fatalities and serious injuries. I am glad to see more than $3 million from this program coming to West Hartford to implement safety measures like sidewalks, bike lanes, flashing beacons, and expanded school zone speed limits. I remain committed to working with state and local partners to improve roadway safety for everyone,” said Larson. “The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law doesn’t just promote economic opportunity; it also makes critical investments to ensure the well-being of communities throughout eastern Connecticut. The need for pedestrian safeguards and an efficient traffic system has become more prevalent. This new round of federal infrastructure funding will support the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation and the University of Connecticut as they move to improve traffic and pedestrian safety, standing as another example of how the Safe Streets and Roads for All grant program is paying dividends for eastern Connecticut," said Courtney. “Safe streets are essential to creating livable and vibrant communities. These investments will help us improve transportation safety, reduce traffic fatalities and injuries, and strengthen our communities connectivity. I was proud to help write the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which continues to improve our infrastructure and transportation safety while combatting climate change and creating good-paying jobs,” said DeLauro. “Car accidents are an all too familiar occurrence in Connecticut, with more than 200 crashes recorded over Labor Day weekend alone. The federal funding towns, cities, and Tribes will receive from the Safe Streets and Roads for All program will empower local authorities to make our roads safer for drivers, bikers, and pedestrians,” said Himes. The funding announced today will support the following regional and local projects: $200,000 to the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation for the Mashantucket Pequot Comprehensive Safety Action Plan Development Project
$1,576,751 to UConn for the University of Connecticut Safe System for All Road Users
$1,000,000 to Connecticut Metropolitan Council of Governments for the MetroCOG Regional Safety Action Plan – Phase II – Crash Hot Spot Countermeasure Suitability Analysis
$3,178,100 to the Town of West Hartford for the Vulnerable User Safety Program
$11,040,000 to the City of New Haven for the Chapel Street Safe Streets Implementation Project The SS4A program supports the Department of Transportation’s goal of zero deaths and serious injuries on our nation’s roadways. This comes at a time where traffic fatalities are at the highest level in decades. In June, Murphy announced $21.7 million for projects to improve pedestrian and traffic safety. In May, Murphy announced an additional $3.44 million for traffic and road safety improvements. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, joined U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) in announcing $2.37 million in Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program grants. The funds, awarded through the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, will establish and strengthen community collaboration in support of local efforts to prevent youth substance use. “This $2.3 million in federal funding will help prevent substance abuse by investing in local programs that educate kids in Connecticut about the risks of substance use, provide drug-free
...Read more alternative programming, and support young people as they develop important social and emotional skills. Kids and teenagers face a lot of pressure these days from social media and their peers, and this funding will help ensure our kids have the tools they need to make good decisions,” said Murphy. “This $2.37 million in federal funding comes at a time of great urgency. We are facing a substance use epidemic, and we must work to protect the next generation from the destructive grip of substance use. The seven coalitions across Connecticut, supported by this funding, are working to do just that. I will continue to fight for these critical investments to support healthy communities where our youth can thrive,” said Blumenthal. “Middle and high school-aged children with substance use disorders experience higher rates of physical and mental illness and are at-risk for worsening addiction behaviors. I was proud to work with the Connecticut Congressional delegation to secure over $2 million in federal funding, including $625,000 for Manchester, to prevent youth substance use and expand access to drug-free alternative activities. We will continue to work together to connect our youth with the resources and support needed to counter substance abuse and promote healthy outcomes,” said Larson. “We need an all-hands-on deck response to address the addiction and overdose crisis, and this federal funding will support important work local coalitions are doing to prevent young people from using alcohol and drugs. Preventing early substance use goes a long way towards reducing the risk of long-term addiction, so kudos to the City of Norwich and Vernon ROCKS on securing these grants to support their ongoing prevention efforts which have already made a significant difference in their communities,” said Courtney. "This $125,000 award for the Coalition for a Better Wallingford from Drug-Free Communities represents a major investment in the future and well-being of our young people. These funds will strengthen critical partnerships and initiatives aimed at fostering safer, healthier environments for our children and adolescents. Together, we are taking a vital stand against the blight of substance use and committing to a brighter, drug-free future for our families,” said DeLauro. “Greenwich Together and The Norwalk Partnership have assembled a coalition of schools, local officials, community organizations, parents, and students to combat youth substance use— supporting and guiding children in making healthy choices. I’m thrilled these organizations will receive federal funding to further their work and look forward to seeing their positive impact,” said Himes. The funding announced today will support the following regional and local projects: $625,000 for the Greenwich Together Coalition
$625,000 for the Norwich Prevention Council
$625,000 for the Change Collaborative of Manchester
$125,000 for the Coalition for a Better Wallingford
$125,000 for the Vernon Rocks
$125,000 for the Norwalk Partnership
$125,000 for the Stand Together to Make a Difference Coalition of Danbury The Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program, created by the Drug-Free Communities Act of 1997, is the nation’s leading effort to mobilize communities to prevent youth substance use. Directed and funded by ONDCP, in partnership with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, the DFC Program provides grants to community-based coalitions to address youth substance use, implement evidence-based prevention locally, and ultimately, save lives. ### Read less US foreign policy is “pretty mismatched” to the United States’ challenges, said Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) at an Atlantic Council event on the 2024 elections on Monday co-hosted by RBC Capital Markets, the first in a series of events bringing in speakers from both parties. Murphy—a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Appropriations committees—argued that the United States is spending heavily on military aid and investment but not enough on solutions to the “most serious threats” for the United States, such as climate change, corruption, and misinformation. “Those challenges can’t be met with aircraft carriers, tanks, or planes,” he said. “You need smart power, you need economic development, you need nimble international development banks, [and] you need anti-
...Read more misinformation capacity.” Murphy spoke ahead of Tuesday’s presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. In the event of a future Harris administration, Murphy said to expect “a significant degree of continuity” with the Biden administration but also “new priorities”—given that Harris is a “next generation” candidate—to address artificial intelligence (AI), mitigate and adapt to climate change, and combat global poverty. Murphy said he expects the Harris administration to work closely with the United States’ allies and partners. A future Trump administration, Murphy predicted, would carry over policies and approaches from the former president’s first term, including its approach to the United States’ alliances. “I don’t think we can trust that NATO will still be around at the end of a Trump presidency,” Murphy warned, adding that the United States would become “a pariah at a moment where it is more important than ever before that we seek and deepen our alliances.” Below are more highlights from the conversation, moderated by Bloomberg’s Kailey Leinz, in which Murphy outlined priorities for the next administration’s foreign-policy agenda, from China to the Middle East to Ukraine. On China
Murphy defended the longstanding US approach of “strategic ambiguity” toward Taiwan. He said that the United States has “a deep and abiding interest in Taiwan’s sovereignty and independence” and that Democrats are “holding open the possibility” of defending Taiwan if China were to try to take Taiwan by force. But he also advocated that Taiwan “increase its defense spending.”
Amid concerns about navigating strategic competition with China, Murphy said that the United States has “woken up far too late” to the mistake it has made over decades by working to integrate China into the global economy under the belief that doing so would protect US workers, US national security interests, democratic values, and human rights. “It did none of those things,” he said. Instead, it has allowed China “to get all of the benefits of economic integration while continuing to squash domestic dissent.”
“I don’t think we are going to decouple ourselves completely from China,” he said. Rather, Murphy said, the next administration should focus on boosting the strength of strategic industries—such as critical minerals, medicine, and advanced technology—to ensure that the United States can produce what it needs. He said that deploying tariffs can help support these US industries.
“China delights as the United States refuses to regulate social media and AI,” Murphy said, noting that the next administration should prioritize these areas. He warned that, because of China’s leadership in such platforms and technologies, leaving them unregulated “could be the undoing of our own democracy.”
On the Middle East
On the Israel-Hamas war, Murphy expressed concern that there is “political upside in not signing a ceasefire” for both parties to the conflict, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attempts to hold onto his coalition and as Hamas sees support growing.
Murphy, reflecting on speculation that Netanyahu is hoping for a Trump win in the US elections, argued that “Netanyahu personally probably does have something to lose from an American administration that cares most about Israel’s security, not Netanyahu’s personal political security.”
On Iran, Murphy argued that “there might be a benefit” to have dialogue with Tehran “down the line at some point . . . But this is not that moment right now,” with how Iran is supporting proxy groups in the region.
On Ukraine
Murphy noted that the next administration will likely still be dealing with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, in part because Russian President Vladimir Putin is likely basing his calculation on whether to seek an end to the war on the outcome of the US election.
“Trump has made it clear if he’s president, he will cut support off for Ukraine. If America cuts support for Ukraine, there’s no way for Ukraine to survive,” he warned. Murphy said that Harris’s commitment to the “long fight” might push Putin to consider a deal.
“All of us who care deeply about the United States helping Ukraine have to do a better job of explaining why that’s different” from interventions the United States made in the Middle East in the past, he argued. Russia’s attempt to expand its borders by invading a neighboring country “threatens to upend the global order,” he said. He added that he believes Harris, with her skepticism about US military commitments in the Middle East, would be well-positioned to make the case to the public that supporting Ukraine is different.
Murphy said that the war in Ukraine has revealed that the US defense industrial base is “broken” given how quickly the war drained Western ammunition stocks. The defense industrial base “is too thin,” he said. “It is too dependent on profit-based efficiency. It is not redundant enough. It’s not resilient enough.” He said the next administration will have to “move fast” to broaden and diversify the number of major defense suppliers—before an even larger war breaks out.
On foreign policy
“The American foreign policy establishment has made a bunch of very big mistakes,” Murphy warned. Because of US failures to protect national-security interests in places such as Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, Murphy argued that Americans have “a hangover” that causes them to “question the wisdom of any recommendation that’s being given on committing US resources or troops overseas.”
He also argued that the US foreign policy establishment has made a “big” mistake by putting “blind faith in global neoliberal economics,” or that integrating global markets would benefit the US economy. “That didn’t work” because of “cheater nations like China,” he said.
The next administration, Murphy said, will also need to “gain back America’s faith in the national security establishment.” He said that to do so, the next president will need to adopt “restraint as a strategy” when it comes to military involvement abroad, to “show the American public that that finally, we have leaders that are willing to learn the lessons of the mistakes we’ve made.” Read less U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy and members of the Connecticut Congressional Delegation John Larson, Joe Courtney, Rosa DeLauro, Jim Himes and Jahana Hayes have announced that $2.37 million in Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program grants will be coming to Connecticut to support seven anti-drug programs. They said that $625,000 will go to the Greenwich Together Coalition, a second grant of $625,000 will go to the Norwich Prevention Council and a third $625,000 grant will be for the Change Collaborative of Manchester. The Coalition for a Better Wallingford is due to receive $125,000, with two more grants of $125,000 going to the Vernon ROCKS and the Norwalk Partnership. There also will be $125,000 for the Stand Together to Make a Difference Coalition of
...Read more Danbury. The funds are awarded through the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy for youth substance use prevention efforts in communities across the country. “This $2.37 million in federal funding comes at a time of great urgency,” Blumenthal said. “We are facing a substance use epidemic, and we must work to protect the next generation from the destructive grip of substance use. The seven coalitions across Connecticut, supported by this funding, are working to do just that. I will continue to fight for these critical investments to support healthy communities where our youth can thrive.” Murphy pointed out that “kids and teenagers face a lot of pressure these days from social media and their peers, and this funding will help ensure our kids have the tools they need to make good decisions.” According to Courtney, “We need an all-hands-on deck response to address the addiction and overdose crisis, and this federal funding will support important work local coalitions are doing to prevent young people from using alcohol and drugs. Preventing early substance use goes a long way towards reducing the risk of long-term addiction, so kudos to the City of Norwich and Vernon ROCKS on securing these grants to support their ongoing prevention efforts which have already made a significant difference in their communities.” Himes said, “Greenwich Together and The Norwalk Partnership have assembled a coalition of schools, local officials, community organizations, parents, and students to combat youth substance use — supporting and guiding children in making healthy choices. I’m thrilled these organizations will receive federal funding to further their work and look forward to seeing their positive impact.” Read less Nearly $17 million is coming to Connecticut for traffic safety projects aimed at ending fatalities on the state’s roads, according to Connecticut’s congressional delegation. The money, from the federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and awarded through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All grant program, was announced Wednesday in a release from U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy and U.S. Reps. John Larson, Joe Courtney, Rosa DeLauro and Jim Himes. “This federal support will help stop catastrophic crashes on our roads and streets — one of the biggest, most preventable causes of death and injury,” Blumenthal said in a release. “Just last year, there were more than 300 deaths on Connecticut roadways, and many of these deaths could have been
...Read more prevented with safer traffic measures and upgrades. I am proud that this federal funding will support five major projects that will transform road and pedestrian safety so our residents are protected.” The funding will support the following regional and local projects: $200,000 to the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation for the Mashantucket Pequot Comprehensive Safety Action Plan Development Project
$1,576,751 to UConn for the University of Connecticut Safe System for All Road Users
$1,000,000 to Connecticut Metropolitan Council of Governments for the MetroCOG Regional Safety Action Plan – Phase II – Crash Hot Spot Countermeasure Suitability Analysis
$3,178,100 to the Town of West Hartford for the Vulnerable User Safety Program
$11,040,000 to the City of New Haven for the Chapel Street Safe Streets Implementation Project “This $17 million will support major upgrades to roadways in New Haven and West Hartford with high crash rates, making some of our most dangerous roads much safer for pedestrians, bikers, and drivers,” Murphy said. “Funding will also lay the groundwork for better public transportation and help local, regional, and Tribal communities develop action plans to target crash hot spots and reduce preventable deaths. This is all thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and I look forward to seeing their impact on our state.” Larson said that more than $3 million of the funding would reach West Hartford to implement safety measures like sidewalks, bike lanes, flashing beacons, and expanded school zone speed limits. Courtney said it would also promote the health of the impacted communities. “The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law doesn’t just promote economic opportunity; it also makes critical investments to ensure the well-being of communities throughout eastern Connecticut,” he said. “The need for pedestrian safeguards and an efficient traffic system has become more prevalent. This new round of federal infrastructure funding will support the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation and the University of Connecticut as they move to improve traffic and pedestrian safety, standing as another example of how the Safe Streets and Roads for All grant program is paying dividends for eastern Connecticut.” Traffic accidents and deaths are at a high, officials have said. The Department of Transportation has reported 224 traffic fatalities this year. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday joined Kailey Leinz, Co-Host of “Bloomberg: Balance of Power,” for a fireside chat to kick off the Atlantic Council’s #ACFrontPage speaker series. Ahead of the 2024 U.S. elections, Murphy discussed the international challenges facing the country today and explored how the next president—as well as the next Congress—might navigate the demanding geopolitical landscape of tomorrow. Murphy emphasized the contrast between Harris' forward-thinking approach to national security and Trump’s record of corruption and close relationships with autocrats: “There couldn't be a bigger gulf between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris when it comes to how they are going to protect us in
...Read more this world. [Kamala Harris] is going to continue to push an agenda that seeks space for people to be able to contest dictators and autocrats around the world. To the extent that there's anything new that comes from a Harris administration—and there will be new priorities—she is, as a younger chief executive, going to care about the real future threats 50 years out, 60 years out to the United States. So, you will likely see a Harris administration paying attention to how we work with our allies, and perhaps our adversaries, to regulate AI. Climate change will be a priority. She'll pay attention to these massive youth poverty bulges that threaten global instability in places like Africa. Donald Trump is, and will be, a daily threat to U.S. national security, first and foremost because his foreign policy will be deeply corrupt. Since he left office, his family has become more deeply entangled in the global financial system; deeper relationships financially, the Trump family personally, with autocrats, with countries that have deep and important interests with the United States. Trump will do what he tried to do in his first term, this time actually shattering alliances. I don't think we can trust that NATO will still be around at the end of a Trump presidency. He will form alliances with autocrats and dictators who model the kind of illiberal democracy that he seeks to bring to the United States. He's a climate denier. He will do nothing to carry on the Biden administration's work of trying to make sure America walks the walk and talks the talk on climate change. And once again, America will be a laughingstock of the global community.” Murphy criticized Republicans’ lack of commitment to defending democracy abroad, warning their failure to confront Putin’s aggression could have dire global consequences: “The Republican Party has no interest in defending democracy abroad. They live in this naive world of neo-appeasement, in which they hope that Putin will just stop at Ukraine, like some leaders in the United States hoped that Hitler would stop in Eastern Europe. The reality is Putin very well may not stop. It will also signal to President Xi that he has a permission slip to go into Taiwan and perhaps other countries in which he has territorial ambitions. The lid could come off overnight—the post-World War II global economic and political order—if we lose Ukraine. And it is just very scary to me that Republicans don't see that.” On prospects for a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza, Murphy said: “I want a ceasefire deal. I wish it were able to happen yesterday, but my worry is that both the Netanyahu government and Hamas may not see it in their political interest to deliver that by election day. There's been some writing about Netanyahu's opinions about the U.S. election. And obviously this is speculative, but it is not hard to believe that Netanyahu is rooting for Trump to win. It is not hard to believe that Netanyahu may not want to deliver any kind of diplomatic victory to the Biden administration in the weeks leading up to the election. I hope that is not the case. I hope that Netanyahu's decisions are rooted only in what's right for Israel and regional security, but I don't think you have to be deeply cynical to believe that he may be making decisions, in part, to affect U.S. political dynamics.” On tackling the economic threat posed by China, Murphy said: “We have woken up far too late to the mistake we made under Democratic and Republican administrations, Democratic and Republican Congresses, for decades, to believe that integrating China into the world economic order would best protect American workers, would best protect American national security interests, and would best advance the cause of democracy and human rights inside China. It did none of those things. It hurt American workers, it compromised American national security interests, and it just allowed for the Chinese regime to get all of the benefits of economic integration while continuing to squash domestic dissent. Now, I don't think we are going to decouple ourselves completely with China. That would be unrealistic and probably a bad decision from a national security perspective. We do want to have some economic dependence on each other. But when it comes to strategic industries, yes, we have to build a capability, either in the United States or between the United States and our democratic allies, to be able to make sure that we can produce critical minerals, critical medicines, critical high technology products in the United States or in countries that we have firm, rock solid, permanent alliances with.” Murphy argued the U.S. needs to be more nimble in its approach to foreign policy: “The US foreign policy toolkit is arranged in a way that is pretty mismatched to the challenges that we are presented with. That'll be another big challenge for the next administration, the fact that we've spent 20 times as much money on conventional military investments. Yes, Ukraine has shown us that conventional military invasions are still a threat to the United States and our interests. But most of the most serious threats to the United States over the next 25 years—whether it be climate change, corruption, misinformation, those big poverty bulges that are going to threaten stability in places like Sub Saharan Africa—those challenges can't be met with aircraft carriers or tanks or planes. You need smart power. You need economic development, nimble international development banks, anti-misinformation capacity. You need more robust humanitarian aid programs. So the second challenge, I think, that the next President is going to have to face is a spending allocation between the State Department, USAID and the Department of Defense that's probably pretty badly mismatched for the set of challenges we'll face over the next quarter century.” Murphy laid out the two key foreign policy mistakes of the 21st century–blind faith in neoliberalism and the belief that American military power can solve every global political problem—that need to be corrected: “There are two big mistakes of American foreign policy in the first 25 years of this century, mistakes that have to be corrected for in the second 25 years. The first we've already talked a little bit about. It's this blind faith in global neoliberal economics, the idea that unfettered, integrated global markets, including cheater nations like China, would accrue to the benefit of the U.S. economy. That didn't work. And U.S. workers are skeptical of deep economic integration with the world, because they saw all their jobs leave for Mexico and China and India. So yes, they want a kind of economic nationalism the next 25 years. They want to rebuild those industries that we lost, and if you don't show them that we care first about American workers, not first about the profits of multinational globally integrated companies, then they're not going to have much patience for an American foreign policy that is ultimately based upon trade dynamics that allow jobs to go overseas. The second big mistake of the first 25 years is this continued belief that American military power utilized overseas could address complicated political realities in far off lands that we don't understand very well. And so I think the next administration, to gain back America's faith in the national security establishment of this country, is going to have to see restraint as a strategy.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday released the following statement on reports that Edmundo González, the Venezuelan opposition candidate for president and likely winner of the July 28 election, fled his country under threat of imminent arrest and received asylum in Spain. “Nicolas Maduro knows he lost this election, which is why he’s employing the playbook of autocrats and dictators — using his corrupt allies to falsify election results and moving to jail his political opponents. He’s desperately trying to cling to power after voters clearly rejected his continued rule. “While I am grateful to our partners in Spain for providing asylum to Edmundo González in support of the Venezuelan
...Read more people, the Venezuelan authorities must immediately drop the charges against him and allow his return home free of threats of violence or arrest, together with all those exiled or unjustly held as political prisoners. The United States must stand with the people of Venezuela who bravely continue their fight for democracy.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Monday released the following statement on the Biden-Harris administration’s steps to improve and strengthen access to mental health care for 175 million Americans with private health insurance. The finalized rule requires health plans to make changes when they are providing inadequate access to mental health and substance use care and closes existing loopholes. “Mental health is just as important as physical health, and yet millions of Americans are forced to pay out of pocket or go without necessary mental health services because insurance companies have found ways to skirt the law and deny coverage. For years, I’ve been pushing for stronger enforcement of our
...Read more federal parity laws, and these new rules are going to hold insurers accountable. I’m grateful to the Biden-Harris administration for taking these steps that will undoubtedly help more people find and afford the care they need.” In June, Murphy led a group of senators in a letter advocating that the Biden administration finalize the mental health parity rules that they proposed last summer. Last year, Murphy released a statement on the proposed rules. Murphy’s Mental Health Parity Compliance Act was signed into law in 2020 to provide federal and state health insurance regulators with additional tools to monitor and assure compliance with mental health parity laws. Last Congress, Murphy introduced the Parity Implementation Assistance Act with U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy (R-La.), which builds upon the Mental Health Parity Compliance Act and would incentivize further compliance with federal mental health parity laws. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined Fox News Sunday to discuss the economy and Vice President Kamala Harris’ agenda for supporting the middle class. In his discussion with Shannon Bream, Murphy emphasized the contrast between Harris’ commitment to expanding opportunities for working Americans and Donald Trump's record of prioritizing tax cuts for the wealthy. Murphy highlighted how Harris’ economic proposals, unlike those of Trump, would lower the cost of living and create opportunities for all Americans: “She just proposed a massive tax cut for small businesses, she’s proposed a massive investment in housing to bring the cost of rent and mortgages down for Americans, she's going to go after price gougers to try and make sure we
...Read more continue to drive inflation down, she wants an expansion of the child tax credit—she's investing in the middle class. She’s talked about an opportunity agenda where everybody has the chance to succeed, which is very different than Donald Trump's agenda. Donald Trump has made it very clear: if you put him back in power, he’s going to think about only one group of people and that's his friends at Mar-a-Lago, another massive tax cut for the richest people in America.” He continued: “I don't doubt that Kamala Harris will continue to roll out proposals to invest in small businesses, to invest in the middle class. I think the contrast is pretty striking between a candidate on the Democratic side who wants to make sure that we grow the economy from the middle out, and Donald Trump who still believes in this magical thinking of trickle-down economics, where if you give him and his friends billions of dollars, eventually that’ll find its way down to everybody else. That’s just not how it works.” Murphy underscored the differences between Donald Trump’s poor economic record and the historic growth achieved under the leadership of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris: “Under this administration we have seen record job growth in this country, we have manufacturing booming, unemployment at a record low. When Donald Trump left office, we had unemployment at a record high. We were going to rebuild the manufacturing sector under Donald Trump. We lost manufacturing jobs. So there is a clear contrast between Donald Trump’s record as president, where our economy fell to pieces, and Kamala Harris and Joe Biden, who have rebuilt the economy and driven down inflation at a rate faster than all of our other high-income nation competitors.” Murphy praised the success of the Inflation Reduction Act, drawing a sharp contrast with Trump's failure to rein in corporate power: “The minute we passed the Inflation Reduction Act, inflation started to decrease at stunning levels in this country. That piece of legislation is growing manufacturing jobs all over the country, it is cutting prescription drug costs for the senior citizens. I'm proud of the fact that we are doing our part to try to clean up the environment. I’m proud that that legislation finally took on the drug industry and said we are not going to put seniors in a position where they go bankrupt because of their prescription drug costs. Donald Trump was in office for four years. He did nothing to take power away from the drug industry. Prescription drug prices skyrocketed under Donald Trump. The Inflation Reduction Act, for the first time, did something about transferring power from the drug industry to regular people.” “That's the difference between these two candidates,” he continued. “Donald Trump is going to put power in the hands of big corporations, he's promised the big oil industry that he will do anything they want as long as they donate a billion dollars to his reelection campaign, Kamala Harris says that she’s going to continue to take power away from the big oil companies, the big drug companies, the big insurance companies, and put that power back in the hands of regular people.” On Harris’s plan to ensure wealthy corporations pay their fair share, Murphy said: “People want tax fairness in this country. They are sick and tired of these massive American companies paying 0% tax rates. That’s what some of the biggest companies in the country were paying—zero—under Donald Trump. There is nobody in this country, Republicans or Democrats, that think that’s fair, except for Donald Trump. So yes, Kamala Harris believes that if you’re a corporation in this country, you should pay some taxes. Yes, she believes that if you're making a billion dollars in this economy, you should help pay for our schools, you should help try to make our communities safer. I don’t think Americans believe this argument that by raising taxes by a couple percentage points on a handful of billionaires, that that ultimately is going to ruin the economy. Kamala Harris also says that she is going to cut taxes on small businesses. She’s going to use the money that we raise in higher taxes for billionaires and transfer that to tax cuts for small businesses and lower income taxpayers.” ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released a statement following the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) announcement that Connecticut will receive $3 million in “quick release” funding from its Emergency Relief program to rebuild roads and aid in additional recovery efforts following severe flooding in western Connecticut. “No amount of money will undo the damage done or bring back lives lost, but I’m glad to see the quick release of these emergency federal funds to immediately start work on road repairs throughout the towns impacted by the flooding. This $3 million is just a start and millions more will be needed to help communities rebuild. My team and I are working closely with FEMA to ensure all of the families and small businesses who
...Read more suffered catastrophic losses get the support they desperately need,” said Murphy. Last week, Murphy met with FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell to press for assistance for Connecticut. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Thursday led 9 senators in urging the Biden administration to withhold the $320 million of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Egypt that Congress made contingent upon specific human rights conditions in the FY23 Appropriations Act. In a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, the senators lay out the Egyptian government’s failure to make meaningful progress in addressing human rights concerns and argue the U.S. should withhold these funds until Egypt takes sustained and effective steps to improve human rights. U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-
...Read more Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) also signed the letter. The senators detailed the Egyptian government’s targeting of political opponents and journalists: “Ahead of presidential elections last year, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s government arrested more than 400 demonstrators for protesting a government-sponsored pro-Sisi electoral event. During the election, the Egyptian government manipulated voter turnout through bribery, coercion, and forced mobilization. And after the election, they sentenced presidential contender Ahmed el-Tantawy and 22 of his campaign supporters to one-year in prison, after previously targeting Tantawy’s phone with Predator spyware…The government has also continued to attack and harass journalists and media organizations with new arrests, investigations, bans, and refusals to issue licenses.” “According to the State Department’s latest human rights report, the Egyptian government has not only failed to investigate allegations of human rights abuses, it has also continued to commit ‘significant human rights’ violations such as extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearance, torture and life-threating prison conditions, and severe restrictions on freedoms of expression, assembly, and association,” the senators added. The senators argue the U.S. can both enforce its law and maintain its security relationship with Egypt: “Egypt and the United States share mutual security concerns that merit the sustainment of our military-to-military relationship. These include efforts to reach a ceasefire in Gaza, bolster Egypt’s efforts to defeat extremist groups, including the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in the Sinai, and to strengthen efforts to counter foreign terrorist fighters. We can continue to support these objectives while enforcing the law to withhold $320 million in military aid to Egypt due to a lack of necessary progress on human rights. As the decision to withhold a portion of Egypt’s $1.3 billion appropriation for each of the last three years demonstrates, the bilateral security relationship can be effectively sustained at a reduced level of assistance while upholding our values.” They concluded: “The decision the administration will make as to whether to enforce the conditions set forth by Congress on holding Egypt accountable for progress on human rights is critical to advancing long-term U.S. interests in Egypt and American credibility on human rights globally. We urge the administration to withhold the full $320 million as called for by the FY23 Appropriations Act until Egypt’s human rights record improves.” Murphy has consistently been a vocal proponent of withholding a portion of security aid to Egypt based on human rights concerns. Murphy raised the issue during the nomination hearings for the new U.S. Ambassador to Egypt and the new Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. He raised it again in June of this year when he chaired a hearing on the FY25 budget request for the Middle East and North Africa. Last October, Murphy applauded U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Ben Cardin’s decision to block a portion of foreign military financing to Egypt until the country takes meaningful steps to improve human rights conditions. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Secretary Blinken, The Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs appropriations bill directs the administration to withhold $320 million of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Egypt absent improvements on human rights. Over the last year, Egypt’s human rights record has continued to deteriorate, despite the Egyptian government’s claims to the contrary. Therefore, we urge you to withhold the full amount of $320 million. Of that amount, $225 million is tied to “sustained and effective steps” by the Egyptian government to: 1) strengthen the rule of law, democratic institutions, and protect women and religious minorities; 2) protect fundamental freedoms, including the ability of NGOs and media to operate freely; 3) hold security forces accountable when they violate human rights; 4) investigate and prosecute cases of extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances; and 5) provide regular access to U.S. officials to areas where U.S. assistance is used. Over the past year, the Egyptian government’s track record on these criteria has declined. Ahead of presidential elections last year, President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s government arrested more than 400 demonstrators for protesting a government-sponsored pro-Sisi electoral event. During the election, the Egyptian government manipulated voter turnout through bribery, coercion, and forced mobilization. And after the election, they sentenced presidential contender Ahmed el-Tantawy and 22 of his campaign supporters to one-year in prison, after previously targeting Tantawy’s phone with Predator spyware. The government has also continued to attack and harass journalists and media organizations with new arrests, investigations, bans, and refusals to issue licenses. Even when it takes some steps, such as closing the infamous “Foreign Funding” case, which long targeted civil society, it maintains travel bans and asset freezes on several of the individuals in the case and targets others. According to the State Department’s latest human rights report, the Egyptian government has not only failed to investigate allegations of human rights abuses, it has also continued to commit “significant human rights” violations such as extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearance, torture and life-threating prison conditions, and severe restrictions on freedoms of expression, assembly, and association. An additional $95 million of the FY23 FMF allocation is tied to the Egyptian government’s “clear and consistent progress” in releasing political prisoners, providing detainees with due process of law, and preventing the intimidation and harassment of American citizens.” Egypt continues to detain thousands of political prisoners, including at least two United States legal permanent residents. At least one American citizen has also been held in pre-trial detention for nearly a year. Since the administration refused to certify the Egyptian government had made progress on this condition last year, al-Sisi’s regime has released approximately 1,000 prisoners. But for each political prisoner who has been released, Egypt has detained at least two more. In addition, authorities have recycled nearly 1,000 political prisoners to new cases, most of whom continue to languish in pretrial detention beyond the two-year legal maximum but also some who have completed their sentences. Lastly, human rights groups have raised concern that Egyptian authorities use of remote video conferencing for pretrial detention renewal hearings is denying prisoners their due process rights. Egypt and the United States share mutual security concerns that merit the sustainment of our military-to-military relationship. These include efforts to reach a ceasefire in Gaza, bolster Egypt’s efforts to defeat extremist groups, including the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in the Sinai, and to strengthen efforts to counter foreign terrorist fighters. We can continue to support these objectives while enforcing the law to withhold $320 million in military aid to Egypt due to a lack of necessary progress on human rights. As the decision to withhold a portion of Egypt’s $1.3 billion appropriation for each of the last three years demonstrates, the bilateral security relationship can be effectively sustained at a reduced level of assistance while upholding our values. The decisions to withhold these funds the last several years have resulted in the Egyptian government taking some steps in some areas to address U.S. concerns. But the steps to date have been wholly inadequate and undermined by regressions in other areas; we must therefore continue to demonstrate our concern for Egypt’s long-term stability by again withholding these funds until the government takes sustained and effective steps to improve human rights, as U.S. law requires. The decision the administration will make as to whether to enforce the conditions set forth by Congress on holding Egypt accountable for progress on human rights is critical to advancing long-term U.S. interests in Egypt and American credibility on human rights globally. We urge the administration to withhold the full $320 million as called for by the FY23 Appropriations Act until Egypt’s human rights record improves. ### Read less BOSTON (SEPTEMBER 5, 2024) – Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation has been selected to receive $1,578,256 in Climate Pollution Reduction Grant funding as part of the Biden-Harris Administration's Investing in America agenda. The Mashantucket Pequot Climate Pollution Reduction Electric Vehicle Implementation Project will reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector by promoting electric vehicles (EVs). It will fund EV charging stations at government buildings, transition the government fleet to electric, and offer residential rebates to replace traditional gas-powered vehicles. "Thanks to President Biden and Vice President Harris' leadership, today's investment marks one of the largest climate investments EPA
...Read more has ever made in Tribal and territorial communities. The ambitious projects selected will deploy community-driven solutions to fight climate change and protect public health," said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan. "The Tribal and territory leaders selected today will fund innovative projects that improve air quality, deliver cleaner affordable electricity, and create economic and workforce opportunities that can be scaled up and replicated across Tribal lands and U.S. territories." "Respect for Tribal sovereignty is a foundation of our work with Native Tribes. Thanks to President Biden and Vice President Harris, this investment is a major step forward in cutting climate pollution, saving on energy costs for families and accelerating the clean energy transition together with our partners," said Regional Administrator David W. Cash. "By investing in projects that matter to the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation, we're supporting solutions to pollution and seizing opportunities that are important to the Tribe." "This $1.5 million in federal funding for the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe will be hugely impactful in growing the Tribe's clean energy infrastructure. Transportation is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in Connecticut, and it's critical for us to support ways to make electric vehicles more accessible for everyone. I am proud that this funding will move environmental goals forward, and I will continue fighting to deliver these investments to Connecticut," said U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal. "Tribes in Connecticut are constantly working to combat the climate crisis and make investments in a greener future. These grants will provide more than $1.5 million in federal dollars to help the Mashantucket Pequot tribe transition to electric vehicles and reduce harmful emissions, supporting the growth of their local Tribal economy and bringing us one step closer to a cleaner, healthier future for everyone in Connecticut," said U.S. Senator Chris Murphy. "We are honored to receive this EPA grant that will assist with our goal at Mashantucket to help reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions," says Rodney Butler, Chairman of the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation. "The Tribe is grateful for the strong leadership exhibited by the Biden-Harris Administration to address climate pollution concerns in Indian country and beyond. We look forward to partnering with Administrator Regan and EPA in this critical initiative. Our efforts will include new electric vehicle charging stations, replacing several government vehicles with hybrid and electric options, and providing rebates for EV purchases to our community as well as educating on the importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions." More information: EPA has selected 34 applications to fund projects proposed by 33 Tribal recipients and the Municipality of Saipan in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to implement community-driven solutions to tackle the climate crisis, reduce air pollution, advance environmental justice, and accelerate the clean energy transition. The grants for the proposed projects, which are funded by President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, will support the implementation of greenhouse gas reduction measures that were identified by Tribal and territorial communities. When estimates provided by all selected applicants are combined, the proposed projects would cumulatively reduce greenhouse gas pollution by over 7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2050—equivalent to the carbon dioxide emitted from nearly 1.4 million homes' electricity use for one year. Today's selections mark the latest phase of investment under this first-of-its kind, nearly $5 billion Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program. In July, EPA announced selected applications from the CPRG Implementation Grants General Competition to receive $4.3 billion in funding. In 2023, EPA provided $250 million in planning grants to develop climate action plans. Those plans served as the basis for greenhouse gas reduction measures proposed in the CPRG implementation grant applications. The selected applications will target greenhouse gas pollution from six sectors of the economy with a particular focus on the transportation, electric power, and commercial and residential buildings sectors, while spurring workforce development and job creation in Indian Country and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Today's investment and ongoing CPRG technical support for planning grant recipients are consistent with President Biden's Executive Order 14112 on Reforming Federal Funding and Support for Tribal Nations to Better Embrace Our Trust Responsibilities and Promote the Next Era of Tribal Self-Determination. The Executive Order demonstrates the Biden-Harris Administration's respect for Tribal sovereignty and its commitment to ushering in the next era of Tribal self-determination by directing agencies to reform federal programs for greater autonomy of Tribal Nations over how Tribes can invest federal funding. The Executive Order also directs agencies to make federal funding less burdensome and more accessible for Tribal Nations. The Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program is also advancing President Biden's historic Justice40 Initiative, which aims to ensure 40% of the overall benefits of certain climate, clean energy, and other federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. EPA made its Tribes and Territories Competition selections following a review of 110 applications that requested a total of more than $1.3 billion in funding. The agency expects to award funds under both the Tribes and Territories Competition and the General Competition later this year, once all legal and administrative requirements are satisfied. See the complete list of selected applications. Learn about the CPRG program. Read less State and federal officials officially broke ground today on a new rail project that will replace the more than 100-year-old Connecticut River Bridge connecting Old Saybrook and Old Lyme. The new bridge will make several improvements over the original, which was built in 1907. The project entails the construction of a two-track, electrified, and moveable bridge that is designed to last 100 years. The project, which is expected to cost $1.3 billion, is primarily financed through an $826.64 million federal grant made possible by the bipartisan infrastructure bill. The remaining cost will be split between the state of Connecticut and Amtrak. The project is expected to support 300 jobs during the course of its construction. “Whether it’s Walk Bridge, Devon, and now Connecticut River
...Read more Bridge, it’s clear that incredible things are happening here in Connecticut, and that across the state, Connecticut’s leaders are prioritizing infrastructure investments and making the type of foundational improvements that are not just about fixing today’s problems, but about setting up the state and the country for a prosperous future,” said Stephen Gardner, CEO of Amtrak. “So it’s clear today how important projects like these are and how important passenger rail is to the future of this region.” According to Amtrak, the new bridge is designed to support a maximum operating speed of 70 mph, a 55% increase from the current maximum speed of 45 mph. With the improvements in speed and safety, officials hope to transport twice as many travelers across the bridge as currently cross it. Maritime navigation and safety will also improve by the increased vertical clearance compared to the existing bridge. “We know how much this infrastructure needs renewing,” said Polly Trottenberg, deputy secretary for the U.S. Department of Transportation. “This bridge, which is carrying all this traffic, is not a reliable bridge right now. It gets stuck as movable bridges are wont to do. So now we have the chance to replace this project to build a better, safer bridge, one where trains can go faster.” US Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut, discussed how important infrastructure improvements are for Connecticut and for the region. “It has been a great bridge. It was a masterpiece in its time, but its time has passed,” he said. “And we now recognize that resilience and reliability require that it be essentially just completely rebuilt. We have to do this work in the Northeast before anybody else in the country, because we’re older. Our transportation system is older. So a lot of our infrastructure is older, which means we need to rebuild more quickly than the rest of the nation.” US Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut, praised the bipartisan infrastructure bill for providing the resources necessary for Connecticut to pursue funding for the bridge replacement. “None of this was inevitable. This was not a foregone conclusion that we were ever going to have the resources necessary to do a project this big,” Murphy said. “We have known here in Connecticut for a very long time that this bridge was and would continue to be a liability that would hurt the growth of our state, especially as we make new investments that are drawing people and families and companies to Connecticut, as more people are vacationing here, are coming to spend time along the shoreline.” Before the project could qualify for federal funding, matching dollars from the state had to be in place. State Transportation Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto thanked Gov. Ned Lamont and the General Assembly for finding the funding for the project, suggesting that the federal government isn’t going to fund projects in Connecticut if the state doesn’t have the matching funds available. “What I have been aiming to do is to fill the walls [in his DOT office] with shovels from groundbreakings,” he said. “We’re getting there. We’re doing big things. Like Senator Murphy mentioned, the federal infrastructure bill, the bipartisan infrastructure law, is allowing us to think big and do big things.” Lamont described the project as a key to the success of not just the state, but the entire Northeast region and beyond. He also mentioned that it helps that the state has the necessary $68 million “co-pay” available to get federal approval for the project. “It’s our future, it’s the future of our entire region. We have a lot of old infrastructure here, as you heard before. This bridge behind me goes back to the era of William Howard Taft, or as Dick and I used to call him, Willie,” he said to laughter from the crowd. “But more importantly, as Dick pointed out, transportation is as strong as the weakest link, and there are a variety of links all up and down the northeast corridor. We cannot be the weakest link. Everything we do here makes us safer and faster and we have to build back better.” Lamont said that has special meaning having just lost a number of bridges “during the terrible flooding in the Naugatuck valley.” Lamont also thanked the federal government for awarding the state $3 million in “quick release” funding from its Emergency Relief program to help the recovery efforts following the historic rain and flooding event on Aug. 18 in western Connecticut. The new Connecticut River Bridge is expected to be completed in 2031. Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Wednesday that the Connecticut Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation (CCEI), the University of Connecticut’s entrepreneurship center, was named “Innovator of the Month” for its work to advance entrepreneurship in Connecticut. The center provides students, faculty, alumni, and military veterans with the necessary resources, mentorship, and networking opportunities to scale up their ideas, empowering entrepreneurs across the state to build sustainable businesses and make a positive impact. “Entrepreneurship drives our economy forward. By connecting local entrepreneurs with the right tools, UConn’s CCEI helps hardworking people across Connecticut build and grow businesses that tackle our biggest challenges,
...Read more create good-paying jobs, and invest in our future. I’m proud to recognize their contributions to our state, and I look forward to seeing their continued impact,” said Murphy. “We couldn’t be more proud to be named Innovator of the Month by Senator Murphy,” said Jennifer Mathieu, Executive Director of CCEI. “CCEI’s mission is to provide programs and resources that drive entrepreneurial success and foster a vibrant startup ecosystem at UConn, throughout Connecticut, and beyond. By educating entrepreneurs and providing them the right tools, we strive to turn innovative ideas into thriving ventures. We offer a suite of programming that supports entrepreneurs at various stages and help to connect them to industry experts, funding sources, community partners, and others who can support next step opportunities. Ultimately it is through these collaborations that our entrepreneurs can launch products and new technologies that have the power to change the world.” Formally established in 2007, the Connecticut Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation (CCEI) was the first organized center to support entrepreneurial activity at the University of Connecticut. Through programs that support local innovators through every stage of entrepreneurship, CCEI focuses on developing entrepreneurs to become leaders within their organizations. Since 2015, CCEI has supported more than 1,500 entrepreneurs and provided more than $2 million dollars in venture funding to over 1,100 startups. These businesses have gone on to raise more than $316 million dollars in follow-on funding. A few notable startups that have launched from CCEI are LambdaVision, which is working to restore functional sight to people with retinal degenerative diseases; Veradermics, which is developing a pipeline of first-in-class therapeutics for prevalent dermatologic conditions; and Feel Your Best Self, which has built a toolkit to help children learn simple, emotion-focused coping strategies. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less To all the frantic parents who’ve survived yet another year of the summer-child-care shuffle: I salute you. It’s a well-established fact that in the United States, finding summer child care can be hell. In a nation with lengthy breaks from school—and no guaranteed paid time off from work for adults—parents are left largely on their own to cobble together camps and other, frequently expensive, arrangements. New data confirm just how tough this can be. A recent Gallup poll found that nearly half of parents with school-age children “wished their children could have participated in summer programs, or participated more than they did.” By far the top reason for this unfulfilled wish was cost, followed by program schedules not aligning with job schedules. Solving this
...Read more problem isn’t so complicated; it’s not like, well, trying to coordinate camp schedules. Summer programs need more public funding to reduce prices for parents and increase the number of slots for children. (To quote The Atlantic’s Annie Lowrey on the state of public investment in child care, in a line that should hang in the office of every politician: “The math does not work. It will never work.”) Barriers limiting access to summer care for lower-income families—such as a lack of transportation—also need to be broken down. These ideas are not new. Legislators a half century ago were fighting over some of the very supports parents are asking for now. Yet since then, summer-child-care policy has been marked by a succession of near misses, half efforts, and false starts. The good news is that recent years have brought glimmers of hope as cities and states have implemented programs that illustrate the power of government action—and one national legislative proposal is offering a potentially transformative solution. But to finally create a national summer-care policy that can meet most American families’ needs, it is crucial to understand the past and avoid the mistakes that led to this care void in the first place. The United States’ summer-child-care nightmare can be traced to 1971 and President Richard Nixon’s veto of the Comprehensive Child Development Act. That bill—at the time the most ambitious national child-care legislation ever proposed—would have jump-started a federally funded, locally run network of child-care programs. It passed through Congress with bipartisan support, including a 63–17 vote in the Senate. But Nixon’s veto, in which he called the bill a “long leap into the dark” that would have seen the government take over child-rearing, forced both parties to limit their vision. The congressional bill had imagined broad support for nearly all families with school-age or younger children. Instead, government-supported child care became synonymous with welfare, and the question became how to design an assistance program that would help only low-income families, and only for a brief period. Around this time, an advocacy and legislative movement focused on child care for school-age children was also beginning to develop—targeted mainly toward after-school care, not summer care. In 1983, Congress held its first Children’s Caucus hearing, focused on the issue of “latchkey children,” those with no adults at home after school. The first national conference on latchkey children soon followed, bringing together researchers, advocates, policy makers, and child-care providers. Many participants spoke of the negative consequences for kids lacking adequate after-school options, and aftercare soon got grafted onto the K–12 education-reform agenda. This all culminated in two different pieces of policy: the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act (CCDBG), passed in 1990, which provides federal funds for states to offer child-care assistance to low-income families, and the 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) program, initiated by Congress in 1994, which provides federal dollars for schools and their communities to develop better after-school options. The funding from both programs has helped millions of families over the years—but summer care, by and large, has fallen through the cracks. Although CCDBG dollars can be used for summer care, the funds are limited; in 2019, only one in nine eligible families even received aid. And as Joan Lombardi, a former director of the federal Child Care Bureau (since replaced by the Office of Child Care) and the author of Time to Care: Redesigning Child Care to Promote Education, Support Families, and Build Communities, told me, the majority of the 21st CCLC grants “went to schools and consortia of schools [that] most often followed a school-year schedule,” leaving parents to “scramble” to cover summer. What’s more, the governance over those programs has produced a cleaving effect. Child-care subsidies rest with the Department of Health and Human Services; after-school funds are overseen by the Department of Education. This means that no single entity is responsible for making summer care work. Until the past few years, in fact, no major federal policies have been aimed exclusively at summer care. Step back for a moment and consider what summer would feel like if care options were abundant and affordable. Imagine significantly less stress for parents—not just over the summer but also throughout the year—and so much more joy, laughter, and connectivity for children. The thousands of dollars saved could be repurposed toward family well-being: finally dealing with a clunking car, paying for a child’s dental work, enjoying a cross-country trip to see grandparents. Lately, there has been an uptick in government action toward that vision, driven in part by the need to respond to the coronavirus pandemic’s impact on children. Most of this has occurred at the state and local levels. But efforts have now reached Congress: Last month, Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut introduced the Summer for All Act, the first major federal public-policy swing at summer care. The bill would authorize $4 billion spread over four years, and $1 billion a year after that, for two grant programs to be administered by the DHS. (The funds would supplement those of existing programs.) The first grant would help community-based organizations such as nonprofits and camps expand their offerings—by, for instance, increasing the number of slots for kids or reducing costs. The second grant would allow states to close the gaps in summer-care options and try innovative solutions, such as making museums free to families over the summer. Recipients of the funding from either grant must prioritize access for groups that most lack it, such as lower-income children. But the gains stand to be widespread, with families of all stripes potentially benefiting from more options and lower fees. Murphy’s bill is not a slam dunk; for one, it only authorizes the funding, which would still need to be approved by a Congress that currently has trouble passing budget-related bills. But it is a firm stake in the ground declaring that the problem of summer care cannot be ignored—and that the government has a responsibility to address it. In an interview, Murphy explained to me that his interest in summer care was spurred by the pandemic and broader negative trends in children’s well-being. “What kids who have grown up in the pandemic and the smartphone era have lost access to is socialization,” Murphy told me, pointing to the dangers of children being stuck at home all summer. “We have got to get them out of their houses, off their smartphones, plugged into activities they love, making new friends.” The federal government’s pandemic response showed how advantageous public investment in summer programming can be. According to an analysis by the nonprofit Afterschool Alliance, which advocates for better out-of-school-time policies, school districts nationwide spent at least $2.4 billion of pandemic-relief funds specifically on summer programs. In 2022, for instance, pandemic funds helped Tulsa Public Schools offer its four-week summer program—with activities including “gardening, robotics, and field trips, in addition to academic enrichment”—free to 10,000 K–12 students. In 2021, California started an Expanded Learning Opportunities Program for children in pre-K through sixth grade that now has $4 billion in annual funding to work with; its goal is to help every school serving this age group offer at least 30 days of summer or other non-school-day programming, in addition to after-school care. (The 30-day minimum is a requirement to get funding.) These services are provided on an income-based sliding-fee scale, with no cost for students who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch. Of course, summer care does not need to run only through schools. The plethora of camps and community programs that already exist provide numerous benefits: Some have more flexible hours than school-based options do, and many have, across the years, provided children with novel experiences in new settings, wonderful memories, and lifelong friends. Nor are camps and schools mutually exclusive. Since 2022, the American Camp Association and the National Summer Learning Association have been testing “camp-school partnerships,” in which camp attendance is integrated into students’ schooling and facilitated by their school district. Whether these sorts of initiatives can work at scale is a question mark, however. Tom Rosenberg, the chief executive of the American Camp Association, told me that in any attempt to widely increase the accessibility and affordability of summer care, “public funding is an important mechanism.” Murphy said that he sees such funding as crucial not only for the present but also as a long-term investment. “The reality is,” he told me, “when kids spend a summer alone, they end up needing extra resources later—so we eventually spend bad money instead of good.” Indeed, a 2019 National Academies of Sciences report on summer care concluded that summertime can either narrow or exacerbate developmental gaps, depending on the quality of services offered to children, and that kids need both structured and unstructured summer activities. Those developmental impacts call for a focus on equity. Lombardi, the former Child Care Bureau director, believes that any solutions must start with the principle that all children, regardless of income, should be able to access out-of-school-time services, including summer care. This reframing underscores how foolhardy it is for Americans’ child-care needs to be addressed via a set of siloed policies and funding streams rather than through comprehensive legislation to support early child care, before- and after-school care, and, yes, summer care. Households’ child-care needs are not best dealt with piecemeal. If the government truly wants to support families, it can’t pretend otherwise. Read less NEW LONDON, CONN. (Aug. 23, 2024) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's New England Regional Administrator David W. Cash was in New London today along with federal, local and state partners to celebrate the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Lead Service Line Drinking Water State Revolving Funds for the City of New London, Connecticut for lead service line replacement as well as progress made in the effort to replace the city's entire lead service line system. "Protecting children and families by reducing lead exposure is a top priority for EPA," said EPA New England Regional Administrator David W. Cash. "Thanks to federal funding, and the City of New London's initiative to proactively replace lead service lines in their community, New Londoners will no longer have to
...Read more worry about what's in their water when they turn on the tap." Thanks to EPA's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding, the Connecticut Department of Public Health allotted the City of New London a $6,949,213 loan, including $4,377,609 in principal forgiveness. This funding will help replace approximately 150 lead service lines, with this phase of the project being halfway complete thus far, as well as complete the city's lead service line inventory. This funding will further the City of New London's goal to replace approximately 500 lead service lines within the New London Department of Public Utilities distribution system. In addition, the City of New London is one of ten Connecticut communities selected for the Lead Service Line Accelerator program. The LSLR Accelerator program provides targeted technical assistance services to help underserved communities access funds from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. This technical assistance includes developing lead service line replacement plans, conducting inventories to identify lead pipes, and increasing community outreach and education efforts. Connecticut is one of the first four states to be selected under the LSLR Accelerator program and will help develop best practices and creative approaches that can serve as a roadmap to the rest of the country. What They Are Saying "This nearly $7 million funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will eliminate more than 150 water supply lines that contain lead, a pernicious poison that can cause crippling damage to children and families," said U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal. "These new pipes will significantly advance New London's goal of replacing all water service lines, which will give everyone peace of mind that the water coming out of their tap is safe and healthy to drink. I am thrilled to see the EPA make this investment in New London and will keep fighting for federal funds to replace lead service lines and protect our drinking water." "No one in Connecticut should have to worry about lead poisoning when they turn on the tap," said U.S. Senator Chris Murphy. "This $6.9 million in federal funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will help us replace about 150 old lead pipes in New London and complete the city's lead service line removal project so every household can continue to count on reliable access to safe, clean drinking water." "The federal Infrastructure law I voted to pass in 2021 continues to provide New London with much-needed resources to ensure every child and family has lead-free drinking water. As was made clear by today's site visit, the federal resources the City received has supercharged its goal to be the first municipality in Connecticut to eliminate 100% of its lead service lines. Kudos to Mayor Passero for serving as a state-wide example on how municipalities can put federal infrastructure funding to work on behalf of our communities," said U.S. Representative Joe Courtney. "The City of New London serves as a wonderful example to the entire state as they continue to make progress on the replacement of these lead service lines," Connecticut Department of Public Health Commissioner Manisha Juthani, MD, said. "Harmful lead exposure is 100% preventable and should not happen to any child. Lead pipes carrying drinking water pose a significant health risk, so it is our responsibility to provide residents with adequate educational information to reduce their risk to exposure to lead from drinking water.?Thanks to the Biden-Harris Administration and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we are taking major steps forward by investing in our communities so?that every child—including those in our most vulnerable communities—can grow up safe from lead." "The City got in front of the new lead regulations and was able to secure funding early to move this historic project forward quickly. The first of its kind in the state, this project plays a major role in improving the health of our residents," said New London Mayor Michael E. Passero. "Strategic planning has put the city at the forefront of lead pipe removal from our drinking water system and helped secure significant funding subsidies to accomplish the goal." Background President Biden's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests a historic $15 billion to identify and replace lead service lines. The law mandates that 49% of funds provided through the DWSRF General Supplemental Funding and DWSRF Lead Service Line Replacement Funding must be provided as grants and forgivable loans to disadvantaged communities, a crucial investment for communities that have been underinvested in for too long. EPA projects a national total of 9 million lead services lines across the country, based on data collected from the updated 7th Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment. The funding announced today will be provided specifically for lead service line identification and replacement and will help every state and territory fund projects to remove lead pipes and reduce exposure to lead from drinking water. This spring, the Biden-Harris administration announced over $28 million for Connecticut lead pipe replacement to advance safe drinking water. This nearly $7 million for New London is part of nearly $100 million allocated to Connecticut to-date from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Lead Service Line Replacement allotments. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, on Thursday released a statement on the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) finding that Amazon is a joint employer of its Delivery Service Partner (DSP) drivers and that the company engaged in unfair labor practices in its dealings with workers at its DSP in Palmdale, California, including unlawfully refusing to recognize the drivers’ decision to unionize with the Teamsters. “This is a monumental victory for hundreds of thousands of Amazon drivers all over this country. For years, Amazon has skirted accountability for its mistreatment of these workers by claiming that drivers wearing Amazon-branded vests who deliver Amazon packages while driving Amazon-branded
...Read more vans are not Amazon employees. I’ve heard directly from drivers who have been forced to endure 12-hour shifts with no breaks, working in extreme heat without air conditioning or functioning windows, and driving in vans that were unsafe. But when they tried to stand up for themselves and organize, Amazon deployed every move in the union-busting playbook before eventually terminating their contract. Today’s decision by the NLRB is a shot of adrenaline for the labor movement and a warning to Amazon and all the other greedy corporations exploiting their workers in the name of profit that the tide is shifting,” said Murphy. In January, Murphy led a bipartisan letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy demanding information about the DSP program, including Amazon’s justification for refusing to bargain with union representatives of DSP employees and requiring DSPs to sign non-poaching agreements. After receiving a response from Amazon that was unresponsive to the questions asked, at odds with publicly available data and reporting, and appeared to be self-contradictory, Murphy led 33 of his colleagues in calling on Amazon to provide the information requested by the members. Earlier this month, Murphy and Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.-12) led 25 of their colleagues in Congress in sending a letter to the NLRB encouraging the Board to reach a decision in several key cases of unfair labor practices brought against Amazon by delivery drivers across the country. ### Read less HARTFORD– U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and the Connecticut Congressional delegation on Tuesday wrote to President Joe Biden urging an expeditious emergency declaration after the sudden and severe flooding that destroyed roads, homes, and other critical infrastructure, and caused at least two deaths in western and southwestern Connecticut on Sunday. “While the state of Connecticut and affected municipalities conducted emergency responses and initial recovery efforts, federal support is absolutely critical to full recovery,” wrote the delegation. “We therefore urge you to swiftly declare a state of emergency for the State of Connecticut, as requested on August 20, 2024, by Governor Lamont, to enable vital supplementary federal assistance.” On August 18, parts of Connecticut received
...Read more up to 16 inches of rain in just a few hours. The floodwaters caused significant damage to critical infrastructure like roads, rail lines, and bridges, devastated local businesses and homes, trapped residents in their homes and forced others to evacuate, and tragically killed two people. Governor Ned Lamont requested a federal emergency declaration under Section 501 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act on August 20, 2024, to assist with debris removal and emergency protective measures in New Haven, Fairfield, and Litchfield Counties. A federal disaster declaration is necessary in order to provide direct federal assistance to the affected communities. The delegation’s letter urges swift action from the federal government so that Connecticut can continue recovery and rebuilding efforts. Full text of the letter can be found below: Dear President Biden, We write in strong support of Governor Ned Lamont’s August 20, 2024, request for an emergency declaration under Section 501 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act after the sudden and severe flooding that occurred on August 18, 2024 in the State of Connecticut. Governor Lamont has specifically requested assistance under Categories A (debris removal) and B (emergency protective measures), including Direct Federal Assistance, for Litchfield, New Haven, and Fairfield Counties. We strongly support this request and urge its expeditious approval. On Sunday, August 18, towns around Connecticut received up to 16 inches of rain – a 1,000-year flood event in some of the harder hit areas. The flooding caused significant damage to infrastructure, including the closure of rail lines and more than 25 roadways; forced some people to evacuate from their homes while others were stranded in theirs; and devastated local businesses. Tragically, two individuals in the town of Oxford lost their lives during the floods. On Sunday afternoon, the state’s Emergency Operations Center was activated, as were regional offices. Emergency response personnel and local and state employees worked tirelessly Sunday and Monday to perform rescues, inspect impacted infrastructure, and begin the recovery processes. On Monday, August 19, Governor Lamont declared a state of emergency in response to this significant flooding event. While the state of Connecticut and affected municipalities conducted emergency responses and initial recovery efforts, federal support is absolutely critical to full recovery. We therefore urge you to swiftly declare a state of emergency for the state of Connecticut, as requested on August 20, 2024 by Governor Lamont, to enable vital supplementary federal assistance. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday announced that Astrocyte Pharmaceuticals, a Groton-based clinical-stage biopharmaceuticals company, was named “Innovator of the Month” for their work to advance cerebroprotective therapies for individuals suffering from stroke, traumatic brain injury (TBI), concussions and other neurodegenerative ailments. Stroke and TBI are among the leading causes of death and disability in the U.S., and there is a growing recognition that concussions are a major public health concern due to the enduring symptoms experienced by many individuals and the mounting evidence for long-term negative consequences from repetitive TBIs. However, there are currently no approved cerebroprotective therapies approved to treat these millions of patients.
...Read more Astrocyte’s flagship program, AST-004, has been shown to significantly reduce early brain damage in a broad range of preclinical studies and is advancing to Phase 2 patient clinical trials next year. “Astrocyte is breaking new ground with their innovative approach to treating strokes and TBIs — two of the most common causes of death and disability. Their work has the potential to transform the lives of countless patients, and I look forward to seeing their continued success and growth in our state,” said Murphy. “We are honored to be recognized by Senator Murphy as a top Innovator in the state of Connecticut,” said Ted Liston, Astrocyte’s Vice President of Research. “For 37 years, I’ve been fortunate to be part of the world-class scientific and drug development community of southeastern Connecticut, and our team is proud to be advancing this innovative life-saving treatment to patients.” Astrocyte Pharmaceuticals was founded in 2014, and its headquarters are at the BioCT Innovation Commons in Groton, CT. The company has raised over $25M from both private investors across the world and public grants. In 2022, Astrocyte was awarded funding by the Medical Technology Enterprise Consortium (MTEC) in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Defense’s U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command to conduct the Phase 1 clinical trials of AST-004. In 2024, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Astrocyte’s Investigational New Drug application to start a Phase 2 clinical trial of AST-004 treating acute ischemic stroke patients. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less In December 2022, early into what he now describes as his political journey, Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut gave a speech warning his fellow Democrats that they were ignoring a crisis staring them in the face. For over a year, President Biden and his allies had been promoting data showing an economic miracle, as friendly pundits described it — a record-setting stock market, low unemployment and G.D.P. growth outpacing that of almost every other Western nation. But very few voters believed the story those metrics were telling. In poll after poll, they expressed a bleak view of the economy — to the frustration of both Democrats and many economists. Mr. Murphy thought he knew why. “The challenges America faces aren’t really logistical,” he told the crowd. “They are
...Read more metaphysical. And the sooner we understand the unspooling of identity and meaning that is happening in America today, the sooner we can come up with practical policies to address this crisis.” The subject of the speech was what Mr. Murphy called the imminent “fall of American neoliberalism.” This may sound like strange talk from a middle-of-the-road Democratic senator, who up until that point had never seemed to believe that the system that orders our world was on the verge of falling. He campaigned for Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders during the 2016 primaries, and his most visible political stance up until then was his work on gun control after the Sandy Hook shooting. Thoughtful but prone to speaking in talking points, he still comes off more like a polished Connecticut dad than a champion of the disaffected. But Mr. Murphy was then in the full flush of discovering a new way of understanding the state of the nation, and it had set him on a journey that even he has struggled sometimes to describe: to understand how the version of liberalism we’d adopted — defined by its emphasis on free markets, globalization and consumer choice — had begun to feel to many like a dead end and to come up with a new vision for the Democratic Party. As the Democrats gather for their national convention this week, with Kamala Harris as their candidate for president, the party has a long way to go toward confronting the crisis Mr. Murphy sees. America’s leaders — from both parties — have long been guided by what’s often called the neoliberal consensus: the idea that “barrier-free international markets, rapidly advancing communications technology and automation, decreased regulation and empowered citizen-consumers would be the keys to prosperity, happiness and strong democracy,” as Mr. Murphy put it. More simply, it’s a shared assumption that what’s good for markets is good for society. This assumption shapes our politics so deeply that it’s almost invisible. But the idea that modern life is a story of constant economic and technological progress steadily making the world a better place has stopped lining up with how Americans feel. You can look at statistics about suicide, depression, overdoses and declining life expectancy. You can point to the fact that roughly 70 percent of wild animals on Earth have disappeared since 1970 or examine the astonishingly pervasive sense of loneliness that now seems to color so many American lives. But no statistics really capture the feeling, shared by growing numbers of Americans, that the world is just getting worse. It’s a “metaphysical” problem, as Mr. Murphy put it. And he began to think that the economic metrics used by economists and presidents to capture the state of the nation were masking a vast “spiritual crisis.” He didn’t know it then, but he was homing in on a problem that Democrats have yet to figure out how to address. Donald Trump and the movement around him have tapped into a sense of deep alienation and national malaise. Democrats often have trouble even acknowledging those feelings are real. In the final days of his campaign, even as he began to push a raft of economically populist plans, Mr. Biden told ABC, “I don’t think America is in tough shape.” No one, Mr. Murphy included, expected Mr. Biden to talk about a metaphysical crisis facing the nation he governed. In an age when elections seem to run full time, an incumbent president has little choice but to argue that things are great and getting better. But now that Ms. Harris is their nominee, the Democrats have a choice: They can continue to argue that the true danger is Mr. Trump and that we need only shore up our institutions against the threat he poses, or they can push her to speak for the almost 70 percent of Americans who said that they want to see fundamental changes to our political and economic systems or even to see them torn down entirely. So far, Ms. Harris has been vague even on relatively basic policy plans and has offered no hint of a vision for how to remake an order that very few people today believe is working, much less on deeper questions about how to rebuild our shredded social fabric. Mr. Murphy is a team player and has publicly been fully supportive of Ms. Harris, but he also wants Democrats to squarely acknowledge the crisis he believes the country is facing and to offer a vision to unmake the “massive concentration of corporate power” that he thinks is the source of these feelings of helplessness and hopelessness. Only by offering a “firm break” with the past, he believes, can Democrats compete with Republicans like JD Vance, who, with outlines like Project 2025, have a plan to remake American statecraft in their image and who are campaigning on a decisive break with the status quo. Academics, think tanks and magazines are buzzing with conversations about how to undo the damage wrought by half a century of misguided economic policies. On the right, that debate has already spilled out into the public view. But on the center-left, at least, very few politicians seem to be aware of this conversation — or at least willing to talk about it in front of voters. Mr. Murphy has been warning for years that by failing to offer a clear vision of the future, Democrats risk losing to a “postdemocracy” Republican Party that might rig the electoral system “in order to make sure Democrats never win again.” His warnings may sound out of place with the sudden mood shift in the party over the past few weeks. But behind the scenes, he is far from the only Democrat raising these concerns. Just a few days before the convention, Mr. Murphy’s good friend Ben Rhodes, a former senior adviser to Barack Obama, told me that in the age of Mr. Trump, Democrats have found themselves in a “trap”: How can they present themselves as the party of fundamental change when they spent the past eight years arguing that America’s institutions need to be shored up against the urgent threat of Trumpism? “Can you reform that system so much that it ceases to be that and starts to be something else?” Mr. Rhodes asked me. “Or does it have to be blown up?” Many on the center-left worry that, absent a liberal vision for how this reform may work, Americans will opt to blow things up. Without much fanfare, the Biden administration has already embraced many of the policies Mr. Murphy is calling for: industrial policy, tariffs, a campaign against corporate monopolies. His vision of economic nationalism can look very similar to the one offered by “America First” Republicans, but the specifics reveal very different priorities; Mr. Murphy supports far higher levels of immigration and paid family leave over the child tax credits increasingly favored by conservatives — some of whom see paid family leave as an unfair subsidy favoring working mothers over those who choose to stay at home to raise kids. But they have a common goal: to remake the incentive structure of our economy. “The core issue is that our economy became one based on extracting rents,” Mr. Krein told me, “rather than building things.” It rewards those who invent clever ways to squeeze money out of government and regular people. This is the simple explanation for why so many jobs feel soulless and so many Americans feel harried and troubled amid the vast material wealth our country produces. “That’s what people are really complaining about when they talk about neoliberalism,” Mr. Krein said. “But that’s tough to fit on a bumper sticker.” “Great leaders tell stories that fit within the cultural and religious contexts of nations,” the Bay Area representative Ro Khanna told me. He helped write the CHIPS and Science Act, but he thought that the Democrats had failed to explain what they wanted it to achieve. “Symbolically, politically and culturally, Biden announcing three new steel plants in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio might have done more than the entire CHIPs act combined, because it would have showed that we were listening,” Mr. Krein said. “Politics is not just about policy,” he said. “It’s about the vision of a nation. It’s about signaling that we’re heading somewhere.” If the selection of Mr. Vance as their vice-presidential nominee is any indication, Republicans are beginning to coalesce around a vision for the future. It begins with plans to fire thousands of civil servants in an attempt to unmake the so-called administrative state, which they believe promotes liberal values and has enveloped America in bureaucracy. They seek to pull back from the internationalist foreign policy and free-trade policies that have guided both parties for decades. They hope to increase America’s birthrate and cut immigration and may pursue steps like reducing the value of the dollar, which they argue would help American-produced goods compete in an international marketplace. “We’re going to build factories again, put people to work making real products for American families, made with the hands of American workers,” Mr. Vance said during his speech at the Republican National Convention. Liberals view many of the plans with horror. But the party has struggled to offer a coherent politics to answer the discontent with globalization, the technological colonization of our minds and lives and the sense of disempowerment so many feel. “The common ground is in the critique,” Mr. Khanna said. “But there are still large areas of difference about where we want to go from here. I don’t think liberalism as it’s defined now is enough to get us there.” Last summer, I attended a dinner hosted by Sohrab Ahmari, a co-founder of Compact, where a couple of dozen people got together to talk about how this future might take shape. It was held at an Italian restaurant in the East 50s of Manhattan and conducted under Chatham House rules, which meant that what was said and the names of people who attended were, like many conversations about new directions for the country among think tankers and politicos, off the record. But the people there represented a decent cross-section of American political views, from people keeping the Sanders-style left-wing populist faith to centrist civil servants to more or less avowed reactionaries. All the attendees seemed to take for granted that the neoliberal era was nearing its endpoint — a fact notable only because it reflected a consensus that has still barely filtered into our mainstream political conversations. It would be very hard, these days, to put together a room of well-informed academics or policy types under the age of 70 who don’t think that America faces a choice between huge systemic reform and a full-blown crisis. The problem, for any Democrat, is to find a way to turn this understanding into winning politics. When I called Steve Bannon, Mr. Trump’s onetime chief White House strategist, late last year, he was very clear that he didn’t think Mr. Murphy’s vision went far enough. Mr. Bannon has frequently praised Mr. Khanna — jocularly accusing him of stealing “our” ideas in his proposals to rebuild America’s manufacturing capacity. But Mr. Bannon was savagely and profanely dismissive of Mr. Murphy, suggesting that he was angling to run for president someday and, even after his political awakening, was still too cautious and naïve to confront the structural issues that shape our economy. “He has a very tough road ahead, and here’s why,” Mr. Bannon said. “There’s no audience for what he’s saying on the Democratic side. Democratic voters like the system.” Mr. Bannon called Mr. Murphy a “neoliberal neocon,” a double epithet Mr. Bannon uses to dismiss politicians of both parties who he believes care more about maintaining America’s superpower status than they do about protecting the national interest. “He supports the war machine,” Mr. Bannon said. Mr. Murphy has joined with both leftists and Bannon-friendly Republican isolationists in opposing American involvement in conflicts like the civil war in Yemen. But he remains mostly within the Democratic mainstream on foreign policy issues like helping to fund Ukraine and maintaining America’s traditional leading military role in the world. Unlike many on both the right and left, he has shown little desire to unmake the complex military and financial systems that critics on both sides often describe as the American Empire. The trouble is that orienting the American economy back toward producing things and building a strong middle class may mean reassessing those old ideas and asking tough questions about whether we can afford to maintain our military might or continue financing the federal government with debt. These are now common talking points on the right, and at a time when Mr. Trump and his allies hint at ideas like withdrawing from NATO and curtailing the independence of the Federal Reserve, even a critic of the globalized economic order like Mr. Murphy can end up looking like a milquetoast defender of the status quo. When I finally met Mr. Murphy in person, a year after he first emailed me, Mr. Ahmari had visited him the week before, and he was excitedly preparing to announce a new legislative collaboration with Mr. Vance. (Mr. Murphy’s staff later noted that the collaboration did not come to fruition.) At 51, he has an earnest seriousness of someone genuinely troubled, and a bit confounded, by the parlous state of the country. I asked Mr. Murphy if I was right that his aim really was to unmake the neoliberal system as we knew it. “You are,” he said. He anticipated my next question, about whether it would ever be possible to translate this kind of big-picture conversation to mainstream politics. I mentioned that I’d seen brutal responses to his testing posts online. “I get a lot of pushback from the left, as you’ve seen,” he said, “and I get a lot of it privately as well.” There is a belief, he continued, “that the people who are against us are hardened by cultural and social and racial biases. And that a higher minimum wage is not going to convince them to align themselves with a group that thinks Black people should be empowered. I don’t know that I believe that.” As if anticipating the Harris/Trump race, he described an electoral landscape where Democratic candidates who won a majority of the popular vote might still lose the presidency if they couldn’t win states in the Upper Midwest. “I think that our coalition is bound to lose if we don’t find a way to reach out to some element of the folks who have been hoodwinked by Donald Trump. We don’t have to win over 25 percent of his voters. We have to win 5 or 10 percent of his voters. I’m just fed up with the political people who say, ‘Why is this going to be bad for us, as the left?’ I’m engaged in a bigger project,” Mr. Murphy said. “I think that we are more likely to protect a woman’s right to choose if we win bigger majorities and expand our coalition a little bit by bringing in people who might occasionally disagree with us on social issues but prioritize our agreement on anti-neoliberalism issues.” We went out for drinks that evening. The conversation got looser. A beer or two in, I asked him if, given the program of economic nationalism he’d proposed, he considered himself an American nationalist. He demurred. “But I do believe,” he said, “that we have to tell a story about what makes America different. To make people proud of being American. And make them believe that that identity is more important than their individual political identity.” It was on some level a question that went to the heart of his project and the issue of how it differed from the plans emerging on the right. “We have to build a uniquely American economy,” he said. “We have to convince people that there is a uniquely American identity while understanding that there are still important moments where you have to engage the rest of the world. That’s not a bumper sticker.” He paused. “That’s what makes this project really hard.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released the following statement on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announcement that it has reached agreements with all participating manufacturers on new negotiated, lower drug prices for the first 10 drugs selected for the Medicare drug price negotiation program. The Inflation Reduction Act gave Medicare the power to negotiate for the first time in history. When the negotiated prices go into effect in 2026, seniors enrolled in Medicare Part D are estimated to save $1.5 billion in out-of-pocket costs. “The Inflation Reduction Act was a historic piece of legislation designed to put money back in the pockets of patients – not Big Pharma CEOs. For the first time ever, we gave Medicare the power to negotiate
...Read more prescription drug prices, and today’s announcement from the Biden-Harris administration is proof of what we can accomplish when we hold greedy corporations accountable. Slashing drug costs by up to 80 percent will make a world of difference for seniors who rely on these drugs to treat everything from blood clots to heart failure to diabetes, and we’re not stopping here,” said Murphy. Fifteen additional drugs covered under Medicare Part D will be up for negotiation in 2025, up to an additional 15 Part B and Part D drugs in 2026, and up to 20 drugs every year after that. The new prices will go into effect for people with Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage in 2026: Drug Name Commonly Treated Conditions Number of Medicare Enrollees Who Used the Drug in 2023 Drug List Price in 2023 for 30-day Supply Negotiated Price for 2026 for 30-day Supply Savings (%) Eliquis Prevention and treatment of blood clots 3,928,000 $521 $231 $290 (-56%) Jardiance Diabetes; Heart failure; Chronic kidney disease 1,883,000 $573 $197 $376 (-66%) Xarelto Prevention and treatment of blood clots; Reduction of risk for patients with coronary or peripheral artery disease 1,324,000 $517 $197 $320 (-62%) Januvia Diabetes 843,000 $527 $113 $414 (-79%) Farxiga Diabetes; Heart failure; Chronic kidney disease 994,000 $556 $178.50 $377.50 (-68%) Entresto Heart failure 664,000 $628 $295 $333 (-53%) Enbrel Rheumatoid arthritis; Psoriasis; Psoriatic arthritis 48,000 $7,106 $2,355 $4,751 (-67%) Imbruvica Blood cancers 17,000 $14,934 $9,319 $5,615 (-38%) Stelara Psoriasis; Psoriatic arthritis; Crohn's disease; Ulcerative colitis 23,000 $13,836 $4,695 $9,141 (-66%) Fiasp; Fiasp FlexTouch; Fiasp PenFill;
NovoLog; NovoLog FlexPen; NovoLog PenFill Diabetes 785,000 $495 $119 $376 (-76%) Source: CMS, https://www.cms.gov/files/document/fact-sheet-negotiated-prices-initial-price-applicability-year-2026.pdf ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Sunday traveled to Nairobi, Kenya to engage with key stakeholders on issues related to the U.S.’ relationships on the African continent, including deepening our economic partnerships, U.S. support for humanitarian aid, and the Kenyan-led Multilateral Security Support mission in Haiti. During his trip, Murphy will meet with government, business, civil society, and NGO leaders to discuss the role U.S. investments in Kenya play in promoting food security, health, climate adaptation and economic prosperity. “The United States cannot succeed in the new world without vibrant, strong relationships with African nations. Kenya holds the keys to many challenges in East Africa, and I'm glad to
...Read more be heading there this week to build and cement key partnerships. As a newly minted major non-NATO ally, we need to increase our work with Kenya to tackle global challenges like humanitarian crises, migration and climate change. “As a member of both the Foreign Relations Committee and the Appropriations Committee, I’m looking forward to learning more this week about how U.S. humanitarian aid is bolstering Kenya’s efforts to help refugees, how our investments in development projects are empowering communities, and what more we can do to support prosperity across Africa.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Representative Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, on Thursday led 26 members of Congress in sending a letterto the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) expressing concerns over Amazon’s Delivery Service Partner (DSP) program and encouraging the Board to reach a decision in several key cases of unfair labor practices brought against Amazon by delivery drivers across the country. In their letter to NLRB General Counsel Jennifer A. Abruzzo, the members thanked the NLRB for its role in protecting workers’ constitutional right to organize and highlighted how an expeditious determination of these cases could deliver an
...Read more important win for these and hundreds of thousands of Amazon workers while sending a strong message to other companies about the consequences of shirking labor laws. “First-person accounts from these drivers about their experience working at an Amazon DSP are not only alarming, but also demonstrate that Amazon exercises substantial direct and immediate control over the essential terms and conditions of these employees,” the lawmakers wrote. “Driver accounts detail how Amazon dictates the delivery routes drivers take and prescribes the number of packages they must deliver on a given day. Workers have further explained that Amazon exercises direct hiring and firing authority over DSP employees, as well as disciplinary procedures. Specifically, Amazon dictates delivery quotas to DSPs directly, and instructs criteria for discipline to DSP for drivers who do not meet these quotas. Further, drivers must use Amazon’s Flex app for all onboarding, offboarding, training, and work performance recording. Lastly, Amazon has the control to offboard drivers independent of DSP knowledge or consent. This control is exercised frequently, if not daily, and does not occur in isolated or sporadic instances. In addition, drivers use Amazon software, wear Amazon vests, and drive vehicles branded with Amazon logos when making their deliveries. Amazon provides DSP, and drivers by default, equipment including vans through Amazon provided and approved vendors. Amazon also provides guidance on payroll and operational functions that DSP executes.” The members continued: “June marked one year since the drivers at Amazon’s DSP Battle Tested Strategies filed their unfair labor practice charges, and we encourage the NLRB Region and Office of the General Counsel to reach a decision in these cases as soon as possible. A group of Amazon DSP drivers in Skokie, Illinois raised similar concerns after going on an unfair labor practice strike on June 26th of this year. These drivers allege that their efforts to organize have been met with retaliation, and that Amazon exercises control over the terms and conditions of their work as a joint employer or single employer, echoing the claims made by Palmdale Amazon DSP drivers last year. An expeditious determination of these cases has the potential to be a win for these and hundreds of thousands of Amazon workers, and can also serve as an important signal to other companies hiding behind subcontractors that their actions will have consequences.” “The NLRB plays a crucial role in ensuring that workers’ constitutional right to organize is protected and we thank you for your dedication to this work. We know you and your colleagues at the Board will continue holding employers to account and enforcing our nation’s labor laws on behalf of workers across the country. We look forward to your continued attention to this important matter,” the senators concluded. U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also signed the letter. U.S. Representatives Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.), Tony Cárdenas (D-Calif.), Danny Davis (D-Ill.), Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-Ore.), Jesús “Chuy” García (D-Ill.), Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas), Daniel Goldman (D-N.Y.), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Katie Porter (D-Calif.), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) and Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) also signed the letter. In January, Murphy led a bipartisan letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy demanding information about the DSP program, including Amazon’s justification for refusing to bargain with union representatives of DSP employees and requiring DPSs to sign non-poaching agreements. After receiving a response from Amazon that was unresponsive to the questions asked, at odds with publicly available data and reporting, and appeared to be self-contradictory, Murphy led 33 of his colleagues in calling on Amazon to provide the information requested by the members. The full text of the letter is available HEREand below: Dear General Counsel Abruzzo, We commend you on the important work you have done as General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). During your time at the NLRB, the Board has worked to undo damage to workers’ rights wrought by the previous administration and fought to ensure the right to organize is protected for workers across the country. At a time when large, powerful companies have too often put profits ahead of workers’ rights, the work you do could not be more important. We write today to express our concerns with Amazon’s Delivery Service Partner (DSP) program. As you are well aware, a group of delivery drivers and workers from Teamsters Local 396 in Palmdale, California has filed unfair labor practice charges against Amazon, alleging the company has not met its legal obligation to bargain with workers in good faith and has committed other egregious unfair labor practice, including terminating en masse its Amazon DSP employees in retaliation for their union and/or other protected concerted activities. We understand the NLRB is investigating these cases, including whether or not the relationship between Amazon and delivery drivers employed at this particular DSP contractor constitutes a joint-employer or single employer relationship and are glad to see the Board is taking this matter seriously. First-person accounts from these drivers about their experience working at an Amazon DSP are not only alarming, but also demonstrate that Amazon exercises substantial direct and immediate control over the essential terms and conditions of these employees. Driver accounts detail how Amazon dictates the delivery routes drivers take and prescribes the number of packages they must deliver on a given day. Workers have further explained that Amazon exercises direct hiring and firing authority over DSP employees, as well as disciplinary procedures. Specifically, Amazon dictates delivery quotas to DSPs directly, and instructs criteria for discipline to DSP for drivers who do not meet these quotas. Further, drivers must use Amazon’s Flex app for all onboarding, offboarding, training, and work performance recording. Lastly, Amazon has the control to offboard drivers independent of DSP knowledge or consent. This control is exercised frequently, if not daily, and does not occur in isolated or sporadic instances. In addition, drivers use Amazon software, wear Amazon vests, and drive vehicles branded with Amazon logos when making their deliveries. Amazon provides DSP, and drivers by default, equipment including vans through Amazon provided and approved vendors. Amazon also provides guidance on payroll and operational functions that DSP executes. June marked one year since the drivers at Amazon’s DSP Battle Tested Strategies filed their unfair labor practice charges, and we encourage the NLRB Region and Office of the General Counsel to reach a decision in these cases as soon as possible. A group of Amazon DSP drivers in Skokie, Illinois raised similar concerns after going on an unfair labor practice strike on June 26th of this year. These drivers allege that their efforts to organize have been met with retaliation, and that Amazon exercises control over the terms and conditions of their work as a joint employer or single employer, echoing the claims made by Palmdale Amazon DSP drivers last year. An expeditious determination of these cases has the potential to be a win for these and hundreds of thousands of Amazon workers, and can also serve as an important signal to other companies hiding behind subcontractors that their actions will have consequences. The NLRB plays a crucial role in ensuring that workers’ constitutional right to organize is protected and we thank you for your dedication to this work. We know you and your colleagues at the Board will continue holding employers to account and enforcing our nation’s labor laws on behalf of workers across the country. We look forward to your continued attention to this important matter. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) announced the inclusion of $33 million for Congressionally Directed Spending projects in the three Appropriations bills that have been passed by the Committee. Committee passage is the first step in the process, and funding will only be made available when the bill is passed by Congress and signed into law. Murphy and Blumenthal are committed to pushing for passage and ensuring Connecticut priorities are reflected in the final spending package. “As a member of the Appropriations committee, my priority is to work with people across Connecticut to identify and secure funding for the projects that make a real difference in our state. I’m proud to have worked
...Read more with Senator Blumenthal to ensure our federal dollars invest in workforce development programs to give people the skills to secure good-paying jobs, expand access to health care, support the growth of new small businesses, and make major investments in improving infrastructure. I’ll keep working to make sure these bills are signed into law and the $109.6 million for Connecticut projects in the budget make it across the finish line,” said Murphy. “This $33 million in federal funding will support critical Connecticut projects across diverse areas – ranging from small business support to innovative health initiatives to crucial environmental upgrades. This committee approval is a significant step toward making these projects a reality for our residents and I will continue working alongside Senator Murphy to ensure these transformative investments are delivered to Connecticut,” said Blumenthal. Murphy and Blumenthal also secured $76.6 million for Connecticut Congressionally Directed Spending projects in the Commerce, Justice, and Science; Agriculture; Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies; Military Construction-Veterans Affairs; Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations bills. Connecticut projects, totaling $5.503 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal-Year 2025 Financial Services and General Government bill, include: $102,000 for the Arts Council of Greater New Haven for their Skillbox: Artists as a Small Business Initiative.
$1,016,000 for Hartford’s Black Business Alliance for statewide capacity growth and office expansions.
$1,000,000 for New Haven’s CitySeed for a shared-use commercial kitchen and food business incubator.
$1,700,000 for CT State Northwestern’s Entrepreneurial Center for small business programming.
$800,000 for SHEBA, Inc., for a small business accelerator and incubator in Hartford.
$885,000 for the University of Connecticut’s Small Business Development Center for digital transformation of Connecticut’s small businesses. Connecticut projects, totaling $25.74 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal-Year 2025 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies bill, include: $718,000 for Albertus Magnus College for improvements to their nursing program.
$120,000 for Applied Behavioral Rehabilitation Institute, Inc. and Homes for the Brave for expanding a vocational rehabilitation and educational support program for veterans.
$98,000 for Arts Council of Greater New Haven for youth arts journalism initiative .
$189,000 for CCARC, Inc. for a manufacturing internship program for individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.
$371,000 for Child Health and Development Institute of Connecticut, Inc. for a substance use prevention and education program.
$2,500,000 for City of New Haven for a career learning center.
$550,000 for Community Health Center, Inc. of Connecticut for environmental and health education.
$1,000,000 for Connecticut Historical Society dba Connecticut Museum of Culture and History for civic education programs.
$1,650,000 for Connecticut Junior Republic Association, Inc., dba CJR for school-based behavioral and mental health services.
$709,000 for Connecticut Public Broadcasting, Inc. for educational programming.
$1,184,000 for CT Puerto Rican Forum dba Center for Latino Progress for creation of a workforce development program.
$822,000 for Cornell Scott-Hill Health Corporation for substance use disorder treatment.
$838,000 for Day Kimball Hospital for facilities and equipment.
$108,000 for Domestic Violence Crisis Center for youth violence prevention education.
$325,000 for Elena’s Light for programming for refugee families.
$381,000 for Fair Haven Community Health Clinic, Inc. for behavioral health services.
$350,000 for Family & Children's Aid, Inc. for facilities and equipment.
$1,473,000 for Flagman, Inc. for road safety education in Connecticut schools.
$222,000 for For All Ages, Inc. to support the mental health and wellness of college students.
$500,000 for Forge City Works for a culinary job training program.
$559,000 for Future 5 for a college access and success program.
$105,000 for Global Partnership to End Human Trafficking Corporation for behavioral health services for survivors.
$585,000 for Hands On Hartford for supportive services for seniors and individuals with disabilities.
$50,000 for Honor Wellness Center, Inc. for mental health support and training including equipment.
$231,000 for KNOX, Inc. for the Green Jobs Apprenticeship Program.
$3,000,000 for Liberation Programs, Inc. for facilities and equipment.
$263,000 for McCall Foundation, Inc. dba McCall Behavioral Health Network for equipment, including a mobile clinic.
$75,000 for Middlesex United Way for supportive services for older adults.
$370,000 for Northwest Regional Workforce Investment Board for a re-entry job training program.
$907,000 for Norwalk Community Health Center, Inc. for equipment, including a mobile unit and information technology.
$407,000 for Ocean Exploration Trust for an education initiative, including traveling exhibit development.
$200,000 for SilverSource, Inc. for supportive services for older adults.
$400,000 for StayWell Health Care Inc. for facilities and equipment, including information technology and an electronic health records system.
$100,000 for The Children's Law Center, Inc. to support legal representation for children in family court.
$500,000 for The Housing Collective for a data platform to connect low-income individuals with affordable housing.
$150,000 for Urban League of Greater Hartford for college success programming including financial aid, school supplies, and the purchase of technology equipment.
$350,000 for Voices of September 11, Inc. for resources and information for individuals impacted by tragedy.
$300,000 for Wakeman Memorial Association for after school programming for youth.
$700,000 for Wesleyan University for improving education programs for formally incarcerated students.
$380,000 for Windham Region Chamber of Commerce Foundation for mental health and supportive services for veterans.
$2,000,000 for Youth Advocate Programs, Inc. for prevention programming and behavioral health services for youth. Connecticut projects, totaling $2.265 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill, include: $684,000 for the Army Corps of Engineers Hartford and East Hartford Levee Rehabilitation Feasibility Study.
$175,000 for the Army Corps of Engineers Housatonic River Shoal Survey and Sampling.
$600,000 for the Army Corps of Engineers Thomaston Dam Building Renovations.
$200,000 for the City of Bridgeport for microgrid reconfiguration.
$225,000 for SmartPower Connecticut, Inc. for rooftop solar and battery storage demonstration. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined Fox News Sunday’s Jacqui Heinrich to discuss Vice President Kamala Harris’ strong record of leadership, his support for eliminating the filibuster to make democracy work better, the stakes of the 2024 election and the threat Donald Trump poses to the future of American democracy. Murphy highlighted Kamala Harris’ success in dramatically reducing migration from Central American countries: “The figures I have seen show that from the three Northern Triangle countries that Kamala Harris was put in charge of stemming migration from, migration has dropped by 50- to 60 percent from those countries. It started high in part because of a series of crises that unfolded during the Trump administration. What drove the increase in
...Read more migration was, in part, huge increased travel from a country like Venezuela, which was plunged into economic crisis because of Donald Trump’s policies. Kamala Harris was given an important but discrete task, she was able to dramatically reduce migration from those countries, and, again, apples to apples, crossings at the southwest border are lower today than they were at the end of the Trump administration.” Murphy expressed his support for eliminating the filibuster to ensure Congress reflects the will of the American people: “I just don’t think that democracy can allow for 40% of the United States Senate to stand in the way of progress that’s popular with the American public. Ninety percent of the American public supports background checks on guns sales. We can’t pass that through the United States Senate not because we can’t get 50 United States senators, but because we can’t get 60 United States senators. So there are many very popular proposals that we can’t pass simply because of the filibuster. But let’s talk for a second about the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is captured by corporate interests today. And the American public knows that. So yes, we should also have a conversation about what to do about a Supreme Court that is increasingly way out of step with the American public and with some members that are brazenly corrupt.” “All I know is that I want democracy to respond to the American public when they want something done, and right now, the filibuster often stands in the way of getting that done,” Murphy added. Murphy also drew a stark contrast between the leadership of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump’s authoritarian Project 2025 agenda: “What's at the heart of any democracy? A majority of Americans that elect leaders who agree with them getting what they want. And so I just think that when there's a majority of Congress in favor of a policy, that policy should get to the president's desk. So yes, Kamala Harris is probably going to run on a series of reforms to make democracy better. Contrast that with Donald Trump, who has promised on day one to become a dictator—to suspend democratic norms, running on a Project 2025 platform that calls for turning the Department of Justice into an operation to hunt political opponents and kill political dissent. So yeah, I think there’s going to be a clear contrast in this election between Kamala Harris, who’s going to run on a platform to make democracy work better, and Donald Trump, who is promising to suspend democracy.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03) on Friday introduced legislation to reaffirm federal funds should not be used to arm school personnel with firearms or to train school staff in the use of firearms. In their resolution, the members emphasize the position held by teachers and parents across Connecticut: namely, that teachers sign up to become educators, not trained law enforcement officers. They also point to existing survey data, which overwhelmingly indicates that arming teachers does not make students safer. A recent survey of gun violence on school campuses showed that out of 225 incidents of gun violence between 1999 and 2018, trained armed personnel or school resource officers failed to
...Read more disarm an active shooter 223 times. Increasing the number of guns in schools adds an unnecessary risk to children and raises the likelihood of unintentional and unwarranted shootings. Not only does this put students and school communities at higher risk, but it also jeopardizes the safety of law enforcement. The Federal Bureau of Investigation recently found that casualties for trained law enforcement during active shooter incidents increased from 2021 to 2022. “For years, the gun lobby has tried to push this narrative that putting more guns into our schools and arming our teachers will make our kids safer. That’s ridiculous. There is zero evidence to support this idea, and plenty of evidence that shows more guns just lead to more gun deaths. Parents, teachers, and kids don’t want guns in school, and we should listen to them. This resolution makes clear that guns do not belong in our classrooms and the federal government shouldn’t be in the business of arming teachers,” said Murphy. “The safety of students and educators is deeply personal for me and so many Americans,” said Hayes. “Teachers should not be responsible for having a firearm in the classroom or be expected to respond with deadly force in an emergency. This resolution builds upon my work to keep guns out of schools and communities. More guns will not solve the gun violence epidemic. We must invest in common sense solutions to keep guns out of schools and improve safety.” The resolution has been endorsed by the National Education Association (NEA), Newtown Action Alliance, National Association of School Psychologist (NASP), American Federation of Teachers (AFT), Everytown for Gun Safety, Council of Administrators of Special Education, National Association of School Nurses, National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP), and Giffords Law Center. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Friday joined U.S. Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and 20 other members of Congress in sending a bipartisan letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressing alarm at the declining state of democracy and human rights in Bangladesh. Bangladesh has been experiencing deadly clashes between student protesters and state security forces across the country in recent weeks, shedding light on human rights abuses taking place under the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. “The Bangladeshi government has continued to take actions that undermine democratic processes, including by holding deeply flawed elections in
...Read more January, failing to improve labor regulations, and, most recently, violently cracking down on demonstrations using guns, tear gas, and imposing a near-total shutdown of Internet services,” the members wrote. The members continued, “Given these alarming and continuing trends, we hope that you will lead the U.S. Department of State in upholding the shared democratic principles that have long underpinned the U.S.-Bangladeshi relationship. The United States must condemn all acts of violence, ensure critical civil liberties, such as the freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, are protected, and take action to hold complicit government officials accountable for the above abuses against the Bangladeshi people. Moreover, in order to prevent the further deterioration of democracy in Bangladesh, the United States must partner with the international community to support the right of the Bangladeshi people to a representative democratic government that upholds human rights and respects individual freedoms.” U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) also signed the letter, along with U.S. Representatives Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Bill Keating (D-Mass.), Seth Moulton (D-Mass), Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), Gabe Amo (D-R.I.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.), Dan Kildee (D-Mich.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), and Delegate James Moylan (R-Guam). The full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Blinken: We write with grave concerns regarding the state of democracy and human rights in Bangladesh and urge the U.S. Department of State to redouble its efforts to support the democratic aspirations of the Bangladeshi people. Our concerns have only become more acute following recent deadly clashes between student protestors and security forces and Bangladesh’s national elections on January 7, 2024, which the United States, United Nations (UN), and other observers have rightly criticized as being neither free nor fair. Since their inception, U.S.-Bangladeshi relations have been predicated on mutual respect for the rule of law, the promotion of democracy, and the protection of human rights. Core priorities have also included strengthening people-to-people ties, enhancing regional security, and bolstering inclusive economic growth and development. Since Bangladesh’s independence in 1971, with support from the United States and other international partners, it has made great strides in improving the lives of its citizens. Over the past 50 years, ties between our two countries have grown stronger and deeper and have been enriched by the contributions of a growing and vibrant Bangladeshi American community. Consequently, we have watched with growing alarm as these shared principles have come under threat in Bangladesh as the ruling Awami League and Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina have acted in an increasingly authoritarian manner since returning to power in 2009. We have been heartened by actions taken by President Biden and his Administration to bolster human and civil rights in Bangladesh. These include the December 10, 2021 imposition of sanctions on the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), following widespread allegations that it committed grave human rights abuses as part of the Bangladeshi government’s war on drugs. As supporters of Bangladesh’s democracy, we also welcomed the May 24, 2023 announcement of a new U.S. visa policy that restricts the issuance of visas for any Bangladeshi individual believed to be involved in undermining the democratic election process in Bangladesh, including current and former officials, members of political parties, and members of law enforcement, security services, and the judiciary. In addition to these actions, we also appreciate the consistent messages conveyed to Bangladeshi officials over the past years urging them to allow free and fair elections and to improve respect for human rights, including the rights of workers. Sadly, the Bangladeshi government has continued to take actions that undermine democratic processes, including by holding deeply flawed elections in January, failing to improve labor regulations, and, most recently, violently cracking down on demonstrations using guns, tear gas, and imposing a near-total shutdown of Internet services. The January 7, 2024 election was largely boycotted by Bangladesh’s political opposition, which itself was hamstrung by a wave of arrests following demonstrations on October 28, 2023. According to widespread reporting, tens of thousands of opposition leaders and activists were arrested and detained in the weeks leading up to elections. While some opposition activists and leaders have been freed since the election, many still remain in prison, with little prospect of receiving justice in a politicized legal system even if they do make bail. Additionally, journalists and online critics of the government have seen their freedom of expression come under serious attack through harassment, surveillance, physical assaults, and a draconian digital censorship law. Most importantly, the election was marred by violence and not supported by a large swath of the Bangladeshi electorate, with voter turnout at about 40 percent when the polls closed compared to 80 percent in the previous national election in 2018. Beyond members of the political opposition, workers and trade unionists have long faced violence, repression, and labor rights violations in Bangladesh. Workers who attempt to form or join trade unions are met with threats and mass dismissals, government labor inspectors fail to sufficiently monitor millions of workplaces, employers fail to pay livable wages, and sexual violence in the workplace is rampant. Wage discrimination persists and unsafe working conditions in the country’s largest employment sectors, which include the garment, shipping, and leather industries, result in millions of workplace injuries and tens of thousands of workplace deaths annually. After the November 2023 killing of Imran Hossain, a factory worker and unionist, by police during a crackdown against fair wage protests, we welcomed the State Department’s statement condemning violence against workers in Bangladesh and expressing concern about the ongoing repression of workers and union members. However, the Bangladeshi government has yet to amend its labor laws to protect workers’ freedom of association in line with the United Nations’ International Labor Organization’s conventions and standards. Most recently, Bangladesh has suffered one of the worst outbreaks in violence in years as the government cracked down on students protesting a quota system that allocates up to 30 percent of government jobs for relatives of veterans that fought in the country’s war of independence in 1971. Police, protestors, opposition activists, and pro-government supporters clashed in the capital of Dhaka and cities across the country, with at least 170 people killed, thousands arrested, and thousands injured. In responding to the student demonstrations, the Bangladeshi authorities deployed the previously sanctioned paramilitary Rapid Action Battalion; condoned the use of tear gas, rubber bullets, and sound grenades by riot police against protestors; imposed a strict, military-enforced curfew and “shoot-on-sight” orders; and shut down Internet and mobile services across Bangladesh. Given these alarming and continuing trends, we hope that you will lead the U.S. Department of State in upholding the shared democratic principles that have long underpinned the U.S.-Bangladeshi relationship. The United States must condemn all acts of violence, ensure critical civil liberties, such as the freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, are protected, and take action to hold complicit government officials accountable for the above abuses against the Bangladeshi people. Moreover, in order to prevent the further deterioration of democracy in Bangladesh, the United States must partner with the international community to support the right of the Bangladeshi people to a representative democratic government that upholds human rights and respects individual freedoms. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Thursday released the following statement on the release of American citizens wrongfully imprisoned in Russia, including Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and former U.S. Marine Paul Whelan. “It is a huge relief that Evan Gershkovich, Paul Whelan, Alsu Kurmasheva, Vladimir Kara-Murza and others are on their way home after months, and in some cases years, of unlawful detainment in Russia. Their families have been put through hell for far too long, and I am thrilled they are soon to be reunited with their loved ones. This is a huge diplomatic success for the Biden-Harris administration and the officials who tirelessly led tough negotiations in partnership with Norway,
...Read more Slovenia, Poland, Germany, and Turkey to make today possible,” said Murphy. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Katie Britt (R-Ala.), respectively Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, on Wednesday wrote Acting Director of the Secret Service Ronald L. Rowe Jr. seeking information regarding the U.S. Secret Service’s Fiscal Year 2025 budgetary needs. This comes after the assassination attempt against former President Donald Trump and is a needed step before the Senate Committee on Appropriations moves forward on the Fiscal Year 2025 Homeland Security Appropriations Act. “The Secret Service was first charged with protecting the President of the United States in 1902, and while it has taken on a number of other important missions over time, safeguarding the President and presidential candidates
...Read more remains one of its core responsibilities,” wrote Murphy and Britt. “Recognizing the importance of this mission, Congress provided more than $190 million to the Secret Service in Fiscal Year 2024, specifically for protection requirements related to the 2024 presidential campaign, plus an additional $22 million above President Biden’s budget request for protection-related travel costs.” The senators continued: “Following the assassination attempt on former President Trump, President Biden announced that Secret Service protection will also be provided to presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Two vice presidential candidates will now also require protection. As a result, the Secret Service is assuming new protection costs related to the campaign at a time when it already appears to lack sufficient resources to fulfill its protective mission.” The senators requested Secret Service provide answers to several questions regarding the agency’s funding needs, including: How has the Secret Service obligated the funding provided by Congress for the 2024 Presidential campaign, including travel-related protection expenses? Please detail the amount of this funding obligated to date, and the proposed plan for any remaining balances.
Did the Secret Service provide a level of protection for former President Trump’s Pennsylvania rally equivalent to the protection provided for President Biden’s campaign rally in Michigan the previous day? Why or why not?
The Washington Post and New York Times have reported that the Trump campaign had requested additional Secret Service protection in recent months, but the Secret Service rejected those requests. Did the Trump Campaign request additional protection, including for the Pennsylvania rally? If so, provide the details of the requests, including the dates, the disposition of such requests, and the rationale for each decision.
Was the security failure at the Pennsylvania rally the result of insufficient resources?
In addition to providing protection to new presidential and vice presidential candidates, what changes, if any, is the Secret Service considering to its protection practices for the remainder of the presidential campaign?
Is the Secret Service currently projecting any funding shortfalls for Fiscal Year 2024? If so, provide in detail the basis and rationale of such shortfalls.
Given the 2024 election will take place in Fiscal Year 2025, do you believe additional resources above those requested in the President’s FY25 budget request, will be required to adequately meet the Secret Service mission, including, the protection of presidential candidates, existing protectees, the election certification, and the Inauguration? The full text of the letter is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke at a U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee markup on the corrosive impact of the growing financialization of American health care and social care delivery systems. In his remarks, Murphy outlined how prioritization of profits is undermining programs like Meals on Wheels and eliminating longstanding social benefits important to the wellbeing of seniors and local communities. Murphy highlighted the importance of the social connection that Meals on Wheels provides to senior citizens across the country: “Sometimes when profit is the only thing that matters, consumers benefit. But it’s often not so when it comes to our health care system. The Meals on Wheels program works not just because it gets food to
...Read more seniors, but because it connects a neighbor, a community member, with that senior at home. The food keeps the senior alive, but it is often that socialization, that check-in, that daily conversation, that actually has the biggest health impact on that senior citizen.” He continued, underscoring the consequences of private equity’s growing involvement in health care and social services: “But under our noses, what has happened to the rest of our health care and social care delivery systems is happening in Meals on Wheels. Big for-profit national companies are coming in and gobbling up more of the market. These companies don't send somebody to deliver the meal. They just send the meal in the mail. Now, technically, that is cheaper. Technically, that is more efficient. But it robs that shut-in senior of a really important personal connection. And I think that it speaks to this broader trend in our health care and social care delivery systems in which all we care about is whiteboard efficiency.” Murphy concluded: “I think that Meals on Wheels works because we prioritize socialization, not just the efficiency of the delivery of the meal. And I hope it's something that this committee can talk about in the future.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to speak for a minute on an amendment that I have that I won't be calling. For the record, count me as someone who wishes that we were having some debate on amendments. I understand the difficult nature of the compromise, but I think it's often pretty healthy for us to sit and contemplate changes in amendments to these very big, important bills. But I wanted to at least speak to an amendment that I was prepared to offer that touches on, I think, a very troubling development in our national meal delivery service. “I know Senator Sanders is concerned with this, and other members of the committee are concerned with this prioritization of profit and the cult of inefficiency in our health care and social care systems today. Sometimes when profit is the only thing that matters, consumers benefit. But it’s often not so when it comes to our health care system. The Meals on Wheels program works not just because it gets food to seniors, but because it connects a neighbor, a community member, with that senior at home. The food keeps the senior alive, but it is often that socialization, that check-in, that daily conversation, that actually has the biggest health impact on that senior citizen. “But under our noses, what has happened to the rest of our healthcare and social care delivery systems is happening in Meals on Wheels. Big for-profit national companies are coming in and gobbling up more of the market. These companies don't send somebody to deliver the meal. They just send the meal in the mail. Now, technically, that is cheaper. Technically, that is more efficient. But it robs that shut-in senior of a really important personal connection. And I think that it speaks to this broader trend in our healthcare and social care delivery systems in which all we care about is whiteboard efficiency. “I had an amendment that would give priority to local community groups who run much of our Meals on Wheels system but are losing share to national companies—national companies who are unashamedly in this business to make money. The biggest national for-profit Meals on Wheels provider is run by a former private equity [investor] who makes no bones about the fact that he's running that company in order to make money, as much money as possible. I think this committee should take steps to have this important conversation. “I’ll just share one last story. My kid doesn’t have a pediatrician because we go to a pediatric practice in which whiteboard efficiency tells them that it's more efficient for us to just see whoever is available on that day. So, we get quicker appointments, they make more money, and the system is technically more efficient. But we don't have a doctor, a pediatrician, that we can build a relationship with, that we can trust—an important part of being a parent. “I checked as I was getting ready for this markup the other week. My kid's pediatric practice is owned by Goldman Sachs. And so, it makes sense that in order to make money, they are going to build as technically efficient a system as possible. Maybe we can't unwind Wall Street from pediatric practices, but we could have made the decision today to stop the beginning of a trend in Meals on Wheels from becoming the norm. I think that Meals on Wheels works because we prioritize socialization, not just the efficiency of the delivery of the meal. And I hope it's something that this committee can talk about in the future.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and U.S. Representatives Grace Meng (D-N.Y.-06), Delia Ramirez (D-lll.-03), and Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.-13) to introduce the Destination Reception Assistance Act, legislation to establish the Destination Reception Services Program and provide federal funding to states, localities, and non-profit organizations that promote self-sufficiency of asylum seekers and refugees, reduce costs of extended emergency shelter, provide diversion from homelessness, and ensure compliance of with the legal immigration process. The new competitive grant program would complement the existing Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Shelter and Services Program that provides
...Read more critical support such as food, water, shelter, and medical treatment to new immigrants following their release from the Department of Homeland Security. By promoting self-sufficiency, the Destination Reception Services Program will ease pressure on states, localities, and non-profit emergency providers and free up public resources for everyone. “Local governments and nonprofits play a really important role in supporting people who are fleeing violence or persecution and helping them adjust to their new communities in the United States. This legislation would make sure those organizations have the resources they need to help newly arrived refugees stand on their own two feet while they are still navigating the legal immigration process,” said Murphy. “This measure helps provide critical resources and aid to asylum seekers who are here after fleeing persecution and violence. They commonly need assistance with housing, jobs, health care and other challenges. Our bill supports the private organizations— such as we’re fortunate to have in Connecticut— reaching out to lift up newcomers as they begin work, school and new lives,” said Blumenthal. “The United States is a nation built on the dreams of immigrant families who came here looking to build a better life,” said Markey. “The Destination Reception Assistance Act is a transformative community-based solution that would address the humanitarian needs of new arrivals in Massachusetts and states in every corner of the country. Our American economy is strong as a direct result of new Americans and immigrants. What unites us is the unshakeable belief that no matter where you come from, no matter your circumstances, you deserve to live safely, be treated with respect, and have access to the opportunities our nation offers, and this legislation makes that pledge a reality. I thank Representatives Meng, Espaillat, and Ramirez for their partnership on this legislation that puts new arrivals on the path to their American Dream.” U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) also cosponsored the legislation. In the House of Representatives, U.S. Representatives Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.-07), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), André Carson (D-Ind.-07), Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.-10), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.-01), Nikema Williams (D-Ga.-05), Juan Vargas (D-Calif.-52), Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.-01), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.-02), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.-01), Cori Bush (D-Mo.-01), Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.-07), and Judy Chu (D-Calif.28) co-sponsored the legislation. Full text of the legislation is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday spoke at a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on U.S. strategic competition with China and U.S. competitiveness beyond the Indo-Pacific. In his questions to U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, Murphy emphasized the importance of maintaining funding for the U.S. State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC) to combat Chinese misinformation and expressed concerns about China’s deepening relations with our Gulf allies. Murphy highlighted the GEC’s success in combatting Chinese misinformation and asked the Deputy Secretary to describe the consequences of allowing the Center’s authorization to expire: “One of China’s most effective national security tools is propaganda and misinformation. Their
...Read more investment dwarfs the investment the United States makes. Estimates are that China’s spending something in the neighborhood of $7 billion per year. The United States clearly does some of this work through the Department of Defense, but inside the Department of State exists the Global Engagement Center, which is funded at a relatively paltry $61 million, but which, over the course of the last half decade, has done some pretty extraordinary work to track Chinese misinformation and to help local actors be able to fight back. The Global Engagement Center is set to expire— the authorization for the center is set to expire—at the end of this year. What would be the impact if we lost the capacity to help coordinate with allies, help to fund efforts in and around the Chinese theater to combat Chinese misinformation, if we lost the authorization for the Global Engagement Center?” Murphy also questioned Deputy Secretary Campbell on the implications of cooperation between Gulf allies and China: “I think the history suggests that our Gulf allies are sort of seeking to have it both ways, right? [They] will play the United States off against China fairly regularly and there's very recent evidence of that: Saudi Arabia's massive investment in the leading Chinese AI company, certainly contrary to U.S. national security interests; the ongoing maturation of UAE's defense relationship with China. I guess I have two sort of simple questions for you on this portfolio. One, do you agree that a security treaty with a country like Saudi Arabia only makes sense if our China policies are aligned? And two, is there any reason to be optimistic that the Gulf nations are going to do anything other than continue to play the United States and China off against each other to get the best deals that they can get on economic investment, security, relationships, et cetera?” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good to see you, Mr. Secretary. I'm going to ask you two questions, one on disinformation and one on China and the Middle East. So, one of China’s most effective national security tools is propaganda and misinformation. Their investment dwarfs the investment the United States makes. Estimates are that China’s spending something in the neighborhood of $7 billion per year. “The United States clearly does some of this work through the Department of Defense, but inside the Department of State exists the Global Engagement Center, which is funded at a relatively paltry $61 million, but which, over the course of the last half decade, has done some pretty extraordinary work to track Chinese misinformation and to help local actors be able to fight back. The Global Engagement Center is set to expire— the authorization for the center is set to expire—at the end of this year. What would be the impact if we lost the capacity to help coordinate with allies, help to fund efforts in and around the Chinese theater to combat Chinese misinformation, if we lost the authorization for the Global Engagement Center?” CAMPBELL: “Senator, first of all, thank you for the question. Let me just say, I think some of the work that the GEC has done in the last couple of years is deeply innovative and helpful to American purpose, and I commend the work under Jamie Rubin, the leader of the organization, and others who work underneath him. I will simply say this: what it has done that has made a difference in a number of places, is simply illuminating the strategies—the actors and the strategy that both China and Russia have undertaken, and so these countries' ability—China, Russia— to manipulate and maneuver is done largely out of public view. When you expose it, actually can be quite purposeful and effective. “I would simply say that you are absolutely right. It's a small amount of money. We have a little bit of DOD that we're working, but the challenge is enormous. I'll just give you one example, Senator: when I was asked to go to the Solomons to basically contest what the Chinese were doing there, I remember waking up in the morning, getting the local newspaper, and on the cover—this is right after the war had started in Ukraine—was a long story about the chemical and biological weapons facilities that the United States maintained in Ukraine. Right? Clearly effective Russian and Chinese disinformation. And we just have to do a better job contesting this globally. A first step would just be to get the GEC reauthorized. I think the GEC has done more on Russia than China, but I think it's stepping up its game substantially on China as well.” MURPHY: “Yeah, just in the last year and a half, 22 different reports produced by the GEC specifically naming Chinese propaganda efforts— which as you state—is sometimes the first and sometimes most effective tool.” “Let me turn to the Gulf. Obviously, we have had a number of conversations in this committee about the Administration's conversation around extending a security guarantee to Saudi Arabia that would impact our broader security obligations in the region towards all of our Gulf allies. I want to ask you about the future of Gulf cooperation with China. I think the history suggests that our Gulf allies are sort of seeking to have it both ways, right? [They] will play the United States off against China fairly regularly— and there's very recent evidence of that: Saudi Arabia's massive investment in the leading Chinese AI company, certainly contrary to U.S. national security interests; the ongoing maturation of UAE's defense relationship with China. “I guess I have two sort of simple questions for you on this portfolio. One, do you agree that a security treaty with a country like Saudi Arabia only makes sense if our China policies are aligned? And two, is there any reason to be optimistic that the Gulf nations are going to do anything other than continue to play the United States and China off against each other to get the best deals that they can get on economic investment, security, relationships, et cetera?” CAMPBELL: “So it's an important question, and I do think when we're talking about some of these fundamental decisions on the part of the United States, security guarantees, substantial investments in technology, you know, we often say, look, we don't ask countries to choose, but we want them to have a choice. In certain circumstances where we're putting our stuff on the line, whether technology or our commitment to support you, I'm afraid it is a binary choice. And I think we would have to insist on that as we go forward. I will say the Middle East is complicated.” “Senator, you talked about the whole region. There was a period, not long ago, where Israel—also had very deep engagements with China and the United States—has chosen, largely, now to engage directly with the United States, because they understand the nature of what they were doing had implications for their own security given China's other actions. I wouldn't want to go through a taxonomy of each country in the Gulf, but my guess is that we'll have more luck with some than others. But ultimately, the process of this all rests on other issues being resolved, and it is just enormously challenging. So, I do think we are right to try to contest. It's an important region. But at the same time, we also have to be clear that we have some real advantages. Our technology, our security guarantee must not be given lightly, and we must demand many things in response.” ### Read less Connecticut Senators Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal announced today the inclusion of $76.6 million for Connecticut Congressionally Directed Spending projects in the five Appropriations bills passed by the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee. This marks the first step in the process, with funding only made available when the bill is passed by Congress and signed into law, per a release. “These bills are full of big wins for Connecticut, including more than $76 million for community-based projects that will help create good-paying jobs, upgrade aging infrastructure and public utilities, expand affordable housing and transportation, and ensure our towns and local organizations have the necessary resources to do what they do best – serve our community,” said Murphy.
...Read more “These investments are the result of thousands of conversations I’ve had with people across Connecticut, and I’m proud to have worked with Senator Blumenthal to ensure their inclusion in the budget. I’ll continue working hard to make sure these bills make it to the president’s desk so these federal dollars can make a real difference in our state.” “These high-impact projects address our state’s most critical needs – ranging from environmental preservation to violence prevention to affordable housing construction. The Committee’s support of more than $76 million for Connecticut is a significant step toward ensuring that these transformative projects move forward. I will keep fighting, alongside Senator Murphy, to deliver these invaluable investments to communities all across our state,” said Blumenthal. Here is the complete breakdown of each of the five Appropriations bills and how the money would be spent, per a release: Connecticut projects, totaling $8.232 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations bill, include:
$56,000 for Connecticut College for Thames River Marine Habitat Feasibility Study.
$112,000 for the Collective Oyster Recycling & Restoration (CORR) Foundation for a shellfish restoration and shell recycling collaborative.
$699,000 for Interdistrict Committee for Project Oceanology to purchase equipment for marine science education.
$68,000 for Havenly for a domestic violence survivor fellowship program.
$1.5 million for St. Francis Hospital and Medical Center for hospital-based violence intervention trauma recovery center augmenting staffing needs.
$250,000 for the Second Chance Re-entry Initiative Program (SCRIP).
$1.5 million for the University of New Haven for a de-escalation training center.
$1.5 million for Youth Advocate Programs for a youth violence prevention project.
$30,000 for the Police Activity League of Waterbury for community enrichment initiatives.
$176,000 for the South Windsor Police Department for radio upgrades.
$229,000 for the Town of Ledyard for police dispatch system replacement.
$350,000 for the Town of Monroe Police Department to upgrade radio equipment.
$62,000 for the Town of Simsbury for dispatch call handling software and upgrades.
$1.7 million for Talcott Mountain Science Center for Student Involvement for astrophysics and data science education destination.
Connecticut projects, totaling $12.9 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill, include:
$2.3 million for the City of Torrington for Toro Field Siphon abandonment and sewer replacement.
$715,000 for the Denison Pequotsepos Nature Center to upgrade the wildlife facility.
$500,000 for Goodspeed Musicals for accessibility upgrades.
$2 million for the Southington Water Department for wells PFAS treatment.
$250,000 for Music Mountain for renovation and improvements to its historic 1930 campus.
$500,000 for the Town of Essex for Centerbrook Meeting House renovation.
$682,000 for the Borough of Jewett City Department of Public Utilities for a wastewater project.
$960,000 for Norwich Public Utilities for North Main Street wastewater system upgrade project.
$975,000 for the Town of Ellington Water Pollution Control Authority for sewer main replacement.
$540,000 for the Town of Winchester for southern sewer network expansion.
$500,000 for the Town of Clinton for wastewater collection system and treatment facility.
$250,000 for the Greenwich Historical Society for Bush-Holley House infrastructure upgrades and conservation.
$1 million for the Town of Fairfield water quality and resilience sewer upgrade.
$1.728 million for the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments for sewer siphon relocation associated with Kinneytown Dam removal.
Connecticut projects, totaling $5.531 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Agriculture Appropriations bill, include:
$247,000 for the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station to conduct research on ticks and tick-borne pathogens.
$210,000 for Community Health Resources to make facility improvements.
$842,000 for the Essex Library to make facility improvements.
$1.597 million for the Eugene O’Neil Memorial Theater Center to make facility improvements.
$182,000 for the Library Association of Warehouse Point to make facility improvements.
$300,000 for the Lower CT River Land Trust for the Osaki Education Center.
$750,000 for the Sea Research Foundation (Mystic Aquarium) to improve water quality and wastewater discharges.
$229,000 for the Town of Andover for installation of a new generator and renovations to a community center.
$750,000 for the Town of Norfolk for the construction of a new firehouse.
$156,000 for the Town of Putnam for an emergency management facility.
$268,000 for the Town of Willington for emergency operations center renovation and remediation.
Connecticut projects, totaling $9.7 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Military Construction-Veterans Affairs Appropriations bill, include:
$6.5M for Connecticut Army National Guard for an Aircraft Maintenance Hangar in Groton.
$3.2M for Naval Submarine Base New London for planning and development of a submarine storage, maintenance, and operations facility.
Connecticut projects, totaling $40.268 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill include:
$1 million for streetscape improvements on Maple Avenue in Hartford.
$2.5 million for pedestrian and bicycle improvements on Washington Boulevard in Stamford.
$3.5 million for the city of New London for construction of the Water Street Garage and Transit Station.
$800,000 for the Warren Affordable Housing Corporation for construction of the town’s first affordable housing development.
$2.74 million for Community Health Resources for acquisition of a facility.
$300,000 for American Legion Post 17 for building renovations.
$1 million for the Hilliard-Jones-Cookson American Legion Post 66 for building renovations.
$1.105 million for Curtis Home for facility renovations on the Curtis Home’s campus.
$1.02 million for the Housing Authority of the City of Norwalk for construction of affordable housing.
$1.05 million for the San Juan Center, Inc. for construction of affordable housing at the El Pocito Dulce Residences.
$1 million for St. Vincent de Paul Middletown, Inc. for construction of a new social services, St. Vincent Commons.
$1.406 million for HOPE Partnership to construct affordable housing at the William F. Palmer site.
$700,000 for the Boys and Girls Club of Greenwich for facility construction and renovation.
$484,000 for the Northeastern Connecticut Community Development Corporation (NCCDC) for renovations to senior low-income housing facilities.
$1 million for Forge City Works to create a culinary training center.
$2.666 million for Beulah Land Development Corporation to acquire land and construct affordable housing through the Dixwell Redevelopment Affordable Housing Initiative.
$495,000 for the Thames Valley Council for Community Action, Inc. to expand the Early Childhood Education Center in New London.
$1.5 million for Mercy Housing and Shelter Corporation for facility improvements.
$601,000 for The Housing Collective for its Fairfield County Coordinated Access Network Housing Stability Program.
$550,000 for the Goshen Housing Trust, Inc. for construction of affordable housing.
$250,000 for Neighborhood Housing Services of Waterbury for land acquisition.
$1.51 million for Cornerstone Foundation, Inc. for facility renovations at community kitchens and homeless shelters.
$550,000 for Keeping North Stonington Affordable, Inc. for construction of three affordable homes, two of which are on Main Street.
$875,000 for Mercy Learning Center, Inc. for a new HVAC system.
$1.7 million to Liberty Community Services for permanent supportive housing.
$3.562 million for the New Britain Housing Authority for redevelopment of the Mount Pleasant public housing development.
$450,000 for Rivera Memorial Foundation, Inc. for a rehabilitation and expansion project.
$1 million for the United Way of Greater New Haven for affordable housing construction at the State and Chapel Development.
$650,000 for Ledge Light Health District for creation of The Place for CommUNITY Wellbeing, a proposed space for overall health and well-being services, events, and more.
$193,000 for the Town of Plymouth for blight remediation.
$2.611 million for the New Britain Museum of American Art for facility upgrades.
$1.5 million for the National Veterans Council for Legal Redress (NVCLR) for the development of the Veterans Living Communities Permanent Housing Project. Read less Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, along with Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, introduced the Smart Kids Not Smartphones Act: A bipartisan legislation aimed at reducing smartphone use in classrooms. The program would bring a non-competitive, non-monetary recognition award program administered by the Department of Education for schools that enforce a policy prohibiting phone use during instructional hours, per a release. “Smartphones in the classroom are a massive distraction from learning and socializing with other students, and feed into our kids’ addiction to technology,” said Murphy. “There are plenty of schools, including in Connecticut, that have seen improved student mental health and academic outcomes after implementing policies that limit phones in the classroom. This simple
...Read more bipartisan bill would recognize schools that implement smartphone bans during instructional time as well as provide transparency and give students and parents the opportunity to share input on those policies.” A study by Common Sense Media found that “97% of 11- to 17-year-olds used their phones during the school day, with a median time of 43 minutes.” “There is no question that smartphones are a major distraction to students in the classroom,” said Romney. “They also contribute to deteriorating mental health, social isolation, and cyberbullying among our youth. Our bill would encourage schools to institute policies which would prohibit the use of smartphones during class time, while still allowing for reasonable exceptions for emergencies, educational activities, and students with exceptional needs.” Smart phone use has been found to harm students’ mental health and ability to learn and focus, as well as negatively impact self-image, safety and general well-being, per a release. It has also led to a bevvy of other issues like social isolation, cognitive dysfunction, smartphone addiction, academic dishonesty, and lower grades. Here is the full breakdown of what the above legislation would do, per a release: Establish a non-competitive, non-monetary recognition award program administered by ED that would give an award—such as a banner or website badge—and recognition to any school that implements and enforces a policy to prohibit the use of smartphones by students during instructional hours, while allowing exceptions for emergencies, for use in educational instruction or educational enrichment activities, and for children with disabilities.
If school districts and state education agencies have 100 percent buy-in from the schools in their district, they will also receive the award from ED.
Instruct relevant federal agencies to publish guidance on smartphone use policies and enforcement mechanisms for schools to be able to use. Murphy has previously introduced legislation aimed to keep kids off of social media and protect them from its harmful impact, per a release. He also co-sponsored “the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), bipartisan legislation to provide young people and parents with the tools, safeguards, and transparency they need to protect against online harm to minors, per a release. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) announced the inclusion of $76.6 million for Connecticut Congressionally Directed Spending projects in the five Appropriations bills that have been passed by the Committee. The Committee plans to continue marking up bills this week. Committee passage is the first step in the process, and funding will only be made available when the bill is passed by Congress and signed into law. Murphy and Blumenthal are committed to pushing for passage and ensuring Connecticut priorities are reflected in the final spending package. “These bills are full of big wins for Connecticut, including more than $76 million for community-based projects that will help create good-
...Read more paying jobs, upgrade aging infrastructure and public utilities, expand affordable housing and transportation, and ensure our towns and local organizations have the necessary resources to do what they do best – serve our community. These investments are the result of thousands of conversations I’ve had with people across Connecticut, and I’m proud to have worked with Senator Blumenthal to ensure their inclusion in the budget. I’ll continue working hard to make sure these bills make it to the president’s desk so these federal dollars can make a real difference in our state,” said Murphy. “These high-impact projects address our state’s most critical needs – ranging from environmental preservation to violence prevention to affordable housing construction. The Committee’s support of more than $76 million for Connecticut is a significant step toward ensuring that these transformative projects move forward. I will keep fighting, alongside Senator Murphy, to deliver these invaluable investments to communities all across our state,” said Blumenthal. Connecticut projects, totaling $8.232 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations bill, include: $56,000 for Connecticut College for Thames River Marine Habitat Feasibility Study.
$112,000 for the Collective Oyster Recycling & Restoration (CORR) Foundation for a shellfish restoration and shell recycling collaborative.
$699,000 for Interdistrict Committee for Project Oceanology to purchase equipment for marine science education.
$68,000 for Havenly for a domestic violence survivor fellowship program.
$1.5 million for St. Francis Hospital and Medical Center for hospital-based violence intervention trauma recovery center augmenting staffing needs.
$250,000 for the Second Chance Re-entry Initiative Program (SCRIP).
$1.5 million for the University of New Haven for a de-escalation training center.
$1.5 million for Youth Advocate Programs for a youth violence prevention project.
$30,000 for the Police Activity League of Waterbury for community enrichment initiatives.
$176,000 for the South Windsor Police Department for radio upgrades.
$229,000 for the Town of Ledyard for police dispatch system replacement.
$350,000 for the Town of Monroe Police Department to upgrade radio equipment.
$62,000 for the Town of Simsbury for dispatch call handling software and upgrades.
$1.7 million for Talcott Mountain Science Center for Student Involvement for astrophysics and data science education destination. Connecticut projects, totaling $12.9 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill, include: $2.3 million for the City of Torrington for Toro Field Siphon abandonment and sewer replacement.
$715,000 for the Denison Pequotsepos Nature Center to upgrade the wildlife facility.
$500,000 for Goodspeed Musicals for accessibility upgrades.
$2 million for the Southington Water Department for wells PFAS treatment.
$250,000 for Music Mountain for renovation and improvements to its historic 1930 campus.
$500,000 for the Town of Essex for Centerbrook Meeting House renovation.
$682,000 for the Borough of Jewett City Department of Public Utilities for a wastewater project.
$960,000 for Norwich Public Utilities for North Main Street wastewater system upgrade project.
$975,000 for the Town of Ellington Water Pollution Control Authority for sewer main replacement.
$540,000 for the Town of Winchester for southern sewer network expansion.
$500,000 for the Town of Clinton for wastewater collection system and treatment facility.
$250,000 for the Greenwich Historical Society for Bush-Holley House infrastructure upgrades and conservation.
$1 million for the Town of Fairfield water quality and resilience sewer upgrade.
$1.728 million for the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments for sewer siphon relocation associated with Kinneytown Dam removal. Connecticut projects, totaling $5.531 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Agriculture Appropriations bill, include: $247,000 for the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station to conduct research on ticks and tick-borne pathogens.
$210,000 for Community Health Resources to make facility improvements.
$842,000 for the Essex Library to make facility improvements.
$1.597 million for the Eugene O’Neil Memorial Theater Center to make facility improvements.
$182,000 for the Library Association of Warehouse Point to make facility improvements.
$300,000 for the Lower CT River Land Trust for the Osaki Education Center.
$750,000 for the Sea Research Foundation (Mystic Aquarium) to improve water quality and wastewater discharges.
$229,000 for the Town of Andover for installation of a new generator and renovations to a community center.
$750,000 for the Town of Norfolk for the construction of a new firehouse.
$156,000 for the Town of Putnam for an emergency management facility.
$268,000 for the Town of Willington for emergency operations center renovation and remediation. Connecticut projects, totaling $9.7 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Military Construction-Veterans Affairs Appropriations bill, include: $6.5M for Connecticut Army National Guard for an Aircraft Maintenance Hangar in Groton.
$3.2M for Naval Submarine Base New London for planning and development of a submarine storage, maintenance, and operations facility. Connecticut projects, totaling $40.268 million, in the Committee-passed Fiscal Year 2025 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill include: $1 million for streetscape improvements on Maple Avenue in Hartford.
$2.5 million for pedestrian and bicycle improvements on Washington Boulevard in Stamford.
$3.5 million for the city of New London for construction of the Water Street Garage and Transit Station.
$800,000 for the Warren Affordable Housing Corporation for construction of the town’s first affordable housing development.
$2.74 million for Community Health Resources for acquisition of a facility.
$300,000 for American Legion Post 17 for building renovations.
$1 million for the Hilliard-Jones-Cookson American Legion Post 66 for building renovations.
$1.105 million for Curtis Home for facility renovations on the Curtis Home’s campus.
$1.02 million for the Housing Authority of the City of Norwalk for construction of affordable housing.
$1.05 million for the San Juan Center, Inc. for construction of affordable housing at the El Pocito Dulce Residences.
$1 million for St. Vincent de Paul Middletown, Inc. for construction of a new social services, St. Vincent Commons.
$1.406 million for HOPE Partnership to construct affordable housing at the William F. Palmer site.
$700,000 for the Boys and Girls Club of Greenwich for facility construction and renovation.
$484,000 for the Northeastern Connecticut Community Development Corporation (NCCDC) for renovations to senior low-income housing facilities.
$1 million for Forge City Works to create a culinary training center.
$2.666 million for Beulah Land Development Corporation to acquire land and construct affordable housing through the Dixwell Redevelopment Affordable Housing Initiative.
$495,000 for the Thames Valley Council for Community Action, Inc. to expand the Early Childhood Education Center in New London.
$1.5 million for Mercy Housing and Shelter Corporation for facility improvements.
$601,000 for The Housing Collective for its Fairfield County Coordinated Access Network Housing Stability Program.
$550,000 for the Goshen Housing Trust, Inc. for construction of affordable housing.
$250,000 for Neighborhood Housing Services of Waterbury for land acquisition.
$1.51 million for Cornerstone Foundation, Inc. for facility renovations at community kitchens and homeless shelters.
$550,000 for Keeping North Stonington Affordable, Inc. for construction of three affordable homes, two of which are on Main Street.
$875,000 for Mercy Learning Center, Inc. for a new HVAC system.
$1.7 million to Liberty Community Services for permanent supportive housing.
$3.562 million for the New Britain Housing Authority for redevelopment of the Mount Pleasant public housing development.
$450,000 for Rivera Memorial Foundation, Inc. for a rehabilitation and expansion project.
$1 million for the United Way of Greater New Haven for affordable housing construction at the State and Chapel Development.
$650,000 for Ledge Light Health District for creation of The Place for CommUNITY Wellbeing, a proposed space for overall health and well-being services, events, and more.
$193,000 for the Town of Plymouth for blight remediation.
$2.611 million for the New Britain Museum of American Art for facility upgrades.
$1.5 million for the National Veterans Council for Legal Redress (NVCLR) for the development of the Veterans Living Communities Permanent Housing Project. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Mitt Romney (R-Utah) introduced the Smart Kids Not Smartphones Act, bipartisan legislation aimed at reducing the usage of smartphones by children in the classroom. The legislation would establish a non-competitive, non-monetary recognition award program—administered by the Department of Education (ED)—to highlight and celebrate any school that has and enforces a policy prohibiting the use of smartphones by students during instructional hours. Similarly, it gives school districts and states the opportunity for recognition if all their schools have and enforce smartphone prohibition policies. “Smartphones in the classroom are a massive distraction from learning and socializing with other students, and feed into our
...Read more kids’ addiction to technology. There are plenty of schools, including in Connecticut, that have seen improved student mental health and academic outcomes after implementing policies that limit phones in the classroom. This simple bipartisan bill would recognize schools that implement smartphone bans during instructional time as well as provide transparency and give students and parents the opportunity to share input on those policies,” said Murphy. “There is no question that smartphones are a major distraction to students in the classroom,” said Romney. “They also contribute to deteriorating mental health, social isolation, and cyberbullying among our youth. Our bill would encourage schools to institute policies which would prohibit the use of smartphones during class time, while still allowing for reasonable exceptions for emergencies, educational activities, and students with exceptional needs.” According to a study by Common Sense Media analyzing smartphone data of students, 97% of 11- to 17-year-olds used their phones during the school day, with a median time of 43 minutes. Smartphone use has been found to harm students’ mental health, ability to learn and focus, self-image, safety, and general well-being. It also has led to social isolation, cognitive dysfunction, smartphone addiction, academic dishonesty, and lower grades. The senators’ legislation would: Establish a non-competitive, non-monetary recognition award program administered by ED that would give an award—such as a banner or website badge—and recognition to any school that implements and enforces a policy to prohibit the use of smartphones by students during instructional hours, while allowing exceptions for emergencies, for use in educational instruction or educational enrichment activities, and for children with disabilities.
If school districts and state education agencies have 100 percent buy-in from the schools in their district, they will also receive the award from ED.
Instruct relevant federal agencies to publish guidance on smartphone use policies and enforcement mechanisms for schools to be able to use. In May, Murphy introduced legislation to keep kids off social media and help protect them from its harmful impacts. Murphy is also a cosponsor of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), bipartisan legislation to provide young people and parents with the tools, safeguards, and transparency they need to protect against online harm to minors. Last year, Murphy wrote an op-ed for the New York Times about the negative impact that social media algorithms are having on young people. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Monday released the following statement on the results of the presidential election in Venezuela: “This election was marred by repression well before Venezuelans started casting ballots, but exit polls, precinct-level reporting, and the wave of enthusiasm for the opposition coalition make it nearly impossible to believe President Maduro’s claims of victory are credible. His refusal to release detailed vote tallies that verify this result only exacerbates my concern that he is once again silencing the voices of Venezuelans, who are clearly disillusioned with a Maduro government that has presided over an economic disaster and fueled a migrant crisis as millions of Venezuelans have fled the
...Read more conditions in their home country. President Maduro must immediately release the full vote tally, and I urge Venezuelan officials to respect the legitimate will of the Venezuelan people.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Friday introduced the Summer for All Act, legislation to provide high-quality summer enrichment opportunities to kids and families who otherwise would not have access to these programs. The bill would establish two new grant programs to provide long-term, direct funding that would help community-based organizations provide free summer camp and other activities to underserved kids and support states in the planning and implementation of initiatives to address summer programming gaps in sustainable ways. In 2021, Murphy secured a dedicated set-aside in the education funding in the American Rescue Plan for summer enrichment programs. With that
...Read more funding, states across the country, including Connecticut, expanded camps for hundreds of thousands of kids and provided programs for families, like free admission to museums, for the past three summers. After this summer, that funding states have relied on will run out. A new survey released by Gallup this week, which shows that an estimated 24 million children in the U.S. did not participate in any structured programming last summer, highlights the inequities in who can access summer learning. While most surveyed families with a household annual income of $100,000 or more report their child did participate in summer programs in 2023, only 38 percent of kids from families with less than $50,000 in annual income were able to attend summer camps or other summer enrichment activities. Gallup’s survey shows that cost is the greatest barrier for parents who want their child to engage in summer programming but had to forgo or limit their participation last summer, finding that 32 percent of all K-12 parents in the U.S. couldn’t send their child to a summer program because it was unaffordable. “The summer months give kids a chance to reset and prepare for back-to-school, and a big part of that comes from camps and other summer programs where kids can spend time with their friends, have fun, and continue to learn. Unfortunately, a lot of kids don’t get those experiences because there aren’t enough slots or their family can’t afford it. Back in 2021, I led an effort to make sure the American Rescue Plan included funding to give more kids the opportunity for a fun summer after a really tough school year. Thanks to those federal dollars, Connecticut’s summer enrichment program has helped thousands of kids and families, but the money is running out. We shouldn’t abandon such a successful and important initiative, and that’s why I’m introducing this legislation to make summer funding a federal priority and ensure every kid has a fun summer – not just the kids whose families can afford it,” said Murphy. The Summer for All Act would authorize $4 billion over four years and $1 billion each fiscal year after to fund two new competitive grant programs managed by the Department of Health and Human Services to expand access to high-quality summer enrichment opportunities. The bill also authorizes the Secretary to reserve up to 5 percent of funds to conduct data collection and analysis to understand gaps in summer enrichment opportunities for youth and how to improve access to and the quality of summer programs overall. Summer Enrichment Expansion Grant: Helps community-based organizations expand the programs they offer in the summer, with a priority for programs that:
Provide programming and transportation free of charge to low-income participants
Expand access to underserved and rural communities
Partner with local schools to identify and enroll at-risk students, including those who were chronically absent the previous school year
Integrate healthy nutrition as part of their programming, as well as incorporate activities that support the physical and mental health of participants
Provide safe, healthy, and supportive environments, and help participants develop relationship-building skills as well as their social and emotional skills
Summer Programming State Grant: Supports states in addressing gaps in summer programming in sustainable ways, along with providing innovative summer programming opportunities for kids and their families, with priority for states that:
Organize state-level teams, comprised of a diverse group of stakeholders, to determine the biggest gaps in summer enrichment programming within their state and develop a sustainable plan to leverage grant funding to address those gaps
Utilize funding for innovative programming that goes beyond providing expanded slots at established summer programs (i.e. making museums free for families throughout the summer)
Build partnerships between local schools, municipalities, and community-based organizations to maximize the impact of existing summer programs among at-risk students This legislation is endorsed by After-School All-Stars (ASAS), American Alliance of Museums, American Camp Association, American Library Association, Breakthrough Collaborative, Cathleen Stone Island Outward Bound School, Coalition for Service Learning, Connecticut Network for Children and Youth, Every Hour Counts, Girls Inc., Girlstart, Horizons National, Maryland Out of School Time Network, MENTOR, National Afterschool Association, National Parents Union, National Recreation and Parks Association, National Summer Learning Association (NSLA), National Youth Leadership Council, Pennsylvania Statewide Afterschool Youth Development Network (PSAYDN), and Youth Service America. “While it’s encouraging that 30 million youth participated in fun and engaging summer opportunities, we must strive for more,” said Aaron Dworkin, CEO of the National Summer Learning Association. “Our mission is to bridge the gap, ensuring all low-income young people have access to high-quality summer programs in community centers, parks, camps, schools, and beyond. Senator Chris Murphy’s Summer for All Act is a pivotal step forward, championing children by removing barriers and transforming summer into a season of enrichment for every child.” “We’ve known for more than a hundred years that summer learning at camp is a transformative experience that fosters character and social-emotional skills development, resulting in a stronger sense of self,” said Tom Rosenberg, president and CEO of the American Camp Association. “Summer learning is crucial for setting our kids up to thrive in the classroom and beyond. Today, we must work together to ensure all children have access to summer learning experiences. The Summer for All Act will greatly expand our ability to provide more kids with summer learning, laying the foundation for capable and confident future generations." “Horizons National, which advances educational equity by building long-term partnerships with students, families, communities, and schools to create experiences outside of school that inspire the joy of learning, is honored to endorse Senator Murphy's Summer for All Act. It is heartbreaking to see the waiting lists for our programs every year and the Gallup data makes it clear that millions of parents are struggling to afford summer learning programs for their children. This legislation is a vital step to ensuring that every child has the opportunity to thrive and grow during the crucial summer months,” said Lorna Smith, CEO of Horizons National. “Ensuring all children have access to high-quality summer enrichment opportunities is essential for closing the equity gap and providing vital support to families who need it most. This legislation will empower schools, municipalities, and community-based organizations to offer enriching summer experiences, fostering growth and development for underserved kids across the country,” said Gina Warner, CEO of the National Afterschool Association. “One of the biggest sources of inequity in U. S. education outcomes is the ‘opportunity gap’ between children who can experience enriching, engaging experiences during the summer, and those that are isolated, bored and disengaged. The Summer for All Act will provide essential funding so that children can make friends, have fun, and continue learning all summer long in a safe and supportive setting. Thank you Senator Murphy for leading the way with this very important legislation,” said Michelle Doucette Cunningham, Executive Director of the Connecticut Network for Children and Youth. A one-pager on the bill is available HERE. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less HARTFORD— U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-5), and Governor Ned Lamont announced the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has selected 3 projects in Connecticut to receive a total of over $700 million in federal funding from the Inflation Reduction Act to tackle climate change, improve air quality, and advance environmental justice. The grants are funded through the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program created by the Biden-Harris Administration’s Investing in America agenda. “These three grants, totaling more than $700 million from the Inflation Reduction Act, are massive wins for Connecticut.
...Read more They will lower energy costs by helping more people install heat pumps, continue to build out our electric vehicle charging infrastructure along I-95, and provide major upgrades to Union Station. These awards are the perfect example for why this legislation was so historic; it funds projects that create good-paying jobs, will cut costs for families, and help us achieve our climate goals. I’m proud to have advocated for this funding, and I look forward to seeing it make a big difference in our state,” said Murphy. “This hugely impactful federal investment attests to Connecticut’s consistent commitment to fighting climate change— and our Congressional delegation’s continuing teamwork. As important as its historic magnitude—tens of millions of dollars— is its message of environmental justice and equity. It enlists and empowers forces of environmental activism in communities disregarded far too long. It will be truly transformative,” said Blumenthal. “Today’s announcement supports a clean energy future for Connecticut and our nation,” said Larson. “The Connecticut delegation worked together to pass the Inflation Reduction Act to address climate change, bolster energy innovation, and lower costs for American families. This funding builds on this historic progress by upgrading critical energy infrastructure from heating and cooling technology to electric vehicle charging while creating good-paying jobs across New England.” “Major federal funding is coming to our region to reduce pollution thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act, which is the largest climate investment in world history,” said Courtney. “I applaud Connecticut’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection and their partners for leading game-changing projects that will create more jobs, advance energy efficiency, and cut emissions.” “I’m elated that the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection was selected as a grant recipient by the New England Heat Pump Accelerator Project. This funding will help lower household utility costs and reduce air pollution across Connecticut through the installation of heat pumps in single-family homes and multifamily residential buildings. Efforts like this are critical to removing economic barriers to our clean-energy economy, and I’m proud that the Northeast will showcase how integrating green technologies into existing infrastructure benefits both families and the environment,” said Himes. "During my time in Congress, I have advocated for investments to reduce pollution so our communities are healthier and part of the climate solution," said Hayes. "Today's grant announcement of over $700 million in Climate Pollution Reduction Grant funding to Connecticut and surrounding partner states is a giant step forward in achieving a greener future. I am grateful to the EPA for funding these projects and to the Biden-Harris Administration for prioritizing historic investment in climate action through the Inflation Reduction Act." “This funding means more residents in Connecticut—and more importantly, more low-income residents in our state—will be able to realize the benefits of truly clean, safe, healthy, and energy-efficient heating and cooling. This multi-state initiative will also enable more equitable participation in the green economy,” said Lamont. “Thank you to the Biden Administration and the EPA for this Inflation Reduction Act opportunity, to our Congressional delegation for their support and efforts to pass the underlying legislation, to DEEP for taking the lead, and to our partner states across the region for their collaboration.” The three selected Climate Pollution Reduction Grant applications that benefit Connecticut are: The New England Heat Pump Accelerator, a coalition application led by Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, has been selected to receive $450 million, the second largest in the country. The selected application will fund projects across Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island that will rapidly accelerate the adoption of cold-climate air-source heat pumps, heat pump water heaters, and ground source heat pumps. The coalition will support its partners in providing resources for more than 500,000 single-family and multifamily residential buildings.
The City of New Haven’s proposal for a networked geothermal system for Union Station has been selected to receive nearly $9.5 million. The selected application will also provide renewable clean energy to surrounding mixed-income housing development adjacent to the train station. The selected application is a partnership between the City of New Haven, the Housing Authority of New Haven, and the New Haven Parking Authority.
The Clean Corridor Coalition proposal for deploying electric vehicle charging infrastructure along I-95 for medium- and heavy-duty commercial vehicles has been selected to receive $248.9 million. The selected application will also provide technical assistance for workforce development and corridor planning across Connecticut. The Climate Pollution Reduction Grants advance President Biden’s historic Justice40 Initiative, which aims to ensure 40 percent of the overall benefits of certain climate, clean energy, and other federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. The grants will fund projects supporting the deployment of technologies and programs to reduce greenhouse gases and other harmful pollution across the country and build the infrastructure, housing, industry, and competitive economy needed for a clean energy future. These grants will also help businesses capitalize on new opportunities, spur economic growth and job creation in new and growing industries, and support development of training programs to prepare workers. ### Read less U.S. Sen Chris Murphy visited Camp Courant Friday to announce newly proposed federal legislation that would invest billions of dollars into free summer programs for kids across the country. The Hartford camp, which bills itself as the largest and oldest free summer day camp in the country, serves hundreds of children each year. It would be among those that could benefit should the Summer for All Act were to become law. The measure proposes the creation of two grant programs that would be funded by $4 billion of federal money over the course of four years. Murphy said that if passed, Connecticut could see about $10 million in funding each year from the legislation. “The bill will have two different grant programs, one that will go directly to camps and camps can
...Read more apply directly to the federal government for dollars to help expand the slots that they have for low-income families,” Murphy said. “The second grant would go directly to states … which they could use in any way they saw fit.” Murphy called the proposed bill “absolutely critical,” especially coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic where schools saw high levels of learning loss, mental health challenges and disruptions to socialization. “Outside experiences, adventure experiences, summer experiences, where you get to improve and enhance your socialization skills, where you get to have your mind opened to new possibilities, new hobbies, new interests — it’s necessary. It’s life changing and often it’s life saving,” Murphy said. “It’s a tough time to be a kid. It’s a tough time to be a parent. So, we have to make sure that when our kids leave school for the summer, they don’t lose access to learning and socialization.” Murphy was joined by Gov. Ned Lamont at the news conference, who gathered a group of Camp Courant children and asked if they loved their camp and whether “camps like this should be available to everyone.” The children erupted in screams and nodded their heads. “What I love about Senator Murphy is that he takes the very best ideas from Connecticut — what we’ve done on gun safety, what we’re doing in our summer learning camps — and makes sure it’s available across this state and hopefully across this country,” Lamont said. The bill comes on the heels of the upcoming expiration of federal COVID-19 relief funding later this year. Funding designated to schools, known as Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief or ESSER, is set to expire on Sept. 30. The COVID-19 relief funding to schools was allocated over three periods, known as ESSER I, ESSER II and ESSER III, which totaled about $1.7 billion for Connecticut schools. Between ESSER I and ESSER III, funding increased tenfold, according to Education Elements, which noted that federal funding was supposed to be spent on summer learning, technology, activities to address student needs, learning loss initiatives and evidence-based interventions especially for disadvantaged students. Schools and other education stakeholders across the state have already announced their anticipated cuts to programs that were funded through the relief dollars, including things like summer learning, mental health services and tutoring. Aaron Dworkin, CEO of the National Summer Learning Association, said continued funding into free summer opportunities can promote educational equity, provide boosted support to local schools and expose children to new opportunities and communities. “We have the programs. We have the expertise. We have the partnerships,” Dworkin said. “Now, if we have the continued funding, we could get every kid who deserves and wants a summer program, we can make sure they’re in one.” The bill proposal also comes as a new Gallup survey was released Friday that said over 45% of children in the U.S. lack summer learning opportunities and that an estimated 24 million children across the country did not participate in any structured program last summer. “About half of parents of kindergarten through grade 12 students say there were summer programs they wanted their children to take but couldn’t. The cost of the programs is the main reason they give for not being able to participate,” the survey findings said. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday reintroduced the Angel Tax Credit Act, legislation to incentivize investment in startups and small businesses that will create good-paying jobs in high growth sectors, including science, technology, and engineering. The Angel Tax Credit Act, which is modeled after Connecticut’s own angel state tax credit established in 2010, would encourage investors in startup companies, commonly referred to as “angel investors,” to support startups by allowing them to claim a tax credit equal to 25 percent of their aggregate qualifying equity investments of $25,000 or more to U.S.-based high-tech startups. “Startups create hundreds of jobs and generate millions of dollars for Connecticut’s economy, but getting a new business off
...Read more the ground requires capital. I’m proud to reintroduce this legislation to support economic growth and help local entrepreneurs access the investments they need to succeed in our state,” said Murphy. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, released the following statement on Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a joint session of Congress. “I attended Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech because it’s part of my job to engage with foreign leaders who make their case before Congress, even if I disagree with them. I have spent my career fighting for a strong U.S.-Israel relationship, and I want Hamas to be defeated. Unfortunately, today’s speech was a setback for both the U.S.-Israel relationship and the fight against Hamas. “Rather than lay out a path for achieving the peace agreement President Biden outlined two months ago to secure the long-
...Read more term security of Israelis and Palestinians, Prime Minister Netanyahu used this speech as an opportunity to insert himself into American politics. His insistence on downplaying the humanitarian crisis in Gaza was astonishing to hear, and the suggestion that any American who objects to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Gazans is a Hamas sympathizer was way out of bounds. The truth is that the civilian deaths in Gaza will be bulletin board recruiting material for terrorists for years to come, increasing threats to both the U.S. and Israel. “This was a speech designed to bolster Prime Minister Netanyahu’s political standing and Republican messaging. His time would have been better spent in Israel finalizing a deal to end the war and bring the hostages home.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) in sending a letter to Jonathan Kanter, Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Jessica Rosenworcel, Chair of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), urging them to closely scrutinize T-Mobile’s proposed acquisition of UScellular. Since T-Mobile acquired Sprint in 2020, just three carriers have dominated the national mobile wireless service market. If approved, T-Mobile’s proposed $4.4 billion acquisition of UScellular would further deplete competition in the industry, giving T-Mobile access to four million new customers. “
...Read more Additional consolidation in the market would have far-reaching effects, reducing choices for consumers, further concentrating wireless spectrum holdings, and potentially leading to higher prices and other harms for consumers across the country,” the senators wrote. “Contrary to unproven claims about the purported benefits of consolidation, the evidence shows that, time and time again, mergers drive up prices and decrease quality of service.” Already, T-Mobile’s 2020 merger with Sprint has had harmful impacts – decreasing market competition, increasing prices for consumers, and harming employees. A class action suit filed in June 2022 charged that decreased competition resulting from the T-Mobile/Sprint merger caused cell phone costs for AT&T and Verizon customers to go up by billions of dollars. U.S. wireless customers have long paid some of the highest prices in the world, and this has only worsened since the merger. In addition to hurting consumers, the T-Mobile/Sprint merger has hit employees particularly hard. The companies have conducted numerous rounds of layoffs, including firing 5,000 employees in the fall of 2023, just two weeks before announcing extensive stock buybacks for shareholders. Antitrust law prohibits any merger that may substantially lessen competition, and the DOJ and Federal Trade Commission’s finalized Merger Guidelines make clear that a merger between competitors that further consolidates a highly concentrated market may impermissibly substantially lessen competition. Given the existing concentration in the wireless market, T-Mobile’s proposed acquisition of UScellular would exacerbate current high concentration levels in presumptive violation of antitrust laws. “T-Mobile’s merger with Sprint resulted in higher costs for consumers, job losses, and less competition in the wireless industry,” the senators concluded. “Allowing T-Mobile to continue its roll-up strategy by acquiring UScellular would exacerbate these harms. We therefore urge DOJ to scrutinize this proposed deal and challenge it if it would substantially lessen competition, and we call on the FCC to carefully review the merger and not to permit the transfer of licenses if it would fail to affirmatively serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity.” Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Assistant Attorney General Kanter and Chair Rosenworcel: We write to urge you to closely scrutinize T-Mobile’s proposed acquisition of UScellular. As an antitrust enforcer, the Department of Justice (DOJ) should challenge the deal if it substantially reduces competition. As the nation’s primary telecommunications regulator, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should not approve the transfer of UScellular’s licenses to T-Mobile if it does not serve “the public interest, convenience, and necessity.” Since T-Mobile acquired Sprint in 2020, three carriers have controlled essentially the entire national mobile wireless service market. If approved, T-Mobile’s proposed $4.4 billion acquisition of UScellular would further deplete competition in the industry, combining the third and fourth largest wireless carriers (by facilities-based subscribers) and giving T-Mobile access to four million new customers. Additional consolidation in the market would have far-reaching effects, reducing choices for consumers, further concentrating wireless spectrum holdings, and potentially leading to higher prices and other harms for consumers across the country. Not only do the companies fail to acknowledge the anticompetitive nature of their deal, but TMobile also appears to be proud of its record of rolling up competitors. In its press release announcing the proposed acquisition, T-Mobile declares that it has “a proven industry-leading track record of bringing companies together in the name of enhanced connectivity, choice, and value for consumers,” specifically citing its MetroPCS and Sprint takeovers in the past decade. As recently as April of this year, T-Mobile also acquired Mint Mobile—adding yet another service provider to its ranks, eliminating a competitor, and further reducing choices for consumers. Contrary to unproven claims about the purported benefits of consolidation, the evidence shows that, time and time again, mergers drive up prices and decrease quality of service. Analysts and legal experts raised concerns about the four-to-three T-Mobile and Sprint merger when it was first discussed in 2014, and again when the transaction was announced in 2018. We opposed the merger and warned that it would give “the three remaining members of th[e] exclusive club … every incentive to shut the door on new members, happily divide the market, and collect ever rising monthly rents from wireless subscribers with few real alternatives.” The foreseeable and harmful effects of the 2020 merger have already materialized, and we urge you to heed these lessons carefully as you assess T-Mobile’s latest acquisition. A class action suit filed in June 2022 charged that decreased competition resulting from the T-Mobile/Sprint merger caused cell phone costs for AT&T and Verizon customers to go up by billions of dollars. U.S. wireless customers have long paid some of the highest prices in the world, and T-Mobile’s acquisition of Sprint eliminated a low-cost carrier from the market, reducing the competitive pressure on the remaining national wireless carriers to aggressively compete to lower their prices. While mobile wireless plan prices across the globe have steadily fallen in recent years, the decline in U.S. prices slowed in the aftermath of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, serving as a warning against increased consolidation in the wireless market. In order to push the Sprint merger through, T-Mobile agreed to lock in pricing for three years. This commitment recently expired, and the company appears to be wasting no time: an internal T-Mobile memo revealed that the company planned to raise rates for customers on older plans starting on June 5, 2024. Accordingly, over the past month, batches of customers have received notifications about “imminent” rate increases. The company has also separately introduced a new assortment of more expensive rate plans. Although T-Mobile executives have attempted to blame price increases on inflation, the company has significantly increased its profits. In 2023, T-Mobile’s $8.3 billion income represented “industry-leading growth of 221%” year-over-year. In 2023, T-Mobile paid its CEO Mike Sievert more than $37 million. T-Mobile has also promised shareholders $19 billion in stock buybacks over the next five quarters. In addition to hurting consumers, the T-Mobile/Sprint merger has hit the companies’ employees particularly hard. Despite promising to be “jobs-positive from Day One” of the merger, TMobile has since conducted numerous rounds of layoffs, firing thousands of employees since its acquisition of Sprint, including 5,000 in the fall of 2023 just two weeks before announcing extensive stock buybacks. Given the already high level of market concentration in the wireless industry, the harmful effects described above would only be intensified by T-Mobile’s acquisition of UScellular. Prior to approving the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, DOJ conceded that at least four competitors would be necessary to prevent harm to consumers, arguing that “the reduction in the number of nationwide providers from four to three” would likely “lead to lessened competition due to an enhanced risk of anticompetitive coordination,” and would “result in higher nationwide prices.” When it reversed course and decided to approve the merger, it tried to create a fourth competitor by requiring that the two companies divest certain assets to DISH Network Corporation (“DISH”), a satellite television provider. Experts expressed concerns about the plan’s feasibility from the beginning, and these concerns seem to have been validated over time. Despite DISH’s wireless network deployment, it has so far failed to become the competitor that proponents of the merger asserted it would become, as evidenced by the continued domination of Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile, and by DISH’s financial struggles. The proposed T-Mobile/UScellular deal would give T-Mobile millions of new customers and “substantially all of UScellular’s wireless operations,” which includes spectrum assets and a “long-term” lease over 2,100 of UScellular’s 4,500 towers. The potential harm to consumers is clear: an international comparative study shows that consumers in markets with three mobile wireless service providers pay phone bills that are, on average, three times more expensive than those of consumers in markets with four providers. T-Mobile’s acquisition of Sprint left the U.S. with only three dominant nationwide wireless providers, and this transaction would eliminate further competition from the marketplace, exacerbating harms to consumers and competition. Antitrust law prohibits any merger that may substantially lessen competition. The DOJ and Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) finalized Merger Guidelines note that “a merger between competitors that … creates or further consolidates a highly concentrated market may substantially lessen competition.” The DOJ and FTC typically use the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (“HHI”) to measure concentration levels, deeming markets with an HHI greater than 1,800 as being “highly concentrated.” In 2017, before T-Mobile’s acquisition of Sprint, the HHI for the mobile wireless market measured 3,101. At the end of 2021, following T-Mobile’s combination with Sprint, concentration levels were 3,596—nearly double the level antitrust enforcers classify as highly concentrated. T-Mobile’s proposed acquisition of UScellular would further concentrate this market, in presumptive violation of antitrust laws. The proposed transaction would eliminate competition between T-Mobile and UScellular where the carriers’ networks overlap, as well as potential competition between the carriers in markets where they do not currently overlap. T-Mobile has previously explained its plans to expand its network in rural America, while UScellular has long been committed to providing “best-inclass connectivity to rural Americans.” The proposed transaction would eliminate any potential for head-to-head competition between T-Mobile and UScellular for millions of Americans in the most difficult-to-serve locations. The finalized Merger Guidelines additionally clarify that antitrust agencies may evaluate a company’s overall pattern of multiple acquisitions in the same business which, as the Supreme Court recognized, can “convert an industry from one of intense competition among many enterprises to one in which three or four large [companies] produce the entire supply.” TMobile’s continual roll-ups cannot go unchecked. To do otherwise would only help perpetuate a vicious cycle of consolidation. In fact, some analysts have already referred to this proposed deal as a “signal [of] the start of more consolidation in an industry with fewer players than ever,” and “the first shot across the bow in the wireless world,” as industry consolidation may “speed up into 2025.” In addition to scrutinizing this latest proposed acquisition by T-Mobile, the DOJ should closely review T-Mobile’s compliance with the T-Mobile/Sprint Final Judgement. If the DOJ finds that T-Mobile has failed to abide by the terms of the Final Judgement, or that the terms need to be strengthened or extended to address transaction-related harms, or if the DOJ finds T-Mobile has otherwise violated antitrust law, DOJ should take appropriate action, including considering unwinding the 2020 T-Mobile/Sprint merger. In addition to granting antitrust authority to the DOJ and FTC, Congress has directed the FCC to review certain telecommunications industry transactions to determine whether they would serve “the public interest, convenience, and necessity.” This ensures that companies that have been granted licenses to use the public spectrum are good stewards of this spectrum and assists in the FCC’s management of spectrum in the public interest. The FCC’s review, while informed by competition principles, is not limited to them. Consistent with the Communications Act of 1934, the FCC must closely examine whether the proposed transaction is in the public interest. The Commission’s analysis should weigh the transaction’s likely and significant public interest harms—such as fewer choices for consumers; higher prices for essential connectivity; fewer jobs; and lower levels of investment in network deployment, innovation, and service quality—against any benefits. The FCC should also consider the proposed deal’s potential reduction of jobs, as it did in its review of AT&T’s proposed acquisition of T-Mobile, where the Commission found the transaction would result in fewer jobs across the business. This is a particularly important factor with respect to this transaction, given T-Mobile’s record of cutting thousands of jobs in the wake of its merger with Sprint. Prior to the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, then-T-Mobile CEO John Legere testified under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights that the deal would create thousands of new jobs, specifying in prepared remarks that the company would add 11,000 new jobs by 2024. But by the end of 2022, SEC filings showed that the new T-Mobile employed 7,000 fewer people than T-Mobile and Sprint employed in 2020, even before the company’s 5,000 layoffs in 2023. Going forward, the FCC should treat any public interest claims of job growth with skepticism, and the DOJ should closely scrutinize the transaction’s impact on competition for telecommunications industry workers. T-Mobile’s proposed acquisition of UScellular would also increase concentration in spectrum holdings, further consolidating control of a key and scarce input for mobile wireless carriers. The FCC has noted that spectrum is a “critical input” that “can affect whether, when, and where … potential entrants will be able to expand capacity or deploy networks.” DOJ has recognized that “spectrum policies that promote competition and enhance the potential for entry and expansion in the wireless market play a vital role in protecting, and indeed enhancing, the competitive dynamic to the benefit of American consumers.” In its 2022 Communications Marketplace Report, the Commission highlighted that “[a]s of July 2022, the three nationwide service providers, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon Wireless, together held 78% of all the spectrum” used for mobile wireless use. Permitting T-Mobile to acquire UScellular would further concentrate spectrum holdings among the largest three carriers, eliminating potential competition from smaller firms. T-Mobile and UScellular bear the burden of proving that the proposed transaction serves the public interest. As such, the FCC should not approve this proposed deal if T-Mobile is unable to prove that it would affirmatively benefit the public. The FCC also should refrain from approving the proposed deal if T-Mobile fails to provide enough information for the FCC to make this determination. The Commission should also analyze how to reduce concentration in spectrum holdings to promote greater competition, investment, network deployment, and innovation in the mobile wireless market. The Commission’s most recent review of its mobile spectrum holdings policies concluded more than a decade ago. Conclusion T-Mobile’s merger with Sprint resulted in higher costs for consumers, job losses, and less competition in the wireless industry. Allowing T-Mobile to continue its roll-up strategy by acquiring UScellular would exacerbate these harms. We therefore urge DOJ to scrutinize this proposed deal and challenge it if it would substantially lessen competition, and we call on the FCC to carefully review the merger and not to permit the transfer of licenses if it would fail to affirmatively serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement: "Joe Biden will go down in history as one of the most effective, consequential presidents in our nation's history. He led us out of a pandemic and rebuilt our economy, creating more jobs than any first term president. He restored our place on the world stage, heroically leading the global response to Russia's war in Ukraine and strengthening NATO. He helped pass legislation to transform our infrastructure, cut prescription drug prices, lower energy costs, and tackle climate change. And of course, because of Joe Biden, we passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the first gun safety legislation in 30 years. "Joe Biden has always put his country first. He knows the
...Read more risk Donald Trump poses to our democracy, mandating that our number one priority must be defeating Trump this fall. I know this decision was agonizing for him, but once again, his love of country shines through. A nation turns its grateful eyes to Joe Biden for his world changing service and his constant selflessness.” ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Friday that Encapsulate, a Farmington-based medtech company founded by two UConn graduates, was named “Innovator of the Month” for their development of a transformative contribution to cancer treatment. The company’s patented tumor-on-a-chip technology helps doctors more accurately predict how a tumor may react to different treatments by enabling users to assess tumor behavior in a microenvironment that mimics the human body. This information allows oncologists to better determine the most effective therapy to treat each patient’s cancer. The technology was developed while the founders were still PhD students at UConn and remains headquartered in UConn’s Technology Incubator Program facility. "We all know how devastating a
...Read more cancer diagnosis can be. By helping doctors identify the right treatment faster and with more accuracy, the team at Encapsulate is doing important work to help more people receive lifesaving personalized care. Their innovative approach is a testament to the talent and cutting-edge research coming out of UConn, and I look forward to seeing their continued growth in the state,” said Murphy. “We are thrilled to be named Innovator of the Month by Senator Murphy,” said Armin T. Radd, CEO and co-founder of Encapsulate. “Our mission has always been to transform groundbreaking research into life-saving solutions. Choosing Connecticut as our home base has been pivotal. The unwavering support from the people, clinicians, academic community, and the vibrant Connecticut entrepreneurial ecosystem has been crucial in our journey to bring this technology from the lab to the clinic.” Encapsulate’s cutting-edge technology is predicted to revolutionize cancer treatment by delivering precise, personalized assessments of how various therapies will affect individual tumors. This breakthrough not only boosts the effectiveness of treatment plans but also slashes the time and cost associated with cancer care, offering a new horizon of hope for patients everywhere. In a pioneering collaboration with NASA and the International Space Station, Encapsulate sent patient colon cancer tumor samples to space for the first time. By studying their responses to various treatments under microgravity while maintaining full automated control from Earth, they have unlocked new insights that enhance treatment efficacy and reduce both time and costs associated with cancer care. According to the ISS National Lab, this study holds significant potential for enhancing the effectiveness of cancer therapies, reducing treatment time, and cutting costs. The data collected from space could revolutionize how we approach cancer care, offering new horizons of hope for patients worldwide?. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) on Tuesday joined U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), U.S. Representative Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) and 43 members of Congress in urging the Biden administration to advance evidence-based solutions that would keep unhoused people from the streets, following the Supreme Court’s recent decision to criminalize homelessness in Grants Pass v. Johnson. “Punishing unhoused individuals for sleeping outside when there are no adequate shelter or housing options does not solve homelessness or address its causes. It is cruel and cynical to impose penalties on people who may be facing real, human challenges like unaffordable rent, financial
...Read more emergencies, or health and mental health challenges,” the lawmakers wrote. Homelessness increased by 23 percent in 2023 nationwide due to the lack of affordable housing, the lack of health care resources, and an end to effective pandemic relief measures like rent assistance, among other challenges. Criminalization also disproportionately harms Black, Indigenous and Hispanic communities, worsening disparities in homelessness and incarceration that they already experience. Punishing people for existing while unhoused, while no shelter or housing options exist, is demonstrated to worsen homelessness and can cost more than providing housing. The lawmakers continued, “The solution to ending homelessness is more affordable housing, which is most effective when combined with individualized and voluntary supportive services. Placing housing at the center of solutions to homelessness, as well as expanding programs like alternative crisis response, reentry services, and workforce development, is essential to creating realistic policies to tackle homelessness rather than prolong homelessness.” U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawai’i), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Tina Smith (D-Minn.) also signed the letter. U.S. Representatives Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), David Scott (D-Ga.), Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.), Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), Morgan McGarvey (D-Ky.), Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.), Katie Porter (D-Calif.), Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.), Nikema Williams (D-Ga.), Chuy Garcia (D-Ill.), André Carson (D-Ind.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.), Dwight Evans (D- Pa.), Kevin Mullin (D-Calif.), Val Hoyle (D-Ore.), Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Shontel Brown (D-Ohio), Mark Takano (D-Calif.), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.), Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.), Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), and Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Mr. President: We appreciate your efforts to increase the availability of affordable housing options for low-income households and to prevent and reduce homelessness. Following the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Grants Pass v. Johnson, we urge the Administration to immediately advance evidence-based solutions to help people experiencing homelessness who have no shelter or housing options available. The lack of affordable housing, emergency rental assistance, and tenant protections, as well as the widening and persistent gap between incomes and housing costs, and the end of highly effective pandemic relief measures, led to a 12 percent increase in homelessness in 2023. In response, legislation that would make homelessness a crime has been introduced in at least 17 states since 2021. Punishing unhoused individuals for sleeping outside when there are no adequate shelter or housing options does not solve homelessness or address its causes. It is cruel and cynical to impose penalties on people who may be facing real, human challenges like unaffordable rent, financial emergencies, or health and mental health challenges. Studies show that these approaches exacerbate the homelessness crisis and can actually cost more than providing housing. These approaches also disproportionately affect Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) communities and exacerbate pre-existing disparities in the rates at which BIPOC communities experience both homelessness and incarceration. The solution to ending homelessness is more affordable housing, which is most effective when combined with individualized and voluntary supportive services. Placing housing at the center of solutions to homelessness, as well as expanding programs like alternative crisis response, reentry services, and workforce development, is essential to creating realistic policies to tackle homelessness rather than prolong homelessness. Additionally, research shows that Housing First policies are the best methods for transitioning people experiencing homelessness to stable, permanent housing and improving their overall quality of life. We appreciate the leadership of your Administration to support these and other initiatives that address the shortage of housing supply. We are working to increase the federal government’s investments to scale up these proven solutions, including increasing funding for housing vouchers and public housing, eviction prevention and emergency rental and utility assistance, investing in homelessness prevention and reduction programs, and funding housing development through programs like the Housing Trust Fund. Federal funding will play a crucial role in fulfilling the promise of safe housing for all. We urge the Administration to take the following actions to expand proactive, evidence-based policies across the country that can reduce initiatives to criminalize homelessness: Immediately declare unsheltered homelessness a public health priority. Direct the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to issue guidance to strengthen the relationship between homeless services providers and public health agencies, provide additional resources for harm reduction efforts and evidence-based approaches to addressing substance use disorder and mental illness, and deploy the U.S. Public Health Service to assist communities with outreach to unhoused people.
Defend the civil rights and liberties of people experiencing homelessness, and those who serve them.
Direct all federal agencies that own or manage federal land and federal law enforcement agencies to provide the resources and services necessary to respond to the effects of homelessness on federal property without displacing vulnerable individuals in the absence of adequate housing or pursuing any criminalization and encampment clearing approaches; and,
Direct the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness (USICH) to jointly develop and issue a consistent set of guidance and protocols for engagement with people experiencing homelessness that uses a harm reduction approach that effectively connects unhoused people to voluntary services and supports as well as housing.
Allow states and communities to better use federal resources to assist people living in encampments move directly into stable housing with voluntary supportive services.
Direct HUD to provide waivers to give communities more flexibility in administering the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program and issue guidance to public housing agencies to maximize existing program flexibilities such as self-attestation to expedite the housing process;
Direct the General Services Administration (GSA) to enhance and speed efforts to convert underused federal buildings to housing and shelter; and,
Direct the Department of the Treasury to work with GSA to quickly resolve conflicts between the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit and the site control requirements of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Act’s Title V application process administered by HHS in order to more quickly facilitate the transfer of surplus federal properties to communities for sheltering and housing people experiencing unsheltered homelessness. We must prioritize solutions to the housing crisis that are effective and humane. With an increase in carceral policies, your Administration can make a difference by taking immediate action to give communities the resources and support they need to end homelessness. Our priority must be on effective and humane solutions.6 We look forward to working with you to scale up evidence-based policies to end this crisis. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday released the following statement after President Biden announced a new proposal to make renting more affordable for millions of Americans. If approved by Congress, the President’s plan would expand affordable housing, rehabilitate and revitalize old units, and withhold a federal tax benefit from large corporate landlords if they choose to increase their tenants’ rent by more than 5% per year. These policies would impact housing costs for more than 20 million rental units. “The number one issue I hear about no matter where I go in Connecticut is the sky high cost of housing. Across the country, out-of-state private equity firms and corporate landlords have exploited the housing shortage to buy up units and jack up
...Read more rents, making it near impossible for millions of people to find an affordable, safe place to call home. The President’s proposal would crack down on corporate landlords, cap rent increases, and increase our nation’s affordable housing stock by repurposing public lands that have sat unused – and Congress should work to make it a reality. But this plan alone won’t solve our housing crisis. We need all levels of government to work together to drive down housing costs, increase construction, and ensure owning a home can be more than just a dream.” In May, Murphy urged Congress to expand access to fund the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (NeighborWorks America), a congressionally chartered national nonprofit that creates affordable housing opportunities. Murphy also cosponsored the following bills to ensure access to housing and protect tenants and homeowners: Fair Housing Improvement Act: Would expand housing protections for low-income individuals and veterans by designating source of income and veteran status as protected classes
Choice in Affordable Housing Act: Would incentivize landlord participation in the Housing Choice Voucher Section 8 program through one-time incentive payments to landlords, security deposit payments, bonuses to public housing agencies employing landlord liaisons, and other amounts for recruitment
Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act: Would create a new type of housing voucher aimed at ending homelessness among families with children
Yes In My Backyard (YIMBY) Act: Would encourage localities to eliminate discriminatory and burdensome zoning and land use policies to increase supply of affordable housing
Housing Alignment and Coordination of Critical and Effective Supportive Health Services (ACCESS) Act: Would direct the Departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Treasury to issue joint guidance on connecting Medicare beneficiaries to housing-related supports and services ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday released the following statement: “Political violence has no place in America, and we must all condemn what happened at President Trump’s rally in Pennsylvania this weekend. While I am relieved the former president is okay, my heart breaks for the family of Corey Comperatore and all those who experienced this terrifying tragedy. It’s critical we get to the bottom of the breakdown in security to ensure nothing like this ever happens again. “For a long time, it has felt like the nation is unraveling as our politics have become more and more hostile, zero-sum, and prone to violence. This is a watershed moment, and history will judge how we choose to move forward as a country. “It’s not too late to save our nation from this spiritual
...Read more unspooling. We can and should choose each other – choose to build stronger communities, limit means of violence, and elect leaders who are dedicated to healing our wounds.” ### Read less Many immigrants would have an easier path to challenging court decisions in deportation cases under legislation a top Senate Democrat plans to introduce Thursday. The measure from Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) would update the legal standard for noncitizens claiming they had ineffective lawyers — bringing the process in line with other US court proceedings. Bloomberg Government first reported on the bill. The proposal’s narrow scope reflects an effort by Murphy, who led doomed bipartisan border policy negotiations earlier this year, to build a foundation of small, pragmatic immigration measures that may draw support from both parties in the next Congress. Broader attempts to overhaul the US immigration system have been mired in politics for decades and face even worse odds ahead
...Read more of the November election. Border Deal’s Demise Makes Future Immigration Talks Even Harder “There are many ways our current immigration system is broken, and this legislation would provide one narrowly tailored fix to improve fairness,” Murphy said in a statement to Bloomberg Government. The legislation focuses on a legal precedent known as Matter of Lozada. The 1988 Board of Immigration Appeals case set out a process for immigrants to reopen their deportation cases based on ineffective counsel. They must file an affidavit, inform the lawyer in question, and file a bar complaint against them, or explain why they haven’t. The steps, particularly the bar complaint, are more onerous than those required in non-immigration court cases. Murphy’s bill would instead apply the same legal precedent across the board, relying on the standard the Supreme Court set in a 1984 case that applies to ineffective counsel claims in non-immigration cases. “Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel for immigration matters should be handled the same way as every other legal proceeding,” Murphy said. “It’s a simple bill to bring consistency to our legal system and eliminate bureaucratic red tape.” Immigration lawyers have long pushed for the change, saying the bar complaint requirement discourages lawyers from taking immigration cases and creates unfair red tape for immigrants pursuing their right to appeal. “It works as a barrier,” Rekha Sharma-Crawford, a Kansas City, Mo.-based immigration attorney and treasurer of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said in an interview. “Is somebody going to retaliate against me? Is the system going to retaliate against me? Those are real fears.” The immigration lawyers group supports Murphy’s bill. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday introduced the Strengthening Immigration Procedures Act, legislation to promote due process, ensure consistency in federal immigration proceedings, and reduce paperwork by removing unnecessary burdensome filing requirements. Currently, some noncitizens must first file a state bar complaint against their prior immigration attorney in order to seek an appeal of their immigration case, even though they are legally entitled to seek such an appeal. This requirement, which is not enshrined in federal law but exists through precedent, applies exclusively to immigration matters and results in more red tape and delays in due process, ultimately denying access to justice for noncitizens. This narrowly tailored bill would eliminate this
...Read more requirement, aligning ineffective assistance of counsel claims in immigration matters with the national standards articulated by the Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington, creating parity for immigration lawyers and reducing confusion by ensuring that the same standard for ineffective assistance of counsel claims is used in all legal proceedings. “There are many ways our current immigration system is broken, and this legislation would provide one narrowly tailored fix to improve fairness. Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel for immigration matters should be handled the same way as every other legal proceeding. It’s a simple bill to bring consistency to our legal system and eliminate bureaucratic red tape,” said Murphy. "For any legal system to have integrity, justice and fairness must be at its core. In the United States, lawful immigration processes are often infused with barriers that threaten fundamental constitutional principles. When prejudicial errors are made that compromise due process, immigration adjudicators may decide to reconsider a case. For years, however, immigration courts and agencies have employed a standard that is inconsistent with what the Supreme Court has established for every other area of law. In immigration cases, neither immigration courts nor immigration agencies can re-examine a case until the harmed person completes the extra bureaucratic step of filing a formal complaint with the state bar administrator. It is oppressive, time consuming, and further weakens a system known for delays and backlogs. I, myself, have had clients whose first attorney could not be found and therefore could not complete the onerous requirement of filing a bar complaint, ending all hopes that the courts and agencies would give them a fair shot in their cases. AILA applauds Senator Murphy for introducing this common-sense bill that ensures fairness, accessibility, and consistency in all areas of law,” said Rekha Sharma-Crawford, Treasurer at the American Immigration Lawyers Association. The bill is endorsed by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA). A one-pager is available HERE. Full text of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke at a U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing on the growing medical debt crisis. In his questions to Dr. Luke Messac, Attending Physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Instructor of Emergency Medicine at Harvard Medical School, and Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, Director and Health Officer at Wayne County Department of Health, Human & Veterans Services, Murphy emphasized the importance of fighting for consumer protections as the financialization of healthcare drives up costs for American consumers. “This is an issue I have worked on for almost two decades,” said Murphy. “I led Connecticut's first effort to put in place pro-consumer debt collection practices when I was a state legislator, the Chair
...Read more to the Public Health Committee, and I’m excited to have introduced a bipartisan piece of legislation with Senator Braun, the Strengthening Consumer Protections and Medical Debt Transparency Act, that would make a number of incremental, but important, reforms to the system.” Murphy highlighted successful efforts in Connecticut to reform medical debt collection practices: “One of the things we’ve seen in Connecticut, for instance, is that sunlight often shames providers who have extraordinarily high rates of, for instance, referring claims to debt collection agencies well outside of the state mean, into better practices. When we undertook our state reform effort, Yale New Haven was an outlier in the state, being much more aggressive than other hospitals in collecting debt. Today, they are frankly one of the most consumer-friendly hospitals, in part because of sunlight. Danbury was at the top of the list, and then in an effort to show that Danbury’s practices were well outside of the mean, we helped bring them back into line as well.” He continued, underscoring how private equity’s growing involvement in health care is driving up prices and reducing quality for patients: “So that works in Connecticut, but it works in Connecticut largely because we have not-for-profit health care hospitals that have a community board, have a responsibility to the community. Increasingly, though, hospitals and health care practices are owned by private equity firms— are owned by shadowy, unaccountable financial organizations whose only interest is in driving profit, in driving return for investors, and have no connection to the on-the-ground practices that impact consumers. These are ownership companies that are only interested in a return on investment. That’s extraordinary, that we have allowed that to become the norm in our health care system. We aren't too far from an era in which we thought health care was so important, kind of like elementary schools, that there should be some connection to the common good. Now that is vanishing.” Murphy also highlighted the role of credit card companies in further exacerbating the medical debt crisis: “Hospitals are adopting these cards—in one North Carolina hospital, they went from 9% of their patients paying interest on their bills to 46% of their patients paying interest on bills because the hospital brought in a credit card company. Instead of just putting patients on installment plans, they now send them to a credit card company. These credit card companies are charging extraordinary interest rates and are often overhyping the benefits of the card.” Last year, Murphy introduced bipartisan legislation to strengthen consumer protections and improve transparency for medical debt practices. A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Senator Sanders, thank you for having this hearing. Thank you all for being here. Senator Cassidy, thanks for helping put this together as well. This is an issue I have worked on for almost two decades. I led Connecticut's first effort to put in place pro-consumer debt collection practices when I was a state legislator, the Chair to the Public Health Committee, and I’m excited to have introduced a bipartisan piece of legislation with Senator Braun, the Strengthening Consumer Protections and Medical Debt Transparency Act, that would make a number of incremental, but important, reforms to the current system. “One of the things we’ve seen in Connecticut, for instance, is that Sunlight often shames providers who have extraordinarily high rates of, for instance, referring claims to debt collection agencies well outside of the state mean, into better practices. When we undertook our state reform effort, Yale New Haven was an outlier in the state, being much more aggressive than other hospitals in collecting debt. Today they are frankly one of the most consumer-friendly hospitals, in part because of Sunlight. Danbury was at the top of the list, and then in an effort to show that Danbury’s practices were well outside of the mean, helped bring them back into line as well. “So that works in Connecticut, but it works in Connecticut largely because we have not-for-profit health care hospitals that have a community board, have a responsibility to the community. Increasingly, though, hospitals and private equity firms are owned by private equity firms— are owned by shadowy, unaccountable financial organizations whose only interest is in driving profit, in driving return for investors, and have no connection to the on-the-ground practices that impact consumers.” “Dr. Messac, I think you talked about this in your book, the impact that the extraordinary increase in private equity ownership of doctors, practices and hospitals have on debt collection. I want to ask one additional question, so give me a minute on what you found.” MESSAC: “Thank you, Senator, and thank you for your leadership on this issue. You really have been at the forefront. A lot of us, three quarters of us now, physicians work for large corporate entities, and that includes nonprofits but also private equity companies, insurance companies. And it takes a tremendous toll on patients. There is not that connection to the patient as you said, there is not that history of relationship to the community. And as a result, a lot of the more recent cases of very aggressive debt collection, filling up courtrooms, oftentimes in the American South, are taken by private equity companies. And so those are the entities that really have taken the lead in aggressive pursuit of low-income patients.” MURPHY: “Again, these are ownership companies that are only interested in a return on investment. That’s extraordinary, that we have allowed that to become the norm in our health care system. We aren't too far from an era in which we thought health care was so important, kind of like elementary schools, that there should be some connection to the common good. Now that is vanishing. “Dr. El-Sayed, I want to ask you about medical credit cards, which is an extraordinary new phenomenon driven in part by the financialization of our health care system. Hospitals are adopting these cards—in one North Carolina hospital, they went from 9% of their patients paying interest on their bills to 46% of their patients paying interest on bills because the hospital brought in a credit card company. Instead of just putting patients on installment plans, they now send them to a credit card company. These credit card companies are charging extraordinary interest rates, are often overhyping the benefits of the card, do you see this as a problem for your patients?” DR. EL-SAYED: “I think it's a huge problem, and, to your point, you can imagine a world where the same private equity firm owns the credit card and owns the hospital that provides the care. Right? And, you think about conflicts of interest, and it’s profound. The other side of this is that we talked about some of the benefits of, or some of the unique aspects of, medical debt, and the ways that policy has sought to pull them out of the traditional consumer monitoring. When you talk about credit card debt, which is what you’re doing, [and how it] is transferring debt owed to a hospital or a clinician to a credit card with super high APR, now you start to appreciate the fact that they don't benefit from a lot of that. And so, this is an extremely pernicious new way of trying to further financialize the cost of getting exorbitantly high-priced healthcare in this country.” MURPHY: “Finally, quickly, Dr. Chino, I saw you nodding your head, it seemed, in skepticism of price transparency as the only means to solve this problem. I share that skepticism. So just a few seconds on why you’re nodding your head.” DR. CHINO: “Yeah, so we’ve done a fair amount of research on price transparency, and we’ve found that price transparency is, number one, not adhered to. Our evaluation of NCI designated cancer centers found that less than a quarter were adherent. But of the prices that were posted, there were huge variations. So, for a single service, one hospital was charging $300. Another one was charging $30,000 for the same service. These are all NCI designated cancer centers. So, when you think about that level of variability, that is the free market. That is, you know, you get as high a price as you can get, and that is not the way to run health care, to maximize profit.” MURPHY: “Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chair.” ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Wednesday joined U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) and Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) and 9 of their Senate colleagues in urging U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken to take steps to rectify Hawai‘i’s exclusion from the North Atlantic Treaty as military threats in the Indo-Pacific grow. In a bipartisan letter to Secretary Blinken, the senators raised concerns about the omission of Hawai‘i under Article 6 of the Treaty, under which an armed attack on Hawai‘i would not be seen as an attack on all NATO countries and therefore not necessitate collective self-defense. The senators called on the State Department to pursue a range of diplomatic measures to address the issue, including
...Read more formally amending the North Atlantic Treaty. Potential short-term measures include clarifying statements from the North Atlantic Council regarding the Treaty language, for which there is precedent. “When the Senate Foreign Relations Committee recommended the Senate ratify the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949, it was with the understanding that overseas territories would not be covered by Article 6,” the senators wrote. “At the time, Hawai‘i was a U.S. territory and the drafters of the Treaty were reluctant to include all territories of the Treaty Parties under the NATO security umbrella. However, the world has changed significantly since 1949. Not only did Hawai‘i become a U.S. state, the importance of the Indo-Pacific to U.S. security has increased tremendously. Although since 1949, NATO’s footprint has expanded from 12 founding members to 32, the alliance has not accounted for the inclusion of Hawai‘i as the 50th state of the union. The alliance also has not accounted for the strategic importance of the Indo-Pacific – and the need to deter destabilizing regional conflict – or the need to be more responsive and respectful toward Hawai‘i residents.” The senators continued: “Allies and adversaries alike must understand now, before potential hostilities erupt, that an attack against Hawai‘i will be seen as an attack on NATO. Silence on whether NATO allies would come to the defense of Hawai‘i undermines our strategy of deterring conflict in the Indo-Pacific. Formally amending the North Atlantic Treaty would be the clearest and most just course of action to rectify this shortcoming.” U.S. Senators Mazie Hirono (D-Hawai‘i), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Todd Young (R-Ind.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) also signed the letter. The full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Blinken, We write to you today about the importance of clarifying that members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would consider an armed attack against the State of Hawai‘i to be an attack against all NATO countries, because of the significant implications for U.S. national security interests and regional and global stability, as well as the imperative that Hawai‘i residents are treated in a respectful and just manner. Hawai‘i is not covered by the geographical parameters set out in Article 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty, NATO’s founding document. Article 6 of the Treaty defines the bounds of the protected territory for the purposes of Article 5, which commits all members to collective self-defense. Under Article 6, an armed attack would trigger a response if one were to occur “on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer,” thereby excluding Hawai‘i. Although Article 4 allows the United States to “consult” with NATO allies in the event of an armed attack against Hawai‘i, it is an insufficient mechanism to address either of the deep concerns about deterring an adversary’s attack or treating residents as equals to those in the other 49 states. When the Senate Foreign Relations Committee recommended the Senate ratify the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949, it was with the understanding that overseas territories would not be covered by Article 6. At the time, Hawai‘i was a U.S. territory and the drafters of the Treaty were reluctant to include all territories of the Treaty Parties under the NATO security umbrella. However, the world has changed significantly since 1949. Not only did Hawai‘i become a U.S. state, the importance of the Indo-Pacific to U.S. security has increased tremendously. Although since 1949, NATO’s footprint has expanded from 12 founding members to 32, the alliance has not accounted for the inclusion of Hawai‘i as the 50th state of the union. The alliance also has not accounted for the strategic importance of the Indo-Pacific – and the need to deter destabilizing regional conflict – or the need to be more responsive and respectful toward Hawai‘i residents. As you confirmed during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in 2022, any attack on the United States or its territories would “almost certainly, in my judgement, draw allied reaction to include via the consultation procedures that exist under Article 4 of the Treaty.” However, the gravity of the Indo-Pacific threat environment requires that we do more. Admiral Harry Harris Jr., a former U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Korea, and a former Commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) recently advocated for including Hawai‘i as a part of NATO during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, arguing that doing so would help deter future attacks on Hawai‘i. Hawai‘i is the center of the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy, geographically located in the heart of the Pacific Ocean, and home to USINDOPACOM headquarters and critical component commands and defense installations. As Admiral Harris said, Hawai‘i is on “the front line of any attack if we were to suffer an attack from China or North Korea.” The fact that Hawai‘i is not covered under Article 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty is not a new concern. Six years after Hawai‘i became a state, Senator Daniel Inouye wrote to Secretary of State Dean Rusk asking whether Hawai‘i would be covered by Article 6 and was told “the absence of formal guarantees for Hawai‘i under the North Atlantic Treaty is obviously but a technicality.” The rising threats in the Indo-Pacific make clarifying NATO’s role in relation to Hawai‘i all the more important today. Admiral John Aquilino, another former USINDOPACOM commander, recently testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that “the People’s Republic of China, Russia, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are taking unprecedented actions that challenge international norms and advance authoritarianism” and becoming increasingly more aggressive. Allies and adversaries alike must understand now, before potential hostilities erupt, that an attack against Hawai‘i will be seen as an attack on NATO. Silence on whether NATO allies would come to the defense of Hawai‘i undermines our strategy of deterring conflict in the Indo-Pacific. Formally amending the North Atlantic Treaty would be the clearest and most just course of action to rectify this shortcoming. There is precedent for amending the Treaty. Aside from the Treaty being effectively amended each time there is a protocol of accession for new alliance members, the Treaty language itself was altered in 1951 by the protocol adding Greece and Turkey. We, of course, recognize it may take time for the Department to navigate the challenges the amendment process may present. However, you may consider interim approaches that help address Hawai‘i’s formal exclusion that are more practical in the short-term. There is precedent for the North Atlantic Council to make clarifying statements regarding Treaty language that is no longer accurate or operative. For example, the North Atlantic Council recognizes the literal wording of the Article 6 phrase “the Algerian departments of France” as being effectively inoperative. In 1963, the French Representative issued a declaration to the Council stating that the President of the French Republic had formally recognized the independence of Algeria on July 3, 1962, and thus “the Algerian departments of France” no longer existed. The Council subsequently issued the following short press release: “Following a statement by the French Representative, the Council notes that insofar as the former Algerian Departments of France are concerned, the relevant clauses of the North Atlantic Treaty became inapplicable as of 3 July 1962.” We strongly encourage you to seriously consider a range of diplomatic options that will best protect and promote U.S. and allied interests. The scars of the attack on Pearl Harbor are still visible today. We understand the threat that any potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific would pose to Hawai‘i and are committed to doing whatever is necessary to protect the state from future aggression. Accordingly, we request a response to the following questions by September 1: Has the State Department raised the issue of Hawai‘i’s exclusion from Article 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty with NATO allies?
If so, what courses of action, if any, have NATO allies considered to legally and formally ensure that an armed attack on Hawai‘i would trigger Article 5 obligations?
What options, if any, have they considered that would fall short of formal amendment of the North Atlantic Treaty, but still bolster deterrence and treat Hawai‘i residents as equal to those in the other 49 states?
Has the State Department sought to amend the North Atlantic Treaty to include Hawai‘i?
If not, what are the Department’s reasons for failing to do so?
If so, what challenges do you anticipate arising from any formal amendment process?
Has the State Department sought assurances from NATO allies?
If not, what are the Department’s reasons for failing to do so?
If so, what assurances have this and previous administrations received from NATO allies that have caused the United States to not seek to alter Article 6 to include Hawai‘i, and what form did they take (for example, written or oral commitments to treat an armed attack against Hawai‘i as an armed attack against all NATO members)? We appreciate your attention to this matter and your ongoing work to protect our nation and deter potentially devastating conflict in the Indo-Pacific. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday released the following statement after Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the Reproductive Freedom for Women Act, legislation that would affirm support for protecting access to reproductive health care. “It doesn’t get simpler than this bill, and yet like clockwork, Republicans have made it clear they have no interest in protecting women’s access to reproductive health care. They just voted overwhelmingly against this commonsense legislation, and their campaign platform includes prohibiting abortion at all stages of pregnancy. Women – not politicians or radical right-wing judges – should be in charge of decisions about their health care. In a
...Read more post-Dobbs America, Democrats are doing everything we can to secure that right while Republicans won’t stop until they pass a nationwide abortion ban,” said Murphy. Last month, Murphy released statements after Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the Right to Contraception Act and the Right to IVF Act. In March, Murphy co-sponsored legislation to protect IVF access and other assisted reproductive technology, but passage was blocked by Senate Republicans. Last year, Murphy co-sponsored a slate of legislation to protect reproductive rights, including the Expanding Access to Family Planning Act, the Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act, the Let Doctors Provide Reproductive Health Care Act, the Women’s Health Protection Act, and a Senate resolution expressing opposition to the use of state resources and power against Americans seeking reproductive healthcare, such as abortion services, contraception, and gender-affirming care. ### Read less HARTFORD – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday released the following statement after President Biden signed into law the Dr. Emmanuel Bilirakis and Honorable Jennifer Wexton National Plan to End Parkinson’s Act. The legislation, which Murphy reintroduced in April 2023 and which passed the U.S. Senate in May 2024, will unite the federal government in a mission to cure and prevent Parkinson’s, alleviate financial and health burdens on American families, and reduce government spending over time. “Anyone living with Parkinson’s or caring for a loved impacted by the disease knows how difficult and devastating a diagnosis can be. It’s going to take major collaboration across the federal government and
...Read more between the public and private sectors to find a cure, and this legislation supercharges our efforts. I’m hopeful that implementing a national plan to end Parkinson’s will put us on a fast-track to better, more effective treatments and provide much-needed support to patients and their families. This legislation will make a big difference for people across Connecticut and all over the country, and I’m so proud to see it signed into law.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined CNN’s State of the Union with Dana Bash to discuss President Biden and the stakes of the 2024 presidential election. In his discussion with Dana Bash, Murphy highlighted the threat Donald Trump poses to the future of democracy and reaffirmed his longstanding support for President Biden but underscored the need for the President to do more in the coming weeks to restore voters’ confidence. “Listen, I think there's no doubt that the President's performance at the debate has raised questions for voters,” Murphy said. “Not questions about his character or his decency or who he cares about or who he fights for. But questions as to whether this is still the old Joe Biden. Now, I've worked with Joe Biden. I've been on the phone with
...Read more him, I've been in the room with him. This is one of the most effective presidents that I've ever served under. I've watched him repair this nation's reputation all around the world. I worked with him on the 2022 gun bill that would not have happened without his detailed support and intervention that saved lives all around the country.” Murphy continued: “I also watched the debate and I think it's pretty amazing that 90% of the conversation is around Joe Biden's style when up on that stage, Donald Trump was engaged in a level of pathological lying that we've never seen before in a debate. He endorsed political violence over and over and over again. It's a statement on our politics that we're not talking more about Donald Trump. Now, that being said, voters do have questions, and, personally, I love Joe Biden. I don't know that the interview on Friday night did enough to answer those questions. And so I think this week is going to be absolutely critical. I think the President needs to do more. I’m not advising this campaign, but if I were, I would probably suggest that the President get out there and do a town hall, that he do a press conference, that he show the country that he is still the old Joe Biden, one of the best retail politicians this country has ever seen. The President says he can do that. I trust that he can.” On Joe Biden remaining the Democratic party’s presidential nominee, Murphy said: “No president has had this level of legislative accomplishment in their first four years as Joe Biden. I think that he's got to go out there this week and show the American public that he is still that Joe Biden that they have come to know and love. I take him at his word. I believe that he can do it, but I think that this is a really critical week. I do think the clock is ticking. I support Joe Biden. Period, stop. But I know that there are a lot of voters out there that need to be convinced that Thursday night's debate performance was a bad night. And, ultimately, I'm supporting Joe Biden, I'm going to vote for Joe Biden, but the President needs millions of votes and I think the President needs to make some moves this week to put himself out there in a position to answer those questions. And if he can't do that, then of course, he's going to have to make a decision about what's best for the country and what's best for the party.” On what is at stake if Donald Trump wins the 2024 presidential election, Murphy said: “There's a lot of anxiety in the country and in the party today, and that's because the stakes are so high. That's because Donald Trump presents an existential threat to democracy. He has advertised he is going to transition this country from a democracy to a dictatorship. He is going to continue the work to take away women's right to reproductive health care choices on their own. He's going to do another massive tax cut for billionaires and corporations, taking money out of the pockets of ordinary average Americans. So, yes, the stakes are very high. Yes, this party wants to make sure that we are in a position to win. Joe Biden has made it clear that he believes that he can be the candidate that will deliver us victory. And this week, I think the President needs to engage in the kind of interaction and with voters that will prove to those that are skeptical out there that he can do the job. And if he can't do that, then he's got a decision to make about what the path forward is. He deeply, deeply loves this country and I know that he wants to do whatever is necessary in order to make sure that Donald Trump doesn't become President and destroy this democracy.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday released the following statement on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. United States, which ruled that former President Donald Trump has presidential immunity from criminal prosecution of federal election subversion charges related to the January 6th insurrection: “Today, the Supreme Court gave Donald Trump the political gift of a lifetime – total protection for the insurrection he led on January 6th. This stunning refusal by the Court to hold Donald Trump accountable for his actions not only gives future presidents a free pass to knowingly commit crimes, it also transforms the office of the President into a King-like ruler. This should be simple. No American citizen is above the law, not even a former president. “The
...Read more fact that the Supreme Court slow-walked this decision to all but guarantee that Donald Trump won’t have to stand trial for his crimes before the election is further proof that the radical right-wing justices are more interested in masquerading as unelected politicians in robes than in upholding American democracy. In the words of Justice Jackson, this 6-3 decision, in which three Trump-appointed judges ruled in his favor, breaks new and dangerous ground when it comes to holding the most powerful person in our country accountable for their actions and flies in the face of constitutional norms.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn forty years of precedent in striking down the Chevron doctrine. Since the 1973 Chevron ruling, the judiciary has deferred to a federal agency’s interpretation of legislation. “Today’s ruling is further proof that the right-wing justices of the Supreme Court believe they know best – better than Congress, better than the issue experts, and better than the American people. Their priority is serving the political agenda of their rich, extremist donors, even if that means overturning forty years of precedent once again. “It’s impossible to overstate the devastating impacts this decision will have on every facet of our lives. From abortion rights to clean air and
...Read more water regulations to workplace safety, unelected judges masquerading as politicians will get final say over the scientists, doctors, economists, and experts at federal agencies. It gives the gun lobby an open invitation to take down rules from the ATF and DOJ to expand background checks, stop the proliferation of ghost guns, and effectively implement the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. “It’s never been clearer that this is a radical court hellbent on enacting an extremist agenda by any means necessary,” said Murphy. ### Read less LOS ANGELES–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) joined leading anti-violence experts, advocates, and practitioners at the 2024 Community Violence Intervention Conference for a conversation about the impact of community violence intervention (CVI) efforts and the future of the movement. In his remarks, Murphy shared his experience becoming an advocate for gun violence prevention and highlighted the invaluable leadership of Mothers United Against Violence, Hartford Communities That Care, COMPASS and other local organizations in helping pass historic gun laws. “I now live in the south end of Hartford, a neighborhood that's been plagued by gun violence for a long time. But I grew up just about five miles away in a suburb of Hartford. I was in elected office, both state office and federal
...Read more office, for over a decade. And I was not working on the issue of gun violence, despite the fact that kids who grew up just a stone's throw from me, in Hartford, Connecticut, were running for their lives,” Murphy said. “I didn't join this movement until after there was a mass shooting in a suburb. Twenty white kids died in Newtown, Connecticut. And about a month later, I went to a community meeting in Hartford, in the north end of Hartford. And I was met there by furious parents, who looked at me and said, we're glad you're here now. But where have you been? Because we've been in this movement and living this movement for decades. And now, because of Newtown, you want in. And so I'm here because I've spent the last 10 years of my life trying to make up for lost time, trying to help build a movement that stitches together the experience of the families that I now live with in the south end of Hartford, along with all the new entrants to this movement, who now see that there is no safe place from gun violence in this nation.” On the implications of the first ever Surgeon General’s advisory declaring gun violence a public health crisis, Murphy said: “I think this has the potential to be really impactful, because the Surgeon General is not a political figure. The Surgeon General has one job, which is to look out for the health of this country. And I think one of the things that you all know, but that those of us in positions of political leadership need to do a better job of, is explaining that the cost of this epidemic is not the number of people who are shot every day, right? That is the most significant cost. That is the most serious cost. But every single child, every single family who is living in one of these neighborhoods is literally having their brain chemistry changed. Their brains are breaking because of their exposure to this violence. And I don't think America understands that. I don't think America understands what happens to kids in the neighborhood that we live in, in Hartford, when school's over and they have to come home, go back to their house, and lock the door and not come out, right, because that's what their parents or their grandparents have told them to do. That has an impact on your brain chemistry in a way that is irreversible. And I think that this Surgeon General's report gives us the chance to be able to explain that better to folks who think that gun violence only impacts you if you actually get a bullet in your stomach.” Murphy discussed the importance of expanding background checks for curbing gun violence and the flow of illegal guns into American cities: “Those of us who are in states with tighter gun laws, we know that the guns that end up being sold in our cities are not bought in our states, because it's really hard for people with criminal records to buy guns in Connecticut. They buy those guns in states that don't have universal background checks, and they traffic them up to Connecticut. So if we had a nationwide requirement that every gun, whether it's sold online, at a gun show, in a gun store, has a background check, it would dramatically slow the pace of the weapons that are trafficked into a lot of the cities that we come from, and so, and that is the most politically popular intervention, like, gun owners really like universal background checks. So my belief is that, while I support a ban on assault weapons and other slightly more controversial changes, if we just sort of focus on that one change, universal background checks, it's the thing that unites us most easily with gun owners, and it probably is the most impactful change that we can make when it comes to the experience of gun violence in our cities.” Murphy concluded: “Part of our job, if we want to change the gun laws of this country, if we want to put more money into CVI, is to overtly join political efforts, campaigns, elections, because if more leaders believe that they are going to lose their race if they don't vote for universal background checks, if they don't vote for another quarter billion dollars into CVI, then we'll get more done. I know that for a lot of folks, it just feels like there's no benefit in being involved in the political process and campaigns. I also know that for a lot of folks who are deeply engaged in CVI, it's like, how can I do both? Right? I'm already giving everything I have to violence interruption; you now want me to go, you know, volunteer, or organize my community for an election? But the reality is that we are on the cusp of something really important. We have Republicans and Democrats, for the first time, committed to historic big investments in this work. And the only way that we get that next big tranche of investment is if we win a handful more elections, or the very least, we make the folks that are sitting on the outside believe that there's going to be a consequence if they continue to sit on the sidelines. So, I have just seen in the last 10 years how our political activation has changed my ability to get legislation done, and I just know that if we do more of it, we'll be more successful.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released the following statement on the Supreme Court’s decision dismissing the appeal from Idaho to allow the State’s law banning abortion to supersede the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), a federal law that requires hospitals receiving Medicare funding to provide necessary stabilizing treatment to pregnant women in emergencies, including abortion care. “It’s good news that Idaho’s draconian law will not stand, but similar to the mifepristone case, the Supreme Court punted the real decision about abortion care until after the election and gave future litigants a roadmap at the same time. This case was an opportunity for the Supreme Court to make clear that women have a right to life-saving emergency care,
...Read more including abortion, and they did not. Because of the confusion created by the Court, doctors need clarity that saving a pregnant woman’s life won’t land them in jail, and without that assurance, women will continue to be at risk of harm when experiencing pregnancy complications. “In the two years since this radical, right-wing Court overturned Roe, Republicans have shown they are willing to put women’s lives in danger, criminalize doctors, and fundamentally reshape medical education in this country all in the name of controlling women’s bodies and imposing their personal beliefs on the nation. We cannot lose sight of the fact that women all over this country have lost the right to make decisions about their own health and Republicans will not stop until they pass a national abortion ban. Don’t be fooled by the temporary victories, the outcome in November is more important than ever because people’s lives are counting on it.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative John Larson (D-Conn.-01) on Wednesday announced three Connecticut projects will receive a total of $21.7 million in federal funding through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s 2024 RAISE grant program awards. “RAISE grants are a great way for the federal government to help towns fund big infrastructure investments that transform our communities for the better,” said Murphy. “This $21.7 million in federal funding will support projects to improve the commuting experience at South Norwalk Train Station, expand public transportation options and access to green spaces along the Naugatuck River Greenway Trail, and make the Berlin Turnpike safer and more convenient for pedestrians,
...Read more bikers, and drivers. I was proud to fight for these projects, and I look forward to seeing their impact in our state.” “This monumental federal investment will be a seismic boost for key Connecticut communities. With reverberating impact around the state, the $21.7 million going to Norwalk, Naugatuck and the Hartford region will reduce pedestrian and bicycle crashes, and improve driver safety. These past few years have been among the most dangerous on record for walkers and bike riders, with heightened numbers of injuries and fatalities. Road safety is a crisis in Connecticut and countrywide. This investment will save lives and lead to more vibrant connected communities,” said Blumenthal. “The Berlin Turnpike Corridor supports jobs, services, and housing for thousands of Capitol Region residents, yet it remains one of our state’s dangerous roads, with thousands of crashes and accidents over the last five years,” said Larson. “I am thrilled to announce federal infrastructure funding to improve safety along the Berlin Turnpike and enhance multi-modal transit options for residents, including bike and pedestrian access. I continue to remain focused on securing funding for projects that advance community-led visions to address our region’s needs.” The $21.7 million in federal funding includes $2 million for the Capitol Region Council of Governments to conduct a comprehensive study of the Berlin Turnpike to identify a feasible route and develop a conceptual plan to accommodate bicycle, pedestrian, and transit users along the corridor. The study will also provide recommendations to reduce vehicle speed and traffic, connect with active transportation networks, and plan for a potential multi-modal transit hub. The Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments will also receive $5.7 million for the Naugatuck River Greenway Trail Project to fund the environmental, engineering design, and pre-construction activities necessary for closing a 16.3-mile gap in the Naugatuck River Greenway Trail between Breen Field in Naugatuck and East Main Street in Thomaston. The Norwalk Redevelopment Agency will receive $14 million for the MLK Corridor Equitable Mobility Enhancement Project to fund the construction of improvements to two miles of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Drive and six other roadways surrounding the South Norwalk Train Station. The project will include bicycle, pedestrian, and transit accommodations, connectivity enhancements, and additional wayfinding upgrades. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s funding through the Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) discretionary grant program helps communities around the country carry out transportation infrastructure projects with significant local or regional impact. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday released the following statement on the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention’s report outlining the implementation and impact of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) two years following its passage. “Gun murder rates in our cities are plummeting, and there's no doubt the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is a big part of the story. This report is more proof that BSCA is saving lives. Writing and passing the first comprehensive gun safety law in thirty years was the hard part, but all that work would be for nothing if not for the Biden administration’s laser focus on implementation. In the past two years, they’ve awarded millions of dollars to states and local communities for community violence intervention,
...Read more expanded mental health services and school safety efforts, successfully increased the number of background checks, and cracked down on gun traffickers. I’m grateful we have a gun safety champion like President Biden in the White House who is determined to make sure BSCA is as effective as possible in making our communities safer.” President Biden signed into law Murphy’s Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in June 2022. Over the last two years: The Department of Justice has made 30 awards for community violence intervention programs, totaling $94 million.
The Department of Justice has charged more than 500 defendants using BSCA’s new gun trafficking and straw purchasing laws, removing hundreds of firearms from the streets in the process.
The FBI’s new enhanced background checks have stopped 776 sales of firearms to individuals under 21 who are prohibited from purchasing firearms.
14 states are already using or plan to use BSCA funding to increase use of red flag laws, helping to keep guns out of the hands of people who are in crisis.
The Biden-Harris Administration has awarded $570 million to 264 grantees across 48 states and territories for the hiring and training of mental health professionals to work in schools.
The Department of Health and Human Services has awarded $85 million in funding to more than 125 school districts to help schools identify students who need mental health care and help them access that care through the Project AWARE program. ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement after Surgeon General Vivek Murthy released the first ever Surgeon General Advisory on the public health crisis of firearm violence in America: “Surgeon General Advisories have the rare ability to cut through the political noise and help us understand the biggest health crises we face as a nation. I’m grateful to see Surgeon General Vivek Murthy use the power and prestige of his office to help wake this country up to the trauma we are putting our kids and families through every day this epidemic continues. This advisory is recognition of what those of us in the gun violence prevention movement know to be true: the best way to stop gun deaths is by passing universal background checks and an assault
...Read more weapons ban – two things Congress could do tomorrow. I’m also glad to see Surgeon General Murthy acknowledge the important role that community violence intervention programs and common-sense measures like safe storage laws can play in keeping our communities safe.” ### Read less WASHINGTON– U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) announced they will introduce the Americas Regional Monitoring of Arms Sales (ARMAS) Act to help stem the flow of U.S.-manufactured weapons across the Americas, which threatens regional stability, U.S. security, the lives of Americans and others and endangers U.S. foreign policy goals across the Hemisphere. Evidence has shown that firearms from the U.S. contribute substantially to gang violence, human rights violations and political instability. The ARMAS Act would transfer small arms authority from the Department of Commerce back to the State Department, require the development of a comprehensive interagency strategy and
...Read more program to disrupt arms trafficking, and take other steps to improve congressional and administration oversight. As Congress observes Gun Violence Awareness month, similar legislation has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Joaquin Castro (Texas-20). “There is a direct line from the hundreds of thousands of illegal guns trafficked from the U.S. to the violence and political instability in Latin America and the Caribbean. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act made firearms trafficking a federal crime for the first time, but there’s more the federal government can do to crack down on traffickers and ensure illegal guns don’t end up in the hands of gangs and cartels. The ARMAS Act would increase transparency of arms exports and help disrupt trafficking circles to help make communities safer both at home and abroad,” said Murphy. “From Mexico to Haiti to Ecuador, criminal gangs are using American-made weapons to commit record levels of violence, fueling insecurity throughout the hemisphere and undermining U.S. national interests in the process,” said Cardin. “If we truly care about keeping the American people safe at home and beyond our borders, then it is past time for Congress to prioritize fending off the rampant illegal export and trafficking of firearms. The ARMAS Act would play a pivotal role in advancing this goal by strengthening congressional oversight of how and what kinds of firearms are exported abroad, improving data collection of trafficked firearms, and establishing a whole-of-government effort to ensure U.S. guns don't end up in the hands of the very transnational criminal organizations seeking to do us harm.” “The illegal trafficking of firearms in the Western Hemisphere is fueling instability, violence, and migration and directly impacts Americans right here at home. We must use all tools at our disposal to ensure U.S. small arms exports arrive at the right destination and do not fall into the hands of gangs and cartels,” said Kaine. “This legislation would create stronger oversight of U.S. small arms exports in order to disrupt arms trafficking and diversion of exported firearms.” “Our nation’s weak gun laws have perpetuated the deadly cycle of firearms trafficking, allowing a steady stream of illicit guns into Latin America and the Caribbean. With the ARMAS Act, my colleagues and I are standing for stronger oversight of America’s gun exports by requiring interagency strategies and disrupting illegal arms trafficking,” said Durbin. In March, Murphy introduced legislation to curb U.S. firearms trafficking to the Caribbean by requiring the Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions to report on the implementation of anti-firearm-trafficking provisions included in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Full text of the legislation to be introduced is available here. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Monday that CREW Carbon, a carbon dioxide (CO2) removal company based in New Haven, was named “Innovator of the Month.” CREW’s technology uses naturally occurring minerals to absorb and remove CO2 produced during wastewater treatment while making the treatment process more effective, benefiting both local communities and their natural environments. Their innovative approach, which enables CO2 removal and permanent storage that is quantifiable and scalable, has led to partnerships with local water resource recovery facilities and generation of high-quality carbon removal credits for the Frontier Climate Fund and other customers. “Tackling the climate crisis requires creativity. CREW’s promising approach offers a new way to
...Read more safely repurpose naturally available minerals into practical tools that remove and store carbon dioxide from wastewater. Their eco-friendly weathering technology is moving us closer to achieving our climate goals by speeding up a process that would otherwise take millions of years, and I look forward to seeing their impact in our state continue to grow,” said Murphy. “Robust carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas removal is needed, and needed rapidly, to limit the effects of climate change and to meet our climate goals,” said Dr. Joachim Katchinoff, CREW Co-Founder and CEO. “We are thrilled that Senator Murphy continues to be an advocate for climate action and are proud that CREW’s measurable, permanent, and co-beneficial carbon dioxide removal technology has been recognized by Senator Murphy. Having researched the global carbon cycle for a decade, it’s imperative that we deploy technologies like ours to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in a way that is highly measurable, permanent, and affordable. CREW’s approach has identified that water resource recovery facilities, where trillions of microbes remove pollutants from wastewater including carbon, are one of the best locations to make positive climate impact happen. Our technology speeds up the same reactions that control greenhouse gas levels on Earth using minerals to soak up and lock in CO2 from the wastewater treatment process. This country has spent decades building amazing wastewater treatment infrastructure to keep our environment safe; now, with CREW’s technology, we can work with utility and industrial partners to supplement their treatment processes in a way that can measurably remove CO2 at scale while enabling safe and efficient wastewater treatment.” Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on the Supreme Court’s decision in U.S. v. Rahimi: “This ruling reaffirms what more than 80 percent of Americans believe: domestic abusers should not have access to firearms. And, for good reason. On average, approximately 70 women are murdered at the hands of their partner every month in the United States. “This case, which would have struck down laws that prevent domestic abusers with active restraining orders against them from having guns, only made it this far because of confusion caused by the Bruen decision. I’m glad the Court took the necessary step to reinforce existing federal law by providing clarity to lower courts, legislators, and the public about how to keep communities safe in the face
...Read more of legal challenges the Bruen decision invited.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday joined U.S. Senators Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and U.S. Representatives Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-Va.) to introduce the Pell Grant Preservation and Expansion Act of 2024, bicameral legislation that would nearly double the Pell Grant maximum award, index the maximum award for inflation, and make other changes to expand the award for working students and families. The Pell Grant program is the cornerstone of federal financial aid for postsecondary education, serving over 6 million undergraduate students. “Pell Grants help
...Read more millions of students afford higher education, but as the cost of college has skyrocketed since the Pell Grant was established in 1973, the maximum award hasn’t come close to keeping up. In fact, the Pell Grant once covered most of the cost of attending a public or community college, but today it covers less than a quarter of those costs. This legislation would give the program a much-needed boost and help ensure that all students can afford college if that's the pathway that best suits their academic and career goals,” said Murphy. “Pell Grants make it possible for every student, regardless of their socioeconomic status, to pursue higher education and earn a quality degree without being burdened by excessive debt. This critical legislation restores the purchasing power of the Pell Grant and ensures that this instrumental tool continues to make college accessible for all. With the Pell Grant Preservation and Expansion Act, we can be sure that more students are supported in their academic endeavors and are provided with the opportunity to succeed,” said Blumenthal. U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also cosponsored the legislation. U.S. Representatives Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Bobby Scott (D-Va.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.), John Garamendi (D-Calif.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.), Nikema Williams (D-Ga.), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), John Sarbanes (D-Md.), Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan (D- Northern Mariana Islands), Marilyn Strickland (D-Wash.), Gwen Moore (D-Wis.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), Juan Vargas (D-Calif.), Robin Kelly (D-Ill.), Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), Alma Adams (D-N.C.), Andre Carson (D-Ind.), Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.), Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.), Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) also cosponsored the legislation. The Pell Grant Preservation and Expansion Act is endorsed by American Association of Community Colleges (AACC); Association of Community College Trustees (AACT); American Association for State College and Universities (AASCU); Association of American Universities (AAU); American Association of University Professors (AAUP); American Association of University Women (AAUW); American Council on Education (ACE); American Federation of Teachers (AFT); American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC); Asian Pacific Islander American Scholars (APIA Scholars); Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities (APLU); Arizona Students’ Association; Associated Students of the University of California: Berkeley; Center for American Progress (CAP); Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP); Denver Scholarship Foundation; The Education Trust (Ed Trust); Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP); Jobs for the Future (JFF); Menlo College; National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU); National College Attainment Network (NCAN); National Education Association (NEA); New American Higher Education Policy Program; National Skills Coalition (NSC); Partnership for the Future; Phi Beta Kappa; Service Employees International Union (SEIU); Southern California College Attainment Network; State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO); The Hope Center at Temple University; Third Way; The Institute for College Access and Success (TICAS); Today’s Students Coalition (formerly HLA); uAspire; United Negro College Fund (UNCF); UNITE-LA; and Young Invincibles. In May, Murphy and Blumenthal called on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (LHHS) to strengthen the Pell Grant program in Fiscal Year 2025 by providing a discretionary increase towards the award. The text of the legislation can be found HERE. A fact sheet is also available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 42 of their Senate colleagues in introducing a bipartisan Senate resolution recognizing Juneteenth Independence Day. Text is below, and the full resolution is available here. “Whereas news of the end of slavery did not reach the frontier areas of the United States, in particular the State of Texas and the other Southwestern States, until months after the conclusion of the Civil War, more than 2\1/2\ years after President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863; Whereas, on June 19, 1865, Union soldiers, led by Major General Gordon Granger, arrived in Galveston, Texas, with news that the Civil War had ended and enslaved African Americans were free; Whereas African
...Read more Americans who had been slaves in the Southwest celebrated June 19, commonly known as “Juneteenth Independence Day”, as inspiration and encouragement for future generations; Whereas African Americans from the Southwest have continued the tradition of observing Juneteenth Independence Day for more than 150 years; Whereas Juneteenth Independence Day began as a holiday in the State of Texas and is now celebrated in all 50 States and the District of Columbia as a special day of observance in recognition of the emancipation of all slaves in the United States; Whereas Juneteenth Independence Day celebrations are held to honor African-American freedom while encouraging self-development and respect for all cultures; Whereas the faith and strength of character demonstrated by former slaves and the descendants of former slaves remain an example for all people of the United States, regardless of background, religion, or race; Whereas slavery was not officially abolished until the ratification of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in December 1865; and Whereas, over the course of its history, the United States has grown into a symbol of democracy and freedom around the world: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate— (1) designates June 19, 2024, as “Juneteenth Independence Day”; (2) recognizes the historical significance of Juneteenth Independence Day to the United States; (3) supports the continued nationwide celebration of Juneteenth Independence Day to provide an opportunity for the people of the United States to learn more about the past and to better understand the experiences that have shaped the United States; and (4) recognizes that the observance of the end of slavery is part of the history and heritage of the United States.” U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Christopher Coons (D-Del.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Angus King (I-Maine), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Thomas Carper (D-Del.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Todd Young (R-Ind.), Benjamin Cardin (D-Md.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Tim Scott (R-S.C.) joined the resolution. ### Read less WASHINGTON—Ahead of the two-year anniversary of the enactment of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor about the lessons learned from the failed police response to the tragic shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas two years ago. In his speech, Murphy emphasized the importance of keeping guns out of schools and called on Congress to take immediate action to deliver the commonsense gun reforms overwhelmingly supported by Americans. “There is a difference between what makes us feel safe and what actually makes us safe. The reality is this: more people with guns and more guns do not make our kids safer,” Murphy explained. “That’s an uncomfortable truth. I get it. Because we want to believe that
...Read more we can meet force with potential force, and everything will be okay. But there were 376 armed police officers and security outside that classroom in Uvalde. There were plenty of good guys with guns outside that classroom, some of them steps away from a shooting that was ongoing for an hour. And it did nothing for those kids. Frankly, it made the massacre harder to live with for so many of those parents, because it exposed this fraud that told us that we can protect ourselves with more guns.” Murphy noted that increasing the number of armed officers in schools has failed to prevent school shootings: “In 1970, police officers were stationed in just 1 percent of America’s public schools. By 1997, 22 percent had an officer on site. 43 percent in 2016. By 2019, the majority of schools had a police officer on sight. You can match almost every uptick with a high-profile school shooting. But despite this exponential increase in armed officers at schools, the shootings have not abated, they have increased in frequency. More guns and more police and more armed security in schools has done nothing to stop this trajectory. We should have seen this, with our own eyes, well before Uvalde. When the gunshots started at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland Florida, the armed police at the school that day ran away, and then argued in court that they had no legal obligation to protect those kids, only an obligation to protect themselves.” “But it’s not just anecdotal evidence,” Murphy continued. “A study of 179 school shootings between 1999 and 2019 found that there was no association between the presence of a police officer in a school and any reduction in the severity of violence and shootings in those schools. When you really stop to think about this, it does make sense. A shooter with an AR-15 needs a minute or two to get off enough rounds to kill dozens. Even if the armed security officer does the right thing and runs to the gunfire – instead of the natural thing, running away from it – time is on the shooters’ side.” Murphy explained that increasing the police presence in schools actually does more harm than good: “What tends to happen, frankly, when police officers populate our schools, is that ordinary school misbehaviors get criminalized, and kids - especially black boys and disabled students - get arrested for things that used to be dealt with in the principal’s office. The police in these schools don’t end up stopping mass shootings, they just end arresting a bunch of kids and ruining their lives.” Murphy emphasized that the best way to protect kids is by passing commonsense gun safety laws: “But amidst all of this bad news, amidst the failure to learn the lessons of Uvalde and Parkland, there is good news. There are policies that work. In states with gun safety laws like universal background checks, safe storage, and red flag laws, fewer people die by guns. In the wake of passage, the bipartisan passage of the 2022 bipartisan gun bill, gun crime is down. Urban gun murders have dropped by 12 percent from 2022 to 2023. Biggest one year drop in the history of the country. 2024 is on pace for another record setting drop in urban gun crime. And this year, the pace of mass shootings is way down as well. Between January and May of this year, there were 29% fewer mass shootings compared to the same period of time in 2023. It is proof that when the primary focus of your efforts is to pass laws to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, instead of loading our communities up with guns, and putting money into communities to get at the root causes of violence, you can save lives.” Murphy concluded: “Congress has the power – right now – to do something about it. We could start, for instance, by responding to last week’s Supreme Court decision and passing legislation to ban the conversion of semi-automatic weapons into machine guns. Our kids would be safer, undoubtedly, if it was harder for a deranged psychopath to get their hands on a banned automatic weapon. The majority of Americans are on our side. They want Congress to act, to pass things like universal background checks, to pass bump stocks. They’re sick of us learning the wrong lesson every time tragedy strikes. And it’s never too late for this time to be different.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Madam President, colleagues, this is a speech I’ve been thinking about giving for a long time. I think it’s a speech somebody needs to give. But it’s hard. There’s some really awful stuff I’m going to talk about. Things that cut deep, when we think about who we are, when we think about how we handle crisis and emergencies, about the things we need to do, as a human race, to feel safe. “I want to talk to you today about what happened on May 24th, 2022, almost two years ago, at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas. After two years of review, investigation, hand wringing, grief, and anger, we now have as full a picture of what happened that day as we ever will. And we need to talk about it. Because it’s important. Here’s what we know. “One hour and 17 minutes after a gunman entered Robb Elementary School and opened fire on two classrooms full of children— 54 minutes after a school police officer got a call from his wife who said that she had been shot in her classroom—38 minutes after a 911 dispatcher told police there were confirmed victims in the classrooms— Only then did a team of officers finally enter Room 111 at Robb Elementary School, and kill the gunman. One hour and 17 excruciating minutes, the kids inside those classrooms — 9, 10, 11 years old — and their teachers waited to be saved by the people whose job was to keep them safe. “The students in Rooms 111 and 112 had prepared for this moment. They had practiced what they should do if something like this were to happen. Drop to the floor. Sit along the walls farthest from the door and the windows. Crouch under desks, countertops, anywhere where you can be safe. They stayed silent — so silent that the officers on the other side of the door thought that there couldn’t possibly be children inside. Surely, they would be crying out. But they were doing, in fact, exactly what they were told to do. They were doing their part. “As the minutes went on, outside the classroom stood not 10 armed officers, not 50, not even one hundred. Outside the classroom and surrounding the school, 376 armed officers were present. Outside the classroom. Inside the classroom, 10-year-old Ailyn Ramos hugged her friend Leann Garcia to stop her screaming out in pain. Inside the classroom, Elsa Avila, a teacher in Room 109, tried to stay conscious after a bullet ripped through her stomach. Her students whispered to her, ‘Miss, we love you. You’re going to be OK.’ They told each other, ‘Don’t let her go to sleep.’ Inside the classroom, 10-year-olds Khloie Torres and Miah Cerrillo called 911, begging for help. Inside the classroom, Khloie and Miah’s classmate, Kendall Olivarez sobbed in pain as she lay stuck under their teacher who had already been killed. As 33 students and three of their teachers spent an hour and seventeen minutes trapped in a room with an active shooter, those hundreds of armed adults stood outside. Doing what? “Well, they were doing the things that would naturally occur to you if you hear a man with military weapons and hundreds of rounds of ammunition is just around the corner from you on a killing spree. They were scared. They were disorganized. They were panicked. They were frozen. There were good people amongst those 376, and they were all providing natural reactions given the circumstances. But that does not excuse their inaction. Of course it doesn’t. Because the adults in Uvalde had bought into this idea that more security - more men with guns in schools - would keep those kids safe. In fact, the Uvalde School District placed so much faith in the ability of armed security to keep schools safe that it had its own school police department. “But all those men with guns didn’t protect those kids. The opposite happened. “How on earth could this happen? How could there be 300 armed law enforcement officers doing nothing for so long? As children called 911, as parents ran toward the school and begged to be allowed in, how could those officers wait one hour and seventeen minutes, when the entire point of having a school police department, full of men with guns, was to stop something like this from happening? “Earlier this year, the Justice Department released a report to try and answer those questions. They spent 20 months reviewing hours of body cam footage, audio recordings, training logs. They interviewed 260 people who were there that day. The final report paints a damning and infuriating picture of what went wrong, and I think it’s important to talk about it. Because it shows how flawed this promise is— this promise that good guys with guns is all that is necessary to stop bad guys with guns. “At 11:35am, Sgt. Daniel Coronado heard gunfire and ran inside the school. Another round of shots grazed two officers who had been approaching the classrooms with him. One of those officers kept running toward the classroom, but he turned back when he realized that none of his colleagues had followed him. Again, this reaction - from those initial police officers - it’s understandable. There was a madman inside that classroom. Instinct tells you to run away, not run towards danger. “Then, confusion set in, the second predictable element of an active shooter crisis. Sgt. Coronado relayed an unconfirmed report that the gunman was contained and had barricaded himself inside the classroom, leading officers to believe that they were dealing with a barricaded subject — not an active shooter. Active shooter training says rush into the classroom, but they didn’t think it was an active shooter, so they didn’t act with urgency. “But eventually, they just couldn’t continue to rationalize standing idle because it was a barricaded suspect. They continued to hear gunfire. They learned that one of the officers’ wives was shot inside the classroom. They heard over their radios that there were victims. Common sense would have told them that there were kids inside these classrooms. “Forty minutes into this massacre, there should have been no doubt what they were dealing with. This was an active shooter. This was the time to enter the classroom. A part of the confusion was that there was no clear command structure. There was no one to give orders. There were probably lots of men with guns that wanted to go in, but were told that they couldn’t. But there really was no excuse. At one point, the officers claimed that they needed keys. But they admitted not a single officer even walked up to the door to check if it was unlocked. Why? Because they all knew that inside that classroom was a young man equipped with military-style weaponry that could kill them, that would kill them, the instant they opened that door. Finally, at 12:50pm, 77 minutes after the shooter entered the school, a team of officers breached the room and killed the gunman. “Two children still had a pulse when they were rescued. Eva Mireles, the teacher whose husband was on the scene, died in an ambulance that never even left the school. 1 gunman. 376 armed officers. One hour and seventeen minutes of avoidable, indescribable horror. 19 children and two teachers dead. A colossal failure. So what does this tell us? What can we learn from this? Because we are commanded to learn something from these tragedies. “I know human instinct. We have a biological inclination to want to fight fire with fire. So, our first reaction when we see the threat of a deranged young man with a gun is to mirror that threat with our defensive reaction. If a gunman steps into a building where our kids are, we want them to be met with equal force. Confront a bad guy with a gun with a good guy with a gun. At some level, in here, I get that that makes sense. “I understand this reaction because I’ve felt it. I’ve had kids in these post-Sandy Hook public schools for the last twelve years. And when we wrote the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the most comprehensive gun legislation in thirty years, it made important changes to our gun laws, it invested in mental health, but it also provided $300 million for school hardening. So I’m on the record as supporting putting more security in our schools. “But in the wake of Uvalde, and in the wake of all of this reporting, it is increasingly impossible to square that gut reaction, that so many of us understandably have, with reality. It’s time for me to admit that to myself. It’s time for all of us to admit this publicly. “In 1970, police officers were stationed in just 1 percent of America’s public schools. By 1997, 22 percent had an officer on site. 43 percent in 2016. By 2019, the majority of schools had a police officer on sight. You can match almost every uptick with a high-profile school shooting. But despite this exponential increase in armed officers at schools, the shootings have not abated, they have increased in frequency. More guns and more police and more armed security in schools has done nothing to stop this trajectory. We should have seen this, with our own eyes, well before Uvalde. When the gunshots started at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland Florida, the armed police at the school that day ran away, and then argued in court that they had no legal obligation to protect those kids, only an obligation to protect themselves. “But it’s not just anecdotal evidence. A study of 179 school shootings between 1999 and 2019 found that there was no association between the presence of a police officer in a school and any reduction in the severity of violence and shootings in those schools. When you really stop to think about this, it does make sense. A shooter with an AR-15 needs a minute or two to get off enough rounds to kill dozens. Even if the armed security officer does the right thing and runs to the gunfire – instead of the natural thing, running away from it – time is on the shooters’ side. “So, it is not surprising that there’s no evidence that more guns in our schools keep our kids safe. What tends to happen, frankly, when police officers populate our schools, is that ordinary school misbehaviors gets criminalized, and kids - especially black boys and disabled students - get arrested for things that used to be dealt with in the principal’s office. The police in these schools don’t end up stopping mass shootings, they just end arresting a bunch of kids and ruining their lives. “Now, we can zoom out even further, to consider this argument of whether more guns, or more good guys with guns, make our communities safer or less safe. If good guys with guns protected us from gun violence, you would expect states or communities with high rates of legal gun ownership to be safer. But they aren’t. You can probably guess by now that the opposite is true. In places with high rates of legal gun ownership, there are more gun deaths than in places with low rates of gun ownership. “There is a difference between what makes us feel safe and what actually makes us safe. The reality is this: more people with guns and more guns do not make our kids safer. “That’s an uncomfortable truth. I get it. Because we want to believe that we can meet force with potential force, and everything will be okay. But there were 376 armed police officers and security outside that classroom in Uvalde. There were plenty of good guys with guns outside that classroom, some of them steps away from a shooting that was ongoing for an hour. And it did nothing for those kids. Frankly, it made the massacre harder to live with for so many of those parents, because it exposed this fraud that told us that we can protect ourselves with more guns. “This is a hard lesson to learn. After Uvalde and Parkland, Texas and Florida just doubled down on a failed strategy - they required more guns in our schools, despite no evidence that it works. In Tennessee, after the terrible Covenant School shooting, the state legislature went even further, arming teachers with guns. In the movies, a heroic lone good guy with a gun kills dozens of armed evildoers. But that’s in the movies. That’s fiction. That’s not reality. A teacher with a gun isn’t going to save our kids. Remember, the evidence tells us over and over again that in places with more guns, there are more gun deaths, not less. “But amidst all of this bad news, amidst the failure to learn the lessons of Uvalde and Parkland, there is good news. There are policies that work. In states with gun safety laws like universal background checks, safe storage, and red flag laws, fewer people die by guns. In the wake of passage, the bipartisan passage of the 2022 bipartisan gun bill, gun crime is down. Urban gun murders have dropped by 12 percent from 2022 to 2023. Biggest one year drop in the history of the country. 2024 is on pace for another record setting drop in urban gun crime. And this year, the pace of mass shootings is way down as well. Between January and May of this year, there were 29% fewer mass shootings compared to the same period of time in 2023. It is proof that when the primary focus of your efforts is to pass laws to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, instead of loading our communities up with guns, and putting money into communities to get at the root causes of violence, you can save lives. “What happened that day at Robb Elementary School is a disgrace. We will never understand – I will never understand – the grief and pain of those parents who lost kids that day, who watched 376 armed officers wait an hour and 17 minutes to confront that gunman. What we can do is make a decision to not simply avert our eyes from what happened that day because it’s what’s easier; but instead, study and learn from this tragedy. “Flooding our schools and our communities with more guns won’t solve the problem. It won’t stop the next Uvalde. What will keep our kids safe is keeping guns, especially the most dangerous guns, out of the hands of dangerous people. “Congress has the power – right now – to do something about it. We could start, for instance, by responding to last week’s Supreme Court decision and passing legislation to ban the conversion of semi-automatic weapons into machine guns. Our kids would be safer, undoubtedly, if it was harder for a deranged psychopath to get their hands on a banned automatic weapon. The majority of Americans are on our side. They want Congress to act, to pass things like universal background checks, to pass [a ban on] bump stocks. They’re sick of us learning the wrong lesson every time tragedy strikes. And it’s never too late for this time to be different.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday released the following statement on President Biden’s Executive Actions to protect undocumented spouses of U.S. citizens and streamline access to work visas for Dreamers with employment offers: “It’s no secret our current immigration system is not only broken, but unfair. Today’s actions will help keep families together by protecting hundreds of thousands of people who have spent at least ten years in the U.S. building a life, and will make it easier for young people, including Dreamers, who have been educated here in the U.S. to receive work visas so they can continue using their talents and skills to strengthen our economy and our country. I’m glad President Biden is taking proactive steps to provide stability for these families
...Read more and young people, but there’s only so much the executive branch can do to fix a fundamentally broken system. Republicans need to stop playing politics and work with Democrats to do the hard work of passing immigration reform.” ### Read less HARTFORD, CT – As the Federal Trade Commission prepares to enforce its ban on non-compete agreements (NCAs), the agency’s chair spoke in Hartford about some of the gaps that could still remain when the rule goes into effect. FTC Chair Lina Khan said Friday that the commission’s new rule – which goes into effect in September if it’s not struck down – will outlaw most NCAs, but will leave loopholes for some because of constrictions on the FTC’s authority. Most notably, organizations that function as nonprofits will still be able to use NCAs, though Khan said she and the commission will be making a point of analyzing whether or not those organizations – often hospitals or healthcare centers – actually function on a not-for-profit basis. Banks wouldn’t be covered under the rule
...Read more either. Khan said that while there will be gaps in the rule, states can step in and help fill them, with the FTC providing a floor for the other states where rules are not nearly as strong. US Sen. Chris Murphy – who led Friday’s listening event – said that Congress is still aiming toward more long-lasting prevention of these agreements through legislation, as that would be much more difficult to overturn under a president that could be in favor of non-competes. “We continue to pursue federal legislation. Our legislation is bipartisan and continues to pick up support on both sides of the aisle. Obviously, the sponsors of this legislation are very supportive of what the FTC is doing, but we want to buttress that with a law that spans administrations,” Murphy told reporters Friday. Khan said that legislation cracking down on NCAs would be wider-reaching, and not leave gaps for non-profits or banks to still include those clauses in employee contracts. NCAs, in general, prevent workers from leaving their jobs for higher-paying or more influential positions, and also prevent them from starting a business in the same field. They are typically viewed as having more profound impacts on individuals that are higher up in a company or those who are being paid well, but Murphy and Khan said that is not always the case. “As we started looking at this issue, you realize that we’re talking fast food workers, security guards, janitors, gardeners, journalists, health care workers,” Khan said. Murphy said that about 30% of workers who are subject to NCAs are making $13 an hour or less. Several other panelists mentioned other impacts of non-compete agreements, like the strain NCAs place on healthcare workers who can only treat patients within a limited radius. What happens next? Many low-income patients are unable to get to their appointments when their healthcare provider has moved. Another issue that comes up is workers who can’t escape workplace harassment or discrimination because of non-compete causes in their contracts. Khan and Murphy said the impact of of NCAs and contractual non-complete clauses on low-wage earners is most devastating in how it takes away their legal right to absent themselves from a hostile work environment. Blumenthal said that these agreements – which are often snuck into contracts – “enslave” workers, and give them no other options. Khan said that there has been some commentary about the authority – or lack thereof – of the FTC to enforce a rule like this. She said that other cases have already laid down the precedent for the commission to make rules regarding fair labor and trade practices, and that if it goes before the courts she expects it to go in the FTC’s favor. The US Chamber of Commerce opposes the rule and said the effective date should be pushed back. The chamber joined with other business groups to sue the FTC on grounds that the rule would have negative impacts and should be decided by Congress. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday hosted Rob Wilcox, Deputy Director of the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention (OGVP), for a social live discussion on the implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA). In their conversation, Murphy and Wilcox discussed how BSCA has helped drive down gun violence across the country and make communities safer since its passage two years ago this month. Murphy emphasized the significance of the Biden administration’s decision to establish the first ever federal Office for Gun Violence Prevention: “We are very excited that this President, that President Biden and Vice President Harris, are so committed to keeping our kids safe and our communities safe that they have established, for the first time ever, an
...Read more office inside the White House that is dedicated to this mission of changing our gun laws, of implementing sensible policy, of putting funding into our communities that help reduce the risk of our kids falling victim to gun violence. Of course, I lived through the nightmare of Sandy Hook. I was the Congressman from Sandy Hook at the time, I was at the firehouse that day as the parents waited for their kids to come back, and they never came back. But I now live in the south end of Hartford in Connecticut. I live in one of the more violence-prone neighborhoods. I've gotten to know a bunch of kids in that neighborhood, and I always remind my colleagues that for those kids, school feels like the safer place. It is the walk to and from school where their trauma exists. So you’ve got to understand the full panoply of gun violence and gun violence risks in this country. The country sometimes only pays attention when it's a school shooting or a shooting in a public place. But there are lots of kids who grow up with the risk of gun trauma every single day. And that's what the Office of Gun Violence Prevention is really focused on, making sure we understand how big a crisis this is.” Murphy continued, highlighting the success of BSCA and OGVP in curbing illegal gun sales and reducing gun violence in Connecticut: “Connecticut has pretty tough gun laws. It's hard for criminals to buy guns in Connecticut, but it's pretty easy for criminals to be able to get guns in a state that doesn't have universal background checks and traffic them up to Connecticut and sell them privately on the black market in Connecticut, but our bill includes the first ever federal prohibition on gun trafficking. And from what I've heard, we've already started to see some pretty significant prosecutions of gun trafficking rings that we couldn't do prior to this law passing. And again, the idea is that if you want to understand why gun murders are coming down in our cities, maybe part of it is that we are making it harder for these gun traffickers to be able to sell guns illegally in our cities.” Wilcox described the impact that this first-time federal prohibition of firearms trafficking is having in cities across the country thanks to BSCA: “I think it's pretty incredible to think that someone who was profiting off bringing illegal guns to our communities used to just get off with a slap on the wrist or paperwork violation. There was no federal law that actually made it a crime to straw purchase or to engage in firearms trafficking, even though any of us would look at that and say, ‘well, the person who is profiting off of illegal gun sales should be held accountable for giving guns to those of you who are most vulnerable or people in crisis.’ The tool that was in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act has been used to great effect. The Department of Justice just announced that the 500th defendant has been charged under that new law and they're going after significant gun trafficking rings. One example is they charge several defendants with trafficking and straw purchasing over 100 firearms, military style firearms, that they were intending to traffic into Mexico.” Wilcox also highlighted how BSCA’s expanded background checks for buyers under 21 has had a massive impact and prevented harm: “Look, the data doesn't lie. Six of the nine deadliest mass shootings were committed by people under 21, oftentimes with red flags in their history that just weren't seen. And I'm proud to tell you that since taking this job, what I can say is that we've taken that law, that enhanced background check law, and tried to maximize the potential. We’ve done about 250,000, a quarter of a million, background checks on 18, 19, 20-year-olds since passage of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. And we've denied about 2,500. And when you look at that 2,500 and dig deeper, you can see that about a quarter of those denials are coming solely from the enhanced background check. That's over 775 individuals who are stopped… [One story the FBI provided] is a juvenile who went in to buy a firearm, and it was only because of the call into the state that what was discovered is that that individual had been found by a juvenile court to be mentally ill and involuntarily committed to a mental health hospital. Thankfully, that person was getting the help they needed. But because of that call, made possible by your law, that individual was blocked from buying a gun. And we don't know if they would have gone on to commit a mass shooting or to hurt themselves, but that is concerning history. And that was not available prior to your law.” View the full recording of Murphy's interview HERE ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor after Senate Republicans objected to passing by unanimous consent the Banning Unlawful Machinegun Parts (BUMP) Act, legislation to statutorily ban the sale of deadly bump stock devices that allow semiautomatic weapons to rapidly fire multiple rounds like machine guns. “I thought we were all in agreement that fully automatic weapons were too dangerous to be in the hands of civilians, that these are unquestionably weapons of war,” Murphy said. “They are designed for mass slaughter. And you just do not need a weapon that allows you to fire hundreds of rounds per minute in order to hunt, in order to protect your home, in order to shoot for sport. But apparently, Mr. President, we do not have
...Read more consensus on the question of whether Americans should have access to machine gun technology.” He continued: “I especially thought we agreed on that after what happened in Las Vegas. On October 1, 2017, a gunman opened fire on a concert from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel. There were 500 yards between that gunman on the 32nd floor and those innocent concert goers. That gunman fired about 1,100 rounds, killing 58 people – 58 people – and wounding 500. When we think about the Las Vegas tragedy, we focuses on that number. 58 people, that’s a stunning number of people to die in an instant. We don't talk about the 500 people who were injured, many of them with injuries that changed their lives forever. Everyone, whether they were injured or not, dealing with trauma that changed their lives forever. 1,100 rounds fired from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel. You know how long it took him to get off 1,100 rounds? 11 minutes. 11 minutes. That gunman was able to fire around 90 shots every 10 seconds. Why? Because he had taken a bump stock and converted a semiautomatic weapon, turning it effectively into an automatic weapon.” Murphy slammed Senate Republicans for blocking commonsense gun safety reforms, including a ban on bump stocks: “What Republicans in the United States Senate and the House of Representatives are doing on a regular basis is facilitating the mass slaughter of Americans. Handing to individuals whose brains are breaking, the tools of mass slaughter. Refusing to do the easy, popular, commonsense things to just make it a little bit harder for 58 people to be gunned down, 500 people to be injured in a 10-minute period of time. No law that we pass will end gun homicides in this country. No law that we pass will completely eliminate mass shootings. But there simply are technologies like the bump stock that turn a mass shooting in which 5 or 10 people might have died into a 58-person slaughter. It is just true that when you have a weapon like an AR-15, or you have a converted semiautomatic weapon with a bump stock, that the slaughter is worse, that more people die. Why on Earth would we choose to hand to these killers weapons that are designed for one purpose and one purpose only: mass slaughter. You do not need a bump stock in order to protect your home. You do not need a machine gun in order to hunt for sport. The only reason you need a bump stock is to engage in mass murder.” Murphy concluded, asking for Republicans to come to the table: “Republicans had an easy opportunity earlier today to just make it a little bit harder for the small subset of individuals in this country whose brains have collapsed and believe that the only way to deal with their demons is to turn a gun on others— we had a chance to make it less likely that that subset of individuals would be able to kill 58 people, like what happened in Las Vegas. And we couldn't even come to that consensus. We're open for business. If this wasn't the way today, show us the way. Tell us how we can answer Republican concerns so that we can get these weapons of war, these facilitators of mass murder, these bump stocks, off the streets.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Mr. President, we don't have to fight over everything here. It's okay if occasionally we find consensus around commonsense things that we could do together to keep our country safe. I kind of thought we had consensus on at least the idea that civilians shouldn't be able to get their hands on machine guns. I understand there's differences between Republicans and Democrats on AR-15's. That maybe not all my Republican colleagues think that everybody should go through a background check before they buy a gun. “But I thought, I thought we were all in agreement that fully automatic weapons were too dangerous to be in the hands of civilians, that these are unquestionably weapons of war. They are designed for mass slaughter. And you just do not need a weapon that allows you to fire hundreds of rounds per minute in order to hunt, in order to protect your home, in order to shoot for sport. But apparently, Mr. President, we do not have consensus on the question of whether Americans should have access to machine gun technology. “Because earlier today, Senator Heinrich, a gun owner, somebody that knows a lot about weapons, came to the floor to ask for consent that we make sure that civilians can't get their hands on a device called a bump stock that allows you to convert a semiautomatic weapon into a machine gun. That's effectively what a bump stock does. It allows you to change a semiautomatic weapon, which you have to pull the trigger in order to fire each round, into an automatic weapon, in which one physical pull of the finger allows you to fire multiple rounds. It effectively gives you access to an automatic weapon. I thought that we all agreed that automatic weapons, machine guns, should be in the hands of the military. “I especially thought we agreed on that after what happened in Las Vegas. On October 1, 2017, a gunman opened fire on a concert from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel. There were 500 yards between that gunman on the 32nd floor and those innocent concert goers. That gunman fired about 1,100 rounds, killing 58 people – 58 people – and wounding 500. When we think about the Las Vegas tragedy, we focuses on that number. 58 people, that’s a stunning number of people to die in an instant. We don't talk about the 500 people who were injured, many of them with injuries that changed their lives forever. Everyone, whether they were injured or not, dealing with trauma that changed their lives forever. 1,100 rounds fired from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel. You know how long it took him to get off 1,100 rounds? 11 minutes. 11 minutes. That gunman was able to fire around 90 shots every 10 seconds. Why? Because he had taken a bump stock and converted a semiautomatic weapon, turning it effectively into an automatic weapon. “Even Donald Trump, the biggest backer of the NRA and the gun lobby that has ever been in the White House, knew that something had to change. He put forward a regulation to ban bump stocks, and most of my Republican colleagues celebrated that change. I don't remember many of them opposing it. This month, the Supreme Court, packed with pro-gun lobby justices, most of which selected by Donald Trump, ruled that that regulation was unconstitutional. I think they got it wrong. I think they absolutely got it wrong. I think if you look at the plain reading of the statute, bump stocks are illegal, and the regulation proffered by the Trump administration should have been ruled as constitutional. But Trump’s appointees thought otherwise, they bought the argument of the gun lobby, and they ruled that bump stocks could once again be sold commercially in this country. “And so we thought that it would be an easy case to make to our colleagues, that having seen the regulation proffered by the Trump administration be ruled unconstitutional, having been offered by the Supreme Court the chance to fix that statutorily, that we could get to that business this week. But we are not, because Republicans objected to our efforts to try to pass into law a ban on bump stocks; to try to take away from psychopaths and madmen the technology that allows them to turn an automatic weapon on crowds of concert goers and get off 1,000-plus rounds in a 10-minute period of time. “What Republicans in the United States Senate and the House of Representatives are doing on a regular basis is facilitating the mass slaughter of Americans. Handing to individuals whose brains are breaking, the tools of mass slaughter. Refusing to do the easy, popular, commonsense things to just make it a little bit harder for 58 people to be gunned down, 500 people to be injured in a 10-minute period of time. No law that we pass will end gun homicides in this country. No law that we pass will completely eliminate mass shootings. But there simply are technologies like the bump stock that turn a mass shooting in which 5 or 10 people might have died into a 58-person slaughter. It is just true that when you have a weapon like an AR-15, or you have a converted semiautomatic weapon with a bump stock, that the slaughter is worse, that more people die. “Why on Earth would we choose to hand to these killers weapons that are designed for one purpose and one purpose only: mass slaughter. You do not need a bump stock in order to protect your home. You do not need a machine gun in order to hunt for sport. The only reason you need a bump stock is to engage in mass murder. “I take this personally because I have lived through an experience of mass slaughter. As has the presiding officer. I didn’t lose a loved one, but I've come to know those families from Sandy Hook like they are family, and I know there is never ever getting over losing a loved one, frankly, whether it be to a gun death by suicide or by mass slaughter. But it makes it harder to deal with the loss of a loved one in a mass killing when you know the people that you elect to positions of high office had the power to prevent the slaughter, or at least prevent it from being as bad as it was, and they chose to do nothing. “Now Republicans complain that this was a political stunt. What about everything that Joe Biden has said and done, what about the efforts that Senate Democrats have undertaken, would suggest that we aren't sincere in our desire to prevent unnecessary gun deaths? We have over and over again acted in good faith to try to find bipartisan compromise around changing the gun laws of this nation. Joe Biden has shown absolute sincerity in his desire to try to keep more people alive. This is not a gotcha unanimous consent request. This is a real attempt to effectuate what we thought was a consensus that people shouldn't have access to machine gun technology in this country. “Senate Republicans could have agreed to work with us. They could make an offer today to expedite consideration of this bill next week. And so, the only political decision that is being made here is by Republicans who are opposing a bill that is undoubtedly supported by the mass majority of Americans. If this wasn't the way the Republicans wanted to do this, then I'm open to other offers. Because we have passed bipartisan legislation to save lives. There are Republicans who have joined us, most recently on the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. “And what we know is that when we do come together and pass laws that make it harder for dangerous people to get their hands on dangerous weapons, we save lives. Urban gun deaths are down by 20% in this country. From 2022 to 2023, we saw the sharpest decline in gun murders in the history of this country. In 2024, mass shootings are down over – well, around 30% compared to the same time period in 2023. We are seeing a precipitous decline in gun violence in this country, whether it be urban homicides or mass shootings. I'm not suggesting the entire reason is the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. But you better believe that's a big part of the reason. You better believe when we pass laws that make it harder for dangerous people to get their hands on dangerous weapons, we save lives. “And what matters in this country more than protecting the physical safety of your loved ones? What matters more? Nothing. Think about it. You would give anything, anything to protect your son or daughter from physical harm. You would trade away your career, your savings, you might even give up your own life. And we have an easy opportunity, we had an easy opportunity, Republicans had an easy opportunity earlier today to just make it a little bit harder for the small subset of individuals in this country whose brains have collapsed and believe that the only way to deal with their demons is to turn a gun on others— we had a chance to make it less likely that that subset of individuals would be able to kill 58 people, like what happened in Las Vegas. And we couldn't even come to that consensus. “We're open for business. If this wasn't the way today, show us the way. Tell us how we can answer Republican concerns so that we can get these weapons of war, these facilitators of mass murder, these bump stocks, off the streets. I yield the floor.” ### Read less US Sen. Chris Murphy introduced new legislation last week to modernize the Job Corps and help connect youth to employment in strategic fields of national importance. The bill, named the Job Corps for the Next Generation Act, is co-sponsored by Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island. It takes several steps to improve the Job Corps, including improving the student experience, giving local campuses more flexibility to tailor programming for their students and staff, and creating a new career training program that provides a direct pathway for youth disconnected from the workforce to enter careers of strategic national importance. “Job Corps is an amazing program that helps train and connect young people across the country to good-paying jobs in fields like manufacturing and healthcare, but it’s
...Read more in need of some serious updates,” said Murphy in a statement. “Last month, I had the chance to talk to Job Corps students and instructors in Hartford about how we can improve the programming and set students up for success in their future careers. This legislation would modernize Job Corps and ensure that helping students secure full-time employment is the top priority. I look forward to working to make sure it’s included in reauthorization of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act this year.” Job Corps is the largest free residential career program in the country, having trained and educated over two million young people between the ages of 16-24 since its inception in 1984. The program helps students earn their college degrees, gives them job training and helps to place those who complete the program with employment opportunities. Job Corps also helps with other transitional services, such as help finding housing, child care, and transportation. “For the past 60 years, Job Corps has helped connect young people who are out of the labor force with the career and technical education they need to get ahead while addressing critical workforce needs for employers,” Reed said. “This program has helped thousands of young people find their career paths while producing long-term labor market gains. Our legislation will update this vital program to ensure it meets the needs of today’s youth and employers.” The improvements in Job Corps are aimed at assisting “disconnected” young people. These are people ages 14-26 who are either not in school, not employed, or both. Connecticut has convened the 119K Commission, which is a collaborative effort between Dalio Education, the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, and nonprofit youth service providers, and tasked it with helping young people reconnect to educational and employment opportunities. According to a report issued by the Commission, there are 119,000 young people in Connecticut who are either disconnected or at risk. That represents 19% of youth in the state, and according to the commission the bubble of disconnected youth poses a major challenge for the health and financial well-being of the disconnected, as well as the state. “I applaud Sen. Murphy and Sen. Reed for introducing the Job Corps for the Next Generation Act,” Andrew Ferguson, co-CEO of Dalio Education, said in a statement. “It’s a welcome step as we at Dalio Education continue to try and draw attention to and address the needs of the 119,000 young people in Connecticut who are at-risk of not graduating High School or disconnected from the workforce. These young people have dreams and aspirations just like everyone else. They also have enormous potential to succeed; what they need is some help. Leadership like the kind being exhibited by Senators Murphy and Reed gives us hope that more help is on the way.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined CNN’s State of the Union with Jake Tapper to discuss the Supreme Court and its recent decision to strike down a federal ban on bump stocks. In his conversation with Jake Tapper, Murphy also discussed President Biden’s support for Ukraine and the impact of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting on efforts to address gun violence. In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to reverse a ban on bump stocks, Murphy called on Republicans who once supported the ban to work with Democrats to pass legislation: “I think it's really scary that we've lost Republican support for banning machine guns. That's what a bump stock does. It turns a semi-automatic weapon into a machine gun. With one pull of the trigger, you can fire hundreds
...Read more of rounds at one time. And of course this is a Republican administration that banned bump stocks. At the time, Republicans in the Senate and the House were supportive of it. But now that they've got a Supreme Court that seems ready to unwind the entirety of the Second Amendment and take away from Congress or the executive branch the ability to keep our community safe, they’re once again lining up behind the gun industry… I would hope that Republicans who said back during the Las Vegas shooting that they want bump stocks regulated, now in the wake of the Supreme Court decision, would join us. If we pass a law, the Supreme Court says that they would honor that law.” Murphy cautioned: “My big worry, Jake, is that this Supreme Court has been signaling in some of their decisions on guns that they are ready to fundamentally rewrite the Second Amendment and take away permanently the ability of Congress to do simple things, like require people to go through a background check or move forward on taking dangerous weapons like AR-15s off of the streets. So I think this court is poised to make it very hard for Congress or state legislatures to be able to regulate guns and keep our communities and schools safe.” Murphy raised concerns over the dubious ethical standards and growing politicization within the Supreme Court: “There's a crisis on the court, in particular with respect to Justice Alito and Justice Thomas. What Justice Thomas is engaged in is just a grift, right? He's got a major political player on the outside who absolutely has political and business interests at the court paying off a justice. Justice Alito is openly displaying affiliation with political causes in public. I think it would be irresponsible the president not to talk about the fact that this court is becoming brazenly corrupt and brazenly political, and it's up to the American people, this election, to do something about that. It's also up to Congress to step up and pass a code of conduct, a code of ethical conduct for this court, before it's too late.” Murphy highlighted President Biden’s leadership in supporting Ukraine and drew a stark contrast between the president and Donald Trump: “There's no doubt that Joe Biden has been the president that is allowed Ukraine to survive and to be able to fight another day. Without Joe Biden's support for Ukraine, Congress would not have passed this latest tranche of aid. And it's just the reality that President Biden has to do two things at once. He has to campaign for reelection—the fact of the matter is, there are going to be a handful of massively funded billionaires on the Republican side that are going to put lots of money into this campaign. Joe Biden has to raise money to counter that. This peace summit, though, was extraordinary. And the fact that the entire western world came together around a simple premise: that Ukraine should be sovereign, free, and independent. And Donald Trump at that very moment was attacking the ability of Ukraine to fight for itself and signaling that if you elect Donald Trump president, he is likely going to hand Ukraine to Putin, which will upend the entire post-World War II order and potentially get the United States in direct conflicts with countries like Russia and China. An incredibly dangerous moment. A clear contrast between Joe Biden, who's going to stand up for the free world, and Donald Trump, who’s going to hand the free world over to autocrats and dictators.” On Father’s Day, Murphy remembered the students who lost their lives at Sandy Hook and honored the families who have turned grief into action: “Today is Father's Day, and I have two sons who are about the same age as those kids, a little bit younger, and I have had the gift of being able to watch them grow up over the last 12 years. A gift that was stolen from those parents in Sandy Hook. A lot of those parents have become part of a movement to try to change the laws of this country so that that never, ever happens again. There's good news to celebrate today. Urban gun homicides over the last two years have dropped by 20 to 30 percent. There are all sorts of young men and women who are alive today who are celebrating Father’s Day with their father because of the laws that we passed, laws that were made possible in part by the families from Sandy Hook who turned that grief into action. So we have a lot of work to do to make sure that something like Sandy Hook never happens again, that every kid gets the chance to graduate. But we have some reason to believe that this country is starting to turn the corner and change our laws in a way that makes our kids and our families safer.” ### Read less Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy said Sunday the Supreme Court is “readying to fundamentally rewrite the Second Amendment” after striking down a federal ban on bump stocks. Recent gun-related rulings from the high court, Murphy told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union,” signal it is prepared to “take away permanently the ability of Congress to do simple things like require people to go through a background check or move forward on taking dangerous weapons like AR-15s off of the streets.” “So I think this court is poised to make it very hard for Congress or state legislatures to be able to regulate guns and keep our communities and schools safe,” he said. The Supreme Court’s striking down of the federal ban on bump stocks marked the latest opinion from the
...Read more conservative bench rolling back firearm regulations. Former President Donald Trump had pushed for the ban in response to a 2017 mass shooting that killed 58 people at an outdoor music festival in Las Vegas. But it was successfully challenged by a Texas gun store owner who purchased two of the devices in 2018 and turned them over to the government after the prohibition before suing to get them back. Bump stocks allow a shooter to convert a semi automatic rifle into a weapon that can fire hundreds of rounds a minute. “This is a Republican administration that banned bump stocks. At the time, Republicans in the Senate and the House were supportive of it,” the Connecticut Democrat said Sunday. “But now that they have got a Supreme Court that seems ready to unwind the entirety of the Second Amendment and take away from Congress or the executive branch the ability to keep our communities safe, they’re once again lining up behind the gun industry.” Murphy’s comments echo the response of gun control advocacy groups, which argued Friday that the court’s ruling will have a dangerous impact in a country constantly reeling from gun violence. The overwhelming majority of Republicans, however, celebrated the court’s decision, arguing that they long believed the ban on bump stocks was unconstitutional. While the action was taken under the Trump administration, many Republicans argued it was the wrong move at the time. GOP Sen. Tom Cotton told Tapper in a separate interview Sunday that the bump stock ban “treads close” to an infringement of the Second Amendment. “I would suggest before we infringe on the rights of law-abiding American citizens, we should crack down on violent crime and gang crimes,” he said. Though the case didn’t rely on the Second Amendment, it did put the debate about guns back on the court’s docket in one of the most closely watched controversies this year. In that sense, the decision was the latest from the high court to side with gun rights groups. Still, Murphy – who has made gun safety legislation his life’s work following the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut – said “there is good news to celebrate today,” pointing to dropping urban gun homicide rates. “We have a lot of work to do to make sure that something like Sandy Hook never happens again, that every kid gets the chance to graduate,” he said. “But we have some reason to believe that this country is starting to turn the corner and change our laws in a way that makes our kids and our families safer.” Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Garland v. Cargill, which struck down a 2017 ban on bump stocks. “The horrific reality is that this decision by a radical, right-wing Court is going to cost innocent lives. In October of 2017, 60 people were slaughtered and more than 800 others were injured in Las Vegas, Nevada, by a mass shooter who fired more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition with semiautomatic rifles legally modified with bump stocks. There is no reason anyone would need a semiautomatic rifle to fire more rapidly unless they want to shoot and kill as many people as quickly as possible. Today’s decision makes all of us less safe and proves this Court has no qualms about legislating from the bench against the
...Read more will of the American people. Congress needs to act immediately to ban these dangerous devices once and for all.” In 2022, Murphy authored and helped pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the first significant gun safety legislation in three decades. Last year, Murphy joined his colleagues in reintroducing the Assault Weapons Ban, which would ban the sale, transfer, manufacture and importation of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines and other high-capacity ammunition feeding devices, as well as the Age 21 Act, which would raise the minimum age to purchase assault weapons from 18 to 21, the same requirement that currently exists in law for handguns. ### Read less For the last 85 years, Harvard has run a longitudinal study on human happiness. Researchers track thousands of participants, wealthy and poor, married and single, and ask them detailed questions about their lives every two years. The study's conclusion about what drives happiness is pretty simple. Your ability to put food on the table and keep a roof over your family's head is obviously vital; but it is the strength of your relationships and your sense of belonging, not the size of your bank account or the prestige of your career, that is the clearest route to making you happy. Deep, meaningful relationships with other people, and a sense of connection to others, are the most important indicators. What people want is connection, positive companionship, purpose and power over their own
...Read more lives. This should come as no shock. By nature, humans are deeply solidaristic creatures. Some psychologists compare our need to be connected with others to our biological needs for food or water. Just like how hunger motivates us to seek out food, and thirst motivates us to seek out water, feelings of loneliness and disconnection motivate us to seek out higher purpose and connection. That’s why it feels so satisfying to attend a music concert, play on a sports team, or join a social or civic organization. We want to be with other people. We want to be part of something bigger than ourselves. When social isolation becomes the norm and our culture and economy send signals that contributing to the common good is a sucker’s game, that unsurprisingly drives societal anxiety and breakdown. We do not want to be living on islands, and we rebel when the waters start surrounding us. But a half-century of neoliberal economic and social order have placed Americans further away from connection and higher purpose than at any other time in our nation’s history. And the consequence is a nation whose citizens feel as if it’s falling apart at the seams. Neoliberalism, the controlling ideology for most of Western democracy for the last 50 years, elevates the experience of the individual above the community. Conservative British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher famously declared that "there is no such thing as society; there are just individual men and women and there are families." Neoliberalism holds that individuals should be self-reliant and resilient, and that lightly regulated and incentivized private markets will deliver the building blocks of happiness and fulfillment. There are countless possibilities to help tilt the balance back toward connectivity and the common good. Despite this promise, neoliberalism has delivered the opposite: a fragmented, atomistic, balkanized culture, and a dog-eat-dog, winner-take-all economy. Unregulated smartphone technology and social media addicts us in virtual worlds. The ascent and dominance of companies like Amazon and Google and Walmart has erased local economies and local identity. Lightly regulated markets have not delivered broad-based prosperity, but instead an economy of scarcity that pits workers and consumers against each other in a contest for the table scraps left over after the elites finish dining. The ascent of individualism over communitarianism has left many Americans feeling alone and empty and in search of something more than just personal economic survival in a me-first world. People do not want to live in a world where all we do is surf social media, look out for ourselves, and forsake any obligations to each other. The sooner political leaders realize this, the better. For my part, I have recently launched a national conversation with Republican Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah to figure out what role public policy can play in helping Americans find more connectivity and easier access to higher purpose. Our goal is to find consensus around a set of ideas that both the left and right can agree on to help reverse our societal trend toward social isolation and our economic trend toward universally prioritizing profit and efficiency over the common good. We’re in the early days, but we’ve had good early discussions and I can easily see a set of policies that both Republicans and Democrats can join in supporting to reverse the damaging impacts of decades of unbridled economic neoliberalism. For example, we know that healthy membership organizations-from churches to labor unions-are most often where people find companionship and higher purpose. Why can’t government work more purposefully to help these institutions grow their ability to reach more people? Or what about the growing right-left consensus on social media regulation? TikTok, Facebook, and Instagram facilitate our withdrawal from one another, and there is an increasing belief that the government needs to step in and curtail the addictive technology that sucks us into our phones and away from much more fulfilling, in-person experiences. Finally, expanding public-service programs is a way to connect people—especially at a formative age—with the psychological high that comes from giving back to your community and putting the welfare of others first. It’s a targeted but powerful way to give more people access to the positive feeling of working for the common good. There are countless possibilities to help tilt the balance back toward connectivity and the common good, and away from neoliberalism’s blind faith in individualism and market fundamentalism. But whatever direction we take, it is important for us to acknowledge that the current methods to measure the success of public policy are increasingly irrelevant. The unemployment rate is historically low, inflation is going down, and crime is decreasing. But because people are still disconnected from each other and have enormous trouble finding a life purpose other than accumulating material achievement, our rates of addiction, self-harm, and unhappiness are growing, not shrinking. America’s seminal founding document, the Declaration of Independence, commands government to guarantee every citizen the right to pursue happiness. This right has been systematically undermined by neoliberalism’s canonization of the individual and devaluation of the common good. It’s time for policymakers to realize that if we don’t invest in policies that reconnect us to each other and build our sense of obligation to community, not just our own success, that inalienable right will just keep drifting further and further out of reach. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Friday hosted a listening session with Chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Lina Khan to hear from Connecticut workers impacted by non-compete clauses. Joined by workers across industries, labor leaders, state officials, and other stakeholders, they discussed how the FTC’s rule to ban non-competes will help raise wages, foster innovation, and give workers in Connecticut more economic freedom. “In this country today we suffer from a handful of problems that continue to plague our economy,” Murphy said. “One is stagnant wages. People need to make more – the amount of money coming in is not meeting the amount of money that is necessary to go out in order to
...Read more live in this country – and we have to have an aggressive strategy of continuing to raise wages and raise income levels for American families. Second, we need more innovation in this country. We are going to thrive as an economy if we have more businesses that are starting up, if we are the place where innovation happens. And the proliferation of non-compete clauses frustrates both our effort to raise wages and our effort to be an innovation economy.” In his opening statement, Murphy emphasized the role of non-competes in stifling prosperity for American workers and impeding innovation: “The majority of workers that are subjected to non-competes are low-income workers and middle-income workers, workers that have no real access to any proprietary information. What we see here in Connecticut is that it's homecare workers that have non-competes, that it's nurses that have non-competes applied to them. In some cases, it's sandwich shop clerks that have non-competes. And in those cases, it is simply being used as an effort to restrain the fluidity of the labor market. The only reason that you apply a non-compete to a low-wage entry-level worker is so that you can bind them to that job and stifle the ability of the market to work properly, whereby workers get to bargain for higher wages because if you don't pay them what they deserve, they're going to go someplace else… And what we know is that because people at the higher income levels and the executive level can't leave their jobs, we are stifling the growth of innovation and other new businesses. Because when you lock in executives, when you lock in higher level talent, they are not able to go pursue their dreams, take their ideas to the next level through the creation of their own company.” Khan echoed Murphy’s sentiments, highlighting key lessons from her work with the FTC to ban the use of non-competes: “As Senator Murphy mentioned, these non-compete clauses started off in the boardroom, but they've really proliferated. And so as we started looking at this issue, we realized that we're talking fast food workers, security guards, janitors, gardeners, journalists, health care workers. After we proposed our rule to ban non-competes, we actually heard from 26,000 people across the country, from every state, from every walk of life. 25,000 of those comments supported our ban. We also, as we undertook this work, learned a few interesting things. One is that non-competes depress wages, not just for the workers that are directly covered by the non-compete, but actually for workers as a whole. Because what happens when you have a non-compete is that the workers that are directly covered can't leave their jobs as easily, and that means there's less fluidity and less dynamism in the labor market as a whole. And so workers as a whole suffer here. We also saw that small businesses, and actually businesses across the spectrum, were also quite supportive of a ban, in part because we've heard from businesses that when they're looking to scale up or when they're looking to enter a market and grow, sometimes they see that they hit a ceiling very quickly, not because customers don't like their services, but because the relevant talent pool is all locked up through these non-competes. And so we got a lot of supportive comments not just from workers, but actually from small businesses, from medium-sized businesses, from entrepreneurs, people who are well positioned to go start their own businesses, but are not able to because of these non-competes.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday authored an op-ed for the American Prospect arguing that, by elevating individualism over the common good, neoliberalism has made it harder for Americans to find happiness. Murphy advocated for a public policy that promotes connection and rebuilds a sense of obligation to community. “We want to be with other people,” Murphy wrote. “We want to be part of something bigger than ourselves. When social isolation becomes the norm and our culture and economy send signals that contributing to the common good is a sucker’s game, that unsurprisingly drives societal anxiety and breakdown. We do not want to be living on islands, and we rebel when the waters start surrounding us. But a half-century of neoliberal economic and social order have
...Read more placed Americans further away from connection and higher purpose than at any other time in our nation’s history. And the consequence is a nation whose citizens feel as if it’s falling apart at the seams.” Murphy pointed to the failure of neoliberal policies to protect Americans’ pursuit of happiness: “Neoliberalism holds that individuals should be self-reliant and resilient, and that lightly regulated and incentivized private markets will deliver the building blocks of happiness and fulfillment. Despite this promise, neoliberalism has delivered the opposite: a fragmented, atomistic, balkanized culture, and a dog-eat-dog, winner-take-all economy. Unregulated smartphone technology and social media addicts us in virtual worlds. The ascent and dominance of companies like Amazon and Google and Walmart has erased local economies and local identity. Lightly regulated markets have not delivered broad-based prosperity, but instead an economy of scarcity that pits workers and consumers against each other in a contest for the table scraps left over after the elites finish dining.” On his work with Utah’s Republican Governor Spencer Cox to restore the common good, Murphy wrote: “We’ve had good early discussions and I can easily see a set of policies that both Republicans and Democrats can join in supporting to reverse the damaging impacts of decades of unbridled economic neoliberalism. For example, we know that healthy membership organizations—from churches to labor unions—are most often where people find companionship and higher purpose. Why can’t government work more purposefully to help these institutions grow their ability to reach more people? Or what about the growing right-left consensus on social media regulation? TikTok, Facebook, and Instagram facilitate our withdrawal from one another, and there is an increasing belief that the government needs to step in and curtail the addictive technology that sucks us into our phones and away from much more fulfilling, in-person experiences. Finally, expanding public-service programs is a way to connect people—especially at a formative age—with the psychological high that comes from giving back to your community and putting the welfare of others first. It’s a targeted but powerful way to give more people access to the positive feeling of working for the common good.” Murphy concluded: “America’s seminal founding document, the Declaration of Independence, commands government to guarantee every citizen the right to pursue happiness. This right has been systematically undermined by neoliberalism’s canonization of the individual and devaluation of the common good. It’s time for policymakers to realize that if we don’t invest in policies that reconnect us to each other and build our sense of obligation to community, not just our own success, that inalienable right will just keep drifting further and further out of reach.” Read the full op-ed here. ### Read less Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan visited Hartford Friday to speak with labor leaders, state lawmakers and worker advocates about her agency’s new ban on so-called “non-compete” language in job contracts. The rule, finalized earlier this year, prohibits non-compete clauses, which are commonly used in a range of industries to restrict employees from going to work for another employer in the same field. The ban also renders most existing non-competes unenforceable — with exceptions for some senior executives — and employers have to notify workers that they can’t be enforced. The rule is slated to go into effect in early September, but legal challenges could block it. But even if it successfully takes effect, there are some industries and employers that won’t be subject to the
...Read more ban. State lawmakers and Connecticut’s Congressional delegation have proposed more comprehensive bans, but so far those efforts have fallen short. Nonprofit organizations, including hospitals, don’t fall under the FTC’s jurisdiction. Khan said banks and transportation companies wouldn’t be covered either. “There will be a gap. And that’s where we believe state enforcers and others can also step in,” Khan said. The FTC rule, when it goes into effect, “would create a floor,” Khan said. State laws could go beyond that. Non-compete agreements originated as a way to prevent former employees from sharing sensitive and proprietary information — and they tended to be focused on high-level employees who had access to a company’s trade secrets. “But they’ve really proliferated,” Khan said at Friday’s roundtable, which was held at the union headquarters of service workers’ union 32BJ SEIU. “As we started looking at this issue, you realize that we’re talking [about] fast food workers, security guards, janitors, gardeners, journalists, health care workers.” According to the FTC, roughly 30 million American workers are now subject to non-compete agreements. The agency has argued that non-compete clauses stifle competition in the labor market and — as the practice has spread to a wider range of industries — the agreements have held down wages for workers who have little to no leverage to negotiate or leave for a higher salary. The language varies by company and industry. It might prevent an employee from working for a competitor for a specified window of time. Some expire during a worker’s tenure, but many endure regardless of the length of employment, even if that worker gets laid off. Critics of the ban argue that the FTC does not have the legal authority to implement its rule. Shortly after the FTC’s April announcement of the final rule, pro-business groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce sued to block it. In a statement at the time, Chamber president and CEO Suzanne P. Clark called the ban “not only unlawful but also a blatant power grab that will undermine American businesses’ ability to remain competitive.” Clark added, “This decision sets a dangerous precedent for government micromanagement of business and can harm employers, workers, and our economy.” The Chamber’s lawsuit was stayed in May to allow a similar complaint filed earlier by a tax services company to go forward. The Chamber has since intervened to join that lawsuit, and earlier this week it filed a brief asking the court to stay the non-compete ban’s effective date and issue a preliminary injunction. “Depending upon what happens in [the courts], it’s really important to have state laws,” Terri Gerstein, director of Wagner Labor Initiative at New York University’s school of public service, said at Friday’s roundtable. “The FTC rule is such a powerful and important step, but I don’t think it obviates the need for action at the state level.” Addressing the state lawmakers in the room — which included Sens. Jorge Cabrera, D-Hamden, and Jeff Gordon, R-Woodstock, as well as Reps. Manny Sanchez, D-New Britain, and Josh Elliot, D-Hamden — Khan offered her agency’s support. “We do things like write letters supporting various types of legislation. We’ve even sent FTC staff to go testify,” she said. “We have a bunch of advocacy tools that we can also use to support state efforts, and so please don’t hesitate to reach out if there’s anything in that vein.” U.S. Sens. Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal also attended Friday’s roundtable. Murphy pointed to federal legislation he introduced that seeks to limit non-compete clauses in employment contracts. He said that effort is ongoing. “We continue to pursue the federal legislation. Our legislation is bipartisan and continues to pick up support on both sides of the aisle,” Murphy said. “Obviously, the sponsors of this legislation are very supportive of what the FTC is doing, but we want to buttress that with law that spans administrations.” Murphy said the risk of FTC rulemaking is that a new presidential administration could reverse those regulations. “Our law would be permanent,” he said. Read less Come September, U.S. workers will no longer be subject to noncompete clauses that keep them from working for rival companies. Federal Trade Commission chair Lina Khan visited Connecticut on Friday to talk about the new rules. Khan, who met with workers and lawmakers at the Building Service Workers Union (32BJ SEIU) in Hartford, said noncompetes keep wages low and suppress new ideas. “We're talking fast food workers, security guards, janitors, gardeners, journalists, health care workers,” Khan said. “And after we proposed our rule to ban noncompetes, we actually heard from 26,000 people across the country, from every state, from every walk of life. 25,000 of those comments supported our ban.” Eighteen percent of the U.S. workforce is covered by noncompete clauses, according to the FTC.
...Read more Stacey Taylor, president of the Connecticut State Medical Society, said the agreements have hurt her patients. “I was working with one large health care organization and because of a noncompete, had to relocate, not relocate my house, but drive much further to work at another location that most of my patients could not get to,” Taylor said. “Many of them have not seen a primary care provider since I left, because there are none." U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) said the new law is expected to raise wages in Connecticut by more than $900 million annually. “What we see here in Connecticut is that it's home care workers that have noncompetes, it's nurses that have noncompetes applied to them, in some cases, it's sandwich shop clerks that have noncompetes. And in those cases, it is simply being used as an effort to restrain the fluidity of the labor market,” Murphy said. “The only reason that you apply a noncompete to a low wage entry-level worker is so that you can bind them to that job, and stifle the ability of the market to work properly, whereby workers get to bargain for higher wages, because if you don't pay them what they deserve, they're gonna go someplace else. So you don't let them go someplace else, then as an employer, as an economy, you can better keep wages down,” he said. The law has been challenged in Texas federal court by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. A decision is expected mid-summer. “We've filed our briefs, and we think we're on very solid ground; if courts follow the law, follow what the FTC Act says, we think we should prevail,” Khan said. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday released the following statement after Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the Right to IVF Act, legislation that would guarantee the right to IVF services. If passed, the bill, which Murphy co-sponsored, would have established a nationwide right to in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and eliminated barriers for the millions of families looking to use IVF to start and grow a family. “In the two years since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Republicans across the country have taken every opportunity to further restrict reproductive health care. When Alabama’s Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos created during IVF are ‘children,’ this
...Read more incredibly common and effective technology that helps people struggling with fertility was jeopardized. Republicans won’t stop until they pass a nationwide abortion ban complete with an ‘embryonic personhood’ provision that would prevent millions of Americans from building their family without fear of being prosecuted for murder. Republicans can claim they support IVF, but today’s vote on a bill to guarantee that right proves otherwise.” Last week, Murphy released a statement after Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the Right to Contraception Act. In March, Murphy co-sponsored legislation to protect IVF access and other assisted reproductive technology, but passage was blocked by Senate Republicans. That month, Murphy also submitted an amicus brief calling on the Supreme Court to affirm the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) requires hospitals to provide emergency stabilizing care, including abortion care. In January, Murphy joined 263 Members of Congress in submitting an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to reverse a dangerous ruling that would restrict access to an FDA-approved abortion drug. Last year, Murphy co-sponsored a slate of legislation to protect reproductive rights, including the Expanding Access to Family Planning Act, the Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act, the Let Doctors Provide Reproductive Health Care Act, the Women’s Health Protection Act, and a Senate resolution expressing opposition to the use of state resources and power against Americans seeking reproductive healthcare, such as abortion services, contraception, and gender-affirming care. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Thursday released the following statement on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, preserving access to mifepristone: “The Supreme Court made the right call today to throw out this case that was bogus from the start. Mifepristone is a safe, effective drug approved by the FDA more than 20 years ago, and the extremist right wing is hellbent on banning it as part of their plan to enact a national abortion ban. While mifepristone can stay on the market for now, it’s concerning that today’s decision leaves the door open for future cases that could limit or ban access to a medication that has become even more essential as red states
...Read more have passed draconian abortion bans. Congress must act to protect women’s health and the right to make decisions about their own bodies.” In January, Murphy submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, urging the Supreme Court to reverse a stay from Texas District Court that would override the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s scientific judgment and dramatically curtail access to mifepristone. Murphy also introduced a resolution in support of equitable, science-based policies governing access to medication abortion. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) announced the Save Our Small (SOS) Farms Act of 2024, legislation to improve access to disaster assistance programs and crop insurance for small-sized farms. “Connecticut farmers have always been the core of our rural communities, but as they often run small operations, they face some unique challenges. It’s increasingly difficult for them to recover from massive crop losses when extreme weather hits, like the flooding last summer, because they often don’t qualify for traditional crop insurance or existing disaster relief programs. By expanding coverage and assistance, lowering costs for small farmers, and directing the USDA to develop more responsive coverage options, this legislation would ensure our small
...Read more farmers have the support they need to weather future storms,” said Murphy. “Extreme flooding and droughts have devastated Connecticut small farms in recent years. Climate change has made it abundantly clear that we need a stronger safety net that better supports farmers facing the unique challenges plaguing New England farms,” said Blumenthal. “Our measure makes necessary reforms to programs that simply do not work for farmers by making coverage and assistance more accessible and affordable than before. Small farms are an essential part of our state’s culture, environment, and economy—they deserve protection when a disaster strikes.” The Non-Insured Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) offers farmers the opportunity to purchase coverage for losses due to natural disasters in areas where crop insurance coverage is unavailable. Unfortunately, payouts from NAP are often delayed and insufficient. In 2022, only 19% of the 1.9 million farms in the U.S. were enrolled in crop insurance, so NAP becomes their only lifeline in the absence of bipartisan supplemental disaster funding. Last year, unprecedented flooding throughout the region devastated Connecticut farms resulting in significant crop losses. In 2022, Connecticut saw one of the worst droughts in recent memory. However, barriers to crop insurance eligibility requirements prevented many Connecticut farms from receiving necessary federal assistance. The SOS Farms Act would help farmers who rely on NAP by lowering the cost of purchasing coverage, reducing paperwork burdens, and increasing indemnity payouts from $300,000 to $600,000. The bill would also require the Farm Service Agency to improve data collection at the county level to improve the accuracy of payouts. Additionally, the bill includes an on-ramp to incentivize and assist farmers in moving to a true insurance policy under the Whole Farm Revenue Protection Program. Congresswoman Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-05) led the Connecticut delegation in introducing companion legislation in the House last week. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Thursday chaired a hearing of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the nominations of Jennifer D. Gavito, Joshua M. Harris, Peter W. Lord, Juan Carlos Iturregui and Tracey Ann Jacobson to serve as U.S. Ambassadors to Libya, Algeria, Senegal and Guinea-Bissau, the Dominican Republic, and Iraq, respectively. Murphy expressed skepticism towards the current U.S. military presence in Iraq, pointing to declining utility and growing risks to personnel: “I talked about my distaste for the drawdown of diplomatic presence in Baghdad at the end of the Trump Administration. I think it’s important that we have robust
...Read more diplomatic and economic engagement with our Iraqi partners, but I do worry about the middling number of American military forces in the region. We’ve got about 2,500 troops, about 6,000 contractors — our presence is really not enough to shift the balance of power, but what it is, too often, is an easy, sometimes unprotected, target for anti-American militias.” Murphy continued: “There is an argument to be made that our presence, on balance, is starting to become more of a liability than a net benefit – I’m talking about our military presence. David Schenker, who was the previous administration’s Assistant Secretary of State for the region, and who I have a lot of respect for, recently argued that it’s time for the United States to start thinking about how to best downsize the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Outside of the Kurdistan contingent, there is less and less utility in the ongoing U.S. military deployment. “ Turning to the Caribbean, Murphy asked Iturregui about the role that a U.S. Ambassador to the Dominican Republic could play in bolstering efforts to reduce gun trafficking and violence in the region: “I want to talk to you about gun violence in the Caribbean. It’s amongst the highest in the world. Customs data indicates that it’s U.S. weapons that are almost always the ones being recovered in crime scenes in the Dominican Republic. 97% of firearms recovered in the D.R. and submitted to the ATF for tracing were manufactured or imported from the United States. There’s a Caribbean firearms roadmap that’s been developed to try to cut down on gun trafficking, largely coming from the United States into the region. Obviously, this matters a lot because of the instability in Haiti today. Can you just say a word about what you understand about this roadmap and what kind of contributions our embassy and an ambassador on the ground can make in trying to interrupt the flow of weapons into the region, and specifically into the D.R., many of which end up moving very quickly into the conflict in Haiti?” Murphy also pressed Gavito on U.S. plans to reestablish a diplomatic presence in Libya, underscoring the importance of balancing risk-mitigation with engagement: “We’ve got a request to establish a diplomatic travel support operation facility, a DTSOF. Tell me a little bit about how we make sure that doesn’t become the new permanent normal. How do we stay on track to get an embassy back up and established, and while we are in this interim period, where we’ve got this sort of temporary facility, how do we manage our risk tolerance to make sure that we are actually getting our diplomats, who may be temporarily housed there, out into the field to talk to people instead of just sitting in this facility and monitoring from inside high walls?” A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with the nominees can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you all for your testimony here today. We have a busy morning in the Senate, and so many of our colleagues may submit questions for the record and may join us, many of them watching from their offices. Let me start with you, Ambassador Jacobson. Obviously, this is a very difficult assignment. I talked about my distaste for the drawdown of diplomatic presence in Baghdad at the end of the Trump Administration. I think it’s important that we have robust diplomatic and economic engagement with our Iraqi partners, but I do worry about the middling number of American military forces in the region. We’ve got about 2,500 troops, about 6,000 contractors — our presence is really not enough to shift the balance of power, but what it is, too often, is an easy, sometimes unprotected, target for anti-American militias. “There is an argument to be made that our presence, on balance, is starting to become more of a liability than a net benefit. I’m talking about our military presence. David Schenker, who was the previous administration’s Assistant Secretary of State for the region, and who I have a lot of respect for, recently argued that it’s time for the United States to start thinking about how to best downsize the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Outside of the Kurdistan contingent, there is less and less utility in the ongoing U.S. military deployment. “I’m not going to ask you to take a position on our force numbers. But, as you’re preparing for this assignment, what is your understanding of the comparable efficacy between our diplomatic presence and our military presence, and can you speak at all about how our military contingent there sometimes complicates relationships with the Iraqi government, for instance, when we have to take retaliatory strikes against the militias inside of Iraq as a means to protect our military contingent inside Iraq?” JACOBSON: “Thank you for the question, Senator. As you know from the time we spent together in Kosovo, I have always approached our engagement as the United States as a three-legged stool. We have to have diplomacy, we have to have development, and we have to have our defense structures together. As you know, last year, the U.S. and Iraq announced a higher military coordinating commission which is looking at how our military component of Operation Inherent Resolve eventually evolves into a bilateral security arrangements, and that is informed by a series of important factors including operational and environmental concerns, the threat that’s continued to be posed by ISIS and the capabilities of the Iraqi security forces. I think this engagement remains very important with regards to the diplomatic platform. As you know, we have several of our agencies present in Iraq, and if confirmed, I would want to play the appropriate role of an ambassador in a whole-of-government approach which gets to our national interests in the region. And I would look at security, economic development, democratic development and the relationship with the Iraq Kurdistan region as all parts of a broad 360-degree relationship which is not only important for Iraq's advancement but also stands as a way to bolster the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people against Iranian influence.” MURPHY: “I don’t obviously expect for you to have an opinion today, but I look forward to consulting with you once you have boots on the ground to really understand what the comparable efficacy is of a relatively small military deployment there, which too often end up being sitting ducks for the folks who are trying to provoke our forces and interests in the region. “Mr. Iturregui, I want to talk to you about gun violence in the Caribbean. It’s amongst the highest in the world. Customs data indicates that it’s U.S. weapons that are almost always the ones being recovered in crime scenes in the Dominican Republic. 97% of firearms recovered in the D.R. and submitted to the ATF for tracing were manufactured or imported from the United States. There’s a Caribbean firearms roadmap that’s been developed to try to cut down on gun trafficking, largely coming from the United States into the region. Obviously, this matters a lot because of the instability in Haiti today. Can you just say a word about what you understand about this roadmap and what kind of contributions our embassy and an ambassador on the ground can make in trying to interrupt the flow of weapons into the region, and specifically into the D.R., many of which end up moving very quickly into the conflict in Haiti?” ITURREGUI: “Thank you Senator. Indeed, it is a very serious problem. From what I read—I haven’t had the opportunity to be fully briefed— but I know that we have a robust presence in the embassy in Santo Domingo of U.S. law enforcement agencies, and they are working very closely with the Dominican government in tackling this challenge. The administration, as you know, also has, with your support, in motion, the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, and I understand that those efforts are being ramped up. We are not only coordinating with Dominican authorities but with other governments in the Caribbean basin.” MURPHY: “I’ve got more questions. I’ll save them for a second round and I’ll turn it over now to Senator Young.” MURPHY: “Thanks, Senator Ricketts. Senator Young and I going to start a second round of questions. Mr. Harris, Algeria has historically supported the Polisario front, whose main goal is the independence of Western Sahara from Moroccan control. They regularly deliver arms, training, financial aid. The Biden Administration has sought to revive the U.N. process on the final status of the Western Sahara, but at the same time, they haven’t rescinded the Trump Administration’s policy of recognizing Morocco's claim of sovereignty over the territory. Do you perceive these policies to be at odds, and what kind of progress do you think that we can make on trying to move forward concessions or actions that we would need from Algeria to resolve this long-standing crisis?” HARRIS: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I think that we have spoken very clearly to the importance of enabling a U.N. political process on Western Sahara to move forward; [the importance of] negotiations leading to a lasting and enduring resolution to this extremely difficult challenge developing over many years without further delay. I have had the good occasion to work very closely with the personal envoy of the Secretary-General, Mr. de Mistura, as he works to intensify these consultations and also to consult privately with partners including Algeria about how all players could lend their influence to the success of that U.N. political process. I believe there is a recognition of the fundamental challenges at play and also the importance of ensuring that political process is successful. Algeria certainly has a very important role to play in that conversation, and if confirmed, a central element of my efforts with the Algerian government would be to further intensify that dialogue so that that U.N. process could finally gain some traction.” MURPHY: “Great, thank you for that. Mr. Lord, talk to us a little bit about U.S.-Senegal security cooperation. Senegal is really critical to U.S. security efforts in west Africa. It’s probably got the most competent security forces in the Sahel. Given the myriad problems facing Senegal's neighbors, what can we do to expand Senegal’s positive security influence in the region? What are going to be the first, second and third steps you’re going to take and ask Congress to support on this mission?” LORD: “Thank you, Senator, for the question. Indeed, we have a long history of cooperation with Senegal on security arrangements and assistance, which has included professionalization of their forces so that they can engage in global stability operations. Senegal is, on a security and diplomatic level, engaged on the difficult problems in the Sahel, both through the west Africa sub-regional organization ECOWAS and through the United Nations. I think one of the key things that we can do is listen to the new government's ideas about how to approach this situation. They have intense interest in seeing a resolution. Many of our interests overlap with them. And so working together with them on a diplomatic plan, as well as providing additional support to their security forces. If confirmed this will be a top priority in working with the new government on how to move this forward in west Africa, because we have very serious concerns but also shared interests with Senegal.” MURPHY: “I also sit on both the Defense Appropriations subcommittee and the Foreign Relations subcommittee, so I look forward to your recommendations on how we can continue to support that cooperative relationship. Ms. Gavito, let’s talk about the embassy. So we’ve got a request to establish a diplomatic travel support operation facility, a DTSOF. Tell me a little bit about how we make sure that doesn’t become the new permanent normal. How do we stay on track to get an embassy back up and established, and while we are in this interim period, where we’ve got this sort of temporary facility, how do we manage our risk tolerance to make sure that we are actually getting our diplomats, who may be temporarily housed there, out into the field to talk to people instead of just sitting in this facility and monitoring from inside high walls?” GAVITO: “Thank you very much, Senator. I think that this is an extraordinarily important step forward, and I was remiss in responding to Senator Ricketts with the same. So much of what we do requires us to be present on the ground. With so much at stake with Russia, with China, having a persistent presence there is absolutely key to having the flexibility, the agility to engage Libyans on all of these range of issues on a consistent basis. This decision to move forward with a persistent presence, affectionately called the DTSOF, came after 2-2.5 years of an increased tempo of short visits into Libya. “Throughout that process the department of state has reviewed at every juncture the security to ensure that everything that is being done is done with an eye towards ensuring that our personnel on the ground are able to stay safe. Of course, that requires constant evaluation. And I think that is fundamentally the answer to your question. There is no automaticity to any part of this process. At every juncture I commit to this committee that we will continue, that I personally will continue, to review the security on the ground, which remains complicated despite the fact that the 2020 cease-fire has largely held, to make sure that everything that we are doing to advance our mission there is again done with the prioritization of the security of our personnel. I’d like to, if I may, add that this commitment is extremely personal to me. Chris Stevens was a friend. I had dinner with him the week before he was murdered. It is never far from my mind, and as I said, I can only commit to you that as we move forward with engaging in Libya on a more sustained basis– you’re right, we cannot sit behind walls. The Russian ambassador in Libya is using as a talking point, ‘We are here and the United States is not.’ It’s all over the media. So we have to get out, we have to engage.” MURPHY: “His death and that tragedy is never far from our mind as well. But the reality is that tragedy did fundamentally alter our risk tolerance and calculation throughout the foreign service in a way that I think has not always accrued to the benefit of the projection of U.S. influence. So I say this to all of you, I think that Senator Risch and I have had a particular interest in trying to reorder the way in which we do reviews of incidents in the field so as not to be overly punitive of our leadership that often has to make tough decisions to put people in harm's way in order to represent the United States. “I’m going to use my prerogative to ask Ambassador Jacobson one last question which is sort of a ‘step back’ question. You’re a rare breed, having served three times as ambassador. You’ve served at a very difficult time in the Foreign Service, a moment when American foreign policy changes very quickly from administration to administration. It is just an absolute marvel to me, the quality and commitment of the people who work in our embassies despite the fact that they might be running one mission before an election and asked to do something fundamentally different thereafter. Talk to me about how you try to make sure that we continue to boost and maintain morale amongst the people that work for you. We teach flexibility and agility to our workforce, even in a moment when from election to election the mission becomes very, very different. Give us a little advice as to what you’ve learned during this difficult time as a leader of men and women at three different embassies.” JACOBSON: “Senator, thank you so much for this question. This is very near and dear to my heart. And when you are someone as long in the tooth as I am, there is no greater privilege or pleasure than supporting the teammates who are rising up through the ranks. So the focus on morale and professional development has really been a hallmark of my career, including during three years in a leadership role at the Foreign Service Institute. It’s true that we often serve in difficult conditions, war, postwar, illnesses, our families may or may not be with us. You have to think of what motivates people to join the foreign service in the first place, and that is a sense of service. I come to this naturally from a military family. Both of my grandparents, my maternal grandparents, served in the British army during World War II. My sister was married to a Navy pilot. Service is in our blood. I think all of my classmates, all of my colleagues here, have a similar story. Keeping morale up means keeping focus on why we joined in the first place— the privilege of representing the American people overseas – and also, what are the missions that we are striving to achieve. I think that one of the most important things that an ambassador does as a facilitator of the team’s work is to keep that vision of the overarching goals first and foremost in everybody’s mind. If we know what we are about and trying to achieve, if we have organized ourselves as an interagency team, including in collaboration with Congress, to keep our eye on those overarching goals and bring all the different skills and experiences and authorities to achieve those goals, and we make a little bit of progress, that’s what motivates people to keep doing the job, even when conditions are tough.” MURPHY: “Thank you, Ambassador.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.) on Wednesday introduced the Job Corps for the Next Generation Act to increase access to Job Corps programming and improve student outcomes. The legislation would improve the student experience, give local campuses more flexibility to tailor programming for their students and staff, and create a new career training program that provides a direct pathway for youth disconnected from the workforce to enter careers of strategic national importance. Job Corps is the largest free residential education and job training program for young adults ages 16-24 that helps students complete their high school education, teaches them high-value
...Read more technical skills, and connects them to employment. “Job Corps is an amazing program that helps train and connect young people across the country to good-paying jobs in fields like manufacturing and healthcare, but it’s in need of some serious updates. Last month, I had the chance to talk to Job Corps students and instructors in Hartford about how we can improve the programming and set students up for success in their future careers. This legislation would modernize Job Corps and ensure that helping students secure full-time employment is the top priority. I look forward to working to make sure it’s included in reauthorization of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act this year,” said Murphy. “For the past sixty years, Job Corps has helped connect young people who are out of the labor force with the career and technical education they need to get ahead while addressing critical workforce needs for employers. This program has helped thousands of young people find their career paths while producing long-term labor market gains. Our legislation will update this vital program to ensure it meets the needs of today’s youth and employers,” said Reed. A one-pager on the bill is available here. Full text of the bill is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.), on Thursday led a group of senators advocating that the Biden administration finalize the mental health parity rules that they proposed last summer. In a letter to U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra, Assistant Secretary of Employee Benefits Security Administration Lisa Gomez, and Deputy Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service Douglas O’Donnell, the senators emphasize that these rules will hold insurers accountable and ensure they follow the law, which requires them to cover mental health and substance use disorders the same way that they cover physical health. U.
...Read more S. Senators Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) also signed the letter. On the scope of the mental health crisis, the senators wrote: “More than two-thirds of the 1 in 5 Americans who experience a mental health condition in any year do not receive any treatment. The consequences are devastating to our communities. In the latest 12 months, nearly 110,000 Americans died of drug overdoses, and nearly 50,000 Americans died by suicide. Children have been among the hardest hit, with the effects of the pandemic still being felt by families and communities across the country.” The senators detailed how insurance companies dodge compliance to deny coverage: “Americans seeking care from a psychiatrist were forced to go out of network to obtain care 8.9 times more often than for medical/surgical specialists, and telehealth services were 4.7 times more likely to be out of network in cases where the patient was receiving mental health services. While insurers cite a lack of available providers, there is actually a greater shortage of primary care providers than mental health providers, yet mental health services are still denied at a greater rate.” “The data also reveals that insurers pay significantly higher rates than Medicare to boost their networks for physical health providers but fail to do the same for MH/SUD providers. When reimbursement rates are low, the money simply isn’t there to equip our health care system to treat patients for mental health conditions,” they added. The senators highlighted how these rules will improve access to mental health care once finalized: “These rules will close existing loopholes in the law, expand narrow networks, and prohibit restrictive practices that prevent families from accessing care. Particularly important are the rules that combat the nonquantitative treatment limitations that are being used to deny mental health services to patients. These commonsense parity rules will help Americans suffering from mental health conditions or substance use disorder, reduce costs for taxpayers, and save lives.” Last year, Murphy released a statement on the proposed rules. Murphy’s Mental Health Parity Compliance Act was signed into law in 2020 to provide federal and state health insurance regulators with additional tools to monitor and assure compliance with mental health parity laws. Last Congress, Murphy introduced the Parity Implementation Assistance Act with U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy (R-La.), which builds upon the Mental Health Parity Compliance Act and would incentivize further compliance with federal mental health parity laws. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Becerra, Assistant Secretary Gomez, and Deputy Commissioner O’Donnell: We write to thank you for proposing rules last summer that will strengthen the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008. We urge the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury to finalize these strong parity rules as soon as possible, which will go a long way in our shared effort to address the ongoing mental health and substance use disorder (MH/SUD) crisis in this country. More than two-thirds of the 1 in 5 Americans who experience a mental health condition in any year do not receive any treatment. The consequences are devastating to our communities. In the latest 12 months, nearly 110,000 Americans died of drug overdoses, and nearly 50,000 Americans died by suicide. Children have been among the hardest hit, with the effects of the pandemic still being felt by families and communities across the country. Yet, more than 15 years after the Parity Act was enacted with bipartisan support, insurance companies are still preventing patients from getting access to mental health and substance use disorder care. These deliberate practices include low reimbursement rates that keep providers from joining insurance networks and discourage new providers from entering the field, failure to contract with available providers, and managed care practices that delay critical care to patients or deny it altogether. A recent review of commercial insurance claims shows that insurers continue to fall short on mental health parity. For instance, Americans seeking care from a psychiatrist were forced to go out of network to obtain care 8.9 times more often than for medical/surgical specialists, and telehealth services were 4.7 times more likely to be out of network in cases where the patient was receiving mental health services. While insurers cite a lack of available providers, there is actually a greater shortage of primary care providers than mental health providers, yet mental health services are still denied at a greater rate. In the last decade, these inequitable practices have not improved overall. One of the critical practices that prevent people from receiving necessary mental health services is low reimbursement rates. Using Medicare as a benchmark across services, physical health providers are reimbursed 21.7 percent higher on average than MH/SUD providers (124.8% vs. 102.5% of Medicare). The data also reveals that insurers pay significantly higher rates than Medicare to boost their networks for physical health providers but fail to do the same for MH/SUD providers. When reimbursement rates are low, the money simply isn’t there to equip our health care system to treat patients for mental health conditions. Given this data, we are grateful that the Biden Administration is acting. In the parity rules you proposed last summer, you recognized that “insurers too often make it difficult for families to access mental health treatment, causing millions of consumers to seek care out-of-network at significantly higher costs and pay out of pocket, or defer care altogether.” These rules will close existing loopholes in the law, expand narrow networks, and prohibit restrictive practices that prevent families from accessing care. Particularly important are the rules that combat the nonquantitative treatment limitations that are being used to deny mental health services to patients. These commonsense parity rules will help Americans suffering from mental health conditions or substance use disorder, reduce costs for taxpayers, and save lives. We stand by your efforts to make mental health parity a reality and urge you to finalize the proposed rules as soon as possible. With strong rules in place, we can see the victory of this legislation fully realized and we can continue the fight to ensure that all Americans have access to mental health services without stigma. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Thursday led 33 of his colleagues in calling on Amazon to provide the information requested by the members in their January 10, 2024 letter regarding the company’s Delivery Service Partner (DSP) program and its efforts to avoid legal liability for the persistent mistreatment of DSP drivers. Murphy and the bipartisan group of senators sent a second letter on Thursday after receiving a response from Amazon that was unresponsive to the questions asked, at odds with publicly available data and reporting, and appeared to be self-contradictory. “Unfortunately, Amazon’s response to our letter follows a familiar pattern of Amazon providing evasive and non-specific
...Read more answers to questions from Congress and gives little if any new information on the DSP Program. Previous inquiries – much like ours – have been met with Amazon’s refusal to share important information on the company’s operations,” the senators wrote. “As we noted in our initial letter, Amazon is facing allegations of flagrant violations of the National Labor Relations Act. As members of Congress, we have the responsibility to ensure that Amazon is working to address shortcomings in the DSP program and placing the utmost importance on workers’ rights and safety.” In their letter, the senators pressed Amazon to answer specific questions about the relationship between the company and DSPs and called into question Amazon’s claim that drivers are not Amazon employees and the company does not restrict drivers’ ability to choose their employer. They also requested more information about how Amazon tracks and reports its safety data after the company provided insufficient evidence to support its claim that the accident rates for DSPs are lower than the industry average. “Your response will inform ongoing discussions between the signatories of this letter, and the oversight staff of the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and will help us determine whether additional oversight is required to receive answers to these serious questions of public concern,” the senators added. U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Maizie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Roger Marshall (R-Kansas), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), J.D. Vance (R-Ohio.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Amazon’s response letter is available HERE. Dear Mr. Jassy, We are writing in regard to Amazon’s February 9th, 2024 letter responding to our concerns with the mistreatment of workers who are part of Amazon’s Delivery Service Partner (DSP) Program. Amazon’s letter included answers that appear to be self-contradictory and at odds with publicly available data and reporting. It also included statements that are not responsive to the questions asked. Unfortunately, the company’s response to our letter follows a familiar pattern of Amazon providing evasive and non-specific answers to questions from Congress and gives little if any new information on the DSP Program. Previous inquiries – much like ours – have been met with Amazon’s refusal to share important information on the company’s operations. As we noted in our initial letter, Amazon is facing allegations of flagrant violations of the National Labor Relations Act. As members of Congress, we have the responsibility to ensure that Amazon is working to address shortcomings in the DSP program and placing the utmost importance on workers’ rights and safety. Accordingly, we are requesting additional information regarding Amazon’s DSP Program as well as further clarification of the answers and other statements in your response. Below, we have outlined areas of particular concern. We ask that you provide a response, with individual answers to each question, no later than July 5th, 2024: Joint-employer status In your response to question one from our January 10th letter, Amazon’s assertion that it does not act as an employer for DSP employees contradicts evidence indicating its considerable control over workers’ employment conditions. Investigations by the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division into Inpax/Inpax LLC and Colonial Logistics LLC have revealed Amazon’s influence and control over DSP employees, suggesting that a joint employment relationship exists. Moreover, Amazon’s use of AI-powered surveillance cameras in delivery vans and its mandate that DSP drivers in the U.S. sign biometric consent forms under threat of job loss further demonstrate the control the company has over individual DSP drivers. Revelations from these investigations and reporting on Amazon’s surveillance practices underscore the depth of the company’s involvement in its DSPs’ operations, challenging the company’s stance on its relationship with DSP employees. Given this evidence, it seems clear that a joint employer relationship exists. Accordingly, we request answers to the following questions: Do Amazon’s DSP program documents govern and impose restrictions on the hiring process for DSP employees?
Does Amazon specify any employment standards or requirements that DSPs must meet before hiring an individual? Can Amazon reject a candidate seeking employment with a DSP?
Has Amazon ever disciplined drivers or directed DSP owners or managers to discipline drivers based on work performance metrics, such as the number of packages delivered or returned by a driver, or adherence to the delivery route specified by Amazon software?
Given Amazon’s claim that it does not employ DSP employees, how is it possible for Amazon to ensure these high standards in health, safety, and compliance within DSP operations without exerting control over the working conditions of DSP employees that concern health and safety matters?
Does Amazon require, suggest, or otherwise recommend that its DSPs enter into forced arbitration contracts with their direct employees so as to minimize Amazon's own exposure as a joint employer for labor standards violations? DOT authority and veracity of Amazon DSP safety/reporting data In response to question three, Amazon stated that DSPs each have their own DOT number, but also that “when DSPs use commercial motor vehicles to provide service to Amazon, they operate those vehicles under Amazon’s DOT number.” It is generally not required that a carrier operates with two DOT numbers, and though there may be reasons for doing so, operating under two DOT numbers may provide opportunities to distort or otherwise mask safety data. In response to question 12, Amazon provided internal data suggesting that accident rates have decreased and fall below the industry average. These responses raise additional questions about Amazon’s safety and reporting data. We therefore ask you to provide additional information by responding to the following questions: When a driver has a reportable incident, is that incident reported in the Safety Management System profile connected to the DOT number associated with Amazon, or the DSP?
If the incident is reported under the individual DSP’s number, please describe how the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) could analyze the safety of the totality of all DSP operations and how Amazon could assist the agency in doing so.
If the incident is reported under Amazon’s number, does Amazon contend that all reportable safety incidents and inspection data for its DSPs are represented under the SMS profile associated with DOT #2881058?
Amazon claims not to possess copies of OSHA 300 or 300A data for DSPs yet claims that injury rates for drivers employed by DSPs are 10% better than industry average. What data is Amazon referring to when he claims that Amazon has an industry rate that is 10% better than the industry average? And does this data include all DSPs? No-poaching concerns In response to question two, which requests that Amazon provide its justifications for the requirement that several DSPs sign non-poaching agreements, Amazon stated that DSPs have never been required to sign non-poaching agreements, and that Amazon prohibits efforts that restrict drivers’ ability to choose their employer. However, this answer contradicts first-hand accounts from several DSPs and DSP drivers. We request that you clarify whether or not any DSP drivers have been required to sign non-poaching agreements by answering the following questions: Does Amazon currently have, or has it ever included a “no-poach agreement” or similar provision in any policy, handbook, rule, guidance, or agreement (whether as a standalone or embedded in other documents) that it has shared with DSPs?
Does Amazon currently have or has it ever had any policy, handbook, rule, guidance, agreement (whether as a stand-alone or embedded in other documents), or understanding (whether formal or informal) with or directed to DSPs that purports to have or has the effect of:
Restraining, impeding, discouraging, or otherwise interfering directly or indirectly with the mobility of DSP drivers, including the ability of a DSP driver that is employed by one DSP to seek and obtain employment from another DSP?
Restraining, impeding, discouraging, or otherwise interfering directly or indirectly with any DSP’s ability to recruit or hire a DSP driver who is currently employed by another DSP? We look forward to your attention to this request and ask that you provide responses to the questions specified in this letter by no later than July 5th, 2024 Your response will inform ongoing discussions between the signatories of this letter, and the oversight staff of the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and will help us determine whether additional oversight is required to receive answers to these serious questions of public concern. ### Read less HARTFORD– In advance of the 80th anniversary of D-Day, U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined their Congressional colleagues in passing a resolution commemorating this historic operation and expressing gratitude and appreciation to the members of the U.S. Armed Forces and Allied troops responsible for carrying out the unprecedented maneuver that proved decisive in securing victory in Europe. The resolution was introduced by U.S. Senators John Boozman (R-Ark.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.), co-chairs of the Senate French Caucus. “Eighty years ago, thousands of brave Americans landed on the shores of Normandy and laid the groundwork for the liberation of France and an Allied victory in Europe. Today, we honor their heroism and pay tribute to those who made
...Read more the ultimate sacrifice. We owe a deep debt of gratitude to those who served that day, and this anniversary is a solemn reminder that the fight for democracy is never free,” said Murphy. “It is my privilege of a lifetime to pay homage to the Allied and American fighters – brave beyond words – who stormed Normandy’s beaches, liberated Europe, and saved the free world. I’m especially honored to lead this bipartisan Senate delegation to celebrate the 80th anniversary of Americans’ heroism and sacrifice, executing one of the greatest military feats in history, at incalculable cost and indescribable significance,” Blumenthal said. “On this solemn occasion, we reaffirm our historic bonds with allies – still at our side – making our strong nation even stronger. We will return better able to raise awareness about the meaning of D-day – of freedom and democracy, and the sacrifices necessary to defend them.” In the early morning hours of June 6, 1944, 31,000 members of the United States Armed Forces and 153,000 of their counterparts in the Allied Expeditionary Force launched Operation Overlord by storming ashore five landing areas on the beaches of Normandy, France. The first day of the operation, which became known as D-Day, saw approximately 10,000 Allied soldiers wounded or killed, including 6,000 Americans. Operation Overlord led to Allied liberation of Western Europe from the control of Nazi Germany and an end to World War II. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday released the following statement after Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the Right to Contraception Act, legislation that would establish federal protections for contraception. If passed, the bill, which Murphy co-sponsored, would have guaranteed the right for people to obtain and use contraceptives and for health providers to prescribe contraceptives and give information related to contraception, free from government interference. “In a post-Dobbs America where a Supreme Court Justice has said the Court should reconsider the Griswold decision, the right to contraceptives cannot be taken for granted. This is a simple bill to
...Read more guarantee that right and ensure that women – not politicians or extremist right-wing judges – are in control of their own health care and futures. It’s appalling that Republicans voted it down today. The reality is that Dobbs was only the beginning and Republicans won’t stop until they pass a nationwide ban on IVF, contraceptives and abortion. I will continue fighting to keep government out of women’s healthcare so that women in Connecticut and across the country can access the reproductive care they need,” said Murphy. In March, Murphy co-sponsored legislation to protect IVF access and other assisted reproductive technology, but passage was blocked by Senate Republicans. That month, Murphy also submitted an amicus brief calling on the Supreme Court to affirm the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) requires hospitals to provide emergency stabilizing care, including abortion care. In January, Murphy joined 263 Members of Congress in submitting an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to reverse a dangerous ruling that would restrict access to an FDA-approved abortion drug. Last year, Murphy co-sponsored a slate of legislation to protect reproductive rights, including the Expanding Access to Family Planning Act, the Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act, the Let Doctors Provide Reproductive Health Care Act, the Women’s Health Protection Act, and a Senate resolution expressing opposition to the use of state resources and power against Americans seeking reproductive healthcare, such as abortion services, contraception, and gender-affirming care. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday spoke at a U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing on the impact of abortion bans on healthcare access across the country. In his questions to Dr. Nisha Verma, Fellow at Georgia’s Physicians for Reproductive Health, Dr. Allison Linton, Chief Medical Officer at Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, and Destiny Lopez, acting co-CEO of the Guttmacher Institute, Murphy expressed concerns about the risk of losing lifesaving reproductive healthcare protections for women and families in Connecticut. He also discussed the widespread impact of abortion bans on the training of future medical professionals and the impact on the healthcare workforce in Connecticut and across the country. Murphy highlighted the
...Read more consequences of Republican-led efforts to restrict reproductive freedoms and emphasized the risks posed to women and families in Connecticut: “In Connecticut, we often hear from our physicians that we should not labor under the belief that there are safe states. Connecticut is a state today that protects the right to full reproductive healthcare for women and for families. But we know what the agenda is. We know that the agenda of Republicans in the Senate and in Congress is to pass a national abortion ban, and we are potentially months or years away from losing those protections in Connecticut.” Murphy questioned the witnesses about the impact of abortion bans on medical training: “But the doctors in my state tell me that this myth of ‘the safe state’ is also due to the fact that the bans that are being passed in states that aren't Connecticut are fundamentally changing the practice of medicine and medical knowledge in the United States…What does it mean that we now have a growing number of states that are not training physicians in the suite of services related to pregnancy loss? What does it mean that we have physicians today that are emerging from education in those states that potentially do not have the full scope of training on how to manage medical challenges like miscarriages, or complications, such as infections or hemorrhaging, that could stem from pregnancy loss? This seems like a significant challenge for our country. How is medical education changing when you have so many residents and medical students who are simply not getting the same kind of comprehensive education around reproductive healthcare?” Murphy pointed to a growing workforce crisis spurred by abortion bans across the country: “In states that have passed these abortion bans, they have seen a 10% decline in applications for OBGYN residencies. And we’re not seeing a 10% increase in our states, in part because we have a set number of residency slots—that’s not going to change overnight. And so, the net effect here, at a moment when we were already desperate for more individuals to go into this care, seems to be a doubling down of a workforce crisis that is going to affect every woman and every family across this country, no matter which state you live in.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you Senator Murray, thank you all for being here today, for your testimony. In Connecticut, we often hear from our physicians that we should not labor under the belief that there are safe states. Connecticut is a state today that protects the right to full reproductive healthcare for women and for families. But we know what the agenda is. We know that the agenda of Republicans in the Senate and in Congress is to pass a national abortion ban, and we are potentially months or years away from losing those protections in Connecticut. “But the doctors in my state tell me that this myth of the safe state is also due to the fact that the bans that are being passed in states that aren't Connecticut are fundamentally changing the practice of medicine and medical knowledge in the United States. So, Senator Sanders started to explore, I think, this really important issue, but I wanted to build on his questioning. “I think I have two questions to ask, and maybe I’ll pose the first question to Dr. Verma and Dr. Linton. What does it mean that we now have a growing number of states that are not training physicians in the suite of services related to pregnancy loss? What does it mean that we have physicians today that are emerging from education in those states that potentially do not have the full scope of training on how to manage medical challenges like miscarriages, or complications, such as infections or hemorrhaging, that could stem from pregnancy loss? This seems like a significant challenge for our country. How is medical education changing when you have so many residents and medical students who are simply not getting the same kind of comprehensive education around reproductive healthcare?” VERMA: “Thank you for that question. Over 50% of OBGYN residencies are in states that have enacted bans or very restrictive abortion laws, and that’s absolutely affecting resident training and medical student training. I think it’s important to highlight here that it’s the same procedures, the same medications, that we use when we’re providing abortion care that we also use when someone comes in experiencing a miscarriage or experiencing a pregnancy loss. And so it’s very concerning that more and more doctors are not going to be able to provide all options for care to someone who comes in, for example, at 14 weeks bleeding after breaking their water and is sick and needs care. And so I absolutely think this is going to affect the ability for people to get all types of care across the country. It’s particularly going to affect women in rural areas in certain parts of the country, and I think that’s really devastating when we’re already experiencing such a healthcare crisis and maternal mortality crisis.” MURPHY: “Dr. Linton?” LINTON: “I agree with Dr. Verma. I will say immediately after the Dobbs decision there are certain requirements that trainees have to achieve, or things that they have to learn in order to satisfy the requirements of residency training, specifically in OBGYN. And I can tell you that in the immediate aftermath of Dobbs, trying to find places for those learners to go and receive that training was incredibly difficult. As you mentioned [when you referred to] safe states, or haven states, not only are these states being asked to take care of an influx of patients, we are also asking them to take care of an influx of learners. And all of that is just being compounded and compounded. So I agree with Dr. Verma, I am concerned about the future of the ability of our workforce to be able to care for patients in a variety of settings.” MURPHY: “Well, Ms. Lopez, let me ask you that question about the broader workforce challenge, because our state reports that we are seeing an influx of individuals for training. But what we also know is that in states that have passed these abortion bans, they have seen a 10% decline in applications for OBGYN residencies. And we’re not seeing a 10% increase in our states, in part because we have a set number of residency slots—that’s not going to change overnight. And so, the net effect here, at a moment when we were already desperate for more individuals to go into this care, seems to be a doubling down of a workforce crisis that is going to affect every woman and every family across this country, no matter which state you live in.” LOPEZ: “Absolutely. Thanks, Senator, for that question. Absolutely. And these folks are not just providing abortion care, right? They are providing the full range of reproductive care, which means that if you are seeking prenatal care, or contraception, or IVF, or any of a number of reproductive care options, you will not have those providers available. We already have maternity care deserts around this country—those will only increase as well. And I think it also forces doctors to think about, do they want to risk criminalization for providing this standard medical care, this basic medical care?” MURPHY: “Thank you.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Tuesday released the following statement on President Biden’s Executive Actions to address challenges at the border: “For years, Republicans and Democrats have acknowledged that our asylum and immigration system is broken. That’s why every recent president, including President Trump, has asked Congress to update these laws. And it’s what makes the Republicans’ decision to demand and negotiate a bipartisan border security bill, only to kill it – not once, but twice – even more maddening. Rather than working with Democrats to solve the problem, they’ve ensured we just have more of the dysfunctional status quo when Americans want the exact opposite. “I am
...Read more sympathetic to the position the administration is in, but I am skeptical the executive branch has the legal authority to shut down asylum processing between ports of entry on its own. Meaningful asylum reform requires a bipartisan solution in Congress. Americans want us to fix our broken immigration and asylum system. They want a secure border, but they also want a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and ways for people to legally come to this country.” ### Read less FRANKLIN - Chris Murphy is in the middle of a sentence walking down Route 32, when a man driving a white pickup truck slows and rolls down his window to call out the attention of the junior senator from Connecticut. "How's it going senator?" the driver yells, his voice lowering once he sees Murphy is listening. "Can we stop sending money to Ukraine, and start bringing jobs back here instead?" Leaning into the window of the now stopped truck, Murphy responds quickly and politely - "We should talk (about) that at some point, we can do both" — before waving the man goodbye. Murphy, who is facing reelection in November, knows he does not need to convince many voters like the man in the pickup in order to secure another six-year term in Washington, D.C. Democrats like him have a
...Read more nearly two-to-one advantage in voter registration, and have not lost a U.S. Senate race since the late 1980s. He also knows that the expectation from many circles — both within the state and from his colleagues in Congress — is that he will share both his own time and some of the more than $11 million he has amassed in his campaign war chest to support Democratic candidates running in tougher districts. Already this year, Murphy's campaign has contributed $10,000 to Democratic Senate candidates in Delaware, Arizona and Texas. In 2022, his campaign gave $150,000 to the House Majority PAC and $11,600 to the state party. "Connecticut will do much better if Joe Biden is president and Democrats control the Senate," Murphy said. "If I am helping Joe Biden win, if I’m helping some of my Democratic colleagues win their senate races, I think I’m also doing what’s right for the state." As the senator completed of his annual walk across Connecticut on Wednesday, he invited CT Insider to join him along a stretch through rural Franklin, in the southeast corner of the state. Murphy has completed the walk each year since beginning in 2015 — interrupted only once by the pandemic and a knee surgery, after which he has stuck to shorter north-south routes. The location is perhaps symbolic for Murphy, who turned heads last year when he made a trek to Appalachia to discuss an "epidemic of loneliness" that he fears is gripping more scattered regions of the country. At Emely's Pizza Restaurant, he chats with regulars Karen and Pam Fuller about the loss of spaces such as the restaurant's busy dining room, where neighbors can come to gather. The Fullers, a mother and daughter, both seem to agree as they heap equal praise on the senator and the food at Emely's, which Karen proclaims is "God's gift to this part of part of the world." "There’s no way that I won Franklin in the last election, I probably got skunked here," Murphy said with a laugh later. (In fact, he eked out a narrow victory, winning 488 to 435.) "But that’s your job, is to listen to everyone," he added. Murphy’s potential rivals in this fall’s election, Beacon Falls First Selectman Gerry Smith and Manchester businessman Matthew Corey, have cast the Democratic senator as an out-of-touch career politician who tows the line on Biden administration policies. Both Republicans will face off in an August primary to determine the nominee. "At the end of the day, you have a Democratic White House and a Democrat-controlled Senate, and their compromise seems to be, 'It's our way or nothing,'" said Connecticut Republican Party Chairman Ben Proto. Those criticisms don’t appear to have phased Murphy, who said he does not plan to spend much time in the coming months engaging with either candidate. Instead, he said he will focus on championing policies such as the lowering of prescription drug prices through the Inflation Reduction Act, which has also delivered billions of dollars in federal funding to Connecticut. Murphy added that he plans to spend a lot of time campaigning with Democratic U.S. Rep. Jahana Hayes in the state’s hotly-contested 5th Congressional District, which he represented for six years before joining the Senate. Murphy said that his relationship with Biden’s White House is different from when he was a freshman senator during former President Barack Obama’s second term. Part of the reason for the change, he said, is because he has taken on a bigger role, brokering deals with Republicans such as the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which ended a nearly three-decade impasse on federal gun control policies in Congress. When asked if the president spends enough time talking up those achievements, Murphy responded diplomatically. "Being president is hard, you can't be messaging all the time," Murphy said. "There's still a lot going on in the country that he has to attend to, he's obviously managing several crisises overseas. So I'm careful not to criticize the president for not messaging enough on X issue or Y issue." Still, he acknowledges that Biden is "going to need to do more" to address what Murphy called a mismatch between economic data showing modest growth and low unemployment and the feelings of unhappiness and anxiety that he continuously hears from people he meets along his walk. "Demagogues prey upon people’s sh---- feelings," he said. One issue that Murphy said has steadily grown in prominence since he began his walks nearly a decade ago is the rising cost of housing in Connecticut that has resulted, in part, due to a chronic shortfall of new construction. Murphy said he wants to work with the Senate to increase federal funding to develop new affordable housing, though he also acknowledged the issue is a challenging one to address from Washington. "I think the biggest problem in Connecticut is NIMBYism, not financing," Murphy said. "But there are solutions that are available and I should probably use my bully pulpit more to try and get Connecticut to do more to streamline its local permitting process." In the Senate, Murphy currently sits on the Appropriations, Foreign Relations and the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committees, though he lacks a coveted chairmanship for the time being. As a result of those assignments and his own self-appointed role as a bipartisan deal maker, Murphy has found himself increasingly at the center of national debates over immigration and America's involvement in supplying foreign military aid to Israel and Ukraine. In the process, he’s attracted both praise and his own fair share of critics, as evidenced by the man in the white pickup. That interaction, like most Murphy says he has with residents during his annual walks, ended respectfully with a wave. It's a degree of civility that Murphy hopes to bring back with him to Washington, where bipartisan compromises have become stubbornly elusive. "I am looking forward to being a little bit more nimble in my third term, and trying to be one of the folks who makes the Senate work and is able to bring people together." Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, along with U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), U.S. Representative Katherin Clark (D-Mass.), and 22 other members of Congress to reintroduce the Elementary and Secondary School Counseling Act, legislation that would greatly boost the availability of mental health providers in America’s public schools. Mental illness affects 20% of American youth. This bicameral legislation will put additional mental health providers in elementary and secondary schools across America. “Kids spend most of their time in the classroom, so teachers and counselors are often the first
...Read more people to notice when something is wrong. This funding will help ensure school districts have the personnel and resources they need to identify students going through a tough time or facing a mental health crisis and connect them to the care they urgently need,” said Murphy. “There is no ignoring the mental health crisis affecting our youth. We know young people are taking their own lives at an accelerating rate, and the decrease in available mental health professionals is only exacerbating this crisis. I have been a long-time proponent for increasing access to school-based mental health providers to support children across the nation. I am proud to support the Elementary and Secondary School Counseling Act—legislation that tackles this crisis head on,” said Blumenthal. “Supporting children in school also means providing resources to support their social and emotional needs. Schools are in desperate need of more mental health providers to ensure we are immediately addressing students in need,” said Hayes. “The Elementary and Secondary School Counseling Act will help fill vacant school-based mental health provider roles so all students can have access to resources that promote their mental wellbeing and educational success.” The recommended maximum student-to-counselor ratio is 250 students per counselor, but currently, the national average is 385 students per counselor and continues to rise. For school psychologists, the recommended maximum ratio is 500 students per provider, and 250 to 1 for school social workers. The Elementary and Secondary School Counseling Act would establish five-year renewable grant programs to help elementary and secondary schools to hire additional school-based mental health providers such as counselors, psychologists, and social workers, ensuring students can receive the mental health care and support they need to achieve their full potential. Students are 21 times more likely to visit school-based health centers for mental health than community mental health centers, but school districts across America too often lack the resources to provide students with the in-school treatment and care they need and deserve. Furthermore, schools that employ more school-based health providers see improved attendance rates, academic achievement and career preparation, and graduation rates, and lower rates of suspension, expulsion, and other disciplinary incidents. U.S. Senators Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), along with U.S. Representatives Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.), and Linda T. Sánchez (D-Calif.) co-sponsored the legislation. The bill is also endorsed by the American Federation of Teachers, American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, American Mental Health Counselors Association, American Psychological Association, American School Counselor Association, Anxiety & Depression Association of America, Girls Inc., International Society of Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurses, National Association of Elementary School Principals, National Association of School Psychologists, National Association of Secondary School Principals, National Council for Mental Wellbeing, National Federation of Families, Postpartum Support International, School Social Work Association of America, and Western Youth Services. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 22 Senate Democrats in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust Jonathan Kanter calling on the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to use every tool at its disposal to prevent and prosecute collusion and price fixing in the oil industry. The senators called for the DOJ to launch an industry-wide investigation into possible violations of the Sherman Act to hold any bad actors accountable and to redress any harms to competition and consumers. The letter also outlined how Big Oil’s alleged collusion with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is a national security concern that aids countries looking to undermine the U.S. The letter
...Read more follows a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation into the Exxon-Pioneer merger – called for Congressional Democrats – that uncovered evidence of price fixing involving American oil executives and OPEC officials that have resulted in higher energy costs for American families and businesses. “From pre-pandemic times to current day, industry collusion may have contributed to the 49% decrease in the U.S. oil production growth rate,” the senators wrote. “Pioneer’s and its co-conspirators’ collusion may have cost the average American household up to $500 per car in increased annual fuel costs – an unwelcome tax that is particularly burdensome for lower-income families. Meanwhile, Western oil majors collectively earned more than $300 billion in profits over the last two years, a surge that many market experts believe cannot be explained away by increased production costs from the pandemic or inflation.” The senators concluded: “Corporate malfeasance must be confronted, or it will proliferate. These alleged offenses do not simply enrich corporations; hardworking Americans end up paying the price through higher costs for gas, fuel, and related consumer products. The DOJ must protect consumers, small businesses, and the public from petroleum-market collusion, and an important part of that mission means seeking full restitution and imposing all penalties supported by the facts and the law.” The letter was also signed by U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jean Shaheen (D-N.H.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). The full letter can be read HERE and below. Dear Attorney General Garland and Assistant Attorney General Kanter: We write regarding our serious concerns about alleged collusion and price fixing in the oil industry. While investigating ExxonMobil’s (Exxon) proposed $60 billion acquisition of Pioneer Natural Resources (Pioneer) – the largest oil-and-gas deal of the 21st century – the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) uncovered evidence that founder and former Pioneer CEO Scott Sheffield colluded with the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Companies (OPEC) to “reduce output of oil and gas, which would result in Americans paying higher prices at the pump, to inflate profits for his company.” These reports are alarming and lend credence to the fear that corporate avarice is keeping prices artificially high. This is also a national-security concern: this alleged collusion with OPEC may have served to enrich countries like Iran and Russia that are actively seeking to undermine the United States and our allies. The federal government must use every tool to prevent and prosecute collusion and price fixing that may have increased gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, and jet fuel costs in a way that has materially harmed virtually every American household and business. We therefore urge the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate the oil industry, to hold accountable any liable actors, and to end any illegal activities. According to the FTC’s complaint, Mr. Sheffield worked to orchestrate “anticompetitive coordinated output reductions” between and among U.S. crude oil producers and OPEC, ultimately to “pad Pioneer’s [and OPEC’s] bottom line[s]…at the expense of U.S. households and businesses.” Mr. Sheffield, it seems, was determined to pull off this collusion even if it meant ignoring opportunities to drill more oil and sell it at lucrative high prices, which would create more chances for rivals to undercut the industry equilibrium and compete on price. For example, on April 16, 2024, Mr. Sheffield said at a conference: “Even if oil gets to $200/bl, the independent producers are going to be disciplined.” It also appeared that Mr. Sheffield was certain that he and his allies could enforce that discipline. He warned competitors that they should be “disciplined” about capacity growth and “stay[] in line,” even threatening that “[a]ll the shareholders that I’ve talked to said that if anybody goes back to growth, they will punish those companies.” In private WhatsApp communications with senior OPEC officials, Mr. Sheffield assured his company’s competitors that “Pioneer and its Permian Basin rivals were working hard to keep oil output artificially low.” These private assurances from Mr. Sheffield stretched back to beginning of the COVID pandemic as Pioneer and other American producers sought to “limit Permian oil production in the face of falling oil prices globally. The strategy appears to have worked. From pre-pandemic times to current day, industry collusion may have contributed to the 49% decrease in the U.S. oil production growth rate, the increase of $23.41 in the average crude oil price per barrel, and the $0.94 increase in the average price of retail gasoline. That means Pioneer’s and its co-conspirators’ collusion may have cost the average American household up to $500 per car in increased annual fuel costs – an unwelcome tax that is particularly burdensome for lower-income families. Meanwhile, Western oil majors collectively earned more than $300 billion in profits over the last two years, a surge that many market experts believe cannot be explained away by increased production costs from the pandemic or inflation. By banning Mr. Sheffield from serving on Exxon’s board following its acquisition of Pioneer, the FTC has taken an important proactive step to prevent further collusive activity. However, only the DOJ can prosecute and fully redress the alleged anticompetitive behavior in the oil sector. Section 1 of the Sherman Act proscribes price fixing and stipulates a fine of up to $100,000,000 for corporations and a fine of up to $1,000,000 and 10 years in prison for individuals. Corporate malfeasance must be confronted, or it will proliferate. These alleged offenses do not simply enrich corporations; hardworking Americans end up paying the price through higher costs for gas, fuel, and related consumer products. The DOJ must protect consumers, small businesses, and the public from petroleum-market collusion, and an important part of that mission means seeking full restitution and imposing all penalties supported by the facts and the law. If any oil corporations or executives have violated the Sherman Act, we urge you to follow the law and seek appropriate punishment. We appreciate your attention to this serious matter. ### Read less Mystic ? Drivers in southeastern Connecticut who passed by Sen. Chris Murphy on Thursday may not have recognized him as the pedestrian wearing earbuds, a University of Connecticut ball cap and a waterproof jacket to stave off Thursday morning’s drizzle. Since Monday morning, the state’s Democratic junior senator had put one foot in front of the other as he walked 64 miles through 16 towns from Suffield to Stonington as part of his eighth-annual Walk Across Connecticut. Along the way he said he talked to hundreds of residents. On Thursday, Murphy had already passed through Preston and Ledyard when The Day caught up with him, approximately a half-mile from the Old Mystic Fire Department headquarters on Cow Hill Road, on his way to his final stop, Mystic Seaport Museum. “
...Read more This is a strange thing to do — to take a week and walk 70 to 100 miles across the state, but I have such joy and passion for this job, and I want to show people that,” Murphy said at lunchtime Thursday while he stood out of the rain inside the fire department’s garage. While there, Murphy spoke with Chief Kenneth Richards Jr., asking about staffing levels, coverage area, and funding. As the chairman of the Appropriations Committee’s Homeland Security subcommittee, Murphy wanted the chief’s thoughts on the DHS Assistance to Firefighters Grant program. “It’s absolutely vital,” Richards said. “Well, you’re talking to the guy that writes the DHS budget, so I’m the right guy to talk to,” Murphy said, exchanging a laugh with Richards before assuring the chief his office would follow up on a port security grant application the department is also pursuing. He said the conversations he has with residents during his annual walk inspire him. Murphy related a conversation he had Wednesday with a seemingly conservative retired Pfizer employee. He said the man wanted to discuss his concerns that people seem to struggle to compromise with those who have different beliefs or backgrounds. “He talked to me about how important it is for him to teach his grandkids to seek out people that are different from you and find a way to get to common ground,” he said. Murphy explained the conversation inspired him because much of his work involves trying to find compromise on weighty issues like gun control and immigration. “I would say the number one issue I hear about on the walk is the cost of rent, the inability to get into your first house, and I hear about housing twice as much today as I did when I started the walk nine years ago,” he said, noting it is primarily a local zoning and permitting issue, but allowed he could do more to help address the housing crisis in the state. “I probably have to be more involved in some of these state conversations around permitting, but I have increased the amount of work I do in the federal government to try to increase housing finance opportunities, because that’s definitely part of the solution,” he said. The annual walk also allows him to make his own observations, like the lighthearted post he made to X, formerly Twitter, on Tuesday, saying he was going to call Connecticut’s senior senator, Richard Blumenthal, and tell him “to work on getting more federal funding for sidewalks.” Murphy said Wednesday that he has experienced firsthand how risky roads can be for the thousands of pedestrians and cyclists on the state’s roads, adding that Cow Hill Road was potentially the most dangerous road he had walked this year. “This is mostly a local issue, but the federal government can do a better job of giving flexible dollars to states that aren’t just for pavement, but that also can be used for pedestrian improvements,” he said. Murphy explained that a risk in his line of work is thinking that the focus of cable news media represents what truly matters to individuals, and his annual walk helps ensure he understands the far more personal concerns of his constituents. He noted that year after year, people want to talk about about the state’s cost of living, how much money they are, or aren’t, earning, the quality of public schools and public safety. “A surprisingly small number of people talk to me about Donald Trump or Joe Biden. They just want their lives to be better, and they want to tell you about the things you can do to help,” he said. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Friday released a statement on the deal proposed by Israel to end the hostilities in Gaza, secure the release of the remaining hostages, and provide long term security for the Israeli and Palestinian people. “President Biden is right: it’s time for this war to end, for the hostages to come home, and for the rebuilding of Gaza to begin. Hamas has been devastated, but the cost is a humanitarian crisis that is worse than ever before, requiring a massive infusion of aid to suffering Palestinians in an environment free from conflict. With the help of U.S. negotiators, the Israelis proposed an agreement that
...Read more is the best chance to bring an end to the suffering in Gaza and return the hostages to their families. Hamas must accept this deal for an immediate 6-week ceasefire, and, eventually, a permanent end to hostilities. The only way we can achieve long term security for both the state of Israel and the Palestinian people is if both sides commit to seeing this deal through and focus on the day after.” ### Read less MYSTIC, CT – US Sen. Chris Murphy finished up his annual walk across Connecticut on Thursday, and said the ritual gives him a chance to hear from constituents about "kitchen table issues" that matter to them. Murphy said the issues that are constantly covered on the major broadcast news channels aren't the ones that cut to the heart of Connecticut residents. "What's remarkable about the walk is that the same issues come up year after year," the senator said Thursday following his arrival at this year's finishing point. "People talking about the price of housing, how much money they're making, the quality of their kids' schools, the safety of their neighborhoods – it's kitchen table issues." Murphy, a two-term incumbent Democrat, will face one of two Republican opponents in November.
...Read more Beacon Falls First Selectman Gerry Smith won the Republican Party’s nomination on May 13, but Matt Corey polled enough support to primary Smith in August. Murphy said there can be a tendency to "chase the headlines," but that ultimately what’s most important are the issues directly facing residents of the state. Very few of the people he spoke with during his walk from Suffield to Mystic cared about the hushmoney trial involving former President Donald Trump. Instead, he said, they’re "exhausted" with the way politics is covered. "People care about policy," Murphy said. "They’re pretty frustrated that the way politics is covered leaves policy to the side, and only focuses on the horse race." Speaking from the deck of the Thompson Building at the Mystic Seaport Museum, Murphy said that the annual walk – this year was his eighth – gives him an opportunity to find a different perspective. "I feel like I have a responsibility to show how seriously I take the job," Murphy said. "That I’m not just sitting in my office and just waiting for people to call me, that I’m willing to go out and see people where they are – to hear everyone’s voice." Murphy said that the individual struggles and triumphs of the people he met along his walk remind him how important the job is. Murphy said he spoke to a retirement-age man named Izzy, who is living on $900 of Social Security per month because he has no savings. Living with three other people, Murphy said Izzy told him "this isn’t how he thought this part of his life was going to go." Despite working full-time for Walmart for 16 years, Murphy said, Izzy is forced to use food stamps to feed himself. "It’s almost dehumanizing," he said, adding later, "That’s just a choice we make as a country. This is a choice we make to not invest in people’s retirement and let wages languish at such a low rate that you can work full time and not have any money for retirement." Nor investing in issues like housing – a hot button topic that remains in purgatory with several landmark bills unable to get through the state legislature during the short session – is one of the major pitfalls for the state and nation, Murphy said. Still, he shared positive thoughts on the future. "You see the challenges, you see the possibilities, and then you see all the folks who are taking Risks, making big bets on Connecticut," he said. "Folks who are doing big things to make our communities better." The growth of submarine manufacturer Electric Boat, and the continual contractual relationships between the federal government and the submarine builder and its subcontractors in southeastern Connecticut, is an indicator of imminent growth on the state’s horizon, Murphy said. Getting the chance to hear all of this from the people of Connecticut he said, makes the week special. "It sounds cliche but it is just true. It is my favorite week of the year," Murphy said. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday led four of their Senate colleagues in urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to finalize its proposed rule banning the use of dangerous electrical stimulation devices (ESDs), also known as electric shock devices, on people with disabilities. In a letter to FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf, the senators expressed support for the FDA’s March 2024 proposal to reestablish a ban on ESDs intended for self-injurious behavior (SIB) or aggressive behavior (AB) and urged the agency to continue prioritizing the protection of those with disabilities. “ESDs deliver a painful electric shock through electrodes
...Read more attached to skin,” the senators wrote. “The devices are commonly used on children and adults with disabilities as a means to reduce SIB or AB, but evidence has condemned this practice as archaic and inhumane. When used, ESDs present an unreasonable and substantial risk of illness or injury including depression, anxiety, worsening of underlying symptoms, development of post-traumatic stress disorder as well as pains, burns and tissue damage.” The senators continued: “If finalized, the proposed rule would remove ESDs from the market and the devices will no longer be considered legally marketed. This proposed rule has been made with careful consideration of the available information and data. The FDA found the weight of evidence indicates that ESDs for SIB or AB present a number of psychological and physical risks while not supporting or improving an individual’s behavior. We support the FDA in these findings. We believe that individuals with disabilities who have been subjected to ESDs need alternative treatments and interventions in line with current medical practices.” “In closing, we thank you for proposing this rule to eliminate an outdated and harmful treatment used on individuals with disabilities. We urge the FDA to finalize the rule to prevent further pain and trauma to individuals with disabilities who are being subjected to ESDs,” the senators concluded. U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also signed the letter. In 2021, Murphy led U.S. Senators Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) in supporting the FDA’s decision to appeal a 2020 reversal of the agency’s previous ban on ESD use. Prior to the reversal, Murphy led the Senate push to support the FDA’s original ESD ban. Murphy also secured a commitment from then-nominee Dr. Stephen Hahn to ban the use of ESDs. In 2016, the FDA proposed a rule to ban this practice, which Murphy and his colleagues supported. The full letter can be read HERE and below. Dear Commissioner Califf, We write to comment on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) issued by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on March 25, 2024, proposing a ban of electrical stimulation devices (ESDs) intended for self-injurious behavior (SIB) or aggressive behavior (AB). We wish to uplift this important step taken by the FDA reestablishing the ban on ESDs following its ban in 2020 that was reversed. Since then, Congress has clarified the FDA’s authority to issue such a ban and the FDA has reproposed the rule, an action we fully support. ESDs deliver a painful electric shock through electrodes attached to skin. The devices are commonly used on children and adults with disabilities as a means to reduce SIB or AB, but evidence has condemned this practice as archaic and inhumane. When used, ESDs present an unreasonable and substantial risk of illness or injury including depression, anxiety, worsening of underlying symptoms, development of post-traumatic stress disorder as well as pains, burns and tissue damage. If finalized, the proposed rule would remove ESDs from the market and the devices will no longer be considered legally marketed. This proposed rule has been made with careful consideration of the available information and data. The FDA found the weight of evidence indicates that ESDs for SIB or AB present a number of psychological and physical risks while not supporting or improving an individual’s behavior. We support the FDA in these findings. We believe that individuals with disabilities who have been subjected to ESDs need alternative treatments and interventions in line with current medical practices. We commend and support the FDA in banning these devices and recognizing the available evidence-based interventions to support. The FDA’s proposed rule is a welcome alignment with the input received from individuals with disabilities themselves, patients and parents of individuals who have been treated with ESDs, disability rights organizations, as well as insight collected from FDA panels. In closing, we thank you for proposing this rule to eliminate an outdated and harmful treatment used on individuals with disabilities. We urge the FDA to finalize the rule to prevent further pain and trauma to individuals with disabilities who are being subjected to ESDs. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released the following statement on the death of Trooper First Class Aaron Pelletier.
“I am devastated by the loss of Trooper First Class Aaron Pelletier, who was killed in the line of duty earlier today. TFC Pelletier bravely served the people of Connecticut for nearly a decade and his death is a terrible tragedy. My thoughts are with his family and friends, and the men and women of the Connecticut State Police.”
###
One foot in front of the other, U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy kicks off a weeklong walking journey from the north end of Connecticut to the south. “Today, I'll walk somewhere between 15 and 18 miles,” Sen. Murphy (D) said. It’s not a journey to log steps, but to connect with constituents. “Every single day I’ll talk to dozens if not 100 or so people, and by the end of the week I have a really good sense of what the state cares about,” Sen. Murphy said. This is the eight year the U.S. senator has done his “Walk Across Connecticut,” stepping off Monday morning in Suffield. Typically donning sneakers and a baseball cap, he strikes up casual conversations along the way. “You know mostly it’s me walking up and introducing myself to somebody who’s out mowing their lawn,”
...Read more Sen. Murphy said. That’s exactly what happened in Maureen Ross Gemme’s front yard in Windsor Locks. “This guy, very well dressed, comes walking up, introduces himself as Chris Murphy, and says he’s walking the state!” Ross Gemme said. “Yeah. I really enjoyed that. I liked it very much.” Constituents surprised by Murphy in Windsor Locks this Memorial Day appreciate his desire to connect. “Very, very emotional,” Vincent Cianfarani Jr., owner of Vinnie’s Little Acre, said after the senator’s visit. With each step of this roughly 80-mile trek, the senator hopes to lend an ear and bring dozens of personal stories with him from Connecticut to Washington. “We talked a little bit about taxes in the state and in the area,” Ross Gemme said. “It’s hard, because I have a family. My kids are raising their family now, and taxes are just so expensive, and they’re trying to feed their family of four.” Sen. Murphy is taking in the experiences and struggles just like that for local families and small business owners alike. “I’d like to have more aid for small businesses, ARPA programs, money distributed,” Cianfarani said. “We’re all struggling, small business is really hurting today with the big giant supermarkets … places like this are almost an extinct species." The congressman hopes this insight empowers him to push for good things coming down the road. “Every year the people I meet, you know they reinforced for me the things that I'm working on,” Sen. Murphy said. “Sometimes they allow me to tell personal stories in Washington that helped me elevate these issues that matter so much to people in Connecticut.”F Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism and of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Sunday joined CBS News’ Face the Nation to discuss the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza and the need for bipartisan collaboration in Congress to address the problem at the U.S. border with Mexico. On responding to the humanitarian situation in Gaza and preventing the proliferation of terrorism, Murphy said: “What we know is that there's a humanitarian disaster unfolding right now in and around Rafah. We have not been able to get in significant shipments of humanitarian aid, and so no matter how many people are dying from Israeli military
...Read more operations, there are people dying every single day from an inability to access food and medicine. This is ultimately accruing to the benefit, not the detriment, of terrorist recruiting. And that's my big worry here. There's a moral cost to the number of civilians that are dying inside of Gaza, but when you continue to withhold food and aid from the people, that ultimately makes these terrorist causes stronger, not just in Israel, but around the world. Our own intelligence experts have told us that this is having a generational impact on terrorism, and so for many of us that want Israel to bring this military operation to a close and focus on the future political settlement inside Gaza, it is in part because we worry that this is a boon to terrorism groups around the world.” Murphy continued, emphasizing the need for Israel to present a plan for post-war governance in Gaza: “I am amongst many of my colleagues who have called on Israel to pause military operations to try to get this humanitarian nightmare under control, and to take the time to come up with a realistic solution for what Gaza looks like after the fighting stops. What you have seen in the past few weeks is that as Israel clears out of certain areas, like northern Gaza, Hamas is just filling back in because there's no viable plan for governance. Israel has to take the time to both be less cavalier about the humanitarian costs but also come up with a plan for what Gaza looks like after the fighting stops, and the fighting is going to stop at some point.” On effectively addressing the crisis at the U.S. southern border, Murphy said: “We have to just recognize that without updating the laws of the is country, without surging more resources to the border, we can't count on the numbers staying as low as they are today. And remember, today you have about 3,000 people crossing at the border on a daily basis. That's still a high number compared to what we saw ten years ago. And so for many of us, we are just heartbroken, we are sick over the fact that our Republican colleagues in Congress continue to vote against bipartisan border security that would give us the opportunity to actually give the President the resources and the authorities to make this a permanent change, to get the numbers under cool, on a permanent basis.” Murphy continued, underscoring the need for Republicans to stop playing political games and support bipartisan reforms needed to solve the crisis at the southern border: “The President has such limited ability to issue executive orders that would have an impact on the border. He can't conjure resources out of thin air. If he were to try to shut down portions of the border, the courts would throw that out, I think, within a matter of weeks. I think the only thing that will bring order to the southwest border is bipartisan legislation. We have a bipartisan border bill, if Republicans decided to support it, it would pass and we could get it to the President's desk. It is up to Donald Trump and Republicans as to whether they want to solve the problem at the border or whether they want to keep the border a mess because it helps them politically in this upcoming election.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) on Thursday applauded Senate passage of the Dr. Emmanuel Bilirakis and Honorable Jennifer Wexton National Plan to End Parkinson’s Act, legislation that aims to unite the federal government in a mission to cure and prevent Parkinson’s, alleviate financial and health burdens on American families, and reduce government spending over time. The bill, which passed the House of Representatives in December 2023, was introduced by Senators Murphy and Capito, along with U.S. Representatives Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.) and Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.). The Dr. Emmanuel Bilirakis and Honorable Jennifer Wexton National Plan to End Parkinson’s Act, which is now on its way to the president for his signature, is the first-
...Read more ever legislation solely devoted to ending Parkinson’s disease. The legislation was renamed to recognize Representative Gus Bilirakis’ (R-Fla.) brother, Dr. Emmanuel Bilirakis, who passed away in May 2023 after a long battle with the disease, and a Congressional colleague, Representative Jennifer Wexton, who is courageously battling the rare neurodegenerative disease Progressive Supranuclear Palsy (PSP) and who helped with the bill’s passage. Parkinson’s disease is the second most common – and fastest-growing – neurological disease globally, with nearly 90,000 new cases diagnosed every year. “All across Connecticut, I meet families that are suffocated by a family members' Parkinson's diagnosis. Anyone living with or caring for a person with Parkinson’s knows it can be an absolutely devastating disease. As the number of people diagnosed with Parkinson’s is expected to rise to more than one million in the next few years, we need real collaboration across the public and private sectors to fast-track promising research, develop better treatments, support patients and their loved ones, and find a cure. I’m proud to have helped get this legislation across the finish line so we can finally establish a national plan to end Parkinson’s once and for all,” said Murphy. “I have spoken with, seen, and heard so many stories of West Virginians impacted by Parkinson’s disease,” said Capito. “Whether they are living with the disease or caring for someone impacted by it, Parkinson’s takes a terrible toll on the physical, mental, emotional, and economic well-being of everyone involved. The Dr. Emmanuel Bilirakis and Honorable Jennifer Wexton National Plan to End Parkinson’s Act is commonsense legislation that will establish a robust response to address the disease and move us towards new treatments and a cure, and I’m thrilled to see it pass the Senate and on its way to becoming law.” The Dr. Emmanuel Bilirakis and Honorable Jennifer Wexton National Plan to End Parkinson’s Act will create an advisory council comprising members of federal agencies that supports research, care, and services for Parkinson’s, plus caregivers, patients, and other non-federal experts. Specifically, the council will: Ensure coordination among federal entities with responsibility for managing, treating, and curing Parkinson’s disease
Evaluate all current federal programs related to Parkinson’s
Write a national plan to prevent and cure Parkinson’s, and reduce the financial impact of the disease on patients and the federal government
Report to Congress on progress toward the plan’s goals ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee and a vocal proponent of boosting investment in the Northeast Corridor, along with U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), led two key initiatives to tackle the nation’s rail state-of-good-repair (SOGR) backlog and increase funding for important transportation infrastructure and safety programs in the fiscal year (FY) 2025 budget. In a letter to U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD), Murphy requested that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail (IPR)
...Read more grant program be funded at the full $1.5 billion to maintain and improve rail infrastructure and rider experience. Meeting this funding level is a necessary step to fully address the nation’s rail SOGR backlog while improving and expanding intercity passenger rail. Full funding for the FRA IPR grants program would help address the backlog while stimulating stagnant rail expansion programs. “According to the Northeast Corridor Commission, ‘[t]he loss of the NEC for a single day could cost the country $100 million in added congestion, productivity losses, and other transportation impacts.’ If Congress does not make the necessary investments, disruptions will become more frequent and more severe over time. While the IIJA made a significant down payment to help address this SOGR backlog, it is simply not enough given the years of underinvestment and the age of the assets. Without sufficient annual appropriations to supplement the IIJA, many of the NEC’s most critical projects will not advance.” U.S. Senators Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Bernie Sanders (I-N.H.) also signed the letter, available HERE. Murphy also led the request to Chairman Schatz and Ranking Member Hyde-Smith calling for at least $150 million for the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in the FY25 THUD Appropriations bill. This request, which would mark a $10 million increase from the FY24 funding level, aims to improve NTSB’s ability to assess accidents swiftly and effectively. “NTSB has only eleven railroad investigators, and three are now eligible for retirement. Those eleven investigators are currently working on twenty-three open rail investigations (including nine involving passenger trains). Further, NTSB currently has only two hazardous materials investigators to support investigations for all modes; these investigators are currently supporting three open investigations. Two pipeline investigators are currently working on two open pipeline investigations. While we have continually urged NTSB to complete its investigations as quickly as possible, the ability of the Board to speedily conclude such reviews is limited by its relatively small investigatory staff and the large number of matters requiring simultaneous investigation. Our funding request would allow the agency to move towards its target of 455 full-time equivalent employees to fully staff the NTSB. In addition, our request would allow the agency to continue its initiatives to stabilize its workforce and improve investigative capabilities involving emerging transportation technologies, including in rail. This request would also allow the agency to make programmatic investments in cybersecurity, system enhancements, and data analytics that would allow NTSB to keep pace with modern threats to transit safety.” U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) also signed the letter, available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Thursday released the following statement after the Senate voted against the motion to proceed on the bipartisan border bill:
“Today's vote is more evidence that Republicans just see the border as a political issue, not as a problem to be fixed.. If Republicans were serious about solving this problem, they would have at least voted to allow debate on the toughest bipartisan border security bill in a generation. Americans want us to work together on a solution, but today’s vote proves that only one party is interested in actually doing its job.”
###
On gun control, health care and immigration, Christopher S. Murphy has gained ground by building coalitions. On the project to refabricate and rehang a portion of Alexander Calder's "Mountains and Clouds" sculpture in the atrium of the Hart Senate Office Building, he's tilting at windmills on his own. "I might be a bit of a Don Quixote on this," the Connecticut Democrat quipped in an interview this week about a project nearly 10 years in the making, with no clear end in sight and few vocal supporters on the Hill. "It just seems sad to me that everybody here is so accepting that we have half a piece of art. You’d never chop off half a painting and keep the other half up." Since Calder’s "clouds" were removed in 2014 for a safety study, Murphy has periodically
...Read more lodged his frustrations with the massive, half-complete art installation that’s made its home in Hart since the 1980s. Last week, at a Senate Legislative Branch Appropriations budget hearing with acting Architect of the Capitol Joseph DiPietro, Murphy again asked for a status update. "Is there any chance that before I leave the Senate, or at least before I die, we can get the clouds back up there?" the senator asked. The answer? Maybe. But the design specifications and sheer size of the Calder piece make it a challenging task. DiPietro didn’t provide a timeline at the hearing, but a spokesperson for the project, who is working with donors and the Calder Foundation, said in an email that the clouds could be rehung as soon as the summer of 2026. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the AOC said a recent donation will allow for completion of the design and alterations and estimated a fall 2026 installation. Murphy is skeptical. "I don’t necessarily accept that timeline," he said, after almost a decade chasing down updates and advocating the reinstallation. Calder, the iconic American sculptor who for much of his life owned a farmhouse in the bucolic Litchfield Hills of Murphy’s home state, was known for his large public sculptures and his use of mobiles. His work features prominently at the National Gallery of Art, as well as other D.C. museums. When construction on Hart began in the 1970s, Calder was approached to submit a design to fill the dramatic, nine-story atrium. In typical fashion, he conceived of something grand. The "mountains" would stand 51 feet tall and become the focal point of the airy, sun-soaked ground floor of the building. The clouds would rotate in the air above, powered by a motor. Calder presented his model to the Architect of the Capitol on Nov. 10, 1976. He died the following day, and complications ensued. Public funds were cut for the project in 1979, and it looked like the whole thing might be nixed. It was only after a fundraising campaign, led by former New Jersey Sen. Nicholas F. Brady, that the full-size sculpture was created and assembled. According to the AOC, it cost $650,000 and is an outlier for Calder because the artist didn’t oversee its final stages. "I’m not a Calder expert, but I understand why this is an exceptional work in his portfolio. In part, that’s what makes it so interesting," Murphy said. The clouds, which were composed of four aluminum pieces with a cumulative weight of more than 4,000 pounds, were hung in 1985. The mountains were installed a year later. The clouds stopped turning in the 1990s, according to The Washington Post, and the mobile was stationary until 2014, when it was lowered so its structural integrity could be tested. It was deemed unsafe and disassembled. No money has been appropriated for the refabrication and reinstallation of the clouds, but Murphy doesn’t think financing is a problem. He said there were several "well resourced" Calder collectors who want to see the project completed. And the Calder Foundation has been supportive, Murphy said. "I think the Architect of the Capitol has slow-walked this for a decade. And I think that, for most of the last decade, the only reason the AOC moves on this is because they get pushed by me or pushed by the Calder Foundation," Murphy said. The AOC, through a spokesperson, did not respond directly to Murphy’s assertions. Striking a hopeful note was Christian Quilici, who said he helps manage the project on behalf of donors Jon and Kim Shirley and serves as a liaison between the foundation and Congress. "As of today, we are still information-gathering and hammering out details with our selected fabricator," he said in an email. Quilici said the mobile will be transformed "using state-of-the-art technology and materials that were unavailable in the 1980s and an updated mechanism to be incorporated so that the Clouds can finally move - realizing the majestic experience that the artist originally intended." "They will be lighter, safer and easier to hang," Quilici added, although he couldn’t provide details on other technical aspects of the installation or the cost. A more detailed announcement from the foundation and the donors is expected this summer, he said. Murphy didn’t wax poetic about the meaning of the sculpture (and Calder reportedly didn’t like to publicly analyze his own work). But he believes democracy requires an investment in the arts and he likes when the government is willing to take a big swing. "I don’t like small-minded government," Murphy said. "To me it symbolizes a government that’s willing to think big and have big ambitions." Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to call for passage of the bipartisan border security bill that former President Trump convinced Republicans to kill earlier this year. Murphy reintroduced the bill as a standalone piece of legislation last week, and the U.S. Senate will vote Thursday. “Why did a bill that had the support of Senator Lankford, the appointed negotiator, had the support of Senator McConnell, fail? And the answer is simple. Donald Trump told Republicans to kill the bill. Donald Trump told Republicans that their party would be better off if the border was a mess, if nothing passed, because more Republicans would get elected this November if
...Read more there were scenes of chaos at the border. And so even though you've got a bipartisan border bill, kill it, because politically it's better for Republicans if the border is a mess,” Murphy said. Ahead of tomorrow’s vote, he said: “And so that's why we're here today. Because the American public wants us to pass bipartisan border security legislation. Democrats want to pass bipartisan border security legislation. But as far as I can tell, Republicans do not, because they want the border to be a mess. We'll see tomorrow. We'll have another chance. If this is an emergency like Republicans say, then let's give it one more shot.” Murphy emphasized the importance of continuing to work to fix the broken immigration system: “[T]his bill does not do everything we need to do to reform our broken immigration system. Of course, I want a pathway to citizenship for people that are living in the shadows. I want to make sure that those kids who know nothing except for being Americans have a chance to stay here permanently. But this bill is a really important downpayment, a really important bipartisan downpayment on border security and immigration reform. Murphy excoriated Donald Trump’s core strategy of turning Americans against immigrants: “[K]eeping this issue of immigration unsolved, keeping the border chaotic is so important to Republicans, and in particular, to Donald Trump. The reason is that making Americans afraid of each other, turning us against each other, is the centerpiece of Donald Trump's message. And thus, for this election, at least, the centerpiece of the Republican platform. The idea is to keep the border broken, to keep the immigration system broken, because it helps breed and maintain resentment towards immigrants, towards people that are different from you. Just last month, Trump said this, he said, ‘Immigrants are not human. They are animals.’ If a major political figure said that 20 years ago, there'd be, I think, Republicans and Democrats both standing up and condemning that kind of language. Donald Trump calls immigrants animals, says they're not human, he says that on a regular basis, and he’s celebrated by Republicans. I wish this weren't true. I wish it weren't a foundational aspect of modern Republicanism, to try to turn us against each other, to try to make us afraid of people who are coming to this country just to save their family's lives. That's where we are. That's where we are. Murphy concluded: “Republicans can complain that we're asking them to vote on a negotiated bipartisan compromise because it is inconvenient for them to vote against a bill that was endorsed by high profile Senate Republicans and by high profile conservative groups. It's inconvenient for them to vote against a bill that actually brings security to the border, that fixes the problem that they say that they want to be fixed. But that is our job. Our job is to come here and not just do press conferences, not just search for clicks online. Our job is to fix problems, and the broken border and our broken immigration system is a problem. This bill doesn't fix all of those problems, but it's the biggest fix we’ve had a chance to vote on in a generation. So yes, we need to vote on this, again, to give Republicans the chance to do the right thing.” A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “Tomorrow, we're going to have a chance to come together, Republicans and Democrats, to be able to secure our border, to make better sense of our immigration system. This is what the American people want us to do. They don't elect us to hold press conferences. They don't elect us to post on social media. They don't elect us to argue. They elect us to solve problems. “To my great gladness, there are Republicans who were willing to solve these problems. Senator Lankford is one of them. Senator Sinema, an independent, Senator Lankford, and I sat in a room for four months, and we negotiated a bipartisan compromise, a compromise, that would allow us to get tougher on our southern border, to make sure that only the right people are coming to the United States, those that have a legitimate claim of asylum, those that are legitimately fleeing terror and torture, that would create a more compassionate, more effective, more efficient system of immigration. “We were engaged in this process because Republicans demanded it. Republicans said ‘We want you to pass bipartisan immigration reform. We want you to get to a result. We'll vote for it if you achieve that result.’ They selected Senator Lankford as the chosen negotiator. We achieved that result. Senator McConnell was in the room for those negotiations. It was endorsed by some of the most conservative outlets and organizations in the country, including the Chamber of Commerce, the Wall Street Journal, and the very conservative Border Patrol Union. But it only got four Republican votes. And so I want to talk for just a minute about why that happened, what the bill does, and why it's important that we have another vote this week. “First, let's just talk briefly about what this bill does. Probably first and most importantly, it fixes the broken immigration system, the asylum system in particular. Right now, you come to this country and apply for asylum, it takes sometimes as long as ten years before you get your claim heard. That's not fair. That's not fair for the individual who's applying. But that's not fair for others who are waiting outside of the country to try to come to the United State. It’s not fair for communities that ultimately have to house and provide services for all those individuals who are waiting to apply for asylum. So this bill fixes that broken system. It takes that five or ten year wait down to weeks or months. “This bill gives the President emergency authorities to close down portions of the border when crossings get too high. You can't handle 10,000 people a day at the border. We all know that. Republicans and Democrats, the American public knows that. They saw that chaos at the end of last year. This bill says the President, whether you're Republican or Democrat, has the emergency authority to close down the border during times of high crossings. “This bill makes significant investments in combating fentanyl. My colleagues have talked about the scourge of fentanyl. Hundreds and hundreds of people dying in my state, thousands across this country. This bill invests significant new resources in stopping the flow of drugs across our border. It’s a $20 billion investment overall, much of that money is targeted towards fentanyl. And then it just takes a bunch of commonsense steps to treat those who are coming to the United States in a more humane way. It says if you're coming here and you have a legitimate claim to asylum, you should be able to work while your claim is being processed, that you should have a right to a lawyer during that process, that we should provide a little bit of money for young kids who are eight years old, eight year olds, to have representation. It provides a pathway to citizenship for certain really critical populations, including Afghans, including the children of H-2B holders. “Inside this bill are a number of really important reforms. This system just makes more sense. It's more effective, it's more humane. But at the foundation of this bill is border security, making sure that we have a border that's manageable, that is not chaotic. Now, I agree with my colleagues, this bill does not do everything we need to do to reform our broken immigration system. Of course, I want a pathway to citizenship for people that are living in the shadows. I want to make sure that those kids who know nothing except for being Americans have a chance to stay here permanently. But this bill is a really important downpayment, a really important bipartisan downpayment on border security and immigration reform. “The question is, why did it fail? Why did a bill that had the support of Senator Lankford, the appointed negotiator, had the support of Senator McConnell, fail? And the answer is simple. Donald Trump told Republicans to kill the bill. Donald Trump told Republicans that their party would be better off if the border was a mess, if nothing passed, because more Republicans would get elected this November if there were scenes of chaos at the border. And so even though you've got a bipartisan border bill, kill it, because politically it's better for Republicans if the border is a mess. “That's not my analysis. That is literally what Republicans have said on the record repeatedly. Senator McConnell said it himself, said Donald Trump told us to do nothing. Senator McConnell didn't say Donald Trump told us to write a better bill. He said Donald Trump told Senate Republicans ‘do nothing.’ And so that's why we're here today. Because the American public wants us to pass bipartisan border security legislation. Democrats want to pass bipartisan border security legislation. But as far as I can tell, Republicans do not, because they want the border to be a mess. We'll see tomorrow, we'll have another chance. If this is an emergency like Republicans say, then let's give it one more shot. “And let me end with this, because I do think it's important to just explore for a minute why keeping this issue of immigration unsolved, keeping the border chaotic is so important to Republicans, and in particular, to Donald Trump. The reason is that making Americans afraid of each other, turning us against each other, is the centerpiece of Donald Trump's message. And thus, for this election, at least, the centerpiece of the Republican platform. The idea is to keep the border broken, to keep the immigration system broken, because it helps breed and maintain resentment towards immigrants, towards people that are different from you. Just last month, Trump said this, he said, ‘Immigrants are not human. They are animals.’ If a major political figure said that 20 years ago, there'd be, I think, Republicans and Democrats both standing up and condemning that kind of language. Donald Trump calls immigrants animals, says they're not human, he says that on a regular basis, and he’s celebrated by Republicans. I wish this weren't true. I wish it weren't a foundational aspect of modern republicanism, to try to turn us against each other, to try to make us afraid of people who are coming to this country just to save their family's lives. That's where we are. That's where we are. “But that doesn't obviate us from the responsibility to govern. And so Republicans can complain that we're asking them to vote on a negotiated bipartisan compromise because it is inconvenient for them to vote against a bill that was endorsed by high profile Senate Republicans and by high profile conservative groups. It's inconvenient for them to vote against a bill that actually brings security to the border, that fixes the problem that they say that they want to be fixed. But that is our job. Our job is to come here and not just do press conferences, not just search for clicks online. Our job is to fix problems, and the broken border and our broken immigration system is a problem. This bill doesn't fix all of those problems, but it's the biggest fix we’ve had a chance to vote on in a generation. So yes, we need to vote on this, again, to give Republicans the chance to do the right thing, to choose the security of this country, to choose fixing a problem that they identify, instead of choosing to try to gain some political advantage in this election, instead of choosing to continue to double down on the strategy of dividing Americans from each other. That's why we're voting tomorrow. And I am hopeful that Republicans and Democrats will come together to support this important bipartisan border security legislation. I yield the floor.” ### Read less HARTFORD– U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senators Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, in introducing bipartisan legislation to authorize several Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) construction projects across the nation. The senators’ Fiscal Year 2024 Veterans Affairs Major Medical Facility Authorization Act would authorize 11 VA construction projects in Connecticut, Washington, Texas, Maryland, Oregon, Nevada, California, Puerto Rico, and Missouri. The West Haven VA Hospital will receive $153 million, appropriated through the federal budget, for the construction of a new surgical and clinical space tower on the West Haven VA campus, as well as the
...Read more renovation of major buildings and demolition projects. The new bill would authorize up to $500 million for these critical improvements to ensure that the West Haven VA is fully modernized and can complete these long overdue renovations. “It’s no secret the West Haven VA is in need of serious upgrades. Investing in a new surgical and clinical tower will provide veterans living in Connecticut with the high-quality, modern and accessible services they deserve. We have a duty of care to those who served our country, and I’m proud to join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to introduce this important legislation,” said Murphy. “VA facilities need to be moved into the 21st century. We’ve delivered $153 million for renovations to the West Haven VA. This new act will mean another half a billion dollars,” said Blumenthal. “Men and women who have served their country deserve the very best – the gold standard in medical care. That’s what new facilities will enable. You simply cannot deliver world class medicine in substandard buildings.” U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.) also cosponsored the legislation. This legislation builds upon historic infrastructure investments in the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act. The PACT Act invested in VA’s infrastructure workforce through new recruitment and retention incentives, provides funding for 31 new facilities in 19 states, and delivers additional tools to build clinics more efficiently in the future including with the Department of Defense and academic hospitals. The legislation also gave VA expanded authority to repurpose or lease out unused or vacant Department buildings benefiting veterans and saving taxpayer funds in the process. The text of the legislation can be found HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) reintroduced the Public Housing Emergency Response Act to address the estimated $70 billion backlog of maintenance and repairs in our nation’s public housing. This investment would allow tenants to live in safe conditions and prevent existing units of affordable housing from falling into disrepair as lawmakers work to end the housing crisis by expanding the supply of public housing. U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Tina Smith (D-Minn.) also cosponsored the legislation. Because of chronic underfunding, there is an estimated $70 billion backlog of repairs to the existing public housing
...Read more stock. As a result, approximately 10,000 units are lost every year, and tens of thousands of residents live in unsafe, unhealthy, and undignified conditions. First introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Representative Nydia M. Velázquez (D-N.Y.), the Public Housing Emergency Response Act was first introduced in the U.S. Senate in 2020. “Poor housing conditions caused by aging infrastructure can lead to serious health problems, including lead poisoning, asthma, and heart disease. While there’s no quick fix, this $70 billion federal investment would go a long way to fund important infrastructure upgrades and repairs and ensure public housing in Connecticut remains clean, safe and affordable,” said Murphy. “Outdated, unsafe, and often decades-old public housing is endangering residents’ health and safety across the country. This measure will dedicate long overdue funding to address the backlog of maintenance and repairs in public housing – helping address our nation’s housing crisis and bring homes in disrepair into the 21st century,” said Blumenthal. "Expanding our supply of quality housing is the only way to dig ourselves out of this housing crisis. I’m pushing for this bold investment in our public housing so that every family has a safe place to live—and to breathe new life into the countless public housing units we’ve lost to decades of neglect and disrepair," said Warren. The bill is endorsed by the National Low-Income Housing Coalition, National Housing Law Project, National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NAHRO), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Public Housing Authorities Directors Association (PHADA), Council of Large Public Housing Authorities, Coalition on Human Needs, Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund, American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO, and National Education Association. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) on Tuesday introduced a resolution affirming Congress’ support for an international mission to restore peace and security to Haiti and return the country to democratic governance. Since the assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moïse in 2021, the security situation in the country has rapidly deteriorated as armed gangs have taken control of critical infrastructure and prevented access to desperately needed humanitarian aid. As a result, thousands of Haitians have been displaced and cholera cases have increased dramatically. The resolution applauds President Biden’s commitment to provide logistical support and financial assistance for the Multinational Security Support mission led by Kenya to
...Read more restore a basic level of security to help ensure the country is able to conduct free and fair elections. The Members also endorsed international election monitoring and called on members of the international community to pledge support for the mission and contribute humanitarian aid. “It’s been deeply concerning to watch the security situation in Haiti continue to deteriorate over the last two years, resulting in the total collapse of basic services and the displacement of thousands of Haitians, many of whom are now choosing to make the dangerous journey to the U.S. in the hopes of escaping the violence. I’ve spoken to Haitian-American leaders in Connecticut who worry not only about the health and safety of their family and friends still in Haiti, but also fear for the future of their home country. I’m hopeful that the UN-authorized Multinational Security Support mission can help stabilize Haiti, but the U.S. and our international partners must also be committed to providing the long-term support and resources needed to put Haiti back on a path toward democratic governance,” said Murphy. “When Haiti is in turmoil, Haitians flee their homeland and come to the United States. A significant market for Louisiana rice goes away,” said Cassidy. “Missionaries and others from the United States are put in danger. We need peace in Haiti.” “We must stand in solidarity with the people of Haiti by using all tools at our disposal to lead the international community in the restoration of peace, security, and democratic governance in Haiti,” said Kaine. “Fully funding the Multinational Security Support mission is essential, and I appreciate the Administration’s commitment to that goal. Congress needs to do its part by releasing that funding so we can work with partners around the world to restore stability for the Haitian people and prevent another migrant crisis.” At a Senate Appropriations hearing in April, Murphy questioned USAID Administrator Samantha Power about the role the U.S. should play in helping stabilize Haiti, as the largest contributor of humanitarian aid to the country. In March, Murphy and Kaine introduced the Caribbean Arms Trafficking Causes Harm (CATCH) Act, legislation that would help curb illicit arms trafficking from the United States to the Caribbean by requiring the Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions to report on the implementation of anti-firearm-trafficking provisions included in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday spoke at a Defense Appropriations Subcommittee hearing on President Biden’s Fiscal Year 2025 budget request for the Army. In his questions to Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth, Murphy expressed concerns about the safety and cost of the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft, as well as the V-280 Valor, a new tiltrotor model which the Army is currently developing for its Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) program. He also underscored the need for adequate investment in modernizing the Black Hawk helicopter to maintain military preparedness, particularly following the Army’s decision to cancel the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program. Murphy raised concerns about the safety of the tiltrotor aircraft,
...Read more highlighting recent fatal crashes of the V-22 Osprey: “I think we’ve made a really bad bet on doubling down on tiltrotor technology that has proved to be deadly and wildly expensive. From March 2022 to November 2023, we had 20 service members die in four separate fatal Osprey crashes. This was after the Department of Defense said in February of 2023 that they had fixed the problem, the hard clutch engagement problem, that was thought to be behind earlier crashes. They were 99% certain that the problem had been fixed, and then there were four crashes where 20 more service members died.” Murphy also pointed out the exorbitant, escalating costs associated with tiltrotor technology: “This is in addition to the program being wildly expensive. Costs per flying hour [for the Osprey] have spiked by 22% just between 2019 and 2020. And so, the decision to double down on the tiltrotor program with a tiltrotor selection as part of the future vertical lift program sounds disastrous and wildly costly for this Committee. Reports are that the tiltrotor bid was twice that of the competing bid, and then you have all of this evidence that you haven’t fixed the safety problems.” Murphy pressed Secretary Wormuth on the Army’s cancellation of the FARA program and the need for meaningful Army investment in upgrading the Black Hawk helicopter: “A couple years ago, the Army's number one modernization priority was the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft program. The Army reversed itself, canceled that program, which is going to put us in position to have to rely on the Black Hawk in the short term to do a lot more work, and yet this budget request includes only $25 million in Army research and development funding for Black Hawk modernization, which just doesn’t sound right given the fact that now that you aren’t building a new Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft, you are gonna need to very quickly scale up and modernize the Black Hawks. So how do we make sure that we invest in the Black Hawk program in part as a means to balance out what we have lost with the cancellation of the FARA program?” Last week, Murphy also raised concerns about the safety and cost of the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft. A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you both for being here and for your service. It sounds like Senator Moran predicted my opening line of questioning here. Listen, I think we’ve made a really bad bet on doubling down on tiltrotor technology that has proved to be deadly and wildly expensive. “From March 2022 to November 2023, we had 20 service members die in four separate fatal Osprey crashes. This was after the Department of Defense said in February of 2023 that they had fixed the problem, the hard clutch engagement problem, that was thought to be behind earlier crashes. They were 99% certain that the problem had been fixed, and then there were four crashes where 20 more service members died. “This is in addition to the program being wildly expensive. Costs per flying hour have spiked by 22% just between 2019 and 2020. And so, the decision to double down on the tiltrotor program with a tiltrotor selection as part of the future vertical lift program sounds disastrous and wildly costly for this Committee. Reports are that the tiltrotor bid was twice that of the competing bid, and then you have all of this evidence that you haven’t fixed the safety problems. “So, Secretary Wormuth, can you explain, (A): How the army can justify moving forward with a new tiltrotor aircraft when we can’t even figure out how to address the safety issues with the existing Osprey? And how we are going to account for a tiltrotor program that is known for its tendency for cost escalation? How can you guarantee that this isn’t gonna become just a giant cost suck on this committee as the costs escalate in the new tiltrotor program as they have in the Osprey program?” WORMUTH: “Thank you, Senator. A couple of things on that. So, on safety, certainly we are concerned always anytime we see a helicopter crash or an airplane crash, whether it is the Osprey, or we have had some crashes of our Apaches. But one of the things I think that the FLRAA program will benefit from is over 20 years of safety experience with the Osprey and lessons from the Osprey. So, we will be factoring all of that and learning from all of that. And again, no helicopter is perfect. They are inherently – there can be challenges. But I think we will benefit greatly from the long track record and be able to learn lessons in terms of safety from Osprey. “More broadly to your point about costs, again, we looked at not just costs when we considered the bids that came in, but also performance. And so, I think we have to weigh that, and as you know, ultimately, the GAO found that our decision to go with Bell Textron was sound. So, we will continue to look very closely at cost and we’ll monitor cost growth, but we also need to be looking at performance, and we felt that the Bell Textron proposal would give us the performance that we need.” MURPHY: “A couple years ago, the Army's number one modernization priority was the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft program. The Army reversed itself, canceled that program, which is going to put us in position to have to rely on the Black Hawk in the short term to do a lot more work, and yet this budget request includes only $25 million in Army research and development funding for Black Hawk modernization, which just doesn’t sound right given the fact that now that you aren’t building a new Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft, you are gonna need to very quickly scale up and modernize the Black Hawks. So how do we make sure that we invest in the Black Hawk program in part as a means to balance out what we have lost with the cancellation of the FARA program?” WORMUTH: “Thank you, Senator. One thing the Army is doing as part of our rebalance of the aviation portfolio is to pursue the reconnaissance requirements in a different way, really relying much more on the combination of space-based sensing, existing platforms, and things like future tactical unmanned aerial systems and what we were previously calling air launch defects but really we’re now just calling launched effects. So inherent in our decisions in the rebalancing is the fact that we believe we can meet that requirement in a different way. “As you point out, we do need to continue to invest in Black Hawk, and I think there are things we could do. If Congress decided, for example, to give us more money for research and development in 2025 for Black Hawk, we could work on the fly-by-wire capabilities, we could work on doing more with the improved turbine engine, which is going to be critical not just for Black Hawk but also for Apache. So there are projects I think we could pursue, but I would leave it there.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Monday joined 42 of their colleagues in sending a letter to U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (LHHS), and U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, encouraging them to provide robust investment in the Pell Grant program for Fiscal Year 2025 (FY 2025). In the letter, the senators requested a discretionary increase to the award as Congress works towards doubling the Pell Grant for students. “We remain concerned that the value of the Pell Grant has steadily declined since
...Read more it was first created – now covering the lowest share of the cost of attendance in its 50-year history,” the senators wrote. “Increasing the maximum award would provide a substantial investment toward reversing this decades-long decline.” Specifically, the letter requests that the discretionary allocation for the Pell Grant effectively: Meets the needs of students
Protects all Pell Grant program reserves
Expands eligibility to students who have been historically excluded or previously cut out from being eligible for the Pell Grant “The need for Congress to provide robust investment in the Pell Grant program is clear. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, students are still struggling just to meet their basic needs as they pursue higher education,” the senators continued. “It is critically important that the Subcommittee continues to protect all Pell Grant reserves from any reallocation, raid, or rescission that would hasten any shortfalls in the program.” “The Pell Grant is the cornerstone of federal student aid, and currently helps over 6 million students pursue higher education in the United States,” the senators concluded. “With a continued investment in the Pell Grant, we can better extend educational opportunity to more students from low- and moderate- income families, who will be critical to meeting the demand for a highly educated-workforce.” U.S. Senators Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Angus King (I-Maine), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Sherron Brown (D-Ohio), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.) also signed the letter. “As lawmakers work toward a funding package for FY25, we strongly support efforts to increase the maximum Pell Grant award and ensure that funding dedicated to the Pell Grant program is protected and not used to fill budget gaps in other programs,” said Michele Zampini, Senior Director of College Affordability (TICAS). “The Pell Grant program is the federal government’s foundational investment in college affordability, enabling more than 7 million low- and middle-income students—including 60 percent of Black undergraduates and half of Latino undergraduates—to attend college each year. By working to double the maximum Pell award and protecting the program’s existing funding reserves, lawmakers can make college far more affordable for millions of students.” The full letter can be read HERE and below. Dear Chair Baldwin and Ranking Member Capito: As you begin your work on Fiscal Year 2025 (FY 2025) appropriations, we urge the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (LHHS) Subcommittee to make sure the discretionary allocation for the Pell Grant effectively meets the needs of students, protects all Pell Grant program reserves, and expands eligibility to students who have been historically excluded or previously cut out from being eligible for the Pell Grant. We respectfully request you provide a discretionary increase to the award as Congress works toward doubling the Pell Grant for students. We appreciate the LHHS Subcommittee’s work to increase the Pell Grant maximum award in recent years. But we remain concerned that the value of the Pell Grant has steadily declined since it was first created – now covering the lowest share of the cost of attendance in its 50-year history. Increasing the maximum award would provide a substantial investment toward reversing this decades-long decline. The need for Congress to provide robust investment in the Pell Grant program is clear. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, students are still struggling just to meet their basic needs as they pursue higher education. Recently, for example, the Center for Community College Student Engagement (CCCSE) reported that 29 percent of the students they surveyed were food insecure, and 14 percent were housing insecure. Especially at a time of expected shortfalls in the Pell Grant program, it is critically important that the Subcommittee continues to protect all Pell Grant reserves from any reallocation, raid, or rescission that would hasten any shortfalls in the program. Pell Grant funds should be retained in the program to increase the maximum award, reverse prior eligibility cuts, and provide new opportunities to provide higher education to historically underrepresented students. The Pell Grant is the cornerstone of federal student aid, and currently helps over 6 million students pursue higher education in the United States. With a continued investment in the Pell Grant, we can better extend educational opportunity to more students from low- and moderate- income families, who will be critical to meeting the demand for a highly educated-workforce. Thank you for your continued commitment to the Pell Grant. We appreciate your consideration of these requests. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday joined U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and 41 other Senate Democrats in a letter calling on Congress to fund the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (NeighborWorks America) in the upcoming FY25 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD) Appropriations Bill. As a congressionally chartered national nonprofit, NeighborWorks creates opportunities for Americans to live in affordable and safe homes. In FY23, NeighborWorks created and maintained over 45,000 jobs, repaired 82,500 homes, and empowered 16,300 new homeowners. That same year, NeighborWorks provided 111,600 families with affordable housing counseling, helping prospective homebuyers and renters make
...Read more informed housing decisions. Despite NeighborWorks ’continued success, Congress slashed its budget in FY24 by $12 million from FY23, bringing the program back to pre-pandemic funding levels. Amidst a severe housing shortage of nearly 4 million units with record-breaking rents and home prices, funding for federal housing programs like NeighborWorks is crucial.
“As you consider the Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD) Appropriations Act, we ask that you provide at least $185 million for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, commonly known as NeighborWorks America. With the nation’s housing crisis continuing to worsen and high interest rates putting homeownership out of reach for working families across the country, now is the time to increase our investment in ensuring that Americans have access to reasonably-priced and quality housing options,” the members wrote. “For FY25, Congress should recommit to battling the affordable housing crisis and provide the necessary support for federal housing programs. Given NeighborWorks’ demonstrated record of success in increasing access to affordable housing and its continued bipartisan support in Congress, we request that you provide NeighborWorks at least $185 million in funding in FY25. With a modest increase in federal investment, NeighborWorks will be able to provide more grants to network community-development organizations, leverage additional investments from private sources, and create opportunities for more Americans to live in affordable homes,” the members continued. “We ask that you work with us to invest in our communities and our constituents by providing robust funding to NeighborWorks.” U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Angus King (I-Maine), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ed Markey (D-Mass), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Maggie Massan (D-N.H.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) also signed the letter, which was sent to the leadership of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Transportation. The full letter can be read HERE and below. Dear Chairman Schatz and Ranking Member Hyde-Smith: As you consider the Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD) Appropriations Act, we ask that you provide at least $185 million for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, commonly known as NeighborWorks America. With the nation’s housing crisis continuing to worsen and high interest rates putting homeownership out of reach for working families across the country, now is the time to increase our investment in ensuring that Americans have access to reasonably-priced and quality housing options. As a Congressionally-chartered, national nonprofit, NeighborWorks creates opportunities for Americans to live in affordable and safe homes by providing community development organizations in all fifty states with financial resources and counseling services. In FY23, NeighborWorks created and maintained over 45,000 jobs, repaired 82,500 homes, and empowered 16,300 new homeowners. That same year, NeighborWorks provided 111,600 families with affordable housing counseling, helping prospective homebuyers and renters make informed housing decisions. Providing consumers access to this kind of accurate, comprehensive information throughout the home-buying process can help protect our nation from another mortgage crisis. This has all come at a relatively low cost—NeighborWorks has demonstrated the ability to attract private sector investments to its affordable housing projects, leveraging $59 in private capital for every $1 appropriated to the program. Additionally, NeighborWorks’ Rural Initiative is specifically dedicated to delivering a range of services to rural communities in America that face unique challenges when it comes to creating affordable homeownership and rental opportunities. With approximately 20 percent of our nation’s population living in rural communities, NeighborWorks’ financial services, technical assistance, leadership development, and training for community-based development are critical to empowering rural homeownership and rental opportunities. After five straight years of funding increases, Congress appropriated NeighborWorks only $158 million in FY24, a $12 million decrease from FY23, bringing the program back to FY20 funding levels. The nation is in the midst of a severe housing shortage of nearly 4 million units with record-breaking rents and home prices.1 For FY25, Congress should recommit to battling the affordable housing crisis and provide the necessary support for federal housing programs. Given NeighborWorks’ demonstrated record of success in increasing access to affordable housing and its continued bipartisan support in Congress, we request that you provide NeighborWorks at least $185 million in funding in FY25. With a modest increase in federal investment, NeighborWorks will be able to provide more grants to network community-development organizations, leverage additional investments from private sources, and create opportunities for more Americans to live in affordable homes. We ask that you work with us to invest in our communities and our constituents by providing robust funding to NeighborWorks. Thank you for your consideration of this request. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives Jim Himes (D-Conn-04) and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) announced $3.44 million in funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to support four traffic safety projects across Connecticut. The funds are awarded through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grant program established to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. “When I walk across the state every year, I see firsthand how many roads are unsafe for pedestrians, bikers, and drivers. This $3.4 million from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will give Bridgeport, Canton, Fairfield, and Norwalk the federal dollars they need to implement evidence-based
...Read more solutions that save lives and make our streets both safer and more walkable,” said Murphy. “This $3.44 million in Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding comes at a time of great urgency as tens of thousands of lives are lost on our nation’s roadways each year. These projects will transform road and pedestrian safety at the local level so that Connecticut’s motorists, passengers, pedestrians, and bicyclists can feel safer on the roads. I am proud to fight for these investments and to lead my colleagues on the Road to Zero resolution to prevent senseless roadway tragedies from occurring,” said Blumenthal. “Too many of our roads are hazardous for pedestrians and cyclists, causing preventable, but often life-threatening, collisions. That’s why I’m thrilled to see the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law continue to deliver for Southwest Connecticut by funding Safe Streets and Roads for All grants for Bridgeport, Norwalk, and Fairfield. This federal funding will be used to identify and mitigate traffic chokepoints and develop town action plans that will create safer, more accessible, and cleaner roadways,” said Himes. “Since its passage, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law has delivered results for communities across Connecticut’s Fifth District. This Safe Streets and Roads for All funding will help Canton to take steps towards ensuring streets and roadways are safe for drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists,” said Hayes. The funding announced today will support the following regional and local projects: $2,538,400 for Bridgeport to advance its community-driven Complete & Safe Streets Design Manual, create an action plan for its implementation, and conduct numerous demonstration activities to inform the action plan
$160,000 for Canton to develop a comprehensive safety action plan
$350,000 for Fairfield to develop a comprehensive safety action plan
$400,000 for Norwalk to develop a comprehensive safety action plan The SS4A program supports the Department of Transportation’s goal of zero deaths and serious injuries on our nation’s roadways. This comes at a time where traffic fatalities are at the highest level in decades. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Friday released the following statement on the 70th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education: “Attending a racially and economically diverse school benefits all students and better prepares them to succeed as adults. But 70 years after the Brown v. Board of Education decision, American public schools are more segregated than they have been in generations. Black and Latino students and those in low-income communities often end up in highly segregated schools with far fewer resources than schools that predominantly serve white students. We shouldn’t be spending $7,000 more on the education of a student in Greenwich than
...Read more we are on the education of a student in Bridgeport, and neither should students expect to go to schools without classmates from the diversity of backgrounds they'll experience as adults in their own communities. We have to do more to make the promise of Brown v. Board of Education a reality, and that’s why I’ve introduced two pieces of legislation to push community-driven strategies to improve school diversity.” Murphy’s Strength in Diversity Act would promote diversity in schools through a federal grant program to support voluntary, community-driven strategies and MAGNET Act would improve and expand upon the federal Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) grant, which has been a key driver for the growth of magnet schools. ### Read less WASHINGTON — The Senate floor is typically the setting for speeches on foreign policy or spending battles or the occasional vote. But on a summer Thursday last year, Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut went to the floor to discuss a rarer topic for the room. “I’m here to talk about loneliness,” Murphy said. Murphy had been grappling with why Americans felt so divided at a time when technology has humans more connected than ever. His focus on the U.S. “epidemic of loneliness” led him down a path with many questions, few answers — and now, a Republican ally in the fight. “How can we feel lonelier in a world where connection to other human beings now requires only a click of a button? How can we feel isolated when linkage to the outside world is delivered via nonstop handheld stimulus?” Murphy
...Read more asked in a piece he wrote for The Bulwark in December 2022. Those questions led Murphy to Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican who himself was trying to find solutions to reconnect the disconnected. The duo is currently holding roundtable discussions with experts and everyday Americans to understand the problems more deeply before plotting the solutions. “I’ve been an admirer of the governor’s work for years,” Murphy shared in an interview with NBC News on Thursday, “especially when it comes to his work to try to draw our kids away from this culture of withdrawal that has been created by the smartphone technology and the apps that have become so addictive to our kids.” Murphy said he reached out to Cox during a June phone call last year to “try to figure out why Utah is a place with really high social capital, with people who feel maybe a little bit more connected to the community than in other parts of the country and see if there was work that we could do together.” Utah ranked as the happiest state last year, according to an annual study conducted by WalletHub. The 29 metrics tested are divided into three categories: emotional and physical well-being, work environment, and community environment. The U.S. ranked 23rd on the list of happiest countries in the world this year. Cox has focused on signing legislation into law that would limit cellphone and social media use for children under 18. One bill enacted last year would require users to verify their age to access their social media accounts. “The data really spoke to us that we were seeing happening in Utah, and what’s happening everywhere in the country and all over the world,” Cox said, seated next to Murphy outside of the Capitol complex. “This kind of hockey stick increases anxiety, depression and self-harm amongst our youth, especially young women.” Facing legal challenges from a group that represents the social media companies Meta, TikTok and X, Cox recently approved a revision to the laws with language that could withstand scrutiny in court, but the overall premise remains. “This is one area where the government, I think, can appropriately intervene,” Cox added, sharing that the “first thing” President Joe Biden wanted to discuss with him were Utah’s first-in-the-nation social media laws. Outside of social media and its impact on children, Murphy and Cox have engaged with various specialists to discuss the economy, housing, gun violence, political polarization and the lack of spirituality among American communities that they said are all contributing factors to social isolation. The issue has also caught the eye of the U.S. surgeon general, who prioritized a study and 85-page report on the loneliness epidemic that found loneliness and social isolation are mental hazards as dangerous as smoking up to 15 cigarettes per day. Murphy has been involved in various bipartisan causes during his time in the Senate, including a gun safety law, the Safer Communities Act, in the wake of the Uvalde school shooting, and a border bill that was consigned to defeat by Republicans earlier this year. He is known for putting partisan politics aside in an effort to strike deals across the aisle. And he’s longing to make progress tackling this wide-reaching project. “Our conversations in Washington nationally are important. And they’re relevant,” Murphy noted. “But they aren’t always connected to the things that actually make people happy.” Federal and state governments can’t “deliver the last mile of happiness,” Murphy said, noting that determining what brings one purpose, meaning and fulfillment is up to the individual. But, Murphy continued, “We are in charge of trying to set rules and laws and norms that give people a better shot at happiness.” The road to happiness and averting social isolation is a long one, even for the elected officials themselves. During his childhood, Cox’s parents got divorced. He faced bullying and social isolation, with the other kids in his class even throwing him in a garbage can in the middle of the hallway. “It was a really dark time and I went through a period of time where I thought the world would be a better place if I wasn’t in it,” admitted Cox, now a 48-year-old father of four. He credits the family members, teachers and church leaders who lifted him up, “who saw something in me that I didn’t see in myself.” It was that experience, Cox said, that drove him to public service and now into his partnership with Murphy. Murphy, who has served in the Senate for more than a decade, said he experiences social isolation for the same reason many Americans do. Murphy, a dad of two teenage boys, said parents could be among the loneliest in the country. “Data tells us some of the loneliest people out there are parents, especially parents of young kids, who feel very alone right now amidst a world that seems to be crashing down on their kids,” he shared. “There’s no doubt that as a parent, I have often felt very alone.” The changing landscape of social media and technology, the risk of violence at schools, and online bullying are among a suite of modern problems that are “unfamiliar” to older generations, Murphy said. “I certainly come to this conversation as a parent who has often felt very, very isolated from the kind of solutions that I feel I need to help my kids thrive,” he said. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to remember his friend and mentor, Margaret Miner, and honor her contributions as a renowned philanthropist, author, and environmental advocate. “I first met Margaret as soon as I finished college,” Murphy recalled. “I went to work for a longshot Congressional candidate who happened to be personal friends with Margaret and Hugh. And Margaret and Hugh were also, at the time, pretty adept local political activists in Litchfield County. There were no two people who worked harder for that longshot candidate, their friend, than Margaret and Hugh. They raised money, they knocked on doors, they put up lawn signs, whatever their friend needed, whatever their friend's 22-year-old campaign manager needed.”
...Read more Murphy highlighted Margaret’s impact as an advocate and as a mentor in the local community: “She single-handedly made her organization, Rivers Alliance, which she led for 18 years, a force to be reckoned with in Hartford. Under her leadership, Rivers Alliance became a force in Connecticut politics. Her team fought for, and successfully helped to pass, state laws to create a statewide water plan to protect stream flow in water courses, to ban the water contaminant MTBE in gasoline, to protect funding for the Connecticut Council of Environmental Quality, and to retore and protect state funding for the U.S. Geologic Survey. That's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what Margaret did, in terms of what Margaret and the people that she mentored produced in Hartford.” He continued: “But her work was always about something bigger than herself, or even her organization, Rivers Alliance. She was really dedicated to building a movement around water quality, around water health, around the environment. She helped teach people all across the state how to advocate for themselves, how to advocate for the causes that they mutually cared about. She was an organizer of people at heart, encouraging countless individuals all around the state and all around the country to join the causes that she cared about. And she was just good at it. There were [few] people that were more inspiring or convincing than Margaret was. Now, Margaret wasn't a big, boisterous, loud personality. But she was sincere, she was genuine, and she never, ever gave up. Her persistence was her calling card.” “Margaret Miner was an original. As her friend, I’ll remember her wit, her political savvy, her boundless heart. And on a personal note, I wouldn't be here if not for Margaret and Hugh. When I decided to run for Congress ten years after first meeting Margaret, she was, not surprisingly, one of my first calls. I planned the early stages of my first campaign at Margaret and Hugh's kitchen table, in their cute house in Roxbury, Connecticut. That’s how important she was to me, and I'm one of hundreds in Connecticut who can say Margaret Miner was one of the most important people in my life,” Murphy concluded. A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “I come to the floor this afternoon to talk about a great friend of mine, Margaret Miner. My friend Margaret Miner died last week. I'm really sad about it. Her family, her friends, are really sad about it. Because she was a great friend. She was warm and she was generous. Because she was funny, she was kind. Because she made a lot of other people's lives better. But I'm also sad because Margaret was one of a kind. She was a true Renaissance woman. She was a polymath. She was voracious about intaking the world and about giving back to it. “I’ve never met anybody like her, I'll never meet anybody like her again. I'll never see a partnership like the one she had with her late husband Hugh Rawson. Her legacy lives on but there's just no doubt that the mold was broken in two when they made Margaret Miner. She was born in New York City in 1938. Her parents, Tony and Frances, were in show business, which kind of makes sense if you know her but kind of doesn't. In 1984, she moved from Brooklyn to Roxbury, Connecticut. Roxbury is a small town, quintessential New England village in northwest Connecticut. There she became a fixture in the community. She began her life's work of fighting to protect the natural beauty of this state that she called home for the next 40 years. “I first met Margaret as soon as I finished college. I went to work for a longshot Congressional candidate who happened to be personal friends with Margaret and Hugh. And Margaret and Hugh were also, at the time, pretty adept local political activists in Litchfield County. There were no two people who worked harder for that longshot candidate, their friend, than Margaret and Hugh. They raised money, they knocked on doors, they put up lawn signs, whatever their friend needed, whatever their friend's 22-year-old campaign manager needed. “She and Hugh were selfless. I saw that up close. I saw what a good friend Margaret could be. Then, a few years later when I was elected to the state legislature, I got to know Margaret as an advocate. She was, in those legislative halls in Hartford, Connecticut, nearly every single day fighting for her cause, the cause of clean water and a healthy environment. “She single-handedly made her organization, Rivers Alliance, which she led for 18 years, a force to be reckoned with in Hartford. Under her leadership, Rivers Alliance became a force in Connecticut politics. Her team fought for, and successfully helped to pass, state laws to create a statewide water plan to protect stream flow in water courses, to ban the water contaminant MTBE in gasoline, to protect funding for the Connecticut Council of Environmental Quality, and to retore and protect state funding for the U.S. Geologic Survey. That's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what Margaret did, in terms of what Margaret and the people that she mentored produced in Hartford. “But her work was always about something bigger than herself, or even her organization, Rivers Alliance. She was really dedicated to building a movement around water quality, around water health, around the environment. She helped teach people all across the state how to advocate for themselves, how to advocate for the causes that they mutually cared about. She was an organizer of people at heart, encouraging countless individuals all around the state and all around the country to join the causes that she cared about. And she was just good at it. There were few people that were more inspiring or convincing than Margaret was. Now, Margaret wasn't a big, boisterous, loud personality. But she was sincere, she was genuine, and she never, ever gave up. Her persistence was her calling card. “Her unrelenting advocacy did not go unrecognized or unnoticed. She received countless awards for her work during her lifetime. She received the first Champion of Water Award from the Connecticut Water Policy Council. She received the Clyde O. Fisher Award for environmental achievement from the Connecticut Bar Association. She was the first recipient of the Marc J. Taylor Environmental Stewardship Award, the Rockfall Foundation's Tom O'Dell Distinguished Service Award. In 2016, I nominated her for the EPA's prestigious lifetime merit award. People knew what she had done in Connecticut. And so good for Connecticut that we didn't have to wait for Margaret's passing before singling her out for her seminal achievements in the area of environmental protection. “But what made Margaret so compelling, what made Margaret so amazing, was that in addition to being a great friend, in addition to leading one of the state's preeminent environmental organizations, she was incredibly accomplished in so many other fields. The rest of her life, when you say it out loud, in addition to all of that achievement, it kind of almost sounds implausible. “For instance, in her free time, Margaret was a nationally known and celebrated author. Not about the environment but about the history of quotable people. She was the co-author of five dictionaries of quotations, including the Oxford Dictionary of American quotations with her husband Hugh. In her spare time, she wrote five anthologies of quotations, five books. She helped found an organization called Our Towns for Sar-e-Pol, a humanitarian effort through the not-for-profit Save the Children to help women and children in Sar-e-Pol, Afghanistan. She was an international philanthropist, and author, and an environmental advocate. “She wrote a consumer reports book on allergies. I didn't even know that until I read the story of Margaret's life. She was an active member of the Roxbury Democratic Town Committee, and just before she passed at 86 years old, she was still serving on the local zoning board of appeals. She was learning Spanish in her 80's, attending two Spanish classes weekly. And as often as she could, she was playing poker, fleecing her friends of their money whenever possible. “Margaret Miner was an original. As her friend, I’ll remember her wit, her political savvy, her boundless heart. And on a personal note, I wouldn't be here if not for Margaret and Hugh. When I decided to run for Congress ten years after first meeting Margaret, she was, not surprisingly, one of my first calls. I planned the early stages of my first campaign at Margaret and Hugh's kitchen table, in their cute house in Roxbury, Connecticut. That’s how important she was to me, and I'm one of hundreds in Connecticut who can say Margaret Miner was one of the most important people in my life. I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to urge Senate Republicans to work with Democrats and pass the bipartisan border security bill that former President Trump convinced Republicans to kill earlier this year. Murphy called out Republicans for using the border as a political talking point, rather than trying to fix the problem and urged them to work with Democrats to pass this bipartisan legislation. Murphy announced the reintroduction of the bipartisan border security bill: “I'm going to reintroduce the bipartisan border bill. And my hope is that we will bring that bill to the floor for a vote to give my Republican colleagues another chance to do the right
...Read more thing, another chance to choose the safety and security of this country over the political prospects of their candidate for president. Americans want us to come together to pass border and immigration reform. They support compromise between the two parties. And that's exactly what the bipartisan border bill represented.” Murphy laid out why Republicans voted against the toughest bipartisan border security bill in a generation when it was put on the floor in February: “Right now, there is only one party, the Democratic Party, that is serious about adding resources to the border, about updating our outdated laws, because it's been 98 days since a bipartisan border security bill, negotiated by Senate Republicans, including Senate Republican leadership, and Senate Democrats, came to this floor and was defeated because Republicans would not vote for it. He continued: “Senate Republicans defeated the bill because it would be effective. And that doesn't make sense. Right? Why would that be? Why would Senate Republicans vote against a bipartisan border security bill that would have been effective at bringing order to the southwest border? The reason is this: Republicans have decided that they don't want to solve the problem at the border. Republicans have decided that they want this issue to be outstanding. They want the border to be chaotic. They want the border to be a mess, because it helps for their political purposes. It helps win an election.” Murphy concluded: “So [tonight], I will reintroduce this legislation. I don't expect it'll get every single Democratic vote. Because it’s a true compromise. But I expect it will get enough Democratic votes that if half of the Senate Republican caucus votes for it, it will pass. And we'll be a step closer to doing what America wants: continuing our tradition of robust legal immigration, building upon our tradition, as a country founded upon immigration, but doing it in a legal way, and creating a much more orderly system at the border. That's what America wants: keep our system of legal immigration, get the border under control. The bipartisan border bill does both of those things. And my hope is that we can come together, and Republicans will choose this country and border security over the political prospects of their presidential candidate, Donald Trump.” A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “Madam President, it's been 98 days, almost 100 days, since Senate Republicans killed the toughest border security bill, the toughest bipartisan border security bill that has been before the Senate in nearly a generation. “We are proud that our nation is a nation with a robust history of immigration. We know that our future involves inviting people to come to this country to seek a better life, to be part of our growing economy, to start their own businesses, to flee violence or terror or torture. We're proud of our history of immigration. We know that America only thrives in the future by committing ourselves to a future of robust immigration. “But what has been happening at the border over the past several years is unsustainable. We want people to come to this country, but we cannot handle 5,6,7,8,9, 10,000 people arriving on a daily basis. Our system of legal immigration is broken. People come to the United States, they apply for asylum, and they often don't get their chance to make their case for ten years. That's not fair to those individuals, but it's also not fair to others who have been waiting outside of the United States to apply to come here. “Our immigration system is outdated. It's in need of reform. Our border is under resourced with statutes that are equally outdated. And right now, there is only one party, the Democratic Party, that is serious about adding resources to the border, about updating our outdated laws, because it's been 98 days since a bipartisan border security bill, negotiated by Senate Republicans, including Senate Republican leadership, and Senate Democrats, came to this floor and was defeated because Republicans would not vote for it. “Republicans would not vote for the bipartisan border security bill, not because it was an ineffective bill. In fact, quite the opposite. Senate Republicans defeated the bill because it would be effective. And that doesn't make sense. Right? Why would that be? Why would Senate Republicans vote against a bipartisan border security bill that would have been effective at bringing order to the southwest border? The reason is this: Republicans have decided that they don't want to solve the problem at the border. Republicans have decided that they want this issue to be outstanding. They want the border to be chaotic. They want the border to be a mess, because it helps for their political purposes. It helps win an election. “If the border was under control, if there were less people presenting, if it was more orderly, that would be good for the country. But that might not be good for Republican electoral prospects, and therein lies the reason that we have not had action on the bipartisan border bill. Because Democrats want to get something done, Republicans want to keep this issue open. They want to keep the border a mess for political purposes. “You don't have to listen to me. Senator McConnell said it out loud. Senator Lankford said it out loud. The reason that this bill was defeated 98 days ago is because Donald Trump told Republicans that it's better for Republicans to keep this issue alive and to not change the law to secure the country. “[Tonight], I'm going to reintroduce the bipartisan border bill. And my hope is that we will bring that bill to the floor for a vote to give my Republican colleagues another chance to do the right thing, another chance to choose the safety and security of this country over the political prospects of their candidate for president. Americans want us to come together to pass border and immigration reform. They support compromise between the two parties. And that's exactly what the bipartisan border bill represented. “Senator Lankford and I do not share views on the border. Senator McConnell and Senator Schumer do not share views on the border. But we all sat in a room for four and a half months, along with Senator Sinema, in order to find a compromise that would better secure our border and create a more humane, more efficient mechanism to bring people into this country legally. “Let me just briefly talk about what this bill does. Because it'll make sense to Americans when you hear it. There's nothing radical in this bill, it's commonsense changes to our laws. “First, it gives the President new authority to better control the border. Listen, we can't handle 10,000 people crossing a day. And so, what this bill does, it says that in periods of time when there are unusually high numbers of people crossing the southwest border, the president can close portions of the border, stop accepting asylum applications, until the numbers are reduced to the point where our resources at the border meet the number of people who are arriving. This is a bold new power, a bold new authority, for President Biden. But it's necessary. Because there are simply sometimes, some days, some weeks when the numbers are too high. “The second thing this bill does is significantly reform our asylum application system. As I mentioned, you come to the southwest border, you present an application for asylum, and we are so backed up in that system that it often takes people five to ten years before their claim is heard. That's not right for that individual or for the country writ large. And so, this bill shortens that timeframe with new laws and new resources, so that instead of it taking ten years for a migrant to have their asylum claim heard, it could now take ten days, a few months. “Now, that's the right thing to do. But it also has the effect of dramatically changing the calculus for people who are thinking about paying a trafficker $5,000, $10,000 to come to the United States. If they know that they have an illegitimate claim, and it's going to be judged as illegitimate within weeks, they won't pay the $5,000 to come to the United States. Today, they might be willing to pay it because even if they have an illegitimate claim, they may get to stay in the United States for five or ten years. This fundamentally changes the calculus and decreases the amount of risk that people are willing to take. “But this bill also understands that we should have more legal pathways to come to the United States. And when people come to the United States and are waiting to have their claims heard, they shouldn't be living in the shadows. And so, this bill also increases the number of work and family visas by 250,000 over the course of five years to allow more legal, planful pathways for people to come to the United States. “The bill also allows for individuals who arrive at the border to get immediate work authorizations in most cases so that while their application is pending, they can work, so that you don't have the situation we have today, where people are being warehoused in homeless shelters in hotels without the ability to work while they're waiting for their claim to be processed. “And this bill does create some pathways for individuals who are here today to become citizens. In particular, our Afghan partners, who fought with us, who stood with us in Afghanistan, under this bill get the opportunity to become American citizens. And the children of high-tech workers that are here on temporary visas, who might have been born outside of the United States but were raised here in the United States. They get a chance to stay here as well. “That's just a handful of the changes in the bill that enhance protections and benefits for individuals who are waiting for the determination of their claim to be processed. But the combination of these changes, the new authorities at the border, the emergency authority, the new asylum system, combined with some new protections for individuals who are coming to the United States, it represents a true compromise between Republicans and Democrats, between right and left. It's exactly what the American people want. “And so, my hope is that our Republican colleagues have had the chance to rethink their vote from several months ago. My hope is that Republicans will decide to do the right thing for the country, the right thing for the border. We negotiated this bill at the request of Republicans. The chief Republican negotiator, Senator Lankford was chosen by the Republican Conference. Senator McConnell, and his staff were in the room for all of those negotiations. “But Republicans voted against it, with the exception of four of our colleagues, for one reason, and one reason only. President Trump said it would be better for Republicans to keep this issue open to keep the border a mess. Better for Republican presidential and congressional campaign prospects. So [tonight], I will reintroduce this legislation. “I don't expect it'll get every single Democratic vote. Because it’s a true compromise. But I expect it will get enough Democratic votes that if half of the Senate Republican caucus votes for it, it will pass. And we'll be a step closer to doing what America wants: continuing our tradition of robust legal immigration, building upon our tradition, as a country founded upon immigration, but doing it in a legal way, and creating a much more orderly system at the border. That's what America wants: keep our system of legal immigration, get the border under control. The bipartisan border bill does both of those things. And my hope is that we can come together, and Republicans will choose this country and border security over the political prospects of their presidential candidate, Donald Trump. “I'm glad to be joined on the floor by a number of my Democratic colleagues today to talk about the importance of this measure, the chance the Senate has to act in a bipartisan way on border security. And with that, I'll yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.) and 22 of their U.S. Senate colleagues in sending a letter to the CEO of Delta Airlines, Ed Bastian, urging the airline to adopt a neutrality agreement regarding its employees’ efforts to form a union. The letter expresses support for the 55,000 Delta employees who are attempting to form a union and raises concerns that Delta is employing unfair tactics, such as threats and anti-union materials, to dissuade workers from unionizing. The 600,000-member International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), North America’s largest air transport labor union, is currently organizing Delta ramp, cargo, and tower workers. The Association of
...Read more Flight Attendants (AFA-CWA) is signing up flight attendants, and the Teamsters are supporting technicians and related crafts. “We understand that Delta employees announced a coordinated campaign to organize a union in November 2022, including Delta flight attendants, fleet service workers, and technicians. Unfortunately, our constituents have informed us about Delta’s history of deploying unionbusting tactics, including threatening employees with termination of their benefits, distributing anti-union literature, and hosting an anti-union website,” the senators wrote. “These retaliatory actions are hostile to workers’ rights, and we urge you to commit to implementing a neutrality agreement with regard to these union organizing efforts.” “All workers should have a free and fair choice to join a union, as is required by law,” the senators continued. “We strongly urge you to adopt a neutrality agreement with regards to any efforts by your employees to unionize and to commit to negotiating in good faith if your employees do choose to form a union.” U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Sherod Brown (D-Ohio), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.) Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D- Hawai'i), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Be Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D- Hawai'i), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. This support follows a bipartisan group of more than 150 members of the U.S. House, led by the House Labor Caucus. Unionized Delta pilots recently endorsed the joint IAM, AFA-CWA, and Teamsters campaign to organize Delta workers. “Delta is receiving a message loud and clear from the U.S. Senate and beyond – ‘cut out the scorched-Earth anti-union campaign now,’” said IAM Air Transport Territory General Vice President Richie Johnsen. “The IAM, our labor coalition and Delta workers will continue to demand that Delta respects its own workforce by allowing them to make their own decision about joining a union.” Delta Air Lines is the only U.S.-based mainline carrier where a union does not represent flight attendants, fleet service, and mechanics – only 20% of Delta workers are unionized. In April, Delta Air Lines strategically increased pay by 5% for nonunion employees, including flight attendants and ground workers. The full letter can be viewed HERE and below: Dear Mr. Bastian, We are writing regarding the efforts of Delta employees to organize a union and to encourage Delta to respect the voices of your employees, our constituents, by pledging not to interfere in any union organizing activities by adopting a neutrality agreement. We understand that Delta employees announced a coordinated campaign to organize a union in November 2022, including Delta flight attendants, fleet service workers, and technicians. Unfortunately, our constituents have informed us about Delta’s history of deploying unionbusting tactics, including threatening employees with termination of their benefits, distributing anti-union literature, and hosting an anti-union website. These retaliatory actions are hostile to workers’ rights, and we urge you to commit to implementing a neutrality agreement with regard to these union organizing efforts. A neutrality agreement simply consists of an employer agreeing not to engage in pre-election activities that influence workers’ freedom to form a union. Your commitment to neutrality would ensure that management does not pressure workers into voting against unionization or delaying the election process. We believe a neutrality agreement is the bare minimum standard that Delta should meet in respecting workers’ rights and to comply with the Railway Labor Act’s directive to not “interfere… influence or coerce” its employees in their choice of representative. All workers should have the free and fair choice to join a union, as is required by law. We strongly urge you to adopt a neutrality agreement with regards to any efforts by your employees to unionize and to commit to negotiating in good faith if your employees do choose to form a union. Thank you for your time and attention to these important issues. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Thursday reintroduced legislation to reform the asylum system and provide the president with new tools and additional resources to better manage the border. “It’s been 99 days since Senate Republicans killed the toughest bipartisan border bill in a generation. This bill makes common sense changes to our broken asylum system and gives the president new tools to better manage the border. But the first time we voted on this bipartisan bill, Republicans decided that maintaining chaos at the border in order to help Donald Trump’s election prospects is more important than border security. I still believe this bill will undoubtedly help fix our challenges at the border,
...Read more and that’s why I’m reintroducing it today. I hope Leader Schumer will put it back on the floor soon and Senate Republicans will put the American people over politics and vote for it.” On Wednesday, Murphy spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to urge Senate Republicans to work with Democrats and pass the bipartisan border security bill that former President Trump convinced Republicans to kill earlier this year. ### Read less WASHINGTON— U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement on the State Department's report to Congress on Israel's compliance with National Security Memorandum (NSM-20): “The National Security Memorandum 20 is an important tool to ensure U.S. security assistance overseas is used in compliance with international law, including international humanitarian law. The report produced by the Biden Administration contains detailed assessments about Israel’s conduct in its war against Hamas. Those assessments are a tough, honest look at the challenges Israel faces in waging war in Gaza as well as many of the mistakes Israel has made in its campaign, which have resulted in far too many civilian casualties and far too little humanitarian aid. “But I’m disappointed that
...Read more ultimately the Administration failed to take a position in many cases and make the difficult determinations required, including whether Israel violated international law on mitigating civilian harm or facilitating humanitarian aid. It is true that in the weeks leading up to the report, the amount of humanitarian aid into Gaza had begun to tick up. But today the aid has once again virtually stopped flowing, demonstrating that Israel has not taken the necessary steps under U.S. and international law to protect civilians during this conflict. “I believe this report should have gone further and I urge the administration to invoke the clause to refresh the credibility of assurances from Israel within 45 days so that we can continue to press Israel to improve the conduct of its operations against Hamas and efforts to free the hostages.” ### Read less President Joe Biden has ignited criticism from both the left and right as he attempts to balance his response to Israel’s war in Gaza. That might be a good thing, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Sunday. “I think frankly, when you’re being a good leader, you are often upsetting people on the right and the left,” Murphy said Sunday during an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Biden has for months faced backlash from the left for his support for Israel as the country embarked on a deadly offensive in Gaza in the wake of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel’s southern border. Thousands of voters have mobilized to stage protest votes against Biden in the primary elections in states across the country. But as the civilian death toll continues to grow in Gaza and with the threat of a wide-
...Read more scale invasion into Rafah, Biden has come down more forcefully on the U.S.’s main ally in the Middle East — most recently saying the U.S. would withhold some military aid to Israel, a comment that raised alarm on the right. But taking a middle-of-the-road stance isn’t new for Biden, Murphy said. And it puts in line with much of the country. “President Biden advertised himself when he ran for office as someone who would often play it down the middle, who would not pay attention to the extremes of the debate and would just do what he thought was right for the country and what the broad middle of the country wants. And I actually think that’s where the broad middle of the country is,” Murphy said Sunday. Murphy supports Biden’s stance, including his decision to hold back some weaponry. “[In] Israel, what Joe Biden is telling the Israelis is we will be partners with you but you have to understand that the pace of civilian casualties, the amount of humanitarian disaster … is in the long-run, going to make Hamas stronger, is going to make it more likely that Israel will be attacked again and is going to make other terrorist organizations that have designs to attack the United States stronger,” he said. Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Sunday that the U.S. has “no obligation” to hand over a blank check to any of their allies after the Biden administration said it would be narrowing some bomb shipments to Israel. Murphy pushed back on Sen. John Fetterman’s (D-Pa.) recent comments about supplying aid to Israel on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. Co-host Dana Bash said Fetterman recently said withholding military aid to Israel “demonstrates to Hamas that they’re winning the PR war and they’re exploiting America’s compassion.” “So, we have no obligation to write a blank check of military support to any of our allies,” Murphy responded. “We have a right, as a sovereign nation with our own independent security concerns, to make sure that, when we are partnering with an
...Read more ally, that we are partnering with a winning strategy. “Our own national security experts tell us that this is a generation — this moment will have a generational impact on the growth of terrorism around the globe. I want Hamas gone. I don’t want them to ever have the ability to hit Israel again. I worry that the number of civilians that are dying are ultimately going to provide permanent recruiting material to Hamas, and Hamas will remain a threat for years to come to Israel,” he said. Fetterman has been a staunch supporter of Israel and has pushed against implementing conditions on aid to the country. Murphy also said he agreed with the Biden administration’s move to delay some bomb shipments to Israel amid a looming invasion of Rafah — where more than 1 million civilians are estimated to be sheltering. “And so, in Israel, what Joe Biden is telling the Israelis is: We will be partners with you, but you have to understand that the pace of civilian casualties. The amount of humanitarian disaster there is, in the long run, going to make Hamas stronger, is going to make it more likely that Israel will be attacked again, and is going to make other terrorist organizations that have designs to attack the United States stronger,” he said. Read less The town of Scotland has about 1,500 residents – and six ZIP codes. And that’s created all sorts of issues in the eastern Connecticut town: Lost mail. School zoning confusion. Voter registration hiccups. Incomplete vital statistics. Frustrated town officials are now turning to Congress for help. U.S. Senator Chris Murphy and U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney are joining forces to address the ZIP code mish-mash. They’ve introduced legislation in Congress to unify the town under one ZIP code. “In a town this small, that many ZIP codes leads to some pretty serious problems,” Murphy said during a Friday press conference on the town green. “Packages that are delayed for days. Residents who have trouble filing official documents. Tax payments that become unnecessarily overdue. Even schoolchildren who
...Read more sometimes end up going to the wrong school.” Or as Courtney, who represents Scotland, put it: “It’s almost comical. I mean, you could do a Monty Python skit.” Gary Greenberg recently retired as Scotland First Selectman. He said not a week went by during his time in office without constituents coming to Town Hall with problems stemming from the converging ZIP codes. To complicate matters more, the ZIP codes aren’t just within Scotland town limits: they extend to neighboring towns. For instance, some Scotland residents have a mailing address for the neighboring town of Hampton. Greenberg recalls one comical example, “the couple who came to town who thought they were moving to Hampton – they were from the north of England and said that they never would have moved to a town called Scotland.” But beyond incidents inconveniencing individual residents, having so many ZIP codes complicates the business of local government. “Public health statistics, aggregate income tax, unemployment, household income – any statistics that sort by ZIP code, which is an awful lot, are wildly inaccurate and, at best, useless,” for Scotland, Greenberg said. He says it’s a burden on small-town government. “Like all small-town governments, we hang on by our fingernails,” Greenberg said. Despite hours of trying, town officials had been unsuccessful in seeking help from the United States Postal Service, he said. “They can’t or won’t fix the problem, which is why, with the help of Sen. Murphy and Rep. Courtney, we’re making a federal case,” he said. Murphy said there’s also a symbolic reason for unifying under one ZIP code. “ZIP codes become part of your identity,” Murphy said. “Everybody knows the five numbers of the ZIP code of the town that they grew up in.” Murphy said ZIP codes “provide a sense of cohesion, a sense of identity, a sense of continuity.” “So when you get a small town with a close-knit community but six different ZIP codes, it doesn’t help the effort to try to facilitate that kind of cohesion that a small community wants,” he said. Murphy said Congress has previously taken up legislation to unify towns from multiple ZIP codes to one, so there’s precedent for the bill he’s introduced alongside Courtney. “It’ll make life easier for people here in town,” he said, “and we’re hopeful to get it across the finish line.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and a bipartisan group of fourteen U.S. Senators on Monday sent a letter to the leadership of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense urging them to preserve the two-per-year procurement cadence of Virginia Class submarines to maintain undersea supremacy and prevent destabilizing the industrial base. “Cutting funding for the Virginia-Class program sends a terrible message to the submarine industrial base working vigorously to rebuild in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis,” the senators wrote. “Preserving a consistent production schedule is essential for shipyard and industrial base stability, and to meet the Navy’s operational requirements.” “Attack submarine capabilities remain one of our most
...Read more distinct national security advantages. In recent years, Congress has heard disturbing testimony regarding growing capabilities and heightened undersea activity of competitors like Russia and China,” the senators continued. “The Virginia Class submarine continues to be a critical asset for combatant commanders to deter our adversaries and sustain our asymmetric advantage in the undersea domain.” U.S. Senators Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Ted Budd (R-N.C.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Dan Sullivan (R-Ark.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) also signed the letter. In a U.S. Defense Appropriations subcommittee hearing last week, Murphy expressed concern over reductions in Electric Boat’s Virginia-class submarine program and urged U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to establish an immediate pathway for annual procurement of two Virginia-classes. Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear Chairman Tester and Ranking Member Collins: As you develop the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 defense appropriations bill, we request steadfast bipartisan support for our undersea capabilities and industrial base. We are deeply concerned the FY25 President’s Budget Request only requests one Virginia Class submarine. Cutting funding for the Virginia-Class program sends a terrible message to the submarine industrial base working vigorously to rebuild in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis. Efforts like the Submarine Workforce and Industrial Base Initiative demonstrate a commitment to improving production methods and addressing staffing shortfalls, but these must be coupled with a strong commitment to production goals. Preserving a consistent production schedule is essential for shipyard and industrial base stability, and to meet the Navy’s operational requirements. This is exactly why Congress has strongly supported a two-per-year build rate for Virginia Class attack submarines since 2011. Reducing the submarine buying cadence will have the unfortunate effect of reducing the demand signal to the submarine industrial base’s 16,000 suppliers, some of whom are sole-source suppliers. Losing any of these suppliers could prove catastrophic for the Virginia-class program. Attack submarine capabilities remain one of our most distinct national security advantages. In recent years, Congress has heard disturbing testimony regarding growing capabilities and heightened undersea activity of competitors like Russia and China. The Virginia Class submarine continues to be a critical asset for combatant commanders to deter our adversaries and sustain our asymmetric advantage in the undersea domain. Unfortunately, our attack submarine fleet experiences significant shortfalls and is projected to decline to just 47 boats in 2030 – a 19 boat deficit from the requirement of 66 attack submarines. While we applaud the FY25 budget request for including substantial investments in the submarine industrial base, consistent procurement of two Virginia Class submarines in FY 2025 is the best way to stabilize the industrial base and keep us on the pathway to 2.33 boats/year that is necessary to meet our requirements and that of our international partners. The proposed request to procure one attack submarine is inconsistent with the Department of Defense’s National Defense Industrial Strategy, which highlights procurement instability as a systemic challenge. This proposal signals a deviation from the Virginia Class procurement profile in the FY 2024 Future Years Defense Plan and 30 Year Shipbuilding Plan. Steady production of the Virginia-class program, and the development of a follow-on attack submarine program, is paramount to maintaining our undersea advantage. We respectfully request that you fully restore procurement for two Virginia Class submarines in FY 2025. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Sunday joined CNN’s State of the Union with Dana Bash to discuss the State Department's report to Congress on Israel's compliance with National Security Memorandum (NSM-20) and the war in Israel and Gaza: On President Biden’s decision to pause aid to Israel if it invades Rafah, Murphy said: “I do support President Biden's decision, and let me tell you why. President Biden is learning the mistakes of US military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. What we learned in both of those efforts was that you cannot defeat a terrorist ideology. You cannot defeat a terrorist movement with military force alone. In Afghanistan, we
...Read more spent 20 years there. And ultimately, we were so cavalier about civilian casualties that we made the Taliban stronger, and we ultimately lost that engagement to the Taliban. And so in Israel, what Joe Biden is telling the Israelis is we will be partners with you, but you have to understand that the pace of civilian casualties, the amount of humanitarian disaster there is in the long run going to make Hamas stronger, is going to make it more likely that Israel will be attacked again, and is going to make other terrorist organizations that have designs to attack the United States stronger. So we will be partners in this fight, but in the situation of Rafah, we cannot have a military invasion of Rafah that ends up in tens of thousands of additional civilians dying. That would be bad for Israel from a moral and a strategic standpoint.” Murphy continued: “We have no obligation to write a blank check of military support to any of our allies. We have a right as a sovereign nation with our own independent security concerns to make sure that when we are partnering with an ally that we are partnering with a winning strategy. Our own national security experts tell us that this moment will have a generational impact on the growth of terrorism around the globe. I want Hamas gone, I don't want them to ever have the ability to hit Israel again. I worry that the number of civilians that are dying are ultimately going to provide permanent recruiting material to Hamas, and Hamas will remain a threat for years to come to Israel.” On the State Department's report to Congress on Israel's compliance with National Security Memorandum (NSM-20), Murphy said: “Listen, I think the report could have gone further. But it does, I think, accurately explain the complexity of this war. And let's just also be clear about that. Yes, I believe that there have been some very disastrous decisions Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on the Department of Homeland Security’s proposed rule to allow statutory bars to asylum to be applied earlier in the asylum process. This change will enable DHS to more quickly remove individuals who pose a risk to U.S. national security and are not eligible for asylum. “It’s no secret that our asylum system is not working, which is why I spent months negotiating a bipartisan border bill that would give the President new tools to better manage the border and make our asylum system more efficient. Republicans killed that bill because they are more interested in using the border as a political talking point than they are in fixing the problem. While I understand the pressure the Biden administration
...Read more is facing, the only way to actually fix our broken asylum system is through congressional action. I urge my Republican colleagues to work with Democrats to solve these challenges, rather than kowtowing to Donald Trump.” ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) on Wednesday announced their offices will host an informational session for Connecticut high school freshmen, sophomores and juniors to learn more about the process to apply for the Military Service Academies. The info session will be held on Friday, May 17, 2024 at 6 p.m. at the East Hartford Cultural Community Center located at 50 Chapman Place, East Hartford. Interested students will have the opportunity to hear from graduates of all five service academies, including the U.S. Coast Guard Academy which does not require a
...Read more Congressional nomination, and learn about the application and selection process. The presentation will be followed by a question-and-answer session. High school students interested in applying to the United States’ service academies must interview for a nomination through their state’s Congressional offices as a part of their respective service academy’s application process. Each year, Members of Congress nominate candidates for appointment to four of the nation's U.S. service academies: The U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York; the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland; the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado; and the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in Kings Point, New York. Graduates are commissioned as officers in the active or reserve components of the military or Merchant Marine and serve for a minimum of five years. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Tina Smith (D-Minn.), both members of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday reintroduced the Student Loan Forgiveness for Farmers and Ranchers Act, legislation to create a loan forgiveness program for beginning farmers and ranchers, as well as women, veteran, and minority farmers. Student loan debt is a major hurdle for beginning farmers, and this legislation would incentivize farmers to enter—and stay—in the agricultural industry, and strengthen opportunities to grow successful businesses. “Connecticut farmers have always been the lifeblood of our rural communities, but starting and maintaining a new farm is increasingly unaffordable for young people who are often saddled with student loan
...Read more debt and can’t afford to make additional investments necessary for success. By helping new farmers pay off their student loans, this legislation would pave the way for Connecticut’s next generation of farmers,” said Murphy. “To keep Minnesota’s agriculture economy thriving, we need to continue to invest in the next generation of farmers as the average age of farmers keeps going up. There is more we can be doing to help future farmers fill their shoes,” said Smith. “Student debt is one of the most significant challenges our young farmers and ranchers face. This legislation would help incentivize a younger, more diverse workforce and help more people start and stay in farming." “Young farmers across the country are passionately growing food for their communities and stewarding our natural resources. At the same time, they are struggling to find secure access to land, persisting through increasingly severe climate change impacts, and balancing rising farm input costs, household expenses, and student loan debt," said Young Farmers Policy Development Director, David Howard. "For many farmers, their student loan debt burden is keeping them from realizing their farming ambitions. National Young Farmers Coalition supports Senator Murphy's efforts to secure a long overdue update to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program that would extend the program's benefits to farmers." In Connecticut, approximately 30% of producers are considered “beginning farmers,” meaning they are operating a farm with less than 10 years of experience. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke at a U.S. Defense Appropriations subcommittee hearing on President Biden’s Fiscal Year 2025 budget request for the Department of Defense. In his questions to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Murphy emphasized the moral and strategic importance of reducing civilian casualties in Gaza and preventing further escalation of conflict in the Middle East. Murphy also pressed the Department on the need to maintain the procurement of Virginia-class fast-attack submarines at two per year – in line with longstanding shipbuilding plans critical for U.S. national security and the submarine industrial base. Electric Boat, which serves as the Navy’s primary contractor for the Virginia program, employs over 15,000 people in Groton, New
...Read more London, and Stonington, Connecticut. Murphy pointed to the consequences of deteriorating conditions in Gaza and highlighted evidence of growing terrorist activity in the region: “The national intelligence estimate released just earlier this year said this: that the Gaza crisis has galvanized violence by a range of actors around the world, and while it is too early to tell, it is likely that the Gaza conflict will have a generational impact on terrorism. A generational impact on terrorism. Both Al Qaeda and ISIS, inspired by Hamas, have directed supporters to conduct attacks against Israeli and U.S. interests.” Murphy continued, underscoring the need for a shift in policy to reduce civilian casualties and prevent further escalation of conflict in the region: “Mr. Secretary, you’ve said today that Israel has a right to defend itself and the United States supports Israel's right to defend itself. I agree. But if Israel's strategy is making it more likely, not less likely, that future terrorist attacks will occur, then it is not an effective strategy. It’s all well and good to get angry about a conversation the United States is having with Israel over the right strategy to defeat terrorism, but we have lots of experience in failed strategies…There is a strategic and a moral reason to care about the number of civilian casualties in Gaza. Even if you don't care about the moral consequences of 13,000 children dead, you should care about the strategic consequences of providing continued bulletin board recruiting material to the very organizations we are trying to destroy.” Murphy expressed concern over reductions in Electric Boat’s Virginia-class submarine program, urging Secretary Austin to establish an immediate pathway for annual procurement of two Virginia-classes: “This budget downgrades our commitment to building Virginia-class submarines from two to one per year. We made a big mistake in the 1990's when we hollowed out the submarine industrial base. We went from having 12,000 employees at Electric Boat down to about 1,500, and it took us a decade or more to scale back up when we realized we really needed these submarines. How can we look at the request for only one Virginia-class submarine in FY25 as anything but a pretty enormous step back for our industrial base? I am really worried about our ability to be able to deliver what we know we need, which is two Virginia-class submarines, and keep the Columbia-class on time. I just worry that you can’t do that if you take this big— even if it’s just a one year— but a big step back in commitment to the Virginia program.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Great to see you both. Thank you for your service to the country. It is pretty stunning to me how this country and our allies failed to learn recent history lessons. Those recent history lessons in both Afghanistan and Iraq tell us that there are substantial grave limitations to the ability of military force to eliminate a terrorist threat. In fact, history tells us that the application of overwhelming military force can in fact grow terrorist threats, not shrink them. “Mr. Secretary, you’ve said today that Israel has a right to defend itself and the United States supports Israel's right to defend itself. I agree. But if Israel's strategy is making it more likely, not less likely, that future terrorist attacks will occur, then it is not an effective strategy. It’s all well and good to get angry about a conversation the United States is having with Israel over the right strategy to defeat terrorism, but we have lots of experience in failed strategies. “The national intelligence estimate released just earlier this year said this: that the Gaza crisis has galvanized violence by a range of actors around the world, and while it is too early to tell, it is likely that the Gaza conflict will have a generational impact on terrorism. A generational impact on terrorism. Both Al Qaeda and ISIS, inspired by Hamas, have directed supporters to conduct attacks against Israeli and U.S. interests. “Here's my question: how do we apply the lessons that we have learned in Iraq and Afghanistan as a means of helping Israel understand how to defeat Hamas, and what is your assessment of whether this campaign is in the long run going to decrease the ability of Hamas or following organizations to recruit and retain strength in the ability to hurt Israel and the United States?” AUSTIN: “Thank you, Senator. We have said all along that Hamas does not equal the Palestinian people. They are not one and the same. And what we learned— to your point, a key lesson there is that you have to protect the people, the civilians in the battle space, otherwise you create more terrorists going forward. So, it is not only a moral imperative, but it is also a strategic imperative that you protect civilians, and the two are not mutually exclusive. You can do both. And we know how to do that. “In terms of the lessons learned and the kinds of things we would endeavor to pass along, those are the things we continue to have a dialogue on. There have been far too many civilian casualties in this battle space, and I think we should do everything possible to ensure that we are protecting civilians and providing for their welfare with humanitarian assistance.” MURPHY: “I think you are right that there is a strategic and a moral reason to care about the number of civilian casualties in Gaza. Even if you don't care about the moral consequences of 13,000 children dead, you should care about the strategic consequences of providing continued bulletin board recruiting material to the very organizations we are trying to destroy. “Mr. Secretary, let me do a hard turn on a subject really important to U.S. national security but also to my state. As you know, this budget downgrades our commitment to building Virginia-class submarines from two to one per year. We made a big mistake in the 1990's when we hollowed out the submarine industrial base. We went from having 12,000 employees at Electric Boat down to about 1,500, and it took us a decade or more to scale back up when we realized we really needed these submarines. “How can we look at the request for only one Virginia-class submarine in FY25 as anything but a pretty enormous step back for our industrial base? I am really worried about our ability to be able to deliver what we know we need, which is two Virginia-class submarines, and keep the Columbia-class on time. I just worry that you can’t do that if you take this big— even if it’s just a one year— but a big step back in commitment to the Virginia program.” AUSTIN: “Thanks, Senator. So, the choices are to increase the backlog by putting more demand on the system or invest more in the industrial base. And that’s the approach that we’ve taken. In ’23 and ’24, we asked you for $1.9 billion to invest in the sub-industrial base. For this budget, we are asking for $4 billion. The supplemental gives us $3.3 billion, and the Australians are also investing in our submarine industrial base. “As I have talked with industry leaders, we have talked about how we go about recruiting more people, increasing strengths in the supply chains. That work is ongoing and needs to be done. But we have to increase the capacity. And I know there are arguments both ways in terms of the demand versus investing in the capacity, but they believe, and I believe, that we will get there. But we just need to do more in terms of capacity.” MURPHY: “I appreciate that $4 billion investment, it’s significant, but that has to be an immediate pathway to get us back on track to be building those two Virginia-classes a year. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.” ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) on Friday wrote a letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) supporting the Connecticut Department of Transportation’s (CTDOT) request for assistance following yesterday’s events in which a tanker fire damaged Interstate-95 (I-95) and the Fairfield Avenue bridge in Norwalk. The damage will result in the closure of the major northeast transportation corridor for at least several days. The delegation wrote in support of using DOT’s Emergency Relief Program to assist CTDOT with the costs for repair and recovery from the
...Read more fire, including the quick release of $3 million to assist CTDOT in the initial response. “Swift reopening of I-95 is extremely critical to flow the vehicular and truck traffic through New England. The best alternative for passenger vehicles is the already often-congested Merritt Parkway, which reported having 13-mile-long delays this morning,” the lawmakers wrote. “In addition, replacement of the Fairfield Avenue bridge over I-95 is vital for local transportation. We appreciate DOT’s rapid response to this catastrophic event and want to underscore the importance of federal funding in expediting the repairs in Norwalk.” In his questions to DOT Secretary Buttigieg during Thursday's U.S. Appropriations Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies subcommittee hearing, Murphy called attention to the closure and urged the Secretary to swiftly and safely resolve the issue. Full text of the letter is available below. Dear Secretary Buttigieg, Yesterday, a tanker fire damaged Interstate-95 (I-95) and the Fairfield Avenue bridge in Norwalk, resulting in the closure of this major northeast transportation corridor for at least several days. We are grateful for your immediate response to this catastrophe, with your staff already working closely with the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) to determine how best to assist the state of Connecticut. One of the main sources of financial assistance for situations like this is the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Emergency Relief Program. We write in support of using the Emergency Relief Program to assist CTDOT with the costs for repair and recovery from this fire, including the quick release of $3 million to assist CTDOT in the initial response. Consistent with the requirements for assistance under the Emergency Relief Program, Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont declared a state of emergency last night in response to the motor vehicle collision that caused this tanker fire. After the collision, a fire engulfed the tanker, causing significant structural damage to the overpass, which must be demolished, as well as additional damage to I-95 and rerouting of motor vehicle traffic. Swift reopening of I-95 is extremely critical to flow the vehicular and truck traffic through New England. The best alternative for passenger vehicles is the already often-congested Merritt Parkway, which reported having 13-mile-long delays this morning. However, that roadway is restricted to only passenger vehicles because of its low bridges, forcing trucks and other commercial vehicles to seek much longer alternate routes, including through New York and Massachusetts. In addition, replacement of the Fairfield Avenue bridge over I-95 is vital for local transportation. We appreciate DOT’s rapid response to this catastrophic event and want to underscore the importance of federal funding in expediting the repairs in Norwalk. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke at a U.S. Appropriations Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies subcommittee hearing on President Biden’s Fiscal Year 2025 budget request for the U.S. Department of Transportation. In his questions to Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, Murphy called attention to this morning’s closure of I-95 in Norwalk and highlighted the importance of continued investment in the Federal-State Partnership program to upgrade rail in Connecticut and cut commute times. Murphy noted this morning’s emergency closure of I-95 in Norwalk and urged the Secretary to swiftly and safely resolve the issue: “This morning, there was a major tanker fire that erupted on Interstate 95 near Exit 15, Fairfield Avenue
...Read more overpass in Norwalk. No major injuries reported, but I-95 right now is closed down and may be closed down for days depending on how fast we are able to make that bridge structurally sound and understand the extent of the fuel leakage. Early estimates are that they are 8,500 gallons of fuel that have leaked from this tanker, and we've got to make sure that the surrounding communities and watershed are safe. I know you've already put out a statement on this, but I just wanted to get your commitment that you'll be working all throughout the day, personally and through your staff, to make sure that we assess the damage, we get crews out there, and we get the highway and the overpass open as safe as it is possible for commuters and residents.” On the importance of maintaining federal investment in the Northeast Corridor to drive down commute times from Connecticut to New York, Murphy said: “It is obviously so maddening that Bridgeport sits only 70 miles away from New York, but still requires an hour and 40-minute train ride to get into the city. There is no reason in 2024 that that should be the case… I guess it is concerning to me to continue to look at accounts like the Fed-State Partnership, like CRISI, that are continuing to be underfunded visa vie where they were in 2022 or 2023. I just want to make sure that we are working with you to make sure that those numbers get back up, at the very least, to their high watermarks over the last 10 years and hopefully far beyond so that we don't have this interruption in momentum for the projects that we're undergoing to try to help a community like Bridgeport once the bipartisan infrastructure dollars expire.” He continued: “What we had hoped to see with this big commitment of federal dollars is that states would step up and make their own commitments. Connecticut has done that— the Governor's Time for Connecticut plan is all about matching the federal investment with significant state investment to ultimately get a 25-minute change in travel time on the Metro North line from New Haven to New York, which would continue to transform and grow New Haven. Even more critical, as I mentioned, for even lower income communities like Bridgeport.” A full transcript of his exchange with Buttigieg can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much Mr. Chairman. Good to see you, Mr. Secretary. First, let me note an emergency situation in Connecticut that you, I think, have already been briefed on. This morning, there was a major tanker fire that erupted on Interstate 95 near Exit 15, Fairfield Avenue overpass in Norwalk. No major injuries reported, but I-95 right now is closed down and may be closed down for days depending on how fast we are able to make that bridge structurally sound and understand the extent of the fuel leakage. Early estimates are that they are 8,500 gallons of fuel that have leaked from this tanker, and we've got to make sure that the surrounding communities and watershed are safe. I know you've already put out a statement on this, but I just wanted to get your commitment that you'll be working all throughout the day, personally and through your staff, to make sure that we assess the damage, we get crews out there, and we get the highway and the overpass open as safe as it is possible for commuters and residents.” BUTTIGIEG: “Absolutely. I spoke to Governor Lamont earlier this morning and the Federal Highway Administrator is tracking this personally. We'll get PHMSA involved, if appropriate, given any spillage that might be in play. And we'll do everything we can to help everybody get back to normal there. We know and of course have been reminded through experience just how important a smooth and normal ride on I-95 can be.” MURPHY: “Good. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I wanted to stay in that part of my state for a second. In Stamford, Connecticut, the average income is about $47,000 a year. Not enough, but you can find a way to get by. Just a couple of miles up the road in Bridgeport, Connecticut, the average income is $29,000 a year, which is simply not enough to get by in a state with a relatively high cost of living like Connecticut. There are a multiplicity of reasons for those differences, but the primary one is distance from New York City, which is the driving economic engine for Fairfield County. “It is obviously so maddening that Bridgeport sits only 70 miles away from New York, but still requires an hour and 40-minute train ride to get into the city. There is no reason in 2024 that that should be the case. The great news is that through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, we are finally delivering some serious money to allow us to do the bridge repairs, track additions, and general upgrades to be able to get 1:40 down to maybe 1:25 in the next 10 years. “But as you know, and Senator Coons has already asked you about Amtrak funding, once this big chunk of bipartisan infrastructure money runs out, we're going to be scrambling as a committee to fill in the gaps. And I guess it is concerning to me to continue to look at accounts like the Fed-State Partnership, like CRISI, that are continuing to be underfunded visa vie where they were in 2022 or 2023. I just want to make sure that we are working with you to make sure that those numbers get back up, at the very least, to their high watermarks over the last 10 years and hopefully far beyond so that we don't have this interruption in momentum for the projects that we're undergoing to try to help a community like Bridgeport once the bipartisan infrastructure dollars expire.” BUTTIGIEG: “Thank you, and I certainly agree people experience distance not in terms of miles but in terms of minutes. And we know that we can do something about that by finally tackling the backlog in terms of state of good repair and accelerating things on the Northeast Corridor. That's what we're going after with all of the improvements taking place funded by the Federal-State Partnership, and we think CRISI plays a role here too. Of course, the $250 million requested here sits on top of the advanced appropriation for a total of about $1.2 billion, but the Fiscal Responsibility Act of course has required us to make challenging choices in terms of making it all add up. As you can imagine, the only person more enthusiastic than me – I thought I would be the most enthusiastic about passenger rail— is the president. And you can certainly count on this administration to be highly committed to improving travel times and reliability on the northeast corridor and any passenger rail corridor in the US.” MURPHY: “Well, and listen, what we had hoped to see with this big commitment of federal dollars is that states would step up and make their own commitments. Connecticut has done that— the Governor's Time for Connecticut plan is all about matching the federal investment with significant state investment to ultimately get a 25-minute change in travel time on the Metro North line from New Haven to New York, which would continue to transform and grow New Haven. Even more critical, as I mentioned, for even lower income communities like Bridgeport. So grateful for your recognition that we've got to have a plan to get these accounts back up to the proper levels so that we keep that really important momentum going. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.” ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), and Katie Britt (R-Ala.) introduced new legislation to keep kids off social media and help protect them from its harmful impacts. The Kids Off Social Media Act updates legislation Murphy introduced last spring and would set a minimum age of 13 to use social media platforms and prevent social media companies from feeding algorithmically-targeted content to users under the age of 17. U.S. Senators Peter Welch (D-Vt.)., Ted Budd (R-N.C.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Angus King (I-Maine), and Mark Warner (D-Va.) also cosponsored the legislation. “As a parent, I see firsthand how damaging social media can be to kids. Social media companies know that they are hurting our children with their addictive
...Read more products, yet they refuse to adequately protect our kids from harm because it would hurt the companies' profits. The intentionally addictive algorithms used on these kids can spoon feed content glorifying suicide or eating disorders within minutes of creating an account. That's horrifying, and it's why it's especially important to treat these algorithms just like nicotine or alcohol and keep them away from minors. I'm glad we have bipartisan agreement on this legislation and look forward to getting it through committee and onto the floor as soon as possible,” said Murphy. “There is no good reason for a nine-year-old to be on Instagram or TikTok. The growing evidence is clear: social media is making kids more depressed, more anxious, and more suicidal. This is an urgent health crisis, and Congress must act,” said Schatz. “Every parent with a young child or a teenager either worries about, or knows first-hand, the real harms and dangers of addictive and anxiety-inducing social media. Parents know there’s no good reason for a child to be doom-scrolling or binge-watching reels that glorify unhealthy lifestyles. The Kids Off Social Media Act not only helps these families in crisis, but it also gives teachers control over their classrooms. Our bill includes bipartisan provisions I’ve championed to restrict teenagers’ access to social media on federally-subsidized school networks and devices. Young students should have their eyes on the board, not their phones,” said Cruz. “I am grateful to Sen. Schatz for his dedication to finding solutions to the significant challenges facing millions of parents of young children and am hopeful that our bipartisan legislation, along with other proposals like KOSA and COPPA 2.0, will greatly reduce the physical and emotional dangers threatening many of America’s youth.” “There is no doubt that our country is facing a growing youth mental health crisis that is inextricably tied to the rise of social media usage by children and teenagers. Families are being devastated and futures are being destroyed in every corner of our nation. I’ll continue to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to enact the commonsense, age-appropriate solutions needed to tackle this generational challenge,” said Britt. No age demographic is more affected by the ongoing mental health crisis in the United States than kids, especially young girls. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Youth Risk Behavior Survey found that 57 percent of high school girls and 29 percent of high school boys felt persistently sad or hopeless in 2021, with 22 percent of all high school students—and nearly a third of high school girls—reporting they had seriously considered attempting suicide in the preceding year. Studies have shown a strong relationship between social media use and poor mental health, especially among children. From 2019 to 2021, overall screen use among teens and tweens (ages 8 to 12) increased by 17 percent, with tweens using screens for five hours and 33 minutes per day and teens using screens for eight hours and 39 minutes. Based on the clear and growing evidence, the U.S. Surgeon General issued an advisory last year, calling for new policies to set and enforce age minimums and highlighting the importance of limiting the use of features, like algorithms, that attempt to maximize time, attention, and engagement. Specifically, the Kids Off Social Media Act would: Prohibit children under the age of 13 from creating or maintaining social media accounts, consistent with the current practices of major social media companies;
Prohibit social media companies from pushing targeted content using algorithms to users under the age of 17;
Provide the FTC and state attorneys general authority to enforce the provisions of the bill; and
Follow existing CIPA framework to require schools to block and filter social media on their federally funded networks, which many schools already do. Parents overwhelmingly support the mission of the Kids Off Social Media Act. A survey conducted by Count on Mothers shows that over 90 percent of mothers agree that there should be a minimum age of 13 for social media. Additionally, 87 percent of mothers agree that social media companies should not be allowed to use personalized recommendation systems to deliver content to children. Pew finds similar levels of concern from parents, reporting that 70 percent or more of parents worry that their teens are being exposed to explicit content or wasting too much time on social media, with two-thirds of parents saying that parenting is harder today compared to 20 years ago—and many of them cited social media as a contributing factor. The Kids Off Social Media Act is supported by the American Counseling Association, KidsToo, National Association of Social Workers, National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners, Tyler Clementi Foundation, National Council for Mental Wellbeing, Count on Mothers, Parents Television and Media Council, Parents Who Fight, Public Citizen, National Federation of Families, National Organization for Women, National Association of School Nurses, National League for Nursing, and American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. The text of the legislation can be found HERE. For more information on the Kids Off Social Media Act, click HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) on Tuesday joined U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and U.S. Representatives Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) and Donald Beyer (D-Va.) in introducing the Choose Medicare Act. This legislation gives every individual who is not already eligible for Medicaid or Medicare the opportunity to enroll in Medicare as an individual and gives every employer the ability to purchase Medicare for their employees. “Medicare delivers the best health care at the lowest cost, and we should give it the opportunity to compete with private insurance. Our legislation would give every American and business the option to decide if Medicare is right for them. It would also give millions more people access to the huge savings on drug prices and
...Read more premiums secured in the Inflation Reduction Act. This bill is a simple way to increase competition and bring us closer to affordable health care coverage for all,” said Murphy. “Affordable and accessible health care should be a right for all, not a luxury reserved for some,” said Blumenthal. “This critical legislation will ensure patients across the nation can access Medicare coverage, helping them avoid costly plans and expensive out-of-pocket costs. I will keep fighting for legislation that expands access to affordable health care coverage, bringing us one step closer to universal health care.” “In the richest country in the world, no person should have to worry about whether they’ll be able to afford care if they become sick or get into an accident. That means every American needs high-quality, affordable health care,” said Merkley. “Luckily, we already have an effective, popular solution: Medicare. It's time we prioritize placing consumers and businesses at the forefront on the path towards universal healthcare by offering every American the opportunity to obtain coverage through this program.” “No one should have to live in fear of getting sick and going bankrupt because they don’t have health coverage. Everyone in America should have the care they need at a price they can afford, and our legislation allows every American the option to join Medicare—our nation’s most popular health insurance system," said Gomez. "The Choose Medicare Act brings us one step closer to achieving universal coverage and a healthier and more just future for all of us." “Simply put, our bill would give all Americans access to Medicare, one the most popular and successful health care delivery programs in history,” said Beyer. “Allowing employers and the general public the option to choose Medicare would fill many of the gaps in our health care system, get more people covered, and make the nation healthier. Every American should be able to access affordable, quality health care, and this bill represents the kind of bold action required to make that a reality for all.” U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and U.S. Representatives Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) also cosponsored the bill. The legislation is supported by Families USA, MoveOn, American Federation of Teachers, and the Center for Medicare Advocacy. Medicare is consistently rated the most popular and efficient health insurance system in the United States. The new plan, Medicare Part E, would be self-sustaining and fully paid for by premiums. Medicare Part E would be offered on all state and federal exchanges, and people could use the existing Affordable Care Act subsidies to help pay for it. Additionally, employers could choose to select Medicare Part E rather than private insurance to provide affordable and reliable health care to their employees. The Choose Medicare Act: Increases Access, Competition, and Choice Opens Medicare to employers of all sizes and allows them to purchase high-quality, affordable health care for their employees without requiring replacement of employment-based health insurance.
Addresses the discrepancy between consumer protections in the individual and group markets by extending the ACA’s rating requirements to all markets, to end discrimination based on pre-existing conditions once and for all. Provides Comprehensive Coverage Includes the ACA’s 10 essential health benefits and all items and services covered by Medicare.
Provides high-quality, gold-level coverage and cost-sharing.?
Ensures coverage for all reproductive services including abortion. Improves Affordability Establishes an out-of-pocket maximum in traditional Medicare.
Increases the generosity of premium tax credits and extends eligibility to all earners.?
Directs Medicare to negotiate fair prices for prescription drugs by incorporating the drug price negotiation section of the Inflation Reduction Act.
Drives down private insurance premiums through competition from Medicare by allowing the HHS Secretary to block excessive private insurance rates.
Extends traditional Medicare protections on balance billing or surprise bills to Part E plans. A summary of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday spoke at a U.S. Senate Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies hearing on President Biden’s Fiscal Year 2025 budget request for the U.S. Department of Education (ED). In his questions to Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona, Murphy highlighted the funding in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to increase mental health services at schools and address chronic absenteeism, as well as the benefits of diverse classrooms. On the consequences of chronic absenteeism in our schools: “I want to talk to you, Mr. Secretary, about a concerning development in our schools, that if unaddressed, potentially threatens to interrupt some of this really tremendous progress. And that's the increasing amounts of chronic
...Read more absenteeism that we're seeing. There is a direct line between kids who are chronically out of school and at-risk behaviors. And so we want to continue to build on this remarkable success because the story of this drop in crime is connected to the work that we're doing in our schools. He added: “You have a billion dollars in BSCA to use for building positive school climates and then you've got a new $8 billion initiative in this budget, that amongst other things, is dedicated to trying to attack chronic absenteeism, and trying to build safer and more welcoming schools. Can you just talk a little bit about the importance of reversing this this post pandemic trend?” Murphy highlighted the Department of Education’s efforts to support more diverse schools: “You have a really interesting demonstration grant program that you've used Title IV-A funds for, and this is the Fostering Diverse Schools Program. Listen, I'm a believer that we should be in the business of helping give our students more access to diverse schools. The data just tells us that if you're in a diverse school, a racially and economically diverse school, you're going to be more ready to learn to succeed as an adult.” He concluded by commending the example set by Secretary Cardona’s hometown of Meriden, where Cardona served for years as an educator in the public school system: “I always tell this story, and I'll turn it back to you, Madam Chair, the Meriden public schools are – Connecticut does not have as many diverse school districts as we should – Meriden is one of them and the level of engagement from those students — they know what they have, they know how special their experience is, and you feel it when you walk into any of these Meriden schools.” A full transcript of his exchange with Cardona can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Secretary, good to see you. Meriden says hello. I want just to take a moment to thank members of this committee for the work that they put in now almost two years ago, to make the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act a reality. We've already referenced it a number of times in this hearing. $13 billion, much of it going to our schools to help build in school mental health resources and build support services around children in need. “But the data, the numbers, are really compelling. Since we passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, we have seen a stunning drop in gun crime in this country. From 2022, when we passed the bill, to 2023, we saw a 12% reduction in urban gun homicides. That's the biggest one year drop in the history of the country. While we're still collecting information on 2024, it looks as if there's going to be another massive drop in gun crime in 2024. In the 200 biggest cities in the country, the first three months of this year compared to the first three months of last year have seen a 20% average drop in crime. That's really something to celebrate. “But I want to talk to you, Mr. Secretary, about a concerning development in our schools, that if unaddressed, potentially threatens to interrupt some of this really tremendous progress. And that's the increasing amounts of chronic absenteeism that we're seeing. There is a direct line between kids who are chronically out of school and at-risk behaviors. And so we want to continue to build on this remarkable success because the story of this drop in crime is connected to the work that we're doing in our schools. “You have a billion dollars in BSCA to use for building positive school climates and then you've got a new $8 billion initiative in this budget, that amongst other things, is dedicated to trying to attack chronic absenteeism, and trying to build safer and more welcoming schools. Can you just talk a little bit about the importance of reversing this this post pandemic trend?” CARDONA: “Absolutely. Thank you, Senator. You know, throughout my career, whether it was as a fourth-grade teacher or a school principal, we would track the absenteeism of our students. And it was a clear correlation between students who were missing school, and students who were struggling to get ahead academically. So we often refer to absenteeism as a symptom of something greater. “So, the work that we're doing in this budget reflects the priority that we're making with addressing chronic absenteeism and introducing additional strategies across the country, because after the pandemic, it has gotten worse. In many states, they're much worse now than they were before the pandemic. We're holding a convening at the White House in a bipartisan fashion, May 15, to address strategies to improve chronic absenteeism. We recognize that if we don't address chronic absenteeism, all the strategies and tutoring and the support that we provide in school won't have the effect that it's supposed to have. “It's all hands-on deck, we're working with state chiefs, we're working with superintendents, teachers groups, to make sure that this message is one that we can all get behind. Students need to be in school. Part of the strategy is also increasing full-service community schools because as I said earlier, attendance is a symptom of something else. When we have full-service community schools that are meeting the needs of the students and families, they're more likely to attend school.” MURPHY: “Let me ask one additional question, you have a really interesting demonstration grant program that you've used Title IV-A funds for, and this is the Fostering Diverse Schools Program. Listen, I'm a believer that we should be in the business of helping give our students more access to diverse schools. The data just tells us that if you're in a diverse school, a racially and economically diverse school, you're going to be more ready to learn to succeed as an adult. “Do you have data yet to understand how those demonstration grants are succeeding, I think you've made about ten two-year planning grants, and four five-year implementation grants. And if you don't, when are we going to know the impact that those grants have had?” CARDONA: “Sure, you know, let me just comment, as someone who grew up in an environment where I was able to attend diverse schools, and really learn how to navigate people from different cultures and understand people with different perspectives, I think that helped me in my career. And I do believe all students benefit from that. So this is something that we do stand behind, and I'd be happy to follow up with you and have my team follow up with you on some data to support that whether it's through our grants or programs that we've seen across the country.” MURPHY: “I always tell this story, and I'll turn it back to you, Madam Chair, the Meriden public schools are – Connecticut does not have as many diverse school districts as we should – Meriden is one of them and the level of engagement from those students— they know what they have, they know how special their experience is, and you feel it when you walk into any of these Meriden schools, so appreciate that context that you bring.” ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced that Q30 Innovations, based in Norwalk, was named “Innovator of the Month” for their development of the first and only FDA-cleared device to reduce traumatic brain injury through partial jugular vein compression. The company’s flagship product, the Q-Collar, applies light pressure around the neck to increase blood volume in the brain’s venous structures, minimizing internal brain movement that can cause brain injury upon collision. The device is backed by research from over 28 independent studies and presents a promising step forward in ongoing efforts to address the rising prevalence of brain injuries among athletes and soldiers. Since fiscal year 2021, Senator Murphy has helped secure over $15 million in federal investment
...Read more through the Department of Defense to support Q30 in developing this innovative protective device with great promise for improving the health and wellbeing of servicemembers, athletes, and others. “There’s nothing more important than keeping our kids safe, especially when they’re playing high-contact sports that put them at risk of brain injury. It was great to visit Q30 Innovations earlier this month to speak with their team and check out their Q-Collar device, a promising piece of equipment that takes a new approach to helping athletes avoid brain trauma. I’m proud to recognize Q30’s innovative work, and I look forward to seeing how their up-and-coming device might be used to protect servicemembers and others at risk for TBIs,” said Murphy. “We are honored to be recognized by Senator Murphy for the crucial work we are doing to help protect the brains of athletes and soldiers,” said Co-CEO of Q30 Innovations Tom Hoey. “Senator Murphy’s recognition and his efforts to make the product more accessible for our soldiers through his work on Capitol Hill make us proud to be based in Connecticut.” Since 2012, Q30 Innovations has worked with leading medical and academic institutions to research and develop the Q-Collar. Over 25 pre-clinical and clinical studies proved the Q-Collar safely and effectively helps protect the brain from effects of repetitive head impacts. The Q-Collar received FDA authorization in February 2021, and officially launched in the United States in September 2021. The Q-Collar is proudly made in the USA and is currently being worn by professionals and youth athletes in lacrosse, football, soccer, winter sports and members of the armed forces. Since the Collar’s commercialization in September 2021, it has already gained the trust of NFL players like Ravens RB Derrick Henry and Titans RB Tony Pollard, and by professionals in soccer, lacrosse, hockey, snowboarding, bobsled and by athletes at over 80 NCAA D1 institutions. The Q-Collar has also been adopted by hundreds of special forces operators in the military and is part of ongoing research by the US Army. Q30 is a partner of the Navy SEAL Foundation and Best Ranger Competition. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Monday sent a letter urging the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to follow through on its commitment to protecting international college athletes’ ability to exercise their rights to their Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) without fear of losing their lawful status as students at American colleges. Joined by U.S. Senators Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), the senators called on DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to provide an update on the steps DHS is taking to allow international athletes to benefit from recent changes to National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) policies that allow college athletes to monetize their NIL. “Last year, in Senate oversight hearings
...Read more and in response to a previous letter requesting guidance and rulemaking, you committed to moving as quickly as you can on providing these important protections for foreign college athletes,” the senators wrote. “Unfortunately, despite that commitment to move quickly, DHS still has not updated its rules a year later. As a result, international students have gone another year without legal protections or clarity, leading star athletes to turn down opportunities, go through extreme hoops to stay in good standing with their visas, or consider leaving school.” While most college athletes have been able to benefit from the NCAA’s updated NIL policy, international student athletes have been shut out as current regulations governing student visas do not consider the unique circumstances surrounding international athletes’ NIL and what constitutes employment for these purposes. As Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, Murphy called on the Department to protect students’ NIL opportunities last year. In July, Murphy reintroduced the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act, which included a new provision to allow international college athletes to market their NIL without losing their visa status. Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear Secretary Mayorkas, We write to request information about the status of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) commitments to provide legal clarity for international students participating in collegiate athletics. Since July 2021, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has maintained a policy to allow college athletes to monetize their name, image, and likeness (NIL), bringing the NCAA into line with laws passed by dozens of states and federal court rulings. These changes recognized that past policies limiting students’ economic rights were unnecessary and unfair — hindering students from benefiting from their hard work. While many students have rightfully benefitted from these new opportunities, international college athletes and college athletic programs face a credible risk that even the most basic NIL deal could violate the work restrictions of the F-1 visa. DHS could clarify that the F-1 visa program does not prevent a student from engaging in NIL related activities, securing college athletes’ economic opportunities and easing concerns that students and schools might run afoul of the law. Unfortunately, the tens of thousands of international students competing in NCAA competitions have been deprived of these economic opportunities because of a lack of guidance on, or changes to, the conditions of their student visas by DHS. Last year, in Senate oversight hearings and in response to a previous letter requesting guidance and rulemaking, you committed to moving as quickly as you can on providing these important protections for foreign college athletes. Unfortunately, despite that commitment to move quickly, DHS still has not updated its rules a year later. As a result, international students have gone another year without legal protections or clarity, leading star athletes to turn down opportunities, go through extreme hoops to stay in good standing with their visas, or consider leaving school. We request a written update on what steps DHS has taken to follow through on your commitment to protect those international college athletes and schools that seek to benefit from the blood, sweat, and tears they put into their sport. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined Fox News Sunday’s Shannon Bream to discuss the conflict in Israel, campus protests, President Biden’s record, and his “Restoring The Common Good” initiative with Republican Governor of Utah Spencer Cox. On the long-term impact of Israel’s military operations, Murphy said: “I think my worry is that the nature of this operation is ultimately going to make it more likely, in the long run, that there's another terrorist attack on Israel, perhaps that there's a terrorist attack on the United States. Listen, we have learned the hard lesson, in both Iraq and Afghanistan, that you cannot defeat a terrorist force simply with military force. And so what's happening, according to our own intelligence analysis, is that we are essentially
...Read more creating bulletin board material, recruiting material, for terrorist groups all around the world when you have 13,000, 15,000 children dying inside Gaza. So I think this is a moment where Israel needs to look to wrap up this campaign. I think it's important for the United States to play a role in helping to facilitate that transition. And in the end, you have to understand that a military campaign alone cannot do the job to try to defeat an ideology like Hamas.” On the current protests on college campuses, Murphy said: “We should all speak out, when protest crosses the line, when it becomes violent or when there's hate speech. But 95% of the young people who are on these campuses are there because they believe there is a fundamental injustice being perpetrated in Israel. We should protect their right to peacefully protest, and you know, we also have a history of overnight, multi-day protests in this country. I don't think there's anything wrong with protecting the ability of peaceful protests to last beyond a handful of hours.” Murphy highlighted President Biden’s strong record of success: “This President has presided over an economy that is growing at record rates. We have unemployment at a structurally low number. If you want a job in this country, you can get it. Crime is plummeting. We saw a 12% reduction in crime in our urban areas. Listen, there's still a lot of progress to be made here. But if Donald Trump wins, it's going to be the same trickle-down economic policies that we lived with. You will have a reckless, irresponsible administration that tries to seek to divide us from each other. Joe Biden still has work to do, but this is a growing, good economy. Our streets are safer. This country's respected around the world again. I admit this is going to be a very close election. But I think Joe Biden is going to have an incredible record to run on.” This week, Murphy announced the launch of his joint initiative with Utah Governor Spencer Cox to convene discussions around how to restore the value of the common good to American life. Following their first forum in Salt Lake City, Murphy said: “We've got to find a way to be able to talk to each other in a more functional way. Governor Cox and I are specifically talking about the ways in which this country has really devalued the common good. We've become a hyper-individualistic country. I love entrepreneurship. I want people to succeed individually, but I want us to care about our neighbors in a way that I don't think we do like we did 30 or 40 years ago. So Governor Cox and I are going to try to come up with a set of ideas that maybe break through the rigid fights the left and right have to try to rebuild a sense of common good in this country. We'll see if we succeed. I know what we're doing is a little countercultural, but I do think it scratches a pretty big itch across this country.” ### Read less Are you skeptical of bipartisan dialogues and commissions that pretend away differences in a chase after a lowest-common-denominator “center”? Me, too. Yet there is good reason to be weary of a political culture so saturated with negative partisanship and mutual mistrust that it makes discussing our nation’s most intractable problems impossible. That’s especially true of challenges that defy easy ideological categorization: social disconnection, loneliness, the damaging side effects of social media, the shattering of families, the curse of drug addiction. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who has made it a personal crusade to move these challenges to the forefront of politics, told me he sees “a lot of room between right and left to work hard” on these questions. This has now taken the form of
...Read more an alliance with Republican Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah to convene “a national conversation” under the rubric “restoring the common good.” A small group of prominent intellectuals and activists ranging from progressive to conservative held its first meeting in Utah on Friday. It is worth briefly interrupting the news about a certain trial in New York and ludicrous claims that presidents don’t have to obey the law to celebrate this effort to do politics differently. Their initiative matters as a signal that parts of both the left and right are reconfiguring politics around communitarian themes. By focusing on deep personal dissatisfactions, they are also offering an explanation for the disconnect between the good news of a nation where “the unemployment rate is low, crime is going down, GDP is growing,” as Murphy put it, and the unhappiness so many Americans express. Murphy and Cox initially came together because of their mutual desire to respond to the damage that cellphones and social media are doing to children and teens. In the process, Murphy told me, they realized they shared a “common worry that this country feels like it’s falling apart at the seams emotionally and spiritually.” If that sounds grand or even theological, the specific forms of suffering that alarm Murphy and Cox are tangible and heartbreaking — from “deaths of despair” caused by suicide and drug overdoses to the collapse of communities that lost their economic purpose. “We had more opioid prescriptions than people in some of these counties,” Cox said in an interview, referring to rural parts of his state. Murphy is emphatic in distinguishing their effort from the usual bipartisan confab. “This is not intended to be some milquetoast, moderate, let’s-all-get-along conversation,” he says. “This is about trying to push right and left into a … conversation about why so many Americans are feeling bad and some of the really big things we may have to do together to fix that.” What could turn this conversation into a larger challenge to the status quo are the links Murphy and Cox draw between the social breakdown often highlighted on the right and the economic injustices that engage the left. Ian Marcus Corbin, a philosopher at Harvard Medical School and architect of the initiative, says the emphasis on the material roots of personal struggles distinguishes this era’s communitarians from their forebears. “You pull out the economic foundation of a community,” he told me, “and family formation goes haywire, and all sorts of social pathologies — drug abuse, loneliness, alienation and anti-social behavior — emerge.” Murphy speaks of how “concentrated power is driving Americans crazy,” the need to “grow bipartisan coalitions around breaking up monopolies and big companies that have way too much power in our economic lives,” and the imperative to recognize that there are “some sacred places where efficiency and profit shouldn’t govern.” Cox has pioneered a call on Americans to “disagree better” — meaning to argue substantively without holding each other in contempt — and he expects to have some disagreements with Murphy about “the proper role of government” in the economy. But, Cox added, “I think he and I will find agreements that when there are major economic changes to a community, that does lead to some of these deaths of despair, this hopelessness that we’re seeing.” Repairing the social damage will require public action to “help build more resilient neighborhoods and economies.” Murphy and Cox also have different (but not diametrically opposed) perspectives on the fiercely contested presidential campaign in the backdrop of their dialogue. Murphy is a staunch supporter of President Biden, whom he credits with pushing “transformational policies.” Cox is critical of both Biden and former president Donald Trump. “We should be nominating different people,” Cox said earlier this year. Yet both insist the nation needs to pay attention to the discontent Trump has exposed. “I guess we can thank him for that, and nothing else,” Murphy said. Cox said that to move forward, the country must figure out why so many voters used Trump as an opportunity “to throw a brick through the window.” Democracies can founder when they fail to address festering social wounds. These bipartisan partners are standing up for the democratic project by insisting that we can’t ignore them any longer. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and U.S. Representatives Scott Peters (D-Calif.) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) on Tuesday led 14 of their Senate and House colleagues in sending a letter to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan urging the FTC to finalize a proposed rule to ban non-compete agreements as soon as possible. In their letter, the members illustrated the myriad harmful effects of non-compete agreements on both workers and the economy and highlighted the anticipated benefits of the FTC’s rule. U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and U.S. Representatives Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Dwight Evans (D-Pa.), Alexandria
...Read more Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Greg Casar (D-Texas), Lizzie Fletcher (D-Texas), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.), Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) and Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) also signed the letter. “The negative effects of non-compete agreements are widespread and pervasive across all sectors of the economy,” the members wrote. “While some special interests would have one believe non-compete agreements are essential tools for protecting sensitive business information and only affect a small handful of well-placed boardroom executives, the evidence paints a different picture. A staggering 30 million workers in the United States are bound by non-competes – a figure that represents roughly 20 percent of the American workforce. In many instances, non-competes are applied to low-wage workers even though, according to a GAO report, businesses admit these workers do not have access to confidential business information. Studies have shown that among workplaces that pay their employees an average of $13, nearly 30% of them apply non-compete agreements to their workers. For employers who are worried about their sensitive business information, other options exist. Non-disclosure agreements, for example, could be used to prevent employees from disclosing business information to their new employer.” The members continued: “To make matters worse, workers from historically marginalized communities are often the most impacted by non-compete agreements. Research suggests that non-compete clauses lower earnings for female and nonwhite workers and that workers with less education experience greater wage loss from non-competes. Non-compete agreements have also been shown to slow innovation and hamper economic dynamism. In the last 40 years, startup growth in the United States has slowed. Research has shown that non-compete agreements reduce firm entry and spinout rates, and that firms founded in states where these agreements are in effect, are more likely to fail than those in states where non-competes are banned.” The members concluded, voicing their support for the FTC’s rule and calling for its swift finalization: “We are pleased that the FTC is taking this much-needed step to protect workers across the country. The proposed Non-competes Clause Rule will help ensure American workers enjoy the freedom to change jobs when they want and remain free from the interference and intimidation that often comes with a non-compete agreement. In addition, the proposed rule would give employers the freedom to compete for talent, which is an essential component of a vibrant and robust job marketplace. Our economy and our country do best when wages increase, and workers can compete for better jobs and better wages. The FTC’s rule on non-compete agreements will bring a welcome change for workers across the country, and we encourage you to finalize it as soon as possible.” Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear Chair Khan, We write to urge you to finalize the FTC’s proposed Non-compete Clause Rule, which would ban non-compete agreements, as soon as possible so that workers bound by these harmful agreements can experience the economic liberty they deserve. As you know, non-compete agreements have long allowed corporations to suppress wages and prevent worker mobility. Finalizing the FTC’s proposed rule will be a huge win for workers, will inject much-needed competition into the labor market, and will let employees and employers follow the market for jobs. The negative effects of non-compete agreements are widespread and pervasive across all sectors of the economy. While some special interests would have one believe non-compete agreements are essential tools for protecting sensitive business information and only affect a small handful of well-placed boardroom executives, the evidence paints a different picture. A staggering 13 million workers in the United States are bound by non-competes – a figure that represents roughly 20 percent of the American workforce. In many instances, non-competes are applied to low-wage workers even though, according to a GAO report, businesses admit these workers do not have access to confidential business information. Studies have shown that among workplaces that pay their employees an average of $13, nearly 30% of them apply non-compete agreements to their workers. For employers who are worried about their sensitive business information, other options exist. Non-disclosure agreements, for example, could be used to prevent employees from disclosing business information to their new employer. To make matters worse, workers from historically marginalized communities are often the most impacted by non-compete agreements. Research suggests that non-compete clauses lower earnings for female and nonwhite workers and that workers with less education experience greater wage loss from non-competes. Non-compete agreements have also been shown to slow innovation and hamper economic dynamism. In the last 40 years, startup growth in the United States has slowed. Research has shown that non-compete agreements reduce firm entry and spinout rates, and that firms founded in states where these agreements are in effect, are more likely to fail than those in states where non-competes are banned. If the FTC does finalize this rule, certain stakeholders have already vowed to try and block the rule on day one – regardless of what the rule says. As members of Congress, we believe unequivocally that the FTC has the statutory authority to ban non-compete agreements under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 (FTC Act), which states that “unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce” are “hereby declared unlawful.” The next clause of the FTC Act states that, “The Commission is hereby empowered and directed to prevent” businesses “from using unfair methods of competition.” In proposing a rule to ban non-compete agreements, the FTC is acting within its statutory authority to ban practices where the evidence demonstrates clearly unfair methods of competition. We are pleased that the FTC is taking this much-needed step to protect workers across the country. The proposed Non-competes Clause Rule will help ensure American workers enjoy the freedom to change jobs when they want and remain free from the interference and intimidation that often comes with a non-compete agreement. In addition, the proposed rule would give employers the freedom to compete for talent, which is an essential component of a vibrant and robust job marketplace. Our economy and our country do best when wages increase, and workers can compete for better jobs and better wages. The FTC’s rule on non-compete agreements will bring a welcome change for workers across the country, and we encourage you to finalize it as soon as possible. ### Read less Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. and Utah’s Republican Gov. Spencer Cox are joining forces to try and address a vexing problem plaguing the U.S.: Americans are less and less happy. Today, the pair is launching the “Restoring the Common Good Initiative,” a bipartisan effort they describe as a way to move away from the divisive politics of Washington and talk about and better understand “the state of American anxiety,” Murphy told Semafor in an interview. US policymakers are grappling with a divided electorate that, data suggests, is increasingly dissatisfied with their political leaders and their lives. A majority of Americans — including young Americans — believe the country to be headed in the wrong direction, according to recent polling. National suicide rates are on
...Read more the rise. The US slipped from 15th to 23rd on Gallup’s global happiness tracker released earlier this year. “The goal is to take a big step back from these important but overworn policy fights that Republicans and Democrats are having,” Murphy said. “Our goal is to try to get political leaders to start asking bigger, more fundamental questions, like what makes up a good life.” Murphy said he was introduced to Cox, who was elected in 2021, by Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, about a year ago and that the two have been talking, texting, and emailing since. He said he took notice of Cox’s approach to issues concerning families, including Utah’s laws restricting children’s access to social media. The two officials will lead roundtable conversations, with the first scheduled in Salt Lake City on Friday, according to a congressional aide. Events in Tennessee and Washington will likely follow, Murphy said. “Many Americans are less happy and less hopeful than ever before,” reads a mission statement from the two officials. Their aim, it says, “is to convene a series of informal conversations across the country that seek to break down the traditional zero-sum limitations of our current politics and explore new areas of work that can bring together the right and left to show a path to help more Americans lead meaningful, fulfilled lives.” Murphy and Cox have tapped a group of thinkers on the left and right to join their new crusade: Harvard philosopher Ian Corbin; the American Enterprise Institute’s Tim Carney and Yuval Levin; social activist Bishop William Joseph Barber II; Roosevelt Institute president Felicia Wong; Brigham Young University psychology professor Julianne Holt-Lunstad; and journalist Sam Quinones. Murphy says they’ll measure success by whether anyone listens. “I think if these conversations happen and nobody notices and nobody tries to replicate them, then we’ll have failed,” Murphy said. “My hope is that we would set off a conversation that other people would try to build on.” It’s not everyday you see politicians try to take themselves out of the political fights in Washington to wage a more spiritual and bipartisan battle — especially in an election year. But in some sense its not surprising to see Murphy, who’s known on Capitol Hill as an across-the-aisle dealmaker with a philosophical streak, give it a shot. More broadly, the divisiveness in Washington seems to have left some politicians craving opportunities for bipartisanship, both on major pressing issues like Ukraine or TikTok, or topics further removed from the headlines like mental health and happiness. Interestingly, both Murphy and Cox are up for reelection this year, though Murphy faces no real threat and Cox — who has called for more civil debates as the chair of the National Governors Association — has a massive lead over his primary opponents in polling. Murphy also said he intends to keep the new initiative away from the heat of the campaign (political funds will, however, be used to pay for flights and other expenses, an aide said). “I don’t imagine that we’re going to be having forums in September and October,” he told me. The two will “probably do these forums through the spring and the summer, probably put it to bed for the fall and pick it back up afterwards,” he said. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday released the following statement on the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) finalized rule to ban employers from imposing non-compete agreements on their employees. The finalized rule is projected to increase wages by nearly $300 billion per year and expand career opportunities for about 30 million Americans. “Non-compete agreements are terrible for workers and our economy – they suppress wages, stifle innovation, and undermine competition. Today’s action by the FTC puts power back into the hands of workers and budding entrepreneurs. Congress should pass our bipartisan legislation to ensure employers can never again use non-competes to protect their own interests at the expense of fair wages and economic growth,” said Murphy.
...Read more Murphy released a statement in support of the FTC’s proposed rule in January 2023. In February 2023, Murphy and U.S. Senator Todd Young reintroduced the Workforce Mobility Act, bipartisan legislation to limit the use of non-compete agreements that negatively impact American workers. In December 2021, Murphy and Young led a letter to the FTC and Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division to restrict the use of non-compete clauses in employment contracts to promote worker mobility. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Governor Spencer Cox (R-Utah) on Tuesday announced the launch of a national effort to convene discussions around how to restore the value of the common good to American life. Murphy and Cox have assembled a group of leading thought leaders, researchers, and writers on the left and right to participate in the project, with the goal of moving the political conversation away from what traditionally divides us and towards a new discussion centered around what gives people purpose and meaning and how policy can support our collective success. In the coming weeks, Murphy, Cox, and group members will participate in a series of roundtable conversations with stakeholders and practitioners on the ground across the country. The group includes:
...Read more Bishop William Joseph Barber II, President and Senior Lecturer of Repairers of the Breach, Co-Chair of the Poor People's Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival, Founding Director of the Center for Public Theology and Public Policy at Yale Divinity School
Felicia Wong, president and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute
Tim Carney, Senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)
Yuval Levin, Director of Social, Cultural, and Constitutional Studies at AEI
Julianne Holt-Lunstad, Professor of psychology and neuroscience and director of the Social Connection & Health Lab at Brigham Young University
Ian Corbin, Philosopher on the Neurology faculty at Brigham and Women's Hospital & Harvard Medical School and a Senior Fellow at the think tank Capita
Sam Quinones, journalist, author, and former LA Times reporter Murphy and Cox released the following mission statement with support from the group: "Many Americans are less happy and less hopeful than ever before. The source of this anxiety may vary, but many feel like they are powerless in their economic lives, disconnected from community, and distrustful of the institutions of government, media, higher education, religion, business, and others. These same Americans are wildly dissatisfied with the stasis of American politics, stuck on seemingly immovable fights that do not always appear to be intimately connected to things that make Americans feel so bad. This broad social and political disaffection begs for a diverse set of leaders to spark a conversation about what makes a truly good life and why this life feels so inaccessible to many Americans. Our goal is to convene a series of informal conversations across the country that seek to break down the traditional zero-sum limitations of our current politics and explore new areas of work that can bring together the right and left to show a path to help more Americans lead meaningful, fulfilled lives." Last year, Murphy authored an op-ed for the New Republic to make the case for a political realignment oriented around a set of solutions that would address America’s spiritual unspooling and enable Americans to have more economic control over their lives, more social connection, and more moral markets. This followed earlier pieces written by Murphy about the wreckage of neoliberalism, politics of loneliness, and importance of prioritizing the common good over individualism. Governor Cox is currently serving as the Chair of the National Governors Association, where he’s sponsored the Disagree Better initiative, showing Americans how to disagree without hating each other. The initiative features a series of videos of governors from around the country modeling the principles of healthy conflict. Governor Cox has highlighted how elected officials can be successful by showing respect to their opponents while maintaining their principles. He’s also written and spoken about the importance of institutions, the dangers of making politics our religion, and why our political identities should be less important than our other identities. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Monday joined U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) in a letter urging the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) to take further action against anti-competitive data sharing in industries such as agriculture, manufactured housing rentals, and healthcare that have driven up prices for consumers. “We write regarding the issue of anticompetitive information exchanges (AIEs). AIEs allow businesses that should compete fairly to collude instead. By directly or indirectly sharing sensitive information about their operations, businesses can insulate themselves from market pressures and
...Read more instead raise prices in tandem without fear of being undercut by their would-be competitors. The result: increases in the cost of food, rental housing, manufactured housing lot rentals, health care and other essentials,” the senators wrote. The senators commended the FTC and DOJ for the efforts they have already made against collusive data-sharing while also highlighting the need for continued action. “Throughout technological evolution and economic change, antitrust enforcers must continue their longstanding job: ensuring markets are competitive and fair. You have rightfully recognized how AIEs can jeopardize competition and increase prices for consumers, and we urge continued vigilance and action,” the senators continued. Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear Chair Khan and Assistant Attorney General Kanter, We write regarding the issue of anticompetitive information exchanges (AIEs). AIEs allow businesses that should compete fairly to collude instead. By directly or indirectly sharing sensitive information about their operations, businesses can insulate themselves from market pressures and instead raise prices in tandem without fear of being undercut by their would-be competitors. The result: increases in the cost of food, rental housing, manufactured housing lot rentals, health care and other essentials. We applaud the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) recent leadership on AIEs. Last year, both agencies withdrew outdated guidance that created overly broad “safety zones” for information exchange. While this old guidance permitted exchanging information that was just a few months old or channeled through a third-party intermediary, Principal Deputy Assistant General Doha Mekki has noted that those guidelines did not “fully reflect market realities, the risk of serious competitive harm, or the full scope of liability under the antitrust laws.” Market concentration and modern data analysis tools heighten the competitive risks of information exchange by enabling companies to collude more with less data. We also support the enforcement actions you have already taken against AIEs. DOJ’s lawsuit against poultry producers for exchanging information about employee pay and benefits resulted in an $85 million settlement last year on behalf of underpaid workers. DOJ’s ongoing lawsuit against Agri Stats for allegedly facilitating an AIE that drove up prices of chicken, pork, and turkey is another critical step in the fight against corporate collusion to take more dollars from Americans’ wallets. DOJ has also filed a statement of interest in the lawsuit against RealPage and continues to investigate the company, which allegedly not only facilitated information exchange among landlords but algorithmically guided them to increase rent prices in unison. We urge you to continue vigorous action against AIEs. First, we encourage your agencies to continue scrutinizing various industries for evidence of AIEs. For example, manufactured home lot rental prices have skyrocketed, allegedly enabled by manufactured home community owners’ collusive exchange of information via Datacomp, a third-party information provider. We urge you to consider filing a statement of interest in the ongoing litigation against Datacomp expressing that even in the absence of algorithmic price-setting, information exchange can still create severe competitive harms. We also urge careful review of the health care industry, a data-rich field that gave rise to your agencies’ initial information-sharing guidelines more than three decades ago. The agricultural sector, which has seen consolidation and price increases and has already been the site of problematic data-sharing, also warrants continued vigilance. Second, we encourage you to consider issuing new guidelines to replace those your agencies have recently withdrawn. Rather than providing a “safety zone,” new guidelines should indicate how myriad forms of information exchange pose dangers for the competitive marketplace. New guidelines, if issued, must clearly derogate the old exception for third-party aggregators. Guidelines must also reflect how defective data anonymization can create competitive harms. Finally, guidelines must expansively define competitively sensitive information within the bounds of the relevant case law. Beyond data on product price and output, information about costs (including wages and benefits) and even about consumers can create competitive harms when exchanged and must be deemed sensitive. Throughout technological evolution and economic change, antitrust enforcers must continue their longstanding job: ensuring markets are competitive and fair. You have rightfully recognized how AIEs can jeopardize competition and increase prices for consumers, and we urge continued vigilance and action. We appreciate your continued attention to this important issue. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday introduced a resolution congratulating the University of Connecticut men’s basketball team for winning the 2024 National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Men’s Basketball Championship. The resolution commends the Huskies’ dominant performance and defeat of every opponent by at least 13 points on their way to their sixth national title since 1999, a feat no other college team has surpassed. This is the Huskies’ second consecutive championship, becoming only one of eight NCAA Division I men’s basketball teams to accomplish this achievement. They also recognize Tristen Newton for being named the Most Outstanding Player of the tournament and congratulate UConn fans, students, and faculty for the
...Read more incredible accomplishment. "I'm a diehard UConn fan, but even I was in awe at the season long domination of this team. Coach Hurley's uncanny ability to blend transfers, veterans, and freshman was a sight to behold, and I was so fired up to be on hand for the final three games of their historic NCAA tournament run. This team will go down in history as possibly the greatest of all of UConn men’s teams, and the whole state is deeply proud of how they represented Connecticut throughout the year,” said Murphy. “The Huskies have filled the great state of Connecticut with pride once again following their record-breaking, consecutive victory,” said Blumenthal. “I congratulate the players’ and coaches’ on earning UConn’s sixth national championship, reasserting Storrs as the ‘Basketball Capital of the World.’ This win is a result of their hard work, dedication, and perseverance. I stand in unwavering support of the team and program.” The resolution was introduced in the Senate on April 19, 2024. ### Read less HARTFORD— U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday applauded Senate passage of a resolution they introduced honoring the late U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman. “Few people left a bigger mark on this world than Joe Lieberman. The history books will remember him for his work to combat climate change, fight for gay rights, and protect the homeland, along with his groundbreaking role as the first Jewish nominee for national office. But I will remember most working with him day in and day out to bring federal dollars back to Connecticut and fighting for policies that made our state stronger. Joe refused to be defined by his party, he led with decency and character, and he conveyed an unbridled enthusiasm for public service. He was one of one, and Connecticut
...Read more was lucky to have him,” said Murphy. “Joe Lieberman was a monumental figure in Connecticut and national politics and I will always remember him for his unwavering values and willingness to bridge divides. He was ferociously independent and deeply strong willed, but also eager to listen, understand and learn from others. Joe’s story ended too soon, but his legacy is large and lasting,” said Blumenthal. Lieberman was born in Stamford, Connecticut in 1942 and graduated from Yale University in 1964 and Yale Law School in 1967. Lieberman was elected Attorney General of the State of Connecticut in 1982, where he led efforts to set higher standards of legal assistance to state agencies and implement a focus on constituent services that continues to this day. During his tenure as Attorney General, Lieberman fought to expand and enforce consumer and environmental protections—efforts he continued to build on once elected to the United States Senate in 1988. Lieberman served as U.S. Senator for Connecticut from 1988 to 2012 and played a key role in creating the Department of Homeland Security and establishing the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States following September 11, 2001. While serving in the Senate, Lieberman was a strong advocate for civil rights and led efforts to repeal the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy of the U.S. Armed Forces. He also led passage of the Clean Air Act of 1990, promoted legislation to warn consumers about the dangers of pesticides and was an early supporter of efforts to combat climate change. In 2000, Lieberman made history as the first Jewish major party nominee for the position of Vice President as Al Gore’s running mate. After leaving public office, Lieberman continued his work in national security and civil rights through organizations such as the Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council and the Counter Extremism Project. The resolution was introduced and passed the Senate on April 18, 2024. Text of the Senate resolution can be found HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) co-authored an op-ed in the Bulwark with Ian Marcus Corbin, a philosopher at Harvard Medical School and a Senior Fellow at the think tank Capita, arguing that former President Trump and the Republican party fixate on immigration and border security to preserve their convenient diagnosis for why so many Americans feel abandoned by their country. Murphy and Corbin expose the dishonesty of Republicans’ argument – exemplified by their tanking of a serious bipartisan border deal – and explain that in reality, our obsession with individual success and blind faith in neoliberal economics have created the angst many Americans feel. They argue that leaders should focus on rebuilding American solidarity and a culture that prioritizes the common good.
...Read more “The country would be better off if we had been able to pass the bipartisan border bill—and not only because it would have strengthened our border security,” the authors wrote. “It would also have left the Trumpian narrative in tatters. Without tens of thousands of immigrants streaming into the country, Republicans would be forced to deal with the complicated reality of why Americans feel more alone and unhappy than ever before. Because it turns out that impoverished people making a desperate play for a better life are not the true source of our angst, and so even if the border were brought under control, our spiritual crisis would have remained.” Murphy and Corbin highlighted how the policies of neoliberalism are most responsible for the way people are feeling, highlighting a recent trip they took to Appalachia: “We heard the same point over and over: People here feel abandoned. Locals told us how good, dignified jobs had left the region, gone in search of cheaper forms of labor, and how pharmaceutical companies had added to the suffering by aggressively plowing addictive, life-wrecking opioids into the region. Many people we spoke with had been directly affected by these problems, and everyone knew of someone who had been affected. Meanwhile, important community institutions, like hospitals and mom-and-pop stores, have withered. Local business owners told us they feel constantly in danger of being squashed by monopolistic corporate behemoths. And ever present in the background was the sense that the government had failed to prevent any of it.” The authors argued that America’s myth of self-sufficiency has eroded our commitment to the common good: “In the last forty years, our sense of obligation to each other has eroded as wealth and personal success have been lionized at the expense of temperance and the common good. Today the sense that each of us is rightly responsible to fend for ourselves in the world sits uncomfortably with an older, deeper sense that we shouldn’t have to face exploitation, deprivation, humiliation, or loneliness. Americans want to stand on their own two feet, but we need to know that there are some limits to competition and greed, and that those around us will defend us, befriend us, or pick us up when we stumble, which we all do.” Murphy and Corbin concluded: “It falls to us to rebuild a sense of obligation to each other—a new American solidarity. We will need to build concrete policies that prevent excesses and cruelties now permitted in the name of profit. But we will also need to rebuild a culture that prioritizes the common good—the idea that we owe more to each other than just whatever the market will allow us to get away with. The threads that connect us have frayed or been cut. Our work, in this election year and beyond, is more than just shaming the demagogues; we must repair our badly damaged tapestry of common concern.” Read the full op-ed here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) and U.S. Representatives Michael Guest (R-Miss.) and Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) on Thursday introduced their Strengthening the Medical Examiner and Coroner System Act, which would help increase the number of board-certified forensic pathologists nationwide by encouraging qualified medical graduates to enter the field and providing support to accredited medical schools and providers in their recruitment efforts. “The shortage of forensic pathologists poses a serious risk to our public health system. Across the country, autopsies are often delayed for months on end, preventing families from gaining important closure and hurting our ability to fight future health crises,” said Murphy. “Our bill tackles this problem head-
...Read more on by providing funding, training, and support to attract qualified medical graduates to forensic pathology so that we have enough Board-Certified Forensic Pathologists to meet national demand.” “The current shortage of medical examiners puts public safety and public health at risk,” said Cornyn. “The U.S. must increase the current amount of forensic medical service providers to meet the needs of communities across the country, and this legislation would help medical providers recruit and train qualified individuals to enter the critically important field of forensic pathology.” “I am proud to join my colleagues in leading this important legislation that could help grow the medical examiner and forensic pathology workforce in Mississippi and across the country,” said Guest. “I look forward to continuing to work with Representative Cleaver, who is my fellow co-chair of the House Forensic Science Caucus, and Senators Cornyn and Murphy on this critical initiative.” “Medical Examiners play a pivotal role in both public health and safety nationwide, but far too many communities are facing a dangerous shortfall of experienced examiners, with the United States needing to roughly double the number of board-certified forensic pathologists to meet the nation’s current needs,” said Cleaver. “To ensure local law enforcement and public health officials have the information they need in a timely manner, it is imperative that Congress strengthen the pipeline of quality pathologists. I’m proud to join Senators Cornyn and Murphy, along with Rep. Guest, to introduce bipartisan legislation that will address this emergency.” Medical examiners and coroners are a crucial part of America’s public health system and help identify causes of death, monitor evolving health challenges, and save lives. Staff shortages can delay autopsies and death certification for months, preventing families from gaining closure and hamstringing the medical community’s ability to fight the opioid epidemic and other health crises. Currently, there are only about 800 full-time practicing forensic pathologists in the country, but the U.S. needs 1,500-1,800 to provide full national coverage. However, recruiting and retaining forensic pathologists is challenging because of the training required and the burdensome workload due to the ongoing shortage. The Strengthening the Medical Examiner and Coroner System Act would: Incentivize qualified medical graduates to enter the practice of forensic pathology by funding forensic pathology fellowships across the country;
Provide support to accredited medical schools and forensic medicine service providers that operate forensic pathology fellowship programs;
Encourage qualified individuals to enter the field of medicolegal death investigation;
Fund forensic medicine service providers and toxicology laboratories who support forensic medicine service providers;
And expand pathways to train, educate, and certify medicolegal death investigators. ### Read less IN FEBRUARY, REPUBLICANS TORPEDOED a tough, comprehensive bill that would have brought serious and much-needed reform to our southern border. This might have seemed a surprising move for the immigration-fixated party of Donald Trump that spent years trying to ‘build the wall,’ but Republicans made a clear political calculus. They decided they could not win the 2024 election if the border was not visibly chaotic. Today’s iteration of the Republican party, dominated by Trump, offers one central explanation for the source of Americans’ problems: immigrants. The country would be better off if we had been able to pass the bipartisan border bill—and not only because it would have strengthened our border security. It would also have left the Trumpian narrative in tatters. Without tens of
...Read more thousands of immigrants streaming into the country, Republicans would be forced to deal with the complicated reality of why Americans feel more alone and unhappy than ever before. Because it turns out that impoverished people making a desperate play for a better life are not the true source of our angst, and so even if the border were brought under control, our spiritual crisis would have remained. Trump’s diagnosis of what ails America is fraudulent and dangerous. But it is true that most Americans chafe at tens of thousands of people crossing the border illegally each month, viewing them as illegitimate competitors for resources in a culture of growing scarcity and go-it-alone individualism. It is a doomed strategy to attempt to convince Americans that the economy is better than they feel it to be; what is needed is an honest conversation about why so many Americans feel so scared and alone that they view a relatively nonthreatening crowd—desperate, low-skilled non-English-speaking migrants—as such an existential menace. Last summer, we took a trip to Boone, North Carolina, located in one of the state’s most overwhelmingly Republican congressional districts. Average household income in Boone ($28,200) is far below the state and national levels, and more than 55 percent of the population lives in poverty. We wanted to hear from people about how the economic policies of the last few decades and the opioid epidemic had affected their lives and their community, and what they were doing about it. We heard the same point over and over: People here feel abandoned. Locals told us how good, dignified jobs had left the region, gone in search of cheaper forms of labor, and how pharmaceutical companies had added to the suffering by aggressively plowing addictive, life-wrecking opioids into the region. Many people we spoke with had been directly affected by these problems, and everyone knew of someone who had been affected. Meanwhile, important community institutions, like hospitals and mom-and-pop stores, have withered. Local business owners told us they feel constantly in danger of being squashed by monopolistic corporate behemoths. And ever present in the background was the sense that the government had failed to prevent any of it. We asked for specifics: Whom exactly did they feel abandoned by? Why? The answer we heard is that people feel abandoned by society as a whole. This answer may seem frustratingly vague—but in fact it is incredibly instructive about the spiritual and economic realities of American life, including the reasons why so many Americans are susceptible to the siren song of immigrant scapegoating and us-vs.-them tribalism. Any American community subjected to the sequence of events described above would understandably feel abandoned. And most would struggle to identify exactly who was at fault. This ambiguity makes sense because America has cultivated the myth of the self-sufficient individual and the idea that all is fair in the realm of buying and selling. In this picture of society the sole goal of business is to make as much money as possible. Full stop. No company owes anyone dignified employment. Job offerings are deployed into the labor market, and jobseekers are free to accept or turn them down as they see fit. If a company no longer desires the service of an individual or group, it owes the individual or community nothing more. If business owners feel no duty of care to their employees, apart from what the law explicitly compels, they also owe no duty of care to their customers. The seller is not responsible for whether the pill or soft drink or payday loan is good for the buyer. The job of a company is to sell things to people who want to buy them. If you buy badly, if the things you purchase make you miserable, addicted, lonely, or unhealthy, that is your mistake. The company did nothing wrong by offering you these options. Meanwhile, the protections of government are reduced to a bare minimum and the consolations of community are allowed to drain away. We’re painting with a broad brush here, of course, and the particularities vary from community to community. But for millions of Americans, these conditions contribute to a sense of growing unease, even if they can’t readily articulate why. HUMAN BEINGS ARE SOLIDARISTIC, mutually dependent creatures. In all times and places where you find humans, you find the voluntary pooling of risk and reward, caring for the sick, and protecting the weak. Few of us, even as full-grown adults, would survive a week without the help of other people, nor should we wish to. Solidarity is in our nature. But America has self-mythologized an overwrought narrative of individualism. From roughly the end of the Second World War until the 1980s, America performed a precarious balancing act between rugged individualism and respect for the necessity of a healthy collective. But in the last forty years, our sense of obligation to each other has eroded as wealth and personal success have been lionized at the expense of temperance and the common good. Today the sense that each of us is rightly responsible to fend for ourselves in the world sits uncomfortably with an older, deeper sense that we shouldn’t have to face exploitation, deprivation, humiliation, or loneliness. Americans want to stand on their own two feet, but we need to know that there are some limits to competition and greed, and that those around us will defend us, befriend us, or pick us up when we stumble, which we all do. Donald Trump figured out long ago that people are feeling anxious, angry, and alone. Regrettably, he preyed upon this sense of betrayal with a message of scapegoating and division. He instructed his followers to scuttle an important piece of legislation to fix our broken border because he cannot win in November if Americans don’t believe the false narrative that their anxiety is caused by immigrants. It falls to us to rebuild a sense of obligation to each other—a new American solidarity. We will need to build concrete policies that prevent excesses and cruelties now permitted in the name of profit. But we will also need to rebuild a culture that prioritizes the common good—the idea that we owe more to each other than just whatever the market will allow us to get away with. The threads that connect us have frayed or been cut. Our work, in this election year and beyond, is more than just shaming the demagogues; we must repair our badly damaged tapestry of common concern. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement on Sikorsky’s announcement that the company will eliminate as many as 400 jobs in Connecticut: “When it comes to designing and supplying rotary aircraft, the men and women of Sikorsky comprise the most talented workforce in this country and play an irreplaceable role in our national defense – full stop. The layoffs announced at Sikorsky stem from the Army’s short-sighted decision to cancel its Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program, which I repeatedly raised concerns about for its implications for both our long-term military capabilities and the second to none workforce at the Stratford plant. I will continue to press the Army on their commitment to maintaining the highly skilled workforce at
...Read more Sikorsky that our nation needs to ensure our military readiness. Our commitment to workers and the future of manufacturing in Connecticut is ironclad, and my office stands ready to assist those impacted by these layoffs in any way we can.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Wednesday released the following statement on the Senate’s vote to dismiss the impeachment of U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas: “Republicans see the border as nothing more than a campaign issue. It’s more important for them to be able to score political points by going to the border and dressing up as patrol agents or yelling about Secretary Mayorkas on cable news than it is for them to actually do something about the challenges at the border. If House Republicans were serious people, the bipartisan border security bill that I helped to write would be law. Instead, they’ve wasted taxpayer dollars on a baseless impeachment that failed to
...Read more prove that Secretary Mayorkas has committed a single high crime or misdemeanor but will keep feeding the Republican moneymaking grievance machine. It’s an embarrassment.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) finalized rule to specify the definition of “engaged in the business” as a dealer in firearms. Murphy’s Bipartisan Safer Communities Act clarified the definition of who is “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms as a person doing so with the intent to “predominately earn a profit.” The finalized rule amends the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) regulations to conform with the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, clarifying who must register as a federally licensed firearms dealer and conduct background checks on gun sales. “Today’s announcement is a landmark day for the implementation of the Bipartisan Safer
...Read more Communities Act that will significantly increase the number of background checks performed and help keep guns out of dangerous hands. For too long, the law allowed individuals who were clearly in business as a firearms dealer to sell guns for profit without conducting background checks, permitting thousands of gun sales to fly under the radar each year. That’s why our legislation made this important change to expand background checks by broadening the definition of who is engaged in the business. This rule brings us closer to the goal of universal background checks and will save lives,” said Murphy. In December, Murphy submitted a public comment in support of the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) proposed rule. In September, Murphy highlighted the importance of this rule and how it will increased the number of background checks on gun sales. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday spoke at a U.S. Senate Appropriations State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Subcommittee hearing on President Biden’s Fiscal Year 2025 budget request for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). In his questions to USAID Administrator Samantha Power, Murphy highlighted the challenges facing aid organizations in Gaza and discussed the deteriorating security situation in Haiti. Last week, Murphy visited Americares, a Connecticut-based, health-focused relief and development organization, whose partner organization in Gaza has suspended operations due to the danger facing aid workers. Murphy highlighted the consequences of this difficult decision: “They’re suspending those operations not because of a lack of
...Read more access, not because of an overly bureaucratic process at the ports. They are suspending their programming there because they don't think they can keep their people safe because of our inability to do deconfliction in a meaningful way. They are not likely to resume operations until there is a cessation of hostilities, and so we just have to be pretty clear-eyed about the fact that until the bombs stop dropping, until the shooting stops, it’s going to be very, very hard to be able to do what we need to do inside Gaza and save the kind of lives we want to save.” On Haiti’s deteriorating security situation and the role the U.S. can play, Murphy said: “We have been the biggest humanitarian contributor to a country that continues to spiral out of control as gangs now control the majority of the capital. $171 million since October 2022 — I think we should be proud of that fact. But I think we all worry that Haiti is lurching into what may be a permanent state of emergency that is going to be a significant drain on what we have heard today are dwindling resources with lots of suitors and competitors. This is a really critical moment and I know there is a deep skepticism about the role that the United States has played and should play when it comes to restoring security in Haiti. He continued: “I convened a meeting of Haitian-American leaders in my state, and they had a variety of opinions as to what role the United States should play. So, I want to ask you a question, not about whether we should be a humanitarian partner in saving lives in Haiti, but what is the proper role for the United States to play right now in restoring security in Haiti? Because this seems to be a moment to double down on our work in that endeavor rather than just to sit back and let others lead while we continue to provide the bulk of humanitarian assistance.” Last month, Murphy released a statement on the deteriorating security situation in Haiti as violence erupted. In March, Murphy also helped introduce the Caribbean Arms Trafficking Causes Harm (CATCH) Act, legislation that would help curb illicit arms trafficking from the United States to the Caribbean by requiring the Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions to report on the implementation of anti-firearm-trafficking provisions included in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much Mr. Chairman. Let me just make one addendum to this discussion about what is happening in Gaza today. Last week I visited a Connecticut-based emergency relief organization, Americares. They deliver mainly emergency medicines into conflict areas. They are amongst a number of organizations that have suspended operations in Gaza. “They’re suspending those operations not because of a lack of access, not because of an overly bureaucratic process at the ports. They are suspending their programming there because they don't think they can keep their people safe because of our inability to do deconfliction in a meaningful way. They are not likely to resume operations until there is a cessation of hostilities, and so we just have to be pretty clear-eyed about the fact that until the bombs stop dropping, until the shooting stops, it’s going to be very, very hard to be able to do what we need to do inside Gaza and save the kind of lives we want to save. “Administrator Power, I wanted to turn your attention to Haiti for a moment. We have been the biggest humanitarian contributor to a country that continues to spiral out of control as gangs now control the majority of the capital. $171 million since October 2022—I think we should be proud of that fact. “But I think we all worry that Haiti is lurching into what may be a permanent state of emergency that is going to be a significant drain on what we have heard today are dwindling resources with lots of suitors and competitors. This is a really critical moment, and I know there is a deep skepticism about the role that the United States has played and should play when it comes to restoring security in Haiti. “I convened a meeting of Haitian-American leaders in my state, and they had a variety of opinions as to what role the United States should play. So, I want to ask you a question, not about whether we should be a humanitarian partner in saving lives in Haiti, but what is the proper role for the United States to play right now in restoring security in Haiti? Because this seems to be a moment to double down on our work in that endeavor rather than just to sit back and let others lead while we continue to provide the bulk of humanitarian assistance.” POWER: “Well just to embrace the premise of your question that there is no humanitarian fix to a complete breakdown in security as is happening in so many neighborhoods and in the capital. Look, I think the U.S. role has been on display over the course actually of several years, going around the world and trying to find a partner who was willing to put security forces, in this case police forces, on the ground in Haiti, securing the commitment. Huge thanks to the Kenyans and to President Ruto for being willing to step forward. And that was of course in an environment that was already unstable, already very, very difficult and now all the more so. “These conversations are ongoing, but mobilizing the resources that we have in order to be in a position to support the payment of salaries — because this is of course not a traditional UN peacekeeping mission, it is blessed by the UN but not funded by the UN— I think that’s an important role for the United States. But so is the diplomacy we’ve done to get other countries, like the Canadians and many of the Europeans as well, to step up and fund and equip that force. “But the diplomacy around the three legs of the stool — security, humanitarian welfare, and governance — and the fact there hasn't been a legitimately elected government in Haiti is something that has surely contributed to the breakdown in security as well as gangs and others use that at least as a pretext for their vigilantism. “So, the efforts to pull together a transition, USAID stands ready with a lot of election support when we are in a position to provide it and when there is a roadmap to elections, but you won't get security without governance and of course you can't get that roadmap to elections until we have a baseline of security.” MURPHY: “Yeah, I think we’ve got a really short window in which to figure out the path forward and find those international partners. Let me pull back and ask you one additional question about China competition. Really excited about the work you are doing to better evaluate the impact of programs on the ground, but there is an asymmetry between how we view our aid and how China views its aid. “We are looking at the impact of our aid largely through a policy lens, trying to impact the largest number of people possible. China is really looking at their aid more so through a political lens. An example is, you know, often there are pet projects that dictators or quasi-dictators have around the world that we don't see as a real ROI for the citizens of that country. We aren’t willing to put our dollars behind it, but China will. Do you see it as an exposure to the United States that our aid is more focused on how many people we can help and China's aid is focused more on how many officials they can influence? How do we balance that asymmetry?” POWER: “Needless to say, I think our budget request is and particularly the investments in global infrastructure efforts are a reflection of our desire to be more competitive in terms of the kinds of resources that we are investing. So that’s quantity. We should be showing up. They are actually receding. From having become the world's largest debt collector, their investments are way down in fact, over the last two or three years, having become overextended, not getting maybe the return on investment that they had sought, being in that position of being debt collector, they’re rethinking what they are doing. “There is an opening, there is a real opening. But I do think our competitive advantage is quality, fundamentally. And that involves not only quality of infrastructure, transparent procurement, not having the investments we make benefit the few rather than the many, but it’s also the quality of what, for example, an agency like USAID can come in with to align with infrastructure that is being built. You've heard a lot about the Lobito Corridor, the flagship initial major investment associated with the PGI. We are looking at mobile money, so small-scale farmers can better access resources in order to take that loan out, in order to be able to get the access to capital they need to grow their business for when that rail exists. We will actually support them in getting their goods to market, but getting them digitized is a prerequisite for the growth that they envisage for themselves. “USAID is funding a public-private partnership with the Department of Transportation in Angola to help them do other concessions for their infrastructure, but again in a manner that is transparent, that changes the enabling environment, hopefully over time sees civil society also empowered to scrutinize what is being done in governmental circles. It’s an entirely different model, but it reflects that, or my response at least tries to reflect, the toolkit that we need to bring to bear, which is both about the hard infrastructure which people are craving, but also aligning development, human development, along with those investments. “We can build a railroad, but if we aren't actually investing in nutrition and education and small- to medium-sized enterprises en route at the same time, the return on that investment is going to be much more limited. The last thing I would say is just the polling is very striking about public reactions in the countries that have taken that alternate development approach, and a real souring on seeing those big infrastructure projects that either aren't actually of the quality that citizens need in terms of their infrastructure – some of them are, but many of them are not – that are saddling publics with debt in the longer term, but also that are bringing in workers from outside the country rather than using infrastructure as a source of employment in the countries themselves. So I think the polls are the best diagnostic about whether we need to change or whether we just need to scale what we are trying to do.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Wednesday held a hearing on President Biden’s Fiscal Year 2025 funding request for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. In his remarks, Murphy called out Senate Republicans for their role in prolonging the crisis at the southern border and criticized unfounded attempts to place the blame on Secretary Mayorkas. Murphy highlighted Republicans’ hypocrisy in killing the bipartisan border bill earlier this year: “This budget doesn’t provide enough money, and this budget by definition cannot update the immigration laws of this country, which are outdated and broken. But do you know what did provide enough money? Do you know
...Read more what did update and fix our broken laws? The bipartisan border bill negotiated by myself, Senator Lankford, Senator Sinema with help from Senator McConnell and Senator Graham. It would have provided $20 billion in extra emergency funding to buy 50,000 detention beds, to hire 4,300 new asylum officers, 100 new immigration judges, 1,500 border patrol agents, 1,000 new deportation officers. The list goes on and on. He added: “In addition, our bill would have made a massive downpayment on fixing our broken border and immigration authorities. It would have given the power to the president to close portions of the border to ordinary asylum claims during periods of high crossings. It would have elevated the screening standards for asylum claims to make sure that only truly meritorious claimants enter the country. It would have reduced, maybe most importantly, the time to process an asylum application from 10 years, in some cases, to just weeks, or, at worst, months. It would have a eliminated the use of 235(a) parole at the border and greatly narrowed and refined the uses of humanitarian parole. That is just the tip of the iceberg. If passed, this would have been the most significant, most serious reform of immigration law in 40 years. And it would have been effective at slowing the pace of arrivals at the southern border and making sure that our system of legal immigration, a key to American greatness, is not abused. And that’s why it’s not the law. It’s not the law because it would have made a big downpayment on fixing the problem. Republicans rejected this bill because they didn’t want to fix the problem. Donald Trump and Republicans decided they would be better off with the border a mess because it would help them politically “ On Republicans’ baseless attempts to impeach Secretary Mayorkas, Murphy said: “These articles are laughable on their face. One accuses the Secretary of a high crime and misdemeanor for failing to stop millions of noncitizens from being released into the United States. Let's be clear. Despite Congress’ inability to respond to this crisis, the Biden administration and Secretary Mayorkas have removed, returned or expelled more migrants in three years than the Trump administration did in four years. The annual apprehension rate is the exact same between the Trump administration and the Biden administration. Another impeachment article rages about the immigration court backlog—a backlog that has existed in both Republican and Democratic administrations; a backlog that is the consequence of Congress's unwillingness to adequately fund a solution; a backlog that—wait for it—would have been solved by the bipartisan border bill that the House Republicans so honestly concerned about the state of immigration killed.” Mayorkas explained how the bipartisan border deal would have helped address the challenges at the borders: “This piece of bipartisan legislation would've been the most transformative change to our broken immigration system, not only for the resources it provided but for the changes in the law that it delivered. It would have brought such extraordinary fairness and speed to a system that has suffered backlogs and interminable timelines in the processing of claims. It would have plussed up our personnel in an unprecedented fashion, as you have commented. It would have allowed us to adjudicate asylum claims that now take more than seven years to run through the courts in sometimes less than 90 days. Absolutely transformative, not only from an efficiency perspective, but also fundamentally from a security perspective.” On the flow of fentanyl into the United States and the flow of guns into Mexico, Murphy said: “The fentanyl trade between the United States and Mexico is a circle. Fentanyl comes into the United States, money and guns leave the United States. That is why on a bipartisan basis we have provided additional money for outbound inspections so that we are catching not all, but an appreciable amount of guns and money as it leaves the United States. This trade can only work if the guns and the money leave and the fentanyl comes back.” A full transcript of Murphy’s opening remarks can be found below: “Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to today's hearing concerning Fiscal Year 2025 and the budget request from the Department of Homeland Security. Calling this hearing to order, and we welcome Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas to testify about the FY25 request. Thank you for being here on a very busy day. Looking forward to a serious and lively discussion about the department's budget priorities for the coming year. Nothing is more important in our federal budget than supporting the 260,000 federal employees who spend every day defending our nation. I’ve reviewed the President's proposed budget. I support lots of it, I have questions about other parts, and I look forward to our subcommittee's bipartisan work. I want to use the rest of my time here today to address two elephants that linger in the room. “First, this budget, even with this proposed increase, is not enough to secure our border and manage the unusually high levels of immigration to the United States that started not in 2021 or 2022 but in 2019; not when President Biden took office but when President Trump was president. This budget doesn’t provide enough money, and this budget by definition cannot update the immigration laws of this country, which are outdated and broken. But do you know what did provide enough money? Do you know what did update and fix our broken laws? The bipartisan border bill negotiated by myself, Senator Lankford, Senator Sinema with help from Senator McConnell and Senator Graham. It would have provided $20 billion in extra emergency funding to buy 50,000 detention beds, to hire 4,300 new asylum officers, 100 new immigration judges, 1,500 border patrol agents, 1,000 new deportation officers. The list goes on and on. “In addition, our bill would have made a massive downpayment on fixing our broken border and immigration authorities. It would have given the power to the president to close portions of the border to ordinary asylum claims during periods of high crossings. It would have elevated the screening standards for asylum claims to make sure that only truly meritorious claimants enter the country. It would have reduced, maybe most importantly, the time to process an asylum application from 10 years, in some cases, to just weeks, or, at worst, months. It would have a eliminated the use of 235(a) parole at the border and greatly narrowed and refined the uses of humanitarian parole. “That is just the tip of the iceberg. If passed, this would have been the most significant, most serious reform of immigration law in 40 years. And it would have been effective at slowing the pace of arrivals at the southern border and making sure that our system of legal immigration, a key to American greatness, is not abused. And that’s why it’s not the law. It’s not the law because it would have made a big downpayment on fixing the problem. “Republicans rejected this bill because they didn’t want to fix the problem. Donald Trump and Republicans decided they would be better off with the border a mess because it would help them politically. That's not me saying that. Here's what one honest Republican senator said: ‘The border is a very important issue for Donald Trump, and the fact that he would communicate to Republican senators and congresspeople that he doesn’t want us to solve the border problem because he wants to blame Biden for it is really appalling.’ Now I'm eager to hear about the President's budget request. But we could have done something together in a bipartisan way to give the real levels of adequate funding, real changes in law to protect our nation. “The second thing that hangs over this hearing is the political impeachment articles that are about to be sent to the Senate. There's not a single act of impeachable misconduct alleged by these articles. The process was an embarrassment to the House of Representatives. These articles are laughable on their face. One accuses the Secretary of a high crime and misdemeanor for failing to stop millions of noncitizens from being released into the United States. “Let's be clear. Despite Congress’ inability to respond to this crisis, the Biden administration and Secretary Mayorkas have removed, returned or expelled more migrants in three years than the Trump administration did in four years. The annual apprehension rate is the exact same between the Trump administration and the Biden administration. Another impeachment article rages about the immigration court backlog—a backlog that has existed in Republican and Democratic administrations; a backlog that is the consequence of Congress's unwillingness to adequately fund a solution; a backlog that—wait for it—would have been solved by the bipartisan border bill that the House Republicans, so honestly concerned about the state of immigration, killed. “But what makes me most angry about this impeachment is its attempts to personally impugn Secretary Mayorkas. His life is one of public service: the youngest U.S. Attorney confirmed by the Senate; the former director of USCIS; the former Deputy Director of DHS. He has sought out the toughest, most controversy-laden jobs in government. He was in the room personally for nearly all of our four months of torturous negotiations. Why? Because Republicans and Democrats trusted him. Because Republicans asked for him to be in that room because they knew that he would be an honest broker. So we are very lucky, in my mind, to have Secretary Mayorkas protecting our nation. He shouldn’t have to endure this process, but we are glad that he is here today.” A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Secretary Mayorkas can be found below: MURPHY: “I have first a personnel question for you. Jeff Rezmovic was nominated to be the Chief Financial Officer of DHS last year. His nomination has been pending for some time before the Senate. Of course, his nomination is especially important to the Appropriations Committee. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to have an agency this large without a CFO for this long. I assume you would agree with me that his confirmation, the ability to get a CFO working with you at the Department, is of the utmost importance.” MAYORKAS: “It most certainly is, Mr. Chair. I have worked very closely with Jeff Rezmovic for about seven years now, previously when I was a Deputy Secretary, and let me say unequivocally that he is pure gold as a public servant. I should also note that the woman over my left shoulder, Anne Tipton, who is serving as our Chief Financial Officer, is also pure gold. We need a Senate confirmed CFO for the stabilization that it provides our department.” MURPHY: “You heard me testify to the amount of resources that would've been allocated in the emergency supplemental that included $20 billion to surge to 50,000 detention beds, to hire over 4,000 new asylum officers to attack the backlog, 1,500 new border patrol agents and officers. Can you talk for a moment about what those kind of resources would have allowed you to do had both Republicans and Democrats come together and supported that bipartisan supplemental package?” MAYORKAS: “Chair Murphy, my first encounter with the immigration system, the broken immigration system, was in the 1990s when I served as a federal prosecutor in California. And I learned then that the system was fundamentally broken, and it remains so. This piece of bipartisan legislation would've been the most transformative change to our broken immigration system, not only for the resources it provided but for the changes in the law that it delivered. It would have brought such extraordinary fairness and speed to a system that has suffered backlogs and interminable timelines in the processing of claims. It would have plussed up our personnel in an unprecedented fashion, as you have commented. It would have allowed us to adjudicate asylum claims that now take more than seven years to run through the courts in sometimes less than 90 days. Absolutely transformative, not only from an efficiency perspective, but also fundamentally from a security perspective.” MURPHY: “Let me ask you specifically about how you achieve an increased deterrence. I think there's a perception here that by just loading up on detention beds, you can have an appreciable impact on deterrence. But what the bipartisan bill tried to do at your and others' urging was to provide more immediate certainty on asylum claims, to adjudicate those claims in a handful of days or weeks instead of what happens today, five years or ten years. Now that is just the right thing to do for the country. It’s just fair to have that outcome at the border rather than 10 years later. But tell us a little bit about the elements of this bill, including that element, that would've had an impact on deterrence, that would've stopped people from ever contemplating the journey to the border, and how that can only be achieved by changes in law, not just changes in funding levels.” MAYORKAS: “Absolutely, Mr. Chair. So fundamentally, the risk calculus of intending migrants would have changed dramatically, because right now, what they see is a broken asylum system, and they understand that when they are encountered at the border and make a claim for asylum, their claim is ultimately adjudicated sometimes in more than seven years. Our backlog is immense, and it's been growing year over year for well more than a decade. And what happens is, in those seven years, they work. Sometimes they have United States citizen children. And they gain a sense of footing in the United States before their claim to stay here has even been adjudicated. Under the bipartisan legislation, that multi-year process would have been transformed to as little as 90 days and sometimes even quicker, and given the denial rate for most asylum claims, an intending migrant would have the calculus of deciding: should I take that dangerous journey, should I place my life savings in the hands of smugglers, only to be turned around upon arrival in the United States within 90 days? An absolute game changer.” MURPHY: “Finally, let me ask you about a topic that we’ve spent a lot of time talking about relative to the fentanyl trade. The fentanyl trade between the United States and Mexico is a circle. Fentanyl comes into the United States, money and guns leave the United States. That is why on a bipartisan basis we have provided additional money for outbound inspections so that we are catching not all, but an appreciable amount of guns and money as it leaves the United States. This trade can only work if the guns and the money leave and the fentanyl comes back. What percentage of traffic today is subject to outbound inspection, and what's a realistic projection for how we’re gonna expand outbound inspections in this fiscal year?” MAYORKAS: “Chair Murphy, I’ll have to get the precise numbers to you subsequent to this hearing, but let me say that CBP, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and Homeland Security Investigations, the investigative arm of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, are working in tandem to address the outbound flow of both money and guns. In fact, Operation Without a Trace—we’ll provide the data to you—has been an extraordinarily effective operation to curtail the movement of guns and money. We also have deployed transnational criminal investigative units to Mexico to work with our law enforcement partners in Mexico to address this issue and we are of course very well and closely aligned with our U.S. Department of Justice.” MURPHY: “Great, look forward to that update.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) on Friday sent a letter to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Under Secretary Dr. Shereef Elnahal calling on VA to take immediate action to address alarming trends in women veterans’ suicide rates. In the letter, the senators urged VA to take swift and concrete steps to update and tailor critical resources and programming to facilitate safer firearm storage, improve lethal means safety counseling, and prevent women veteran suicide. “We all know that women veterans face challenges distinct from those experienced by the broader population. For far too long these unique stressors have gone unaddressed and appear to be contributing to a startling uptick in suicides,” the senators wrote. “VA’s 2023 National
...Read more Veteran Suicide Prevention Annual Report drives home the scale of this problem: from 2020 to 2021, women veterans’ suicide rate jumped by 24.1%, four times the 6.3% increase among male veterans, and far above the 2.6% increase among nonveteran women. Women veterans’ suicide rate in 2021 was a shocking 166.1% higher than that of non-veteran women. In addition, the rate of women veterans dying by firearm suicide was found to be nearly three times higher than non-veteran women, with firearms used in 51.7% of cases. This data speaks to the serious and mounting threat to the mental health and wellbeing of the women who have served in our armed forces.” The senators called for research to tailor support to the needs of women veterans: “For this conversation to progress, VA must develop a better understanding of women veterans, the troubles they face, their views of firearms, and the best methods of supporting them. There is evidence that during the pandemic more women veterans began expressing safety concerns and gravitating towards firearm ownership as a means of protecting themselves and their families. We fear that VA, and our country broadly, have not done enough to fully understand women veterans’ views of firearm ownership and personal safety, as well as any trauma that has informed those views. VA must lead in conducting the research that can inform the reform needed to make its suicide prevention and lethal-means safety counseling programs more impactful in reaching women veterans.” Citing shortcomings in VA’s universal suicide prevention campaigns, the senators called on VA to reevaluate its approach: “When over half of suicides take place within ten minutes of the suicidal urge, we must do all we can to ensure that VA’s public service campaigns, lethal-means safety counseling, and safe storage programs are as effective – and as well-tailored to women veterans – as possible, to place a barrier of time and space between the thought of suicide and action. Unfortunately, studies have indicated that VA’s universal suicide prevention campaigns have not been as effective as they could be in drawing the connection between suicide and access to firearms. Viewers have also reported that campaigns lack a call to action that is clear and well-tailored to the audience.” After outlining specific recommendations, the senators concluded: “It’s past time for the VA to take a close look at its suicide prevention efforts and to work to ensure that its programs meet women veterans where they are. Continuing to partner with VSOs, veterans leaders, and other relevant organizations, VA must refine its messaging, carefully select its messengers, and fine-tune its programming to ensure that VA suicide prevention and lethal-means safety programs effectively reach their audiences and support them in taking life-saving firearm safety precautions.” Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear Under Secretary Elnahal, We write today to draw your attention to disturbing recent trends in women veterans’ suicide rates and to urge the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to take swift, concrete steps to tackle this issue head on. Striking recent data and devastating stories from across the country make clear that our government must act to better meet the needs of women veterans – especially when it comes to better tailoring VA’s resources and programming to enable safe firearm storage, improve lethal means safety counseling, and prevent suicide. We all know that women veterans face challenges distinct from those experienced by the broader population. For far too long these stressors have gone unaddressed and appear to be contributing to a startling uptick in suicides. VA’s 2023 National Veteran Suicide Prevention Annual Report drives home the scale of this problem: from 2020 to 2021, women veterans’ suicide rate jumped by 24.1%, four times the 6.3% increase among male veterans, and far above the 2.6% increase among nonveteran women. Women veterans’ suicide rate in 2021 was a shocking 166.1% higher than that of non-veteran women. In addition, the rate of women veterans dying by firearm suicide was found to be nearly three times higher than that of non-veteran women, with firearms used in 51.7% of cases. This data speaks to the serious and mounting threat to the mental health and wellbeing of the women who have served in our armed forces. These numbers emphasize the need for VA to ensure it is doing everything possible to address this glaring problem and to meet the needs of women veterans intentionally, especially through its suicide prevention programming. We recognize your work to improve VA’s efforts to prevent suicide and better support at-risk veterans across our communities. We appreciate that VA has tried to help ensure veterans know that the 988 Suicide and Crisis Hotline exists and is available to them. We also know that VA has worked in recent years to implement new laws aimed at better supporting survivors of military sexual trauma (MST), which has been tied to increased suicide risk. Still, we feel strongly that VA can and must quickly take additional action to turn the tide on these recent terrible trends that show women veterans to be uniquely at risk and without sufficient support. Specifically, we believe that VA needs to reexamine its lethal means safety programming with a closer eye to the experiences and needs of women veterans. About 38% of women veterans own a firearm, and they are three times as likely as non-veteran women to die by firearm suicide. These statistics highlight the pressing need to draw more attention to and counteract the risk of firearm suicide by women veterans. There needs to be a more proactive and productive conversation about the deadly outcomes that too often arise among this population when dark moments coincide with ready access to firearms. For this conversation to progress, VA must develop a better understanding of women veterans, the troubles they face, their views of firearms, and the best methods of supporting them. There is evidence that during the pandemic more women veterans began expressing safety concerns and gravitating towards firearm ownership as a means of protecting themselves and their families. We fear that VA, and our country broadly, has not done enough to fully understand women veterans’ views of firearm ownership and personal safety, as well as any trauma that has informed those views. VA must lead in conducting the research that can inform the reform needed to make its suicide prevention and lethal means safety counseling programs more impactful in reaching women veterans. When over half of suicides take place within ten minutes of the suicidal urge, we must do all we can to ensure that VA’s public service campaigns, lethal means safety counseling, and safe storage programs are as effective – and as well-tailored to women veterans – as possible, to place a barrier of time and space between the thought of suicide and action. Unfortunately, studies have indicated that VA’s universal suicide prevention campaigns have not been as effective as they could be in drawing the connection between suicide and access to firearms. Viewers have also reported that campaigns lack a call to action that is clear and well-tailored to the audience. It’s past time for the VA to take a close look at its suicide prevention efforts and to work to ensure that its programs meet women veterans where they are. Continuing to partner with veterans service organizations, veteran leaders, and other relevant groups, VA must refine its messaging, carefully select its messengers, and fine-tune its programming to ensure that VA suicide prevention and lethal means safety programs effectively reach their audiences and support them in taking life-saving firearm safety precautions. As outlined in the Women Veterans report published by Disabled American Veterans in February 2024, VA has clear steps it can and should take to better tailor its suicide prevention programs to women. These include: Collaborating with all relevant VA offices, experts, and outside groups to study and better understand women veterans’ perception of suicide prevention and lethal means counseling and to determine what actions are most effective;
Conducting focus groups to determine the best secure firearm storage messages and messengers to get through to women veterans;
Considering partnership with VSOs, healthcare organizations, and other partners to stand up a national firearm suicide prevention program with greater appeal and reach; and
Taking lessons learned from this research and implementing them across the VA, including in its training of employees and better tailoring of programs to support the specific needs of women veterans. With the pressing need to stop women veteran suicides, we request that VA provide to our offices updates on its consideration of the steps outlined above, no later than 21 days from today. We are keen to learn the exact steps VA is planning and the ways that Congress might help bolster its efforts to better support women veterans in our communities and across the country. We look forward to your response and working together with you to better meet the needs of our nation’s women veterans. Thank you for your attention to this important issue. ### Read less Despite a decrease in the overall veteran population from 2020 to 2021, the number of suicides has continued to increase, especially among female veterans. Although the number and rate of suicides for male veterans have been historically higher than for female veterans, the adjusted suicide rate for female veterans jumped by 24.1 percent from 2020 to 2021, according to U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs data released in November. This increase is four times higher than the one seen with their male counterparts. The suicide rate for female veterans is 166.1 percent higher when compared to their civilian counterparts, according to department data. U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, sent a letter to the VA early
...Read more Friday to urge the department to “take swift, concrete steps to tackle this issue head-on.” The letter notes that although the VA has made many efforts to address the mental health crisis, the department needs to go further in its support and services for female veterans. Murphy said he was inspired to write the letter after meeting with a group of female veterans in New Haven in late March and hearing stories of the challenges they faced when accessing mental health care. “We owe a duty of care to those who sacrificed so much to serve our country, and that’s why I’m pushing VA to double down on its suicide prevention efforts,” Murphy said. “Improving VA’s programming and resources to support women, facilitate safe storage of firearms, and increase access to counseling will save lives.” VA representatives issued a statement saying preventing veteran suicide is a “top-clinical priority," adding the reasons for the rise in suicides are complex. Women veterans often experience specific challenges relating to their military services that worsen their mental health and heighten the risk of suicide, such as readjustment, posttraumatic stress disorder, trouble sleeping and physical injury, the VA said. When compared to civilian women, the VA said female veterans also face “a substantially larger trauma burden” between their combat exposure and higher rates of adverse childhood experiences. Female veterans also experience higher rates of military sexual trauma and intimate partner violence than their civilian counterparts. “Suicide is influenced by factors at the individual, community and societal levels, and there were substantial public health and societal challenges in 2020 and 2021,” the VA statement read. “These unique experiences can increase the risk of suicide and require targeted solutions.” In its 2024 report, Disabled American Veterans also identified several other unique factors that may heighten suicide ideation among female veterans, including access to health care, substance use, eating disorders and reproductive health. The Disabled American Veterans report found there is a 20 percent increased risk for suicide among rural veterans. An estimated one in four women veterans who use VA health care services live in rural areas where they are less likely to receive mental health and gender-specific healthcare services compared to their peers in urban settings. The report also highlights the connection between sexual trauma and disordered eating, which is linked to an increased risk for suicide. Pregnancy and menopause can also play a role in suicide ideation. Menopause has also been shown to raise the risk for depression twofold and corresponds to the highest rates of suicide among U.S. women, according to the report. Easy access to lethal means, specifically firearms, also plays a role in the high rates of veteran suicides, Disabled American Veterans found. Firearms are the most common lethal means used in veteran suicides compared to civilians. The firearm suicide rate was 281.1 percent higher for female veterans than that of nonveteran women. There was a nearly 15 percent increase in veteran women firearm suicide deaths from 2001 to 2022, while male veterans saw a six percent increase, according to the report. “One veteran suicide is one too many, and we’re using every tool at our disposal to prevent these tragedies and save veterans’ lives,” the VA said in its statement. “VA’s mission is to offer comprehensive support that is designed to save lives and get Veterans the world-class care they need, wherever they need it, whenever they need it.” The VA has implemented more than 50 programs to help address the mental health crisis among veterans. Some of the general initiatives include circulating public service announcements about lethal means safety training and mental health services, offering free emergent suicide care for veterans in crisis, developing a suicide prevention clinical telehealth program and launching a system to identify veterans at risk for suicide. In its emailed statement, the VA said it also offers support with vocational rehabilitation programs, homeless services, Veterans Justice Outreach services and peer support services. The VA agrees though that a “one-size-fits-all veteran suicide prevention strategy” is not practical in meeting the various needs of the population. “Suicide is a complex problem requiring a full public health approach involving community prevention and clinical intervention,” the VA said. “Creating culturally sensitive and responsive interventions to meet women Veterans’ needs will be required.” The VA said their clinicians have access to the VA’s National Reproductive Mental Health Consultation Program, which offers consultation about mental health as it relates to women’s reproductive concerns, such as the menstrual cycle, pregnancy, postpartum and perimenopause. Similarly, the VA medical centers have at least one Women’s Mental Health Champion to support and expand women’s mental health initiatives and facilitate responsiveness to the needs of female veterans locally, the VA said.
“As more and more women enter the general Veteran community and access Veterans Health Administration health services, VA is rapidly scaling up the availability and sophistication of gender-tailored service to meet women Veterans’ diverse treatment needs,” the VA said. Murphy and Murkowski’s letter urges the VA to reexamine prevention strategies to incorporate the unique needs of female veterans better. The letter encourages the department to look at the lethal-means safety programming with a “closer eye” since its general messaging could be fixed to be more impactful in reaching women. “For this conversation to progress, VA must develop a better understanding of women veterans, the troubles they face, their views of firearms, and the best methods of supporting them,” Murphy writes. “I fear that VA, and our country broadly, has not done enough to fully understand women veterans’ views of firearm ownership and personal safety, as well as any trauma that has informed those views,” The letter highlights several other “clear steps” the VA can take to better support female veterans that were in the Disabled American Veterans 2024 report. These steps include collaborating with relevant VA offices, considering partnerships with veterans service officers and healthcare providers. In their letter, Murphy and Murkowski request the VA provide an update on its considerations within 21 days to learn about the department’s next steps and how Congress can help bolster efforts. “It’s past time for the VA to take a close look at its suicide prevention efforts and to work to ensure that its programs meet women veterans where they are,” the letter reads. Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced that Allyx Therapeutics, a clinical-stage biotechnology company based in New Haven, was named “Innovator of the Month” for their ongoing development of a novel therapeutic approach for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. The company’s lead compound, ALX-001, is a highly selective, first-in-class, synapse-targeted, disease-modifying oral therapy in development for neurodegenerative diseases. Founded in 2019, Allyx Therapeutics recently presented new data and announced its plans to begin Phase 2 research studies. “A diagnosis for a neurodegenerative disease can be devastating, especially given the limited treatments available. The team at Allyx is doing important work to develop a new, highly innovative treatment that aims to
...Read more preserve and protect brain synapses for people living with Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s. It has the potential to be a gamechanger for patients, and I look forward to seeing their continued growth in our state,” said Murphy. “Even with recent progress, current treatment options for people living with Alzheimer’s disease are limited in their ability to slow cognitive decline. We believe that the unique mechanism of ALX-001 has the potential to have a greater impact on cognition and function, while avoiding some of the well-known consequences associated with other therapies that target amyloid beta,” said Allyx Therapeutics co-founder and CEO Stephen Bloch, M.D. “In addition, because our compound is being developed as an oral medicine, we believe it will be markedly easier for patients and caregivers to access and stay on therapy.” One of the well-known characteristics of Alzheimer’s disease is increased levels of the protein amyloid beta in the brain, which is believed to limit the ability of cells to communicate with one another and cause loss of cognition and function that worsens over time. Blocking the brain’s mGluR5 receptor has been shown to halt the ability of amyloid beta to damage the communication network of neurons. ALX-001 does not impact normal receptor function and alters the activity of protein at a specific location. These characteristics make ALX-001 a first-in-class compound that has disease-specific activity to benefit patients, while avoiding challenges experienced by other Alzheimer’s disease medicines. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Tuesday released the following statement on the deaths of seven World Central Kitchen workers in Gaza: “World Central Kitchen volunteers have played a heroic role in getting food to innocent civilians facing famine inside Gaza. The deaths of these seven aid workers, killed by Israeli airstrikes, are outrageous, and underscore the continued need for Israel to set up a working deconfliction mechanism with humanitarian organizations to prevent these tragedies from happening. Since this incident, aid ships carrying 240 tons of additional humanitarian aid have left Gaza’s shore and turned back toward Cyprus, and the UAE is
...Read more pausing its support of the maritime corridor. With the sea route shutting down and delivery of aid via land routes already far too restricted, it is near impossible for enough urgently needed humanitarian assistance to reach Gaza. Israel must immediately suspend military operations inside Gaza and allow for a dramatic surge in humanitarian aid.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Thursday highlighted the inclusion of $1.5 million in the FY24 Homeland Security Appropriations bill for an independent review of the U.S. Coast Guard’s efforts to address its history of sexual assault and harassment at the Coast Guard Academy and across the service. The review will deliver an impartial assessment of the Coast Guard’s track record and concrete recommendations for improving climate and culture, support for victims, and other measures to prevent further abuse. The bill also includes language to ensure Congress receives key information and regular briefings to ensure transparency and accountability regarding the Coast Guard’s decision to hide
...Read more from Congress the findings of Operation Fouled Anchor, an internal investigation the Coast Guard conducted into allegations of pervasive sexual assault and abuse at the Academy between 1988 and 2006. “It’s unacceptable that for years Academy leadership and senior Coast Guard officials chose to hide from Congress and the public the findings of Operation Fouled Anchor and other reports documenting issues of harassment and discrimination across the Coast Guard. The inclusion of this language in the Homeland Security appropriations bill is a key step in ensuring that those who breached the public’s trust and failed to protect the victims are held accountable. We have a responsibility to the institution of the Coast Guard Academy and the cadets to create a culture that fosters leadership, learning, and a sense of duty. While I appreciate efforts at reform by Commandant Fagan and the Academy’s new leadership, this language requiring fuller transparency and a forward-looking independent review is necessary to ensure a better future for all Coast Guard personnel,” said Murphy. The relevant FY24 language is below: Ending Sexual Assault and Harassment – Within 60 days of the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall charter an independent and impartial review of the Coast Guard's efforts to reduce and respond to sexual assault and sexual harassment. The review shall be conducted by a non-Department of Homeland Security entity and shall evaluate past and present climate and culture, preventative measures, accountability, transparency, victim support, and awareness; identify and evaluate completed and ongoing efforts and reforms undertaken to improve these areas; and make recommendations for additional efforts and reforms that should be undertaken to close remaining gaps. The recommendations shall identify if and how they differ from those in the November 2023 Accountability and Transparency Review Team Report, as well as cost estimates and any statutory or administrative changes necessary for implementation. A report on the review and its recommendations shall be provided to the Committees within 210 days of the date of the charter. The Committees provide $1,500,000 above the request for the completion of the review and report.
Operation Fouled Anchor – In lieu of the reporting requirements under this heading in the Coast Guard section of the Senate report, OIG is directed to review, in accordance with the provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), the timeline of all approval correspondence regarding the "Operation Fouled Anchor" report. Within 90 days of the completion of the review, the Inspector General shall provide a report to the Committees on the results of the review, including a detailed accounting of if, when, and why the decision was made to withhold information regarding the investigation from Congress, the Coast Guard personnel involved in any such decision, and their respective roles in any such decision. Further, OIG shall, where appropriate and in accordance with the provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), investigate uninvestigated allegations of sexual assault and sexual violence within the Coast Guard from 1992 to the date of enactment of this Act, and review the results of previous investigations of sexual assault and sexual violence over the same time period to determine whether they were appropriately handled. The Inspector General shall provide quarterly briefings to the Committees on any such completed investigations of previously uninvestigated allegations and completed reviews of previous investigations. In preparing the information required to be released to Congress under this heading, the Inspector General shall not disclose personally identifiable information if disclosure is not otherwise lawful. In addition, the Inspector General shall protect the privacy of individuals with respect to the information required in the quarterly briefings, to include redacting all Personal Identifiable Information. Nothing under this heading shall require OIG to investigate a restricted sexual assault report. In February, Murphy and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced bipartisan legislation to extend “safe-to-report” protections to cadets and midshipmen at the Coast Guard Academy, ensuring they are not punished for minor infractions of the Uniform Military Code of Justice when reporting incidents of sexual abuse. Since Operation Fouled Anchor first came to light in June 2023, Murphy has held several meetings with Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, Admiral Linda Fagan, to discuss her plans to address the culture of harassment and discrimination at the Academy. In December 2023, Murphy released a statement on the Coast Guard’s Accountability and Transparency Review (ATR) report. Murphy has a long pushed the U.S. Coast Guard to deal with harassment and bullying at the Coast Guard Academy. In 2019, he criticized the Coast Guard for covering up allegations of harassment and for failing to appear before the U.S. House of Representatives Homeland Security and Oversight Committees investigating the allegations. That same year, following an OIG Whistleblower Retaliation Investigation and other reports of bullying, harassment and retaliation at the United States Coast Guard Academy, Murphy wrote a letter to the Coast Guard Commandant demanding reforms to the Academy’s climate of bullying, harassment and retaliation. In 2018, Murphy along with U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Joe Courtney (CT-02) wrote to Admiral Schultz seeking information on racial disparities at the Coast Guard Academy. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday joined 256 Democratic members of Congress in submitting an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States, two consolidated cases concerning the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) that the Supreme Court will hear this April. EMTALA is a federal law that requires hospitals that receive Medicare funding to provide necessary “stabilizing treatment” to patients experiencing medical emergencies, which can include abortion care. After the Dobbs decision in 2022, Idaho passed a draconian anti-abortion law that made it a felony for a doctor to terminate a patient’s pregnancy unless it was deemed “necessary” to prevent the patient’s death.
...Read more The United States sued the State of Idaho, arguing that the state’s law is preempted by EMTALA in those circumstances in which abortion may not be necessary to prevent imminent death, but still constitutes the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient’s emergency medical condition. The district court agreed; it held that in those limited, but critically important situations, EMTALA requires Medicare-participating hospitals to provide abortion as an emergency medical treatment. In their brief in support of the Justice Department, the lawmakers asked the Supreme Court to uphold the district court’s ruling. They argued that the congressional intent, text, and history of EMTALA make clear that covered hospitals must provide abortion care when it is the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient’s emergency medical condition, and that EMTALA preempts Idaho’s abortion ban in emergency situations that present a serious threat to a patient’s health. “[T]he 99th Congress passed EMTALA to ensure that every person who visits a Medicare-funded hospital with an ‘emergency medical condition’ is offered stabilizing treatment,” the members wrote. “Congress chose broad language for that mandate, requiring hospitals that participate in the Medicare program to provide ‘such treatment as may be required to stabilize the medical condition.’… That text—untouched by Congress for the past three decades—makes clear that in situations in which a doctor determines that abortion constitutes the ‘[n]ecessary stabilizing treatment’ for a pregnant patient… federal law requires the hospital to offer it. Yet Idaho has made providing that care a felony, in direct contravention of EMTALA’s mandate that it be offered.” The members noted that in this case, “respecting the supremacy of federal law is about more than just protecting our system of government; it is about protecting people’s lives. If this Court allows Idaho’s near-total abortion ban to supersede federal law, pregnant patients in Idaho will continue to be denied appropriate medical treatment, placing them at heightened risk for medical complications and severe adverse health outcomes. And health care providers, forced to let Idaho’s abortion law take precedence over their medical judgment about their patients’ best interests, will continue their exile from Idaho, creating maternity-care ‘deserts’ all over the state.” “These are not hypothetical scenarios. Because Idaho’s abortion ban contains no clear exceptions for the ‘emergency medical conditions’ covered by EMTALA, physicians are forced to wait until their patients are on the verge of death before providing abortion care. The result in other states with similar laws has been ‘significant maternal morbidity,’” the members continued, pointing to harrowing reports of pregnant women with severe health complications being denied necessary abortion care. “Federal law does not allow Idaho to endanger the lives of its residents in this way.” In their brief, the members also clarified that the references to “unborn child” in EMTALA were intended to expand hospitals’ obligations with respect to providing stabilizing treatment—not contract them or take away the obligation to provide abortion care in certain circumstances. The members’ brief countered an argument from Idaho and its amici that the Supremacy Clause does not apply in this case because EMTALA was passed using Spending Clause authority, and therefore acts only as a condition on Medicare funding. The Members made clear that all laws passed by Congress are entitled to preemption—regardless of their source of constitutional authority—and states cannot pass laws that make it impossible for private parties to accept federal funding, inhibiting the purpose of the federal law. “Once this Court recognizes that EMTALA requires abortion when necessary to stabilize a patient presenting with an emergency medical condition, it is clear that Idaho’s near-total abortion ban is preempted to the extent that it prevents pregnant patients from receiving that care,” the members wrote. “Petitioners and their amici offer remarkably little argument about the Idaho law itself to refute that point. Instead, they assert that EMTALA is not entitled to preemptive effect because it was enacted pursuant to Congress’s spending power. This Court should reject that argument, as it has many times before. Under the Supremacy Clause, all ‘the Constitutional laws enacted by [C]ongress’ constitute ‘the supreme Law of the Land.’… As this Court has repeatedly held, the principle of federal supremacy applies to laws, like EMTALA, enacted pursuant to Congress’s spending authority no less than it does to laws effectuating other enumerated powers.” “In sum, EMTALA plainly requires hospitals that participate in the Medicare program to provide abortion care when, in a doctor’s professional judgment, it constitutes the ‘[n]ecessary stabilizing treatment’ for a patient’s ‘emergency medical condition.’” The lawmakers concluded by asking the Supreme Court to affirm the district court’s decision that EMTALA requires Medicare-participating hospitals to provide abortion care when it is necessary as emergency medical treatment. U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Murray (D-Wash.), Wyden (D-Ore.), Durbin (D-Ill.), Sanders (D-Vt.), Baldwin (D-Wis.), Bennet (D-Colo.), Booker (D-N.J.), Brown (D-Ohio), Butler (D-Miss.), Cantwell (D-Wash.), Cardin (D-Md.), Carper (D-Del.), Casey Jr. (D-Pa.), Coons (D-Del.), Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Duckworth (D-Il.), Fetterman (D-Pa.), Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Hassan (D-N.H.), Heinrich (D-N.M.), Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Hirono (D-Hawaii), Kaine (D-Va.), Kelly (D-Ariz.), King (I-Maine), Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Luján (D-N.M.), Markey (D-Mass.), Menendez (D-N.J.), Merkley (D-Ore.), Padilla (D-Calif.), Peters (D-Mich.), Reed (D-R.I.), Rosen (D-Nev.), Schatz (D-Hawaii), Shaheen (D-N.H.), Sinema (I-Ariz.), Smith (D-Minn.), Stabenow (D-Mich.), Tester (D-Mont.), Van Hollen (D-Md.), Warner (D-Va.), Warnock (D-Ga.), Warren (D-Mass.), Welch (D-Vt.), and Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also signed the brief. The lawmakers’ amicus brief to the Supreme Court can be read in full HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), U.S. Representative Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.), and 12 other members of Congress in sending a letter to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan urging the agency to revive enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA), a critical tool to promote fair competition in the food industry. In the letter, the lawmakers noted that the RPA is still the law of the land and called on the FTC to investigate potential RPA violations and, when merited, bring lawsuits under the RPA to protect consumers, small businesses, farmers and workers. The letter follows a recent FTC report that found that giant grocery chains took advantage of supply chain disruptions during
...Read more the pandemic to hike up prices to increase their profits. “The FTC should use the RPA to combat price discrimination and concentration. Congress enacted the RPA to address these exact problems in the food and retail industry. The RPA is an effective tool to promote fairness and competition and to protect small businesses. The FTC should also use the RPA to combat creative, subtler forms of price discrimination that have emerged in recent years, namely slotting fees and volume-based rebates. These practices harm small retailers and producers and may exclude new entrants from the food retail market,” the lawmakers wrote. Today, the food industry is more consolidated than when Congress adopted the RPA. Currently, four food retailers account for over a third of national grocery sales. Grocery suppliers are also highly concentrated—four firms controlled more than 60 percent of sales in most grocery categories in 2019, and some categories are almost entirely controlled by a single food company. Because of this concentration, dominant retailers can extract more favorable prices and terms from suppliers, beyond what might be justified by economies of scale. Suppliers are often forced to make up their losses by charging higher prices to independent, smaller grocery stores. Congress passed the Robinson-Patman Act to create a level playing field for retailers by ensuring that both small and large firms pay the same price for comparable products. The RPA prohibits sellers from engaging in price discrimination and prevents sellers and buyers from skirting around the price discrimination ban by giving more favorable commissions, brokerages, processing fees, handling fees, or other similar schemes to certain buyers. Strong enforcement of the RPA in the years after its passage succeeded in promoting competition between small and independent retailers and larger chain stores. However, misguided theories of antitrust popularized in the 1970s and 1980s led to the RPA’s disuse, and the law has essentially laid dormant for the last 40 years. Despite this shift by enforcers and courts, the RPA is still law, and all the precedents that enabled the prior era of successful RPA enforcement still stand. Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear Chair Khan, We write to urge the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to revive enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA). Nearly every step of the food supply chain is highly concentrated, causing higher prices to consumers and harming farmers and small businesses. This consolidation happened after RPA enforcement fell into disuse in the 1970s. But the RPA is still the law of the land and can be a critical tool to promote fair competition in the food industry. The FTC should investigate potential RPA violations and, when merited, bring lawsuits under the RPA to protect small businesses, farmers, workers, and consumers. Congress passed the Robinson-Patman Act to create a level playing field for retailers by ensuring that both small and large firms pay the same price for comparable products. The RPA prohibits sellers from engaging in price discrimination and prevents sellers and buyers from skirting around the price discrimination ban by giving more favorable commissions, brokerages, processing fees, handling fees, or other similar schemes to certain buyers. Strong enforcement of the RPA in the years after its passage succeeded in promoting competition between small and independent retailers and larger chain stores. Unfortunately, misguided theories of antitrust popularized in the 1970s and 1980s led to the RPA’s disuse, and the law has essentially laid dormant for the last 40 years. Despite this shift by enforcers and courts, the RPA is still law and all the precedents that enabled the prior era of successful RPA enforcement still stand. Given the RPA’s successful record, and the high levels of concentration in the food and retail industries, the FTC must use this valuable authority to investigate and police potential violations. Today, the food industry is more consolidated than when Congress adopted the RPA. Currently, four food retailers account for over a third of national grocery sales. Grocery suppliers are also highly concentrated—four firms controlled more than 60 percent of sales in most grocery categories in 2019, and some categories are almost entirely controlled by a single food company. Because of this concentration, dominant retailers can extract more favorable prices and terms from suppliers, beyond what might be justified by economies of scale. Suppliers are often forced to make up their losses by charging higher prices to independent, smaller grocery stores. This phenomenon, called the “waterbed effect,” requires independent stores to internalize the higher costs or pass them onto consumers. Price discrimination can therefore hurt small and medium businesses and hike up food prices for consumers. The harm to consumers may be greatest in communities most likely to be served by independent groceries and pharmacies, such rural communities or areas with higher levels of poverty. Consolidation and preferential pricing for large chains also inflict harms beyond those seen on a store receipt. Independent grocery stores benefit their community as employers and by attracting foot traffic to other local businesses. In contrast, large grocery chains often direct these benefits outside of the communities where they are located. Large chains can obtain enough control of a local market to reduce wages, benefits, or their workforce without the risk of meaningfully decreasing their bottom line. Additionally, large grocery and retail chains regularly outsource production to overseas firms that produce lowerquality goods with less workplace regulations and lower wages than those in the United States. Concentration in retail also incentivizes competing firms to consolidate. Food retail has experienced an uptick in mergers and acquisitions to match the trend toward consolidation in other parts of the food supply chain. Kroger Company’s proposed $24.6 billion acquisition of Albertsons Companies, Inc. would result in a duopoly with Walmart. The two corporations would control more than 70 percent of the grocery market in over 160 cities, increasing their ability to lower wages and unfairly exert pricing power. Further consolidation of food retailers, such as the Kroger-Albertson’s merger, fuel the vicious cycle of concentration and price discrimination. The FTC should use the RPA to combat price discrimination and concentration. Congress enacted the RPA to address these exact problems in the food and retail industry. The RPA is an effective tool to promote fairness and competition and to protect small businesses. The FTC should also use the RPA to combat creative, subtler forms of price discrimination that have emerged in recent years, namely slotting fees and volume-based rebates. These practices harm small retailers and producers and may exclude new entrants from the food retail market. The FTC should explore whether discriminatory slotting fees violate the RPA. In recent decades, producers and suppliers began paying food retailers slotting fees to secure shelf space for their products. Retailers may also charge “display,” “promotional,” “end cap,” or “pay to stay” fees for product placement. The fees are ostensibly used to help cover the cost of restocking shelves. But the largest food brands can offer retailers large slotting fees that smaller producers cannot match, unfairly excluding emerging companies from obtaining or increasing their shelf space. A supplier may violate the RPA if it pays a large slotting fee to a big chain, but offers to pay less to competing, smaller retailers. A large buyer may violate Section 2(f) of the RPA or Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act if it encourages such discrimination. Slotting fees may also be considered an illegal brokerage under section 2(c) of the RPA. And, when food producers and wholesalers pay slotting fees to dominant retailers in exchange for better shelf space or other preferential treatment, these payments may violate sections 2(d) and 2(e) if the supplier is not offering these same payments to competitors. The FTC should also consider whether certain rebate practices violate the RPA. Food manufacturers and suppliers sometimes offer distributors or retailers large rebates in return for ordering a set sales volume or a set percentage of all the buyer’s purchases within a food category. These rebates can have the implicit or explicit effect of excluding competition. Grocery stores and other food retailers have grown to depend on these rebate revenues. But smaller, independent stores often cannot obtain large enough rebates to compete with the revenue boost obtained by existing dominant suppliers. Rebates also figure heavily into the business models of food service management companies, which leads to smaller suppliers being excluded from large swaths of food offerings at large organizations, such as business headquarters, colleges, or hospitals. These rebates may be impermissible under Section 2(c) of the RPA. Unfair competitive practices and high concentration in the food industry harms small businesses, workers, and consumers. Dominant food retailers and wholesalers can use their purchasing power to drive out independent grocers, small businesses, and other competitors. By limiting competition, the largest firms can raise the price of food and lower worker’s wages. Congress enacted the Robinson-Patman Act to give the FTC the authority to prevent these related risks of price discrimination and local businesses being driven from the marketplace. By enforcing the RPA, the FTC can prevent dominant market players from further eroding the economic and social benefits that independent stores provide to their communities. We urge the FTC to fulfill Congress’s intent and enforce the Robinson-Patman Act. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released the following statement on the passing of former U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman: “Connecticut is shocked by Senator Lieberman’s sudden passing. In an era of political carbon copies, Joe Lieberman was a singularity. He fit into no political box. He defied party orthodoxy. He simply did what he believed to be right for the country and what was right for the state he adored. His work to combat climate change, repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, create the Department of Homeland Security, and protect abortion access propelled our nation forward. He sometimes frustrated members of both parties, but that was mostly because he refused to be defined by partisanship. I learned a lot from Joe Lieberman and I’m honored to succeed him in
...Read more the Senate. My thoughts are with Hadassah and his entire family.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday authored an op-ed for MSNBC illustrating how public policy decisions have failed to make good on the founding fathers’ promise that our government has a role to play in protecting Americans’ pursuit of happiness. Following last week’s release of Gallup’s World Happiness Report, in which the United States dropped out of the top twenty happiest countries for the first time, Murphy makes the case for government to get back into the happiness business and to reevaluate the measures we use to determine the success of public policy. “All of the measures we use to determine how Americans are doing tell us that our nation is trending quickly in a very positive direction. Leading quality-of-life indicators are flashing green as of late.
...Read more The unemployment rate has never been this low for this long, inflation has cooled, GDP is surging, and violent crime rates are tumbling. So, then, why are more and more Americans feeling so unhappy?” Murphy wrote. Murphy asked whether we should reconsider the measures used to evaluate the success of our public policy: “This is an important question to answer, because government does need to be in the happiness business. The public sector isn’t responsible for delivering the last mile of personal happiness — what you’re passionate about, whom you connect with, where you find purpose and meaning — but it is responsible for setting the rules for a society in which finding happiness isn’t so hard. It was no less than our Founding Fathers who commanded government to set the conditions for people to find true contentment. It’s right there in the Declaration of Independence — the state must guarantee the right of people to pursue happiness.” Murphy laid out the policy decisions that have bred broad-based unhappiness: “Some of this retreat from society is cultural and personal, but much of this Great Withdrawal has been caused by bad public policy choices. The failure to regulate social media has caused us to retreat into our devices, trading meaningful in-person relationships for insufficient virtual ones. The decision to keep wages low, forcing people to work longer hours just to maintain the same quality of life, has eroded the time we have left to hang out with friends, attend church or engage in hobbies. The choice to look the other way as corporate monopolies gobble up the market has led to rising costs and hollowed-out downtowns and main streets.” “The sum of these decisions has left Americans feeling not just lonely, but also powerless. It’s difficult to be happy when it feels like no matter what you do or how hard you work, the system is designed to benefit only the people at the very top. Finding your purpose is nearly impossible when something as simple as providing a good life for your family feels out of reach. The quest for happiness is perhaps the most fundamental piece of the human experience, and yet at almost every turn, we have created structural obstacles to living a happy and fulfilled life,” he continued. Murphy concluded: “Low unemployment rates and a growing economy are important objectives, and of course it’s easier to be happier if you have a job. But these indicators can’t serve as government’s only measures for what makes a successful policy. We should also pursue an agenda that rebuilds our connections and obligations to one another — the proven necessary foundation to broad-based happiness.” Read the full op-ed here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and 27 of their Senate colleagues in sending a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen urging the Biden Administration to adopt rules that facilitate smooth implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act’s prevailing wage and registered apprenticeship tax credits. The tax credits are intended to provide tens of thousands of electricians, metalworkers, welders, and other workers with good pay, training, and apprenticeships to build the clean energy workforce pipeline for the next generation. In the letter, the senators pressed the Administration to make the process of receiving these tax credits smooth and efficient so that the law can reach its full potential. The
...Read more senators wrote, “The purpose of the IRA credits is to not only spur the creation of new clean, affordable energy, but to employ tens of thousands of electricians, metalworkers, welders and other workers in high-paying jobs, with training and apprenticeships to build the pipeline of workers for the next generation. We write today to encourage the Treasury to adopt rules that empower workers, raise wages, and set our workers up for success for years to come.” In the letter, the senators made several recommendations to ensure that clean energy workers are able to take full advantage of the new IRA tax credits. Those recommendations include treating project labor agreements as evidence of compliance with the IRA’s prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements, establishing a front-end compliance monitoring system, and strengthening the good faith effort exception to PWA requirements. U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Corey Booker (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Il.), Richard Durbin (D-Il.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also signed the letter. Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear Secretary Yellen and Commissioner Werfel: We are writing regarding the Treasury Department’s proposed rulemaking to implement the prevailing wage and registered apprenticeship (PWA) requirements permitting taxpayers to claim increased tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA). The IRA expanded several clean energy tax credits and provided for increased amounts for taxpayers who meet the law’s PWA standards. The purpose of the IRA credits is to not only spur the creation of new clean, affordable energy, but to employ tens of thousands of electricians, metalworkers, welders and other workers in high-paying jobs, with training and apprenticeships to build the pipeline of workers for the next generation. We write today to encourage the Treasury to adopt rules that empower workers, raise wages, and set our workers up for success for years to come. The PWA bonus credit is the most important labor provision in the IRA, and effective implementation of these standards is critical to ensure that the IRA creates the high-quality, good-paying jobs that Congress intended. To claim the full IRA tax credits, taxpayers must ensure that workers are paid the prevailing wage as determined by the Department of Labor (DOL). Additionally, the apprenticeship utilization standards require qualifying taxpayers to employ apprentices from registered apprenticeship programs for a certain number of hours, among other requirements. It can be difficult and time-consuming for agencies to certify that a taxpayer has met these conditions. That is why we urge the Treasury to adopt the following commonsense recommendations that will shift compliance to the front end and rely more heavily on workers and their representatives. These suggestions will ensure that the award of bonus tax credits goes to companies who have set out to comply with the law, made a good faith effort to fulfill the conditions of the law, and whose compliance can be verified by workers on the ground through project labor agreements to the extent practical. To that end, we urge Treasury to adopt the following recommendations in its final PWA rule: Treat Project Labor Agreements as Evidence of Compliance with the IRA’s PWA requirements. Taxpayers should be able to demonstrate compliance with the IRA’s prevailing wage and apprenticeship utilization requirements by presenting evidence that all construction work at a Qualified Facility was completed under a Project Labor Agreement (PLA), using the definition of PLAs as included in the comments submitted by North America’s Building Trades Unions (NABTU). A taxpayer that certifies to the Treasury Department that construction work on a Qualified Facility is subject to a PLA should be entitled to a presumption of compliance, given that PLAs (1) ensure that construction workers receive wages at or above the local prevailing wage, (2) promote the employment of registered apprentices on the project, and (3) provide for labor standards enforcement through a grievance procedure. Allowing PLAs to show compliance with these rules is the best way to simplify the compliance process for taxpayers and the Treasury. Establish a Front-End Compliance Monitoring System for Clean Energy Bonus Credit projects. Treasury’s proposed rule relies heavily on records retention, and while important, records retention alone is insufficient to ensure compliance. Therefore, we urge Treasury to adopt the framework of DOL’s existing Davis-Bacon compliance monitoring system while also requiring that taxpayers who intend to claim a bonus credit based on labor standards compliance notify Treasury before construction begins or shortly thereafter. For example, Treasury should require taxpayers to ensure that all solicitations, contracts, and subcontracts for construction on qualifying projects include provisions describing the applicable labor standards to ensure that contractors, at all tiers, are on notice of their obligations. Workers should also receive notice early on of their right to a prevailing wage. Without direct front-end notice, there will be no way for workers to know what they are entitled to, and whether they are being shorted. To this end, taxpayers should be required to post Davis-Bacon posters and the applicable wage schedules throughout the job site, including all designated entrances where workers and the general public can see them. Taxpayers must also ensure that each construction worker is provided a written notice identifying the worker’s classification and the proper prevailing wage rate to which they are entitled. Relatedly, Treasury should require that taxpayers who plan to claim enhanced credits for labor standards compliance notify Treasury of that intent before construction begins through Treasury’s pre-filing registration system. In this way, Treasury will be able to identify early on those projects subject to labor standards, and to monitor and audit those projects for compliance. Taxpayers should also be required to collect weekly certified payroll reports from their contractors, as well as periodic apprentice labor hour reports for review and transmission to Treasury. This process is critical for verifying that contractors and subcontractors are paying the prevailing wage and meeting their apprentice utilization requirements. The certified payroll process has been consistently applied to a wide range of federal and federally assisted projects for over 60 years, as well as state public works projects covered by state prevailing wage laws. Treasury must also establish a complaint procedure that aggrieved workers can use to report noncompliance and an office dedicated to enforcement. To that end, Treasury should create a designated Office of Labor Standards Enforcement, which should partner with the Department of Labor on enforcement efforts. Taxpayers should also be required to pre-file an intended labor plan with the Treasury and with the Department of Labor, explaining how they will fulfill the requirements of the IRA, including pay rates, hours worked for applicable workers and their apprenticeship utilization plan. Treasury should also clarify that aggrieved workers on covered projects are protected by anti-retaliation provisions. Further Strengthen the Good Faith Effort Exception to the Apprentice Requirements We urge Treasury to adopt several changes to ensure the Good Faith Effort Exception for the taxpayers’ apprenticeship utilization requirement better captures situations where entities have truly acted in good faith: If a taxpayer wishes to claim the good faith effort exception, require that that taxpayer have requested apprentices from all registered programs that could be reasonably expected to provide apprentices to the qualified facility, rather the proposed requirement to only request apprentices from “one registered apprenticeship program”. Taxpayers, contractors, and subcontractors should also be required to request apprentices by multiple means: email, registered mail, and telephone, rather than the proposed requirement to request apprentices in writing either electronically or by registered mail. Clarify that where a Registered Apprenticeship program is only able to partially fulfill a request for apprentices, the requesting entity must accept the apprentices that are provided, and that an entity’s outreach to DOL’s Office of Apprenticeship or a State Apprenticeship Agency should have no bearing on whether the entity qualifies for a good faith effort exemption. Treasury should also impose key affirmative obligations on taxpayers under the good faith effort exception to facilitate development of a strategic plan that would enable taxpayers to comply with the three separate prongs of the Apprenticeship Requirements: Labor Hours, Participation, and Ratios. We recommend inclusion of the following affirmative obligations: Require taxpayers, which are not signatory to a PLA (or already participating in a Registered Apprenticeship Program [RAP]), to develop an apprenticeship utilization plan at least 90 days before work is to begin and also before the taxpayer, contractor, and/or subcontractor on a project makes a request(s) to a RAP(s) for apprentices to work on a covered project. Taxpayers should confer with the Department of Treasury on this plan before work begins. Require taxpayers, contractors, and subcontractors not signatory to a PLA (or already participating in a RAP) to request apprentices at least 90 days before apprentices are needed on a qualified facility, rather than permitting a taxpayer to request apprentices merely hours before starting a job as would be permitted under the proposed rule. Effective implementation of the IRA is critical to ensuring the success of this law, and we appreciate your consideration of these recommendations. Thank you for your time and attention to these important issues. ### Read less Chris Murphy has built a reputation on his ability to make policy on the most emotionally fraught issues in America, from gun safety (where he managed to get a law passed for the first time in three decades) to the border crisis (where he got a bipartisan committee to agree on a bill, only to see it fall apart after Trump pressured the party). He’s also someone who thinks deeply about the background conditions of American life, as with his book from some years ago on the role of violence in American life. Rare among American politicians, he has an ability to be both in the arena and up in the stands, observing the whole scene. Lately, he’s been thinking about something that we have, too: the role of emotion in the fraught political life of America in 2024. It is an anxious,
...Read more fearful, tumultuous period in the country’s history. We’ve been arguing in this newsletter than the political left needs to take emotional appeal more seriously. And Murphy has been thinking along similar lines. We talked to him just after he’d finished work on the 2024 edition of the World Happiness Report, a process that got him to recognize how the country’s democratic crisis is rooted in deep emotional distress. We believe Democratic leaders have failed to help Americans cope with the crisis of anxiety and unhappiness they face in a transformed world — and this failure of change management has had dire political consequences. When we see people unsettled by it, discombobulated, a lot of them are just trying to get their heads around all that a new era is asking of them. And the authoritarians are getting to them earlier and more effectively than pro-democratic movements. And so people who start out as merely disoriented by change are radicalized into fanatics. Murphy says that Democrats simply cannot leave emotion to the Republicans — it just plays directly into a classic authoritarian strategy. As Ruth Ben-Ghiat has told us: Autocrats are very, very good at tapping into people's innermost fears. On the one hand, they make themselves the carriers of those fears, but they also make themselves the solution. So when Trump said, The American dream is dead, he made himself the vessel of the forgotten, the people who felt downtrodden. Of course, his regard for them is fake. He just wants to use them. But he simulated care and inhabited those emotions, and then provided a solution: “I alone can fix it.” And people felt safe with him. . Below, Senator Murphy tells us not just about his work on the border crisis, or about how the presidential campaign should be messaging, or even about how Republicans have been able to soothe people’s fears where Democrats have failed, but also about what he’s trying to do now to provide an alternative to right-wing social and political offerings — before it’s too late. “You don’t solve a crisis of meaning and purpose by just giving people a little bit bigger tax credit,” he told us. I want to start with what you’ve said about happiness. Can you expand on your notion that the government you are part of is culpable for inhibiting people's happiness, or at least for not making happiness probable? It’s important to remember that the government’s responsibility to protect your right to happiness is in our founding document. So this is a legitimate conversation — our founders thought this was an essential conversation. Government stays out of what you’re passionate about, who you connect with, where your purpose and meaning come from. But we are responsible for setting the rules of society and culture and economy that give you a chance at happiness. The studies on what brings happiness don’t surprise anybody. What people want is connection and positive relationships and agency and power over their lives. They feel like they have less chance of connection today, and they certainly feel like they have much less agency over their economic lives. And there are public policy choices we’ve made that have robbed people of connection and power. It’s our decision not to regulate social media; our decision to hollow out unique local places; it’s our decision to force people to work longer, eroding leisure time, that leads people to lives of isolation. It’s our decision to look the other way at monopoly power, our decision to let costs rise for families while wages are flat, that erodes people’s sense of economic agency. You can’t be happy if you don't have friends and connections. You can’t be happy if you don’t feel like you have control over your life. And to the extent people feel more isolated and less in control of their lives today, there are direct lines from government policies to the ways that people feel like happiness is further away. I don’t want to let the Republicans off the hook here, but in a way it’s very obvious to me, and I think to a lot of people reading this, what the Republican culpability is in everything you just said. But what are Democrats missing in the approach they’ve been taking over the years? I think Democrats got captured by a neoliberal vision of the future in which we would all become part of this one big common global thing. And that the technology elites would take care of the rough edges by themselves. We were wrong. It’s really important to have a truly domestic industrial economy. It’s important to have places that feel different than other places. And technology needs to be regulated. The elites don’t have our best interests in mind. More broadly, we are all guided by what we measure. And when we measure public policy success, we generally look at unemployment rates and GDP and inflation and crime. None of those have anything to do with connection. Very few of them have anything to really do with granular-level economic power. And so I just think it’s time that we start accepting that the ways that we measure the success of our public policy are pretty disconnected from the ways that people actually measure their own happiness and success. What’s the application of what you're saying to what a campaign could look like? What would you like the president to invite people to do to connect with each other in service of saving democracy, beyond just saving democracy by voting for him? I think we’ve reached a tipping point of exhaustion with an American society that has become hyper-focused on individual success and treats human beings as consumers instead of citizens. We are not a common-good society any longer. We are a kill-and-eat-what-you-can society. It’s been a gradual process, but I think we have reached a point where folks want something different. Leaders should be talking about this sense of exhaustion that Americans have. I think we should be asking everybody in this country to think about how we rebuild connections to each other, how we rebuild a sense of the common good. And I think people will eat that up right now. It feels a little cold when all we talk about is dialing the knobs of existing public policy one direction or the other. Yes, people want lower prescription drug prices. The polls tell you that they want the government to negotiate directly with Medicare, but that doesn’t address the spiritual crisis people are feeling today. And I think the best progressive leaders have talked in spiritual terms, have talked about meaning and purpose and connection. I think we’re not as good as we used to be about talking in those terms and asking people to do something for themselves when it comes to rebuilding bonds and reinvesting in communities. All that being said, Joe Biden is still one of the few that can talk in terms that relate to the kitchen-table conversations that people are having about topics like how isolated and lonely their kids are today. So if there’s anybody in the upper echelons of progressive politics who can talk this game of meaning and purpose and connection, it’s Joe Biden. Do you have the policy levers you need? If I were to tell you to go provide health insurance to 10 million more people, you could draft that in five minutes. You know exactly what levers you could pull to do that. To create 10 million more social connections, do you have policy levers in mind that could make that happen? Yes and no. I do think we need to realize the limitations of government policy when it comes to rebuilding social connection. I think there’s been a cultural movement in this country since the 1980s away from an investment in the common good and towards a winner-take-all ethos. I worry sometimes that I'm over-hyping the damage that’s been done in this country by social media, but then I check myself because I think it’s hard to over-hype. I think if you just turned off these algorithms for kids and gave them a shot at getting off of their screens and made it less likely that they would show up at adulthood with a built-in addiction to technology, you’d have a better shot at more connection, more leisure time. There's a crisis in leisure time today. Do you think there’s a case that — given the terms in which you described it — just as we don't allow alcohol consumption below a certain age, or we don’t allow tobacco consumption below a certain age, should we not allow social media consumption at all below a certain age? I think the harm of TikTok is comparable to the harm of cigarettes. You can, after registering a TikTok account, within five minutes be getting fed information on how to kill yourself. That is horrifying. So I think you start with just dramatically changing what these sites look like to kids. My proposal is that you do not allow for the information of kids to be used to create a recommendation algorithm. That would fundamentally change the nature of all these sites for kids, because now all they could get would be channels that would not be curated for them. That, essentially, is a ban on social media for kids, at least when it comes to the most essential function of social media, which is the algorithm. Are the platforms just too powerful to ban outright for kids, or do you think it would be a bad idea to ban them outright for kids? I think that it gets difficult politically and logistically to decide exactly which sites are banned and which aren’t. It’s easier to ban a certain technology than it is to ban access to certain websites or certain applications. I want to switch to the border, given the doggedness with which you worked on the deal and the sense that maybe compromise was possible. I wonder, when you look back now, do you think it was a mistake to assume good faith from Republicans on that issue or any issue? I’ve got the same answer as before: yes and no. Yes, I thought we could get a deal. I thought we could get a deal on Sunday afternoon before the bill was dropped, and within four hours everybody had run for the hills. So I was wrong. I thought just enough Republicans would be sincere. Some pretty serious Republicans and the Senate Republican Caucus told me that notwithstanding Trump’s opposition, they would be for the bill and whip the bill, and by Monday morning, none of them were returning our calls. Why I caveat my answer is that there is a pretty important silver lining to all of this: we've exposed what the Republicans’ actual position is on the border. They don’t want to solve the problem, they want to keep the border a mess. They don’t give a shit about the crisis, except to use it as a political wedge. And we’ve never really had the opportunity to show that for sure. But when you negotiate a comprehensive immigration and border reform bill with one of the most conservative senators on the border and all of his colleagues vote no, it allows Democrats to, for the first time in decades, have proof of concept when it comes to Republicans’ hypocrisy on the border. I’m always interested in what makes an issue really salient or explosive to people, and not just interesting to party elites. The country is so full of anxiety right now, and the border issue seems to be part of that. There’s just this very visceral sense of anxiety that people are feeling, and fear people are feeling. People thousands of miles away, people who are not materially touched by it. How do you think this connects to some of the larger questions around disconnection and loneliness and happiness in the country? It won’t surprise you to know that I'm writing something on this right now because I’ve really given a lot of thought to this question, and I’m trying to work through it, because I believe there is a connection. Here’s what I've come up with: I think there are just a lot of people in crisis today, in spiritual crisis and economic crisis. And when you’re in crisis, you are open to messages of blame and scapegoating and division. And so when you’re told that you should be fearful, or have animus towards immigrants, it hits a little different when you’re already in crisis. But I think there’s another element here. Americans look at the people who are coming into the country, getting to stay for 10 years, even though they don't have a valid claim of asylum. And it looks like a massive evasion of the rules. It looks like people are skipping the line, and when Americans feel like they’ve been standing in line and never reaching the front, and then they see others who appear to be skipping the line and going around the system of rules, it makes them really angry. And I understand that anger — that’s a legitimate anger. And so for a lot of Americans, they just don’t have the patience and the tolerance for a massive evasion of the rules, especially if they feel like they’ve been playing by the rules and not getting a benefit. And I think that it was easier to look the other way when there were 500 or 1,000 people a day crossing. It’s really hard to look the other way when it’s 10,000 people a day. And, again, some of those people do have legitimate asylum claims, but most of them don’t. And it’s OK for Democrats to acknowledge that most of the people coming across the border don’t have a legal claim to stay in the United States. And I think we were mistakenly reluctant to acknowledge that for a very long time. First of all, I’m very glad you're writing something about the role of inner life in these political fights, because I think it’s the core issue, this notion of a kind of background crisis that people are in on this deeper level — it’s one of my obsessions, it’s one of the things this newsletter has been very consumed by. And I think we’re all chasing these individual issues instead of noticing the state people are in as the basic fact of our politics right now. But when I think about the Democratic agenda, it is very materially oriented. It’s all stuff that would probably have a significant effect on the crisis you’re talking about, but if you’re right, it seems like there would be an entirely different or additional way for the Democratic Party to show up in the conversation, to show up in people’s lives, to show up in terms of organizing. I’m going to press you to be really real here. What is your party not doing correctly now if you’re right about the emotional state of the country? You’re speaking my language. So this is the project that I had started last year and I’m going to try to pick back up after having taken a big detour on border and immigration policy. I mean, listen, material success matters, but all the longitudinal studies on happiness tell us that it’s not what matters most. What matters most is people’s sense of connection to others and their sense of meaning and purpose in the world. And you don’t solve a crisis of meaning and purpose by just giving people a little bit bigger tax credit. So, listen, I’m for lowering the cost for drugs, and I’m for the child tax credit, but we need to be talking about the actual crises of purpose and meaning that are happening in this country. That means talking about really hard issues like masculinity and why so many men are feeling like they are lost. That means a really hard, tough critique of globalism and being very open and vocal about our desire to rebuild healthy small cities and healthy small towns. That means talking about power and not being afraid to name the people who have screwed us, the corporations and the billionaires. Republicans are doing a better job at diagnosing the metaphysical state of the country and tailoring policies to meet it, and I’ll give you an example. Democrats broadly scoffed at the Republican parental rights effort. It looked so silly, giving parents the right to choose the books in the library or the principal of their school. We wrote it off as really hateful, naive bigotry. But Republicans realized parents are feeling a crisis of control right now. They feel out of control of their kids’ lives for a whole host of reasons. And so anybody that’s going to put parents in a position where they can make more decisions about their kids’ lives is going to find a lot of people willing to listen. And so that’s part of the reason why I think we need to be super bold about giving parents control over kids’ social media lives. So I want to ban the algorithm, but I also want to have parental consent for any kid who wants to get on social media under 18, and I think we need to be really loud about that because parents are feeling a certain way, and a child tax credit is not the answer to solve the emotional crisis that they’re in. It’s part of the answer, because part of the crisis they’re in is a feeling of economic powerlessness, but they want actual tools that give them more decisions over their kids’ lives. Republicans have been offering them, and by and large Democrats have not. I don’t want to understate the radicalness of what you’re suggesting — this would be a party that has a completely different kind of approach to how it speaks to people in this age, because of a very different diagnosis than the prevailing one? I got into this conversation through a few different routes, but one of them was a real deep dive in some super dangerous New Right literature. And you’ve probably looked at a lot of this stuff coming out of Claremont, coming out of Curtis Yarvin and Patrick Deneen and others that sit in between those two extremes in the new right. But the new — and largely young — right is in a conversation about consumerism and meaning and identity. They end up in super-dangerous places, which basically amount to a reversion to 1950s patriarchy. But they’re at least attempting to connect to the spiritual conversation that families are having. So that’s in part why I started to think about this, because I saw the danger of letting Jordan Peterson be the only person that was saying something that connected with men’s sense of broken identity. There need to be corollaries on the left. And I’m not close to there, I’ve got a bunch of partners now that are working and thinking on it with me, but I think it’s a really important conversation, and I think it’s a bit of a red alert moment, because this spiritual crisis is a threat to democracy. And Republicans’ ability to capture the answers before we do, especially when those answers are really dangerous, is just as worrying. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and 22 of their Senate colleagues in sending a bipartisan letter to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator Deanne Criswell urging FEMA to collaborate with the National Weather Service (NWS) to update its methodology for assessing federal assistance eligibility following a severe snowstorm. In their letter, the senators pointed to shortcomings in the existing system and called for the development of a multi-pronged, statistically driven approach capable of supplying communities with the funds they need to respond to increasingly intense and destructive snowstorms. “The real-life implication of [the current requirements] is that a freak
...Read more storm under perfect conditions could record exceptionally high snowfall totals across I, 2, or 3 days, increase the NWS snowfall record, and necessitate a FEMA declaration,” the senators wrote. “While this is important for that initial event, every subsequent storm that is still far above the average, but less than 10% of the now-higher record snowfall, is no longer eligible, even if a region suffers 10 such storms in one year. With extreme storm systems becoming increasingly common, FEMA must be prepared with formulae that help ensure an appropriate disaster response.” The senators continued: “Furthermore, if a county or Tribal land does not exceed the NWS record totals, then the expense of snow removal, de-icing, salting, snow dumps, and sanding of roads cannot be included in a state's or Tribal government's Major Disaster declaration application, making it less likely a state or Tribal government can hit its Major Disaster Public Assistance threshold. While we agree that not every snowstorm warrants a federal disaster response, FEMA's current single metric approach based only on an all-time snowfall record is an increasingly inaccurate way to assess if federal assistance is justified.” The senators concluded by recommending specific updates to FEMA’s Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide (PAPPG): “It is our strong belief that C.F.R. 206.227, stemming from the authority provided in the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, provides sufficient authority for FEMA to interpret ‘record or near record snowstorms’ in a multi-pronged, statistically driven approach in the updated version of the PAPPG. FEMA, working in coordination with the NWS, has the authority to determine what ‘record or near record snowstorms’ means in the context of this regulatory language. We urge FEMA, in coordination with the NWS, to use all the tools and data at its disposal to use this broad definition to implement the statistically driven, multi-pronged approach to determine snow assistance eligibility that best serves Americans impacted by severe snow-related weather. If FEMA concludes that it is not possible to update the PAP PG in the ways outlined above, we urge FEMA to make these changes through its agency rulemaking process.” U.S. Senators Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Angus King (I-Maine), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) also signed the letter. Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear Administrator Criswell, We write to respectfully urge the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to update its methodology for determining if federal reimbursement of snow-related activities is warranted following a severe snowstorm. FEMA must work with the National Weather Service (NWS) to construct a multi-pronged, statistically driven approach to develop an inclusive and complete system for assessing which snowstorms rise to the level of a federal response. Increasingly intense and destructive snowstorms across the United States in recent years have highlighted why FEMA must update its methodology to ensure that federal funds can flow to communities that have been inundated with storms beyond their capacity to respond to. We stand ready to support FEMA as it develops a more inclusive and complete reimbursement methodology for future storms. Currently, FEMA's Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide (PAPPG) indicates that states and Tribes impacted by a severe snowstorm can seek reimbursement for "Snow-Related Activities" under Category B - Emergency Protective Measures only if a county received record or near record I-day, 2-day, or 3-day snowfall, as determined by the NWS. The 1-, 2-, and 3-day snowfall record is assessed and maintained by the NWS, and is a count of how much snow falls within a day. The NWS notes that, "A 'day' is defined as a calendar day (midnight to midnight LST), which is consistent with first-order climate records [where] [m]easurable snowfall (at least 0. l inches) had to fall on 2 (3) consecutive days in order for it to count as a 2 (3)-day snowfall total." Additionally, FEMA clarifies that a "near record" is within 10% of the record snowfall. The real-life implication of this requirement is that a freak storm under perfect conditions could record exceptionally high snowfall totals across I, 2, or 3 days, increase the NWS snowfall record, and necessitate a FEMA declaration. While this is important for that initial event, every subsequent storm that is still far above the average, but less than 10% of the now-higher record snowfall, is no longer eligible, even if a region suffers 10 such storms in one year. With extreme storm systems becoming increasingly common, FEMA must be prepared with formulae that help ensure an appropriate disaster response. Furthermore, if a county or Tribal land does not exceed the NWS record totals, then the expense of snow removal, de-icing, salting, snow dumps, and sanding of roads cannot be included in a state's or Tribal government's Major Disaster declaration application, making it less likely a state or Tribal government can hit its Major Disaster Public Assistance threshold. While we agree that not every snowstorm warrants a federal disaster response, FEMA's current single metric approach based only on an all-time snowfall record is an increasingly inaccurate way to assess if federal assistance is justified. Therefore, we urge FEMA to update its P APPG to adopt a multi-pronged, statistically driven methodology for determining if federal reimbursement for snow-related activities is warranted following a severe snowstorm, and to work with the NWS to develop a more inclusive and complete system for assessing which snowstorms rise to the level of a federal disaster response. It is our strong belief that C.F.R. 206.227, stemming from the authority provided in the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, provides sufficient authority for FEMA to interpret "record or near record snowstorms" in a multi-pronged, statistically driven approach in the updated version of the P APPG. FEMA, working in coordination with the NWS, has the authority to determine what "record or near record snowstorms" means in the context of this regulatory language. We urge FEMA, in coordination with the NWS, to use all the tools and data at its disposal to use this broad definition to implement the statistically driven, multi-pronged approach to determine snow assistance eligibility that best serves Americans impacted by severe snow-related weather. If FEMA concludes that it is not possible to update the PAP PG in the ways outlined above, we urge FEMA to make these changes through its agency rulemaking process. We are confident that a multi-pronged, statistically driven approach for determining if federal reimbursement for snow-related activities is warranted following a severe snowstorm, and strongly believe that this interpretation will allow FEMA to better fulfill its mission to help people before, during, and after disasters. Our states' residents have seen firsthand how difficult it is to dig out after a severe snowstorm, and FEMA's assistance is critical to ensuring that communities impacted by severe weather can recover and rebuild to be more prepared for the next storm. We appreciate your attention to this important matter and look forward to your response. Please do not hesitate to reach out to our staff with any questions. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, on Friday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor about the release of Gallup’s 2024 World Happiness Report. Murphy discussed key takeaways about happiness in America, why people are feeling this way, and what policymakers should do about it. Murphy explained that the metrics we use to assess the quality of our public policy are insufficient to measure Americans’ happiness: “In a report released this week, we come to find that despite unemployment going down, despite inflation going down, despite GDP going up, Americans are more unhappy than any time before. This year in the Global Happiness Rating Survey, the United States, for the first time since they started doing this survey,
...Read more fell out of the top 20. We are now number 23 in the world. Even more worrying, amongst young people the United States ranks 62nd in the world. And this is reflected by other surveys that show over the last 10 years the rate of happiness and contentment and fulfillment self-reported by Americans dropping despite the fact that the economy is growing and more people have jobs and crime is plummeting.” Murphy argued that America has long been invested in promoting happiness as a policy goal: “That charge, that mission is in our founding document. The Declaration of Independence says that amongst the inalienable rights enjoyed by all human beings includes the right to pursue happiness. And so that means that our job, charged to us by our founders, is to set up rules of the economy, rules for society, rules of culture that give people the best shot at achieving happiness. And so it's time that we take a big step back as policymakers and ask if a job or rising GDP or a safe neighborhood isn't bringing people happiness, what does? And all I'm suggesting today is that we engage in a conversation together, an apolitical, nonpartisan conversation, to try to discover the roots of American unhappiness. Because it doesn't appear that just dialing the knobs of public policy to the right, as happened under Trump's presidency, or to the left, under Biden's presidency, is changing this long-term dynamic of more Americans reporting being unsatisfied with their life.” Murphy explained that public policy decisions have made it more difficult for Americans to find connection: “We decided not to regulate this transformative new technology called smartphones, nor the apps that dominate those smartphones, social media. That technology has facilitated this withdrawal from socialization, from connection, from conversation. We haven't meaningfully adjusted wages in this country so that people are being forced to work 70 hours now to enjoy the same quality of life that 40 hours of work would have 40 years ago. What does that mean? People are robbed of leisure time so they can't connect with friends and neighbors through socialization in the evenings or on the weekends. We've undermined the places that people often find connection, like downtowns, which are less healthy and less vibrant than ever before, as we have created an economy where everybody just buys stuff from a set of big monopolistic internationalized companies.” Murphy concluded by calling on legislators to put politics aside and work together to diagnose the problem and find solutions: “I get it. These are hard topics for policymakers to talk about. They feel more natural for philosophers or academics or theologians. But our founders told us in the Declaration of Independence that we need to be in the happiness business, and we have made some likely wrong assumptions about what leads people to happiness. So these are the questions I think that we should be answering. I think it's a really lovely way for us to set aside some of the policy fights that have worn this place out. What brings meaning? What brings purpose? What makes you feel happy? Ask those questions. And then let's let those answers guide the policies that we can work on together. I, frankly, think that we would be surprised to find out that that inquiry and the policies that that inquiry commend us to pursue might not divide us as much as the policy arguments that currently dominate this business.” A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “Mr. President, we've had a lot of good news in the last several months, over the last year. Unemployment remains at its lowest level ever. For the last two years the unemployment rate has been under 4%— that's the longest stretch that we've had less than 4% of Americans without a job in 50 years. Inflation has cooled to the lowest level since the start of the pandemic. The U.S. economy is booming. We've seen it grow faster than any other large, advanced economy in the world. Crime is down. We saw a 12% reduction in urban gun violence in 2023— that's the biggest reduction in the history of the country in one year. That's a lot of good news if you look at the metrics that we normally look to when we assess the quality of our public policy. “But here's some other striking data. In a report released this week, we come to find that despite unemployment going down, despite inflation going down, despite GDP going up, Americans are more unhappy than any time before. This year in the Global Happiness Rating Survey, the United States, for the first time since they started doing this survey, fell out of the top 20. We are now number 23 in the world. Even more worrying, amongst young people the United States ranks 62nd in the world. And this is reflected by other surveys that show over the last 10 years the rate of happiness and contentment and fulfillment self-reported by Americans dropping despite the fact that the economy is growing and more people have jobs and crime is plummeting. “And so I'm on the floor for just a few minutes to ask this simple question: should we care about this disconnect between the quality of life indicators that we normally look to to assess the measure of our public policy and self-reported rates of happiness? My answer is pretty simple: we should care, because we are in the business of happiness. I know that doesn't sound right because your happiness comes from your personal decisions, the priorities that guide your day. America isn’t— our government isn't in the business of delivering the last mile of happiness, but we absolutely are in the business of delivering the first mile of happiness. Why do we know that? Because that charge, that mission is in our founding document. “The Declaration of Independence says that amongst the inalienable rights enjoyed by all human beings includes the right to pursue happiness. And so that means that our job, charged to us by our founders, is to set up rules of the economy, rules for society, rules of culture that give people the best shot at achieving happiness. And so it's time that we take a big step back as policymakers and ask if a job or rising GDP or a safe neighborhood isn't bringing people happiness, what does? And all I'm suggesting today is that we engage in a conversation together, an apolitical, nonpartisan conversation, to try to discover the roots of American unhappiness. Because it doesn't appear that just dialing the knobs of public policy to the right, as happened under Trump's presidency, or to the left, under Biden's presidency, is changing this long-term dynamic of more Americans reporting being unsatisfied with their life. “Let me just tease this conversation with two routes to happiness that we don't talk enough about. The first is connection. In fact, if you look at longitudinal surveys of Americans' happiness, there is a seminal study done by Harvard where they studied over the course of 75 years, Americans of every income bracket and every race, and asked them questions every year: ‘are you happy, and if so, why are you happy?’ What they found, and what many other surveys find, is that it’s actually not a job or career or how much money you make, but your relationships, your connection to other human beings, that actually is most indicative, most predictive, of whether you will report being happy and fulfilled in your life. So it shouldn't be surprising or shocking to us that during a moment where more Americans are reporting feeling deeply lonely, we are also seeing more people reporting being unhappy. There has been a sea change in this country over the last 20 years when it comes to the amount of time that we spend with other human beings. And the data is particularly acute for young people, but it is true of adults as well. We spend nearly half as much time today with other human beings in personal connection than we did just 30 years ago. That is a catastrophic decline in socialization. “There are lots of reasons for that, but many of them are connected to public policy choices that we have made. We decided not to regulate this transformative new technology called smartphones, nor the apps that dominate those smartphones, social media. That technology has facilitated this withdrawal from socialization, from connection, from conversation. We haven't meaningfully adjusted wages in this country so that people are being forced to work 70 hours now to enjoy the same quality of life that 40 hours of work would have 40 years ago. What does that mean? People are robbed of leisure time so they can't connect with friends and neighbors through socialization in the evenings or on the weekends. We've undermined the places that people often find connection, like downtowns, which are less healthy and less vibrant than ever before, as we have created an economy where everybody just buys stuff from a set of big monopolistic internationalized companies. “And so what we know is that feeling connected to other human beings, having strong relationships, is maybe most predictive of whether you're going to report being happy. But we make public policy choices consistently to make connection harder, not easier. And we don't measure it. We don't measure it. Instead, we just measure things like unemployment and GDP, which are important, but not most predictive of whether people are going to be happy. “Let me give you a second way that people find a root to happiness, and that is living a life of purpose. Knowing what your role is in the world and living a life that fulfills that role. Well let's be honest. Many of the ways in which people found purpose 50 years ago are not available to them today. “One purpose, for instance, was passing along a better life to your kids; making sacrifices as an adult—tough, difficult sacrifices— but knowing those sacrifices would allow for your child to do better than you. Well, that purpose feels further away than ever before today because we have made it so hard for parents to be able to pass on that better life. College is 400% less affordable today than it was in 1980. Economic mobility is more difficult than before in part because we favor legacy admissions in colleges, in part because we allow for so much massive transfer of inherited wealth, economic mobility is further away. So we've robbed from individuals that sense of meaning and purpose, passing along a better life to your children. “Other people found purpose in serving God. Living a life in accordance with religious traditions, securing your place in the afterlife. But in a very short period of time, we went from 70% of people belonging to a church to 50% of people belonging to a church. I don't think there's a government solution to reverse that trend, but we need to admit that it's another example of how very quickly people have become unmoored from a place where they previously found all sorts of purpose and meaning. If we're not talking about trying to create alternative places where people can find that purpose or meaning, or perhaps working together to find a way to make those institutions, like churches, healthier places, well then we're not connecting in to the roadways, to the pathways, to happiness: connection, meaning, purpose. “I get it. These are hard topics for policymakers to talk about. They feel more natural for philosophers or academics or theologians. But our founders told us in the Declaration of Independence that we need to be in the happiness business, and we have made some likely wrong assumptions about what leads people to happiness. We have become such a materialistic world and we have become such a materially focused institution, that we make an incorrect assumption that by changing the rules of the economy, we are automatically providing people a route to happiness. But it is not always economic change. It is not always economic policy that provides people meaning, provides people purpose, and makes people feel happy. “So these are the questions I think that we should be answering. I think it's a really lovely way for us to set aside some of the policy fights that have worn this place out. What brings meaning? What brings purpose? What makes you feel happy? Ask those questions. And then let's let those answers guide the policies that we can work on together. I, frankly, think that we would be surprised to find out that that inquiry and the policies that that inquiry commend us to pursue might not divide us as much as the policy arguments that currently dominate this business. I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and U.S. Representatives Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) and Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) introduced the Caribbean Arms Trafficking Causes Harm (CATCH) Act, legislation that would help curb illicit arms trafficking from the United States to the Caribbean by requiring the Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions to report on the implementation of anti-firearm-trafficking provisions included in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.?? Illicit arms trafficking from the United States to the Caribbean is a regional and national security threat. While Caribbean countries do not manufacture firearms or ammunition or import either on a large scale, they account for half of the world’s top ten highest national murder rates.
...Read more Law enforcement officials in the Caribbean have identified Florida as a significant source of the illicit firearms that are exacerbating crime in their countries. In Haiti, the steady flow of illicit firearms from the United States has enabled violent gangs to take control over 80% of Port-au-Prince and caused a dramatic increase in migration to the United States.? The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, championed by Sen. Murphy and signed into law in June 2022, created federal criminal offenses for firearm trafficking and granted the government new authorities to prosecute these crimes. In 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice named its first Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions to specifically oversee these cases of arms trafficking prosecutions involving the Caribbean. The CATCH Act will require the Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions to report on its progress prosecuting these cases, including:? The number, destination, and method of transportation of firearms, ammunition, and firearms accessories.?
Coordination efforts with Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies?
Coordination efforts with the Department of Justice and any regional or international organizations, such as CARICOM.?? “I am extremely concerned with the deteriorating security situation in Haiti and high rates of violence elsewhere in the Caribbean. The prevalence of illegal guns trafficked from the United States into the region is fueling this violence. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act made firearms trafficking a federal crime for the first time, and this legislation would ensure the newly established Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions is implementing the law to its fullest extent,” said Murphy. “Illicit weapons are a major source of instability in the Caribbean and are fueling the horrific scourge of gun and gang violence we’ve seen in Haiti,” said Kaine. “The consolidation of power in Haitian gangs and the use of trafficked firearms to inflict terror in their communities is deeply concerning and an immediate threat to stability in the region. The United States must use all tools at its disposal to crack down on arms trafficking, support international efforts to restore regional stability, and secure our safety at home and abroad.” “Weapons trafficking by way of the United States is a major contributor to Haiti’s growing gang crisis and the current instability that plagues the country,”?said Cherfilus-McCormick. “We must ensure the Department of Justice is effectively utilizing the new anti-firearm-trafficking provisions in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Our standing in the region and our national security depends on it.”?? “Two years ago, I voted for the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to help the United States tackle the devastating toll of our gun violence crisis. Since the law went into effect, the Department of Justice has successfully prosecuted hundreds of straw purchases and gun trafficking offenses and saved countless lives,”?said Castro. “As we build on those efforts, the CATCH Act will improve transparency and accountability within U.S. antitrafficking efforts and prevent U.S. firearms from fueling gun violence in the Caribbean — especially in Haiti, where guns from the United States have played a tragic role in the ongoing security, political, and humanitarian crisis.” The text of the legislation can be found HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Saturday announced the inclusion of more than $35.68 million in the second and final fiscal year 2024 appropriations package passed by the U.S. Senate. The bill will fund 38 congressionally directed spending projects requested by Murphy and Blumenthal. “This funding package is full of big wins for Connecticut, including more than $35
...Read more million to make sure local organizations have the necessary resources to do what they do best – serve their community. These projects will help workers learn new skills to secure good-paying jobs, expand access to mental health services, support small businesses, give kids better educational opportunities, and upgrade aging water infrastructure. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I’m proud to have worked with Senator Blumenthal to advocate for these programs and I look forward to seeing them make a difference in our state,” said Murphy. “These federal funds are another tremendous win for Connecticut. Communities can count on robust federal funding for urgent needs—from preventing devastating flooding, to job training that will bolster our state’s workforce, to crucial funding for mental health care and violence prevention. These projects will be transformational for their communities and I am proud to have fought alongside Senator Murphy to deliver this infusion of federal support to Connecticut,” said Blumenthal. In the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill, there is $25.68 million for Connecticut workforce development, health, and education projects, including: $350,000 for Connecticut NAACP to support its One Million Jobs Campaign, which creates a supportive pipeline into good-paying jobs for individuals impacted by the criminal justice system
$876,000 for Capital Workforce Partners Inc. for its On-Ramps to Infrastructure program, which provides training opportunities for jobs in the infrastructure sector
$150,000 for CitySeed to support a culinary training program serving refugees and immigrants
$1,188,000 for Workforce Alliance to establish a Healthcare Advancement Program (HCAP) to help individuals enter careers in the healthcare industry
$1,403,000 for Klingberg Family Centers, in partnership with CIL Community Resources Inc., to renovate youth and family mental health facility after flood damage
$5,000,000 for the City of Waterbury to equip mobile school-based health centers
$232,000 for Community Health and Wellness Center of Greater Torrington to purchase equipment for a rural health center in North Canaan
$156,000 for the Hartford Gay and Lesbian Health Collective to upgrade its dental clinic
$2,000,000 for Regional Hospice and Home Care of Western Connecticut for facility upgrades.
$750,000 for Stamford Health to expand its inpatient adult psychiatric unit
$449,000 for The Jackson Laboratory for equipment at an endometriosis laboratory
$616,000 for Catholic Charities to expand its Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) for individuals with substance abuse and co-occurring disorders
$1,398,000 for Mid Fairfield Child Guidance Center to hire bilingual care coordinators and clinicians
$500,000 for Mothers United Against Violence for trauma support and mental health services
$330,000 for Staywell Health Center for a support the work of the Greater Waterbury Health Partnership program
$335,000 for United Community and Family Servicers to expand its medication-assisted therapy program
$150,000 for Annie C. Courtney Foundation to provide job training opportunities for justice-involved foster youth
$355,000 for R Kids to support work of its Resiliency Center, which is a trauma-focused day care center
$1,274,000 for Saint Francis Hospital to fund a community health worker program
$230,000 for TEAM Inc to run a health food access program
$706,000 for Bridgeport Public Schools to create support teams of social workers and school counselors to help address social-emotional and mental health needs of students
$200,000 for Building One Community to expand afterschool enrichment programming for low-income immigrant youth
$1,500,000 for the New Haven Public Schools to support its BioCity Academy
$1,162,000 for Clifford W. Beers Guidance Clinic to improve mental health services within Hamden Public Schools
$1,875,000 for Danbury Public Schools to support a curriculum redesign project
$155,000 for Make the Road CT to improve college access for youth from historically underserved communities
$570,000 for Mystic Seaport Museum to support its mentoring and STEM education youth programming
$264,000 for Neighborhood Housing Services of Greater Waterbury and Bridge to Success to serve disengaged and marginalized youth adversely effected by the COVID-19 pandemic
$750,000 for Our Piece of the Pie to provide young adults in foster care with academic support, life skills, college exploration opportunities, and job readiness training
$200,000 for Stamford Public Education Foundation to fund its summer start program, a summer program for early learners
$59,000 for The Ethan Miller Song Foundation to fund a firearm safety curriculum
$85,000 for the Waterbury School District to hire an attendance coordinator
$300,000 for the University of Hartford to fund a collaboration with school districts to create innovative pathways to teacher certification
$116,000 for Hartford Promise to fund an unpaid internship support program In the Homeland Security Appropriations bill, there is $4.5 million for Connecticut priorities including: $4.5 million for the City of Hartford’s North Main Street Corridor Drainage System to improve storm water drainage systems in the northeast Hartford In the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill, there is $5.5 million to support Connecticut small businesses, including: $500,000 for ClimateHaven to build out climate tech prototyping lab
$4 million for ConnCORP to build new incubator space for startups
$1 million for the Hispanic Federation to support their Crear y Crecer su Negocio program to support Latino-owned businesses ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday joined U.S. Senators Angus King (I-Maine), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), and 29 of their Senate colleagues in sending a bipartisan letter urging the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to prioritize mental and physical healthcare resources for women veterans who experienced sexual trauma during their service. In a letter to VA Secretary Denis McDonough, the senators urged the VA to remove unnecessary barriers to sexual assault resources and programs through changes such as using existing call center infrastructure to inform women of the resources available to them, expanding telehealth options, and providing female-only waiting rooms. Military Sexual Trauma (MST) is the term used by the VA to
...Read more refer to sexual assault or harassment during military service. Approximately 33% of all women experience some version of MST during their active duty service (compared to 2% of men). However, many existing VA resources are underutilized—approximately only half of women who experienced MST use the VA programs to heal from sexual assault and harassment. “While the VA has made many improvements over the years, we are concerned that women veterans, specifically those who have experienced Military Sexual Trauma (MST), continue to face barriers to care. Healthcare access for women veterans is a growing area of importance, as women veterans are expected to comprise 18% of the veteran community by 2040. To address this, the VA must increase engagement with women veterans and build trust by enforcing accountability,” the senators wrote. “About one in three women veterans have experienced MST during their service in the military. Veterans who have experienced MST may face difficulties with interpersonal relationships, have an increased risk of developing substance use disorder. These issues can significantly impact the veteran’s quality of life, make it difficult to successfully transition into civilian life, and increase their risk of suicide. In fact, a recent VA report found that suicide rates among women veterans jumped over 24 percent between 2020 and 2021. Women veterans with histories of MST, in particular, are at a 65 percent increased risk of suicidal ideations compared with women who have not.” The senators continued, “Once enrolled in VA care, many women veterans with MST report needing to justify and explain their request for treatment to their provider. This experience causes undue stress and places an unnecessary burden on the veteran. To reduce the stigma of seeking care for MST, the VA must educate all providers about the high prevalence and complexities of MST. Staff at all levels of care should be well-versed in trauma-informed care, recognize the signs and symptoms of PTSD and MST, and understand how that impacts trust. This is especially important for women who report MST to military legal officials but experience significant secondary victimization, which often impairs later help-seeking in VA facilities.” As with other types of trauma, the VA recognizes that MST can affect a person’s mental and physical health—with disturbing memories, feelings of depression, isolation, anger management, self-doubt, and blame—even many years after leaving the service. Every VA health care system has a designated MST coordinator that helps veterans access the appropriate services and programs for their needs. Additionally, all treatment related to experiences of MST is provided to veterans free of charge, regardless of the status of their discharge. The full letter can be found HERE or below. Dear Secretary McDonough, Thank you for your hard work and dedication to our nation and its veterans. While the VA has made many improvements over the years, we are concerned that women veterans, specifically those who have experienced Military Sexual Trauma (MST), continue to face barriers to care. Healthcare access for women veterans is a growing area of importance, as women veterans are expected to comprise 18% of the veteran community by 2040. To address this, the VA must increase engagement with women veterans and build trust by enforcing accountability. About one in three women veterans have experienced MST during their service in the military. Veterans who have experienced MST may face difficulties with interpersonal relationships, have an increased risk of developing substance use disorder. These issues can significantly impact the veteran’s quality of life, make it difficult to successfully transition into civilian life, and increase their risk of suicide. In fact, a recent VA report found that suicide rates among women veterans jumped over 24 percent between 2020 and 2021. Women veterans with histories of MST, in particular, are at a 65 percent increased risk of suicidal ideations compared with women who have not. While we commend the VA for providing free counseling and evidence-based treatment for women with MST, these services are clearly under-utilized, as only approximately half of female veterans with an MST history use VA healthcare. To inform these women of their VA benefits, the VA should consider employing the Women Veterans Call Center (WVCC) to conduct additional outreach tailored to women veterans with MST. Specifically, the VA should look to inform veterans about Vet Centers, which provide essential services regardless of the nature of their discharge. Once enrolled in VA care, many women veterans with MST report needing to justify and explain their request for treatment to their provider. This experience causes undue stress and places an unnecessary burden on the veteran. To reduce the stigma of seeking care for MST, the VA must educate all providers about the high prevalence and complexities of MST. Staff at all levels of care should be well-versed in trauma-informed care, recognize the signs and symptoms of PTSD and MST, and understand how that impacts trust. This is especially important for women who report MST to military legal officials but experience significant secondary victimization, which often impairs later help-seeking in VA facilities. The environment in which veterans receive MST care may trigger post-traumatic stress symptoms. A large percentage of these women veterans anticipate harassment or associate harassment with VA facilities. Female-only waiting rooms for privacy, expanded VA telemedicine capabilities, and additional programming at Vet Centers for women would all work to create a more inclusive environment for women veterans. Women veterans who have experienced MST already endure so many hardships – let’s work to eliminate any barriers to VA care so they can access the high-quality care that they deserve. We ask that you answer the following questions: What is the VA doing to reduce social stigmas that prevent veterans from accessing MST treatment?
Are women veterans who are ineligible for care at a VAMC informed of their eligibility for treatment at a Vet Center? If so, how are they informed?
What research is the VA currently conducting or planning to conduct to understand and prevent women veteran suicide, especially amongst younger and older veterans?
What additional resources and care are provided to women veterans who respond “yes” when being screened for MST?
Since launching the “Don’t Wait. Reach Out.” campaign in 2021, how many of the 2.8 million veterans who were made aware of the campaign and reached out for help were women? Thank you for your prioritization of the health and well-being of women veterans. ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on the U.S. Department of Treasury’s new guidance for the Offshore Wind Tax Credit: “Offshore wind is crucial to achieving our climate goals and lowering energy costs. For months, we have been pushing Treasury to release this guidance so that bureaucratic red tape doesn’t stand in the way of offshore wind projects in our state. Today’s announcement is great news for the industry in Connecticut and will help us fulfill the true intent of the Inflation Reduction Act – to create good-paying jobs, lower costs, and invest in clean energy. This is a promising development, and we will continue working to support the success of offshore wind projects in our
...Read more state.” In October, Murphy and Blumenthal sent a letter to Treasury and the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS), requesting the release of final and strengthened guidance on the domestic content and energy communities bonus tax credit so that states can maximize ratepayer savings and contribute to a clean energy economy. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, and U.S. Senators Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Angus King (I-Maine), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) on Thursday introduced the Improving Public Safety Through Immigration Warrant Issuance Act, legislation to improve public safety and ensure strategic cooperation between state and federal governments by creating a mechanism that would allow Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to obtain a judicially authorized warrant for a noncitizen who has been charged or convicted of committing a felony or violent crime in the United States. Under the current system, when a noncitizen is charged by state or local
...Read more law enforcement, ICE often issues an administrative request, known as a detainer, to hold the person in state custody until ICE arrives. However, because detainers are not authorized by a judge, state or local law enforcement cannot hold a person in physical custody longer than the period they would have been released or they risk violating that person’s Fourth Amendment rights. “Even though we know immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than Americans, it is also true that there are times when ICE needs to take custody of a noncitizen accused or convicted of a serious crime. This proposal is a narrowly-tailored, commonsense solution to address that serious gap, while also preserving the due process rights of noncitizens. Unlike the bills proposed by House Republicans, this legislation would actually fix one of the problems facing our immigration system, rather than serve as a messaging tool to demonize immigrants. If Republicans are interested in anything other than political theater they should support this bill,” said Murphy. “We need to do everything we can to keep Ohio communities safe and secure the border. That means making sure that local, state, and federal law enforcement have the tools they need to do their jobs,” said Brown. “With this legislation, we can make the changes necessary to ensure law enforcement can work together to protect the people they serve.” “Wisconsinites should feel safe in their neighborhoods and know that law enforcement has the tools they need to do their jobs,” said Baldwin. “Our bill ensures that if a noncitizen is charged with a violent crime or could be a risk to our community, our state and federal law enforcement agencies can effectively coordinate to protect Wisconsin communities. This is a step in the right direction to fixing our broken immigration system and I am proud to be part of the solution.” “We have a solemn obligation to keep our communities safe, and all criminals off our streets,” said King. “The Improving Public Safety Through Immigration Warrant Issuance Act is a commonsense step forward that will work to improve coordination between local, state and federal authorities regarding undocumented people who have been charged with or convicted of violent crimes. This legislation reinforces our commitment to public safety while we work toward a bipartisan solution to our nation’s insufficient immigration policies.” “As families across Pennsylvania are increasingly worried about public safety in their communities, we need to make sure that violent criminals aren’t being released from custody because of a system that isn’t working,” said Casey. “This bill would give local and federal law enforcement the tools they need to better coordinate and keep perpetrators of serious and violent crimes off our streets.” “Public safety is one of my top priorities,” said Kaine. “That’s why I’m joining my colleagues in calling for this commonsense step to ensure that federal and local law enforcement can work together to help protect communities from people who pose a genuine threat to public safety or national security.” Specifically, the legislation would: Ensure due process and consistency with the U.S. Constitution by requiring ICE to show probable cause, which is the same standard that state and local governments must meet to obtain a criminal warrant;
Ensure that individuals who have been charged or convicted of a felony, a crime of violence, including crimes against children, or who are a national security threat and are removable under the immigration laws, remain in physical custody as appropriate;
Ensure that an entity holding a noncitizen, pursuant to a lawfully served warrant, notifies the federal government when such noncitizen is planned to be released. The text of the legislation can be found HERE. A one-pager on the bill can be found HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Wednesday joined U.S. Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.) and 17 of his Senate colleagues in a letter urging the Biden Administration to establish a bold, public framework for the U.S. to recognize a nonmilitarized Palestinian state as part of a regional peace initiative. As a strong diplomatic leader in the region for decades, the U.S. must continue this role and take concrete action toward a two-state solution, in line with established U.S. foreign policy and our historic support for Israel as a Jewish, democratic state. “Given the severity of the current crisis, this moment requires determined U.S. leadership that must move
...Read more beyond facilitation. As such, we request the Biden Administration promptly establish a bold, public framework outlining the steps necessary for the U.S. to recognize a nonmilitarized Palestinian state, which includes the West Bank and Gaza, to be governed by a revitalized and reformed Palestinian Authority,” the senators wrote. The senators continued: “The diplomatic steps that you and your Administration have taken have been of utmost importance, and we urge you to do even more. We believe it is critical at this moment for the United States to signal our willingness to lead a regional peace initiative that would eventually result in U.S. recognition of a nonmilitarized Palestinian state, as well as Israel’s full integration into the region. The road to enduring peace in the region depends entirely on the two-state solution—the establishment of a Palestinian state, existing in concert with a regionally-integrated Israel. Despite decades of U.S. support for this policy, there has been limited success in bringing it to fruition. In order to prevent future deaths and insecurity for both Palestinians and Israelis, the U.S. must continue to take decisive action to bring about a two-state solution once and for all.” U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also signed the letter. In February, Murphy joined 24 of his Senate colleagues in a letter to President Biden supporting ongoing U.S. diplomatic efforts to secure the release of Israeli hostages in tandem with the restoration of a mutual ceasefire agreement in Gaza. In January, Murphy joined a majority of the Senate Democratic Caucus in an amendment to the national security supplemental package that reiterated longstanding U.S. policy in support of a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Read the full letter HERE and below. Dear President Biden, On October 7, 2023, Hamas terrorists committed heinous atrocities leading to the deadliest day in Israel’s history, and more than 100 hostages remain in Gaza today. The ensuing war that Israel has waged in Gaza has resulted in devastation and tens of thousands of deaths. We call on you to continue to take bold diplomatic action during this time of crisis. It is our firm belief that only with two states for two peoples – an independent Israel alongside an independent Palestinian state – will we see enduring peace in the region and safety and security for Israelis and Palestinians alike. To that end, in an effort to reignite U.S. leadership on a diplomatic solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we call on you to publicly outline a path for the United States to recognize a nonmilitarized Palestinian state. For decades, the United States – under presidents of both political parties– has been a leader in facilitating diplomatic negotiations and in urging both sides to come to the table. For example, in March 1991, President George H.W. Bush announced to Congress that, “the time has come to put an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict,” and initiated eight months of diplomacy led by the U.S. Secretary of State James Baker that culminated in the Madrid Peace Conference in October 1991. For the first time, under American leadership, all of the parties to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict came together to hold direct negotiations. Additionally, in September 1993, President Bill Clinton brought together Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and then-Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) negotiator Mahmoud Abbas at the White House in a symbol of unity to sign a peace agreement, commonly known as the Oslo Accords. This marked the first time Israeli and Palestinian leaders acknowledged and accepted each other’s right to self-governance. And, subsequently, in June 2002, President George W. Bush cemented the two-state solution as official U.S. foreign policy when he shared his vision for “two states, living side by side in peace and security.” Given the severity of the current crisis, this moment requires determined U.S. leadership that must move beyond facilitation. As such, we request the Biden Administration promptly establish a bold, public framework outlining the steps necessary for the U.S. to recognize a nonmilitarized Palestinian state, which includes the West Bank and Gaza, to be governed by a revitalized and reformed Palestinian Authority. We believe the framework’s parameters should also include: A set of governmental and institutional reforms to the Palestinian Authority, among them reforms to democracy and governance, including:
Reforms to the education system;
Reforms to the judicial and security systems;
Reforms to the prisoner payments program; and,
Concerted efforts to combat corruption and incitement to violence.
A requirement for the reformed Palestinian Authority, as the governing body of the West Bank and Gaza, to reaffirm its recognition of the State of Israel; and,
A mandate within the reformed Palestinian Authority for government ministers and senior officials to commit to nonviolence, accept the principles of two states - an Israeli and a Palestinian state - and renounce Hamas and all terrorist activity. Only with the success of the aforementioned initiatives and regional support for a two-state solution can the State of Israel exist with security and Israelis live without fear. We recognize that in order for this framework to be achieved, the Israeli government must take parallel steps, beginning with facilitating a major surge of humanitarian aid into Gaza and enabling the process of rebuilding Gaza. While we have been particularly disappointed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s refusal to engage on a path to a Palestinian state, we believe that this provides even more reason for the Biden Administration to lead and push the Israeli government to take the following additional actions: Take effective action against settler violence in the West Bank;
End home demolitions, including evictions of Palestinians from their property;
Stop settlement planning and construction in the West Bank;
Release customs revenues to the Palestinian Authority; and,
Reactivate permits for Palestinian workers from the West Bank to enter Israel. We recognize that none of this is possible until there is a ceasefire in Gaza, all hostages are released, and unfettered humanitarian aid is allowed into Gaza. We are grateful for the role that you and your Administration have played thus far in demonstrating your support for a diplomatic two-state solution and, throughout the war, demanding the protection of civilian life, access to necessary life-saving humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza, and aiding the hostage negotiations that resulted in a week-long pause in fighting and the safe return of 105 hostages last year, including two Americans. The diplomatic steps that you and your Administration have taken have been of utmost importance, and we urge you to do even more. We believe it is critical at this moment for the United States to signal our willingness to lead a regional peace initiative that would eventually result in U.S. recognition of a nonmilitarized Palestinian state, as well as Israel’s full integration into the region. The road to enduring peace in the region depends entirely on the two-state solution—the establishment of a Palestinian state, existing in concert with a regionally-integrated Israel. Despite decades of U.S. support for this policy, there has been limited success in bringing it to fruition. In order to prevent future deaths and insecurity for both Palestinians and Israelis, the U.S. must continue to take decisive action to bring about a two-state solution once and for all. This crisis has reached an inflection point. Your leadership is needed at this time now more than ever. As you said on October 25, 2023, “Israelis and Palestinians equally deserve to live side by side in safety, dignity, and peace. And there’s no going back to the status quo as it stood on October the 6th.” We agree. By providing a roadmap for U.S. recognition of a Palestinian state, the United States can set a path to finally realizing a two-state solution and reinvigorate conversations towards a comprehensive regional peace plan. This would be in the interest of not only Palestinians but, crucially, also in the interest of our ally Israel. We strongly believe that the solution to this conflict will be found through diplomacy and that you are uniquely positioned to provide American leadership toward a two-state solution that will forge enduring peace in the region. Mr. President, heed the call of history—seek peace and pursue it. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday participated in a moderated conversation with Steve Clemons, Founding Editor-at-Large of Semafor, for the organization’s “The State of Happiness in 2024” event marking the launch of Gallup’s 2024 World Happiness Report. Murphy discussed key takeaways from the report about happiness in America, why people are feeling this way, and what policymakers can do about it. On what the 2024 World Happiness Report tells us about why so many Americans feel unhappy, Murphy said: “I've given, as you mentioned, a lot of thought to what is making this country so unhappy; the reasons why you have a crisis of meaning and purpose in America. This dataset just confirms what we've been watching in this country for 10 years. I think a big
...Read more element of American unhappiness is this sense of powerlessness that people have; people feel like they are playing by the rules — particularly youth, right, who sort of feel like they are playing by the rules, feel like they're doing everything that they are told—and they feel as if success is further and further away. That sense of powerlessness is in part because they don't feel like democracy is working. So young people are like, ‘I fear for my life when I go to school, the climate is going to be out of reach for me to fix when I become older, and my government's doing nothing about it.’ But some of it also is that these companies have become so big and so unaccountable, and so opaque, that people feel a sense of consumer powerlessness. Because there's no ability to make these companies compete against each other. If you don't like Facebook, or you don't like TikTok, and you're a young person, there's not a lot of other places to go. So, the market doesn't seem to be working either.” On why lawmakers should care about growing rates of loneliness and social isolation, Murphy said: “We're just spending far less time with other people than we did 20 years ago. So, we have seen a rapid decline in the amount of time you spend every day with peers, for young people, but for older people as well. 20 years ago, the number of Americans who reported having 3 or fewer friends was 25%, today that number is 50%. 20 years ago, the number of Americans who said they had 0 friends was 3%. Today, that number is 12%. …I just think there is a straight line between that increasing self-reported loneliness, that increasing withdrawal, and rising suicide rates, rising overdose rates, rising violence rates, and a general overall health of the country that has been stagnant for a very long time. So, I just think it's time for us to view loneliness as a political issue. It has political consequences. It has health consequences that have cost consequences for the federal government, and we can make different choices to help people find that connection.” On the destructive power of social media algorithms, Murphy said: “I had this conversation a couple months ago with a group of kids in my state about this bill. And the thing that they were panicked most about was not the parental consent, but the loss of the algorithm, because they have become so used to being fed on this conveyor belt things that interest them, connections, they can't imagine not having this technological crutch to engage in these basic rituals of childhood—discovery, exploration, trial and error. And I am just deeply fearful for this country, especially as we lurch into this new era of AI that these basic human functions, figuring out what you like and going through the difficult process of trial and error in that endeavor, is going to be replaced by machines. And I think that that is a big part of what leads to this unhappiness. We are not happy when machines do those basic human functions for us.” On his hope for bipartisan collaboration amongst policymakers, Murphy said: “This conversation that you're convening, right, is happening in increasing pace and frequency. And I do think that there is an ability for both parties to come together on some of the beginning elements of doing better when it comes to an issue like social connection. I'm really encouraged by the fact that we do have the ability to bring together Republicans and Democrats around regulating social media, and I think that that would be a really important signal to the country — that we hear you when it comes to this crisis of meaning and purpose and connection, and that we are willing to break through barriers to do something about it. So, I'm hopeful.” ### Read less NEW HAVEN–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) last week hosted the inaugural Creating Community Summit which convened non-profit leaders, state and local officials, community organizers, and other stakeholders for a conversation on the crisis of loneliness and social isolation and how Connecticut can work together to build connection. Bishop William J. Barber II, co-chair of the Poor People’s Campaign and founder of Yale Divinity School’s Center for Public Theology and Public Policy, delivered a keynote address, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy provided virtual remarks, and Lt. Governor Susan Bysiewicz, head of Connecticut’s social connection campaign, also addressed the audience. The half-day event also featured two panel discussions on how social isolation impacts young adults and
...Read more how we can build healthy downtowns and third places. Panelists included representatives from libraries, non-profits, a local running club, community organizations and more. News 8 - New Haven summit hopes to end loneliness By Kent Pierce […] Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) called the Creating Community Summit as a way to approach what he said is an epidemic of isolation. “You see it in rising rates of self-harm, rising rates of addiction, rising rates of violence against other, rising rates of political instability,” Murphy said. A big reason for that, advocates said, is social media, because people spend so much time by themselves scrolling through their screens. Studies show young people, especially, spend half the time they used to with other people. “Ultimately, what loneliness does is it steals your hope,” said Bishop William Barber, the co-chair of the Poor People’s Campaign. He gave the keynote speech and said that Jesus Christ preached that poverty itself can be lonely. “To say to the poor among us: You are welcome, we are going to stand with you, we’re not going let society to continue to isolate you,” Barber said. Another way Barber said we could deal with isolation as a country is to stop choosing to isolate ourselves. In other words, separating the country into “us” and “them.” “At some point, people feel lonely because social injustice creates social isolation,” Barber said. Whatever the reason, the summit hopes to start the process of fixing it. “We can make a choice to build stronger communities,” Murphy said, “to help people come out of the cycle of withdrawal and isolation.” WSHU - Summit looks for ways to bring CT together to overcome loneliness By Molly Ingram U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) hosted the inaugural Creating Community Summit in New Haven on Tuesday. It’s part of his campaign against loneliness, which he has touted as a public health crisis for over a year. The CDC declared loneliness a public health epidemic after the COVID-19 pandemic. He said rising rates of self-harm, addiction and violence are caused by social isolation, but it’s an issue that can be solved with stronger communities. “We can make a choice to build stronger communities to help people come out of this cycle of withdrawal and isolation,” Murphy said. “And if we do so, it may simply be just as important as the work that we do in building economic power.” Barber spoke about the connection between social injustice and social isolation. “If you add the number of poor and low-income voters that didn't vote, it is 4 million. But why would people not vote? Is it voter suppression? Well, yes, but that's not the only reason. It's that nobody talks to them,” Barber said. “I've heard it out in the mountains of East Kentucky. I’ve heard it in the urban setup. People feel alone and isolated.” Murphy admitted that the issue isn’t necessarily what one would expect a U.S. senator to focus on. But according to Barber, that makes it meaningful for lonely Americans. “No matter how broken people are, their souls do have ears. And they can hear that someone cares, they can see their senator fighting for them, and they can see somebody trying to make a difference, and pull us together,” Barber said. U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, who provided virtual remarks, said he believes tackling loneliness is one of the most pressing issues of our time. He credited Murphy for drawing attention to the issue of loneliness. New Haven Independent - Barber’s Loneliness RX: Start With Poverty By Tom Breen […] U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy organized the morning-long gathering as part of his sustained public push to draw attention to what he sees as one of the most urgent problems facing our nation: that of loneliness, isolation and despair. Such a fraying of connections and relationships all too often leads to real problems, personal and public alike, Murphy told the NXTHVN crowd of roughly 100 politicians, nonprofit leaders, and community organizers from across New Haven and Connecticut. Addiction, self-harm, violence towards others, political apathy and extremism seem to follow in the wake of ?“this crisis of connection, this crisis of identity and meaning that we see all across the country,” Murphy said. Finding a way to ?“help people come out of this cycle of withdrawal and isolation” might prove to be even more effective than just ?“economic empowerment” at addressing some of the most deeply embedded problems in America today, he proposed. The rest of Murphy’s opening address and subsequent panels he moderated during the summit touched on how Americans don’t belong to churches and unions in the ways that they used to; how smart phones pull young people’s eyes downward and stunt their development of social skills; how parents who need to work multiple jobs to make ends meet simply don’t have time to take their kids to sports practices and other extracurricular activities; how communities needs to cultivate ?“third spaces” outside of work and home that foster human connection. ### Read less HARTFORD—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) on Wednesday joined Governor Ned Lamont and Connecticut Department of Transportation Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto to announce $21.8 million in federal funding for pedestrian and road safety projects in Connecticut. The federal funding comes from the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Neighborhood Access and Equity Program through the Inflation Reduction Act, and will fund projects in Norwalk, Stamford, Bridgeport, Hartford, Naugatuck and Western Connecticut. “The way that many Connecticut cities are designed has
...Read more cut neighborhoods off from each other. This almost $22 million will support projects across the state to improve road safety for pedestrians and bicyclists, make public transit more accessible to everyone, and reconnect neighborhoods. Projects like these have impacts far beyond transportation—they create good-paying jobs and revitalize our downtowns, and I’m glad to see the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law continue to pay dividends,” said Murphy. “This unprecedented investment will make Connecticut’s roadways safer for all and reconnect communities that have long been disconnected and divided by highways. With this $21.8 million in federal funding, Connecticut communities will transform road and pedestrian safety, and make access to reliable transportation easier for all,” said Blumenthal. “The Connecticut delegation fought for the inclusion of the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to end the isolation caused by the construction of I-84 and I-91, particularly in Hartford and East Hartford,” said Larson. “This grant will advance efforts to reclaim the riverfront, reconnect Hartford’s North End with the rest of the city, and promote multimodal transit. Notably, this project brings us closer to achieving the longstanding goal of recapturing the riverfront in Hartford. Burying I-91 from the Founders Bridge to Dillon Stadium will unlock direct access to the Connecticut River and create new pedestrian and bicycle routes for communities on both sides of the river. I commend Governor Lamont and the Connecticut Department of Transportation and I look forward to working with them to fix the Hartford region’s past planning mistakes and move the interests of the community forward.” “As Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Committee, I am committed to ensuring our investments deliver for the American people,” said DeLauro. “The funding provided to local transit projects in Connecticut will go a long way to rebuilding our crumbling roads, sidewalks, rail infrastructure, and more.” “I am thrilled to see federal funds help connect our communities and make our thoroughfares safer and more accessible so that commuters can get to work, children to school, and families to visit relatives a town over with ease and peace of mind. As an avid biker myself, I understand the importance of dedicated infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists so that every member of our community can easily traverse our cities and enjoy Southwest Connecticut’s vibrant natural spaces and bustling commercial areas,” said Himes. “Too many communities across the Fifth District and Connecticut are disconnected due to poor transportation options, forcing residents to travel long distances to seek basic needs like health care and education. It is great to see nearly $22 million of federal funding being invested into bridging these gaps and connecting more communities. Improved transit access not only sparks economic development but makes our neighborhoods more equitable for all,” said Hayes. “These federal funds are going to increase safety and mobility throughout Connecticut. Much of our state’s infrastructure was designed and built for cars and cut off communities from one another. By refocusing on pedestrians and bicyclists, the state can have roadways that work for everyone. Thank you to President Biden, Secretary Buttigieg, and our entire federal delegation for providing these funds that improve safety and reconnect communities,” said Lamont. “The Greater Hartford Mobility Study is a generational investment that will improve safety, reduce congestion, reconnect the city and provide greater access to the riverfront and open space. From redesigned highways to improved local roads and new public transportation services and additional bicyclist and pedestrian amenities, the Greater Hartford Mobility Study is a transformational project that benefits all roadway users,” said Eucalitto. More information on the projects that received funding can be found below: $17 million for the city of Stamford for the West Side Neighborhood Connector Project. This project will fund a 12-foot-wide neighborhood greenway to connect residents of the West Side neighborhood past I-95 to the Metro-North Railroad Line, and the South State Street area to Downtown Stamford and the South End neighborhoods. $600,000 for MetroCOG for Bringing Resilient, Interconnected Development to the East End of Bridgeport. This community planning grant will analyze the Interstate 95 (Exit 29), Seaview Avenue, Stratford Avenue and Connecticut Avenue intersection in the East End of Bridgeport, Connecticut. The study will evaluate current and future uses and provide a forum for robust public engagement to better align the transportation infrastructure with the goals and needs of the East End and the City of Bridgeport. $600,000 for the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency for the MLK Community Reconnection Project. This project will build on the work of the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency for the MLK Community Reconnection Project to improve pedestrian safety and remediate safety risks posed by I-95 and the care centric corridor it created. $2 million for CTDOT for the Greater Hartford Mobility Study (GHMS): River Gateway. Hartford/East Hartford has 4 distinct components that will strengthen the City of Hartford’s connections to the Connecticut River, East Hartford, and reconnect the Downtown to the surrounding neighborhoods which have had limited access due to the barrier created by Interstate I-91 in the mid-20th century. The Project includes the capping of I-91 from the Founders Bridge to Dillon Stadium and the creation of a surface boulevard, redesigning Whitehead Highway as an urban boulevard from Pulaski Circle to the west and the riverfront to the east and creating a new local bridge over the Connecticut River with bicycle and pedestrian amenities between the Whitehead Highway and Riverfront Boulevard to East River Drive in East Hartford. The creation of the region's highway system, including I-91, disconnected neighborhoods from each other and resources in Hartford and East Hartford, which directly impacts residents’ income and overall health. $652,800 for the Borough of Naugatuck for the Eastside-Westside Connectivity and Rail Mitigation Planning Project. Project will provide planning funding to enable construction of a pedestrian connection, linking the Borough of Naugatuck's Metro North Rail Line and the downtown core in the west with the Naugatuck River Greenway Trail and State Route Highway 8 in the east. The east and west sides are currently disconnected by the Metro North Rail Line and the Naugatuck River, with affordable and market rate housing developments taking shape on either side of the river. $1 million for WestCOG for the Western Connecticut Regional Transit Study. Southwestern Connecticut is served by three transit agencies providing fixed route, paratransit and other bus services to one of three cities and surrounding areas in the region. These funds will be used to study barriers to using transit systems and provide solutions that ensure efficiency and affordability. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke at a U.S. Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee hearing on the need for a 32-hour workweek that gives workers a fair share of the benefits gained through advancements in technology. In his questions to Shawn Fain, International President of the United Auto Workers (UAW), Murphy emphasized the importance of giving people more time to lead fulfilling lives outside of work. Murphy pushed back on Republicans’ claim that reducing work hours is unsustainable, pointing to the diversion of an unprecedented share of economic productivity away from workers and into the hands of the 1%: “I think the fundamental question here that we're asking is: Where has all this wealth gone that has been gathered in this economy from
...Read more these massive increases in productivity if it hasn't been going to workers; if the UAW and other unions have to fight tooth and nail just to be able to get living wage increases?” Murphy continued: “Here's a stunning piece of data: for the first time, last year, the majority of wealth for new billionaires – these were people who became billionaires in 2023 – came not from their work, but through inheritance. It's the first time ever that that's happened. A thousand billionaires are expected to pass down $5.2 trillion worth of wealth to their heirs in the next 20 years. And so, you hope that if the money isn't going to the workers, it's at least being recycled back into the economy. It's just not true. A lot of that money is being hoarded and then passed down to kids who, in previous ages, would not have been able to enjoy that level of benefit from their parents’ success.” Murphy highlighted the decline in participation in faith and civic institutions: “There’s a pretty wild thing happening in America today: in 2000, 70 percent of Americans belonged to a religious institution, but today that number is 50 percent. There has been a pretty precipitous decline in the ability or willingness of Americans to go to church or to a religious institution on a regular basis. And I think that has lots of broad impacts in our society. There are a lot of reasons for that, but one of them is that Americans just have less free time. When you have to work 70 hours to get the same standard of living for your family that 40 hours would have gotten you a few decades ago, you don't have time to go to Wednesday night Bible study; you might not have the ability to even attend church services on a Sunday.” Murphy concluded: “A lot of people find value in work, and I’m glad that they do, but a lot of people find more value by the institutions and the social clubs and the churches that they affiliate and spend time with outside of work. But that is just less accessible for people today and that should be a public policy interest of the United States Congress.” In December, Murphy co-wrote an op-ed with former U.S. Representative Tim Ryan (D-Ohio-13) for MSNBC making the case for a new economic vision that recognizes the importance of leisure and free time. A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for convening this hearing. I think this is a really important conversation to have, regardless of where you stand on this issue. And I think the fundamental question here that we're asking is: Where has all this wealth gone that has been gathered in this economy from these massive increases in productivity if it hasn't been going to workers; if the UAW and other unions have to fight tooth and nail just to be able to get living wage increases? “I will tell you something we haven't talked about yet. A lot of that money is going to trust funds. A lot of that money is going into inherited wealth. And at some point, we should have a conversation about that a little bit more openly as a committee and as a Congress. “Here's a stunning piece of data: for the first time, last year, the majority of wealth for new billionaires – these were people who became billionaires in 2023 – came not from their work, but through inheritance. It's the first time ever that that's happened. A thousand billionaires are expected to pass down $5.2 trillion worth of wealth to their heirs in the next 20 years. “And so, you hope that if the money isn't going to the workers, it's at least being recycled back into the economy. It's just not true. A lot of that money is being hoarded and then passed down to kids who, in previous ages, would not have been able to enjoy that level of benefit from their parents’ success. “Mr. Fain, I wanted to talk to you just a little bit about leisure time. You’ve talked about this already. “You, really importantly, talk about the importance that your faith plays in the work that you do in your life. There’s a pretty wild thing happening in America today: in 2000, 70 percent of Americans belonged to a religious institution, but today that number is 50 percent. There has been a pretty precipitous decline in the ability or willingness of Americans to go to church or to a religious institution on a regular basis. And I think that has lots of broad impacts in our society. “There are a lot of reasons for that, but one of them is that Americans just have less free time. When you have to work 70 hours to get the same standard of living for your family that 40 hours would have gotten you a few decades ago, you don't have time to go to Wednesday night Bible study; you might not have the ability to even attend church services on a Sunday. “You can talk about church if you want or if you don't want, but it is just true that some of the leisure time activities, some of the institutions that Americans found value and meaning in, are less accessible when you have to work these long hours. I’d love to just hear your thoughts on that. FAIN: “One of the biggest, one of the things we talked about was the 32-hour work week when we put that in our contract talks was the fact that we wanted to create work life balance. Because it's just in this country, we are the most productive – sadly, I say, not proudly. Sadly, we are the most productive nation in the world, which means our people are working more and more hours with less and less people, and something's gotta give. And so, you know this is work life balance. “And as I say when you're working multiple jobs to live paycheck to paycheck or you're working seven days a week, 12 hours a day, something else is sacrificed in that, and that's what ends up happening. You have to sacrifice, you know, the ability to go to church. If it's something else to do on a Sunday, maybe you get a Sunday off and you haven't slept all weekend, and you spend the whole day sleeping. I mean that that is a reality a lot of workers face on some of the schedules they work. “And you know, the thing to me that I think, I hear all this, you know, we've heard my whole life about good for business is good for people, trickle-down economics, all those type things, but to me, we have to focus. I do believe Congress has an obligation here, spending priorities and regulations. And that may be an ugly word to some people that represent business. “But, you know, the point of this is this should be done to create more jobs, more jobs, at a better rate of pay, so that people have more free time to live and if government's got to invest in business, the trillions of dollars we invest in business, that are taxpayer dollars invest in business, those benefits should be going to working class people, not just strictly business and that's the problem. All this money goes to business, but it never seems to funnel its way down to benefit working class people.” MURPHY: “Well, listen, I agree with you. I think we should have an interest in leisure time. We should have an interest in making sure that people are able to find value outside of work. “A lot of people find value in work, and I’m glad that they do, but a lot of people find more value by the institutions and the social clubs and the churches that they affiliate and spend time with outside of work. But that is just less accessible for people today and that should be a public policy interest of the United States Congress. I appreciate this hearing allowing us to talk about that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Thursday released the following statement after the U.S. Senate voted to confirm Dennis Hankins as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Haiti: “I am extremely concerned with the deteriorating security situation and dire humanitarian crisis in Haiti. It is critical we get an ambassador on the ground as soon as possible and I am glad that the Senate has finally confirmed Ambassador Hankins after months of Republican delays. Ambassador Hankins will play an important role, alongside Haitian stakeholders and our international partners, in helping form the transitional presidential council and advancing a political process that ensures the Haitian people have the power to decide their
...Read more future in free and fair elections. I support the Biden administration’s efforts to help restore order and facilitate the delivery of aid to the people of Haiti through the UN-authorized Multinational Security Support mission, but only so much is possible until Republicans lift their hold on the additional $40 million in funding necessary to deploy for the mission. They should do so immediately.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03) on Wednesday sent a letter to David Neeleman, the Chief Executive Officer of Breeze Aviation Group, Inc. cautioning him to respect workers’ rights as employees in Connecticut consider the decision to join a union. Earlier this year, flight attendants employed by Breeze Airways announced a campaign to form a union with the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, AFL-CIO (AFA) and filed for an election with the National Mediation Board. “Breeze Airways employs nearly 600 flight attendants across the United States – including 99 based at Bradley International Airport in Connecticut. We are excited that
...Read more Breeze is continuing to offer additional flights from Bradley International Airport. As you continue to expand your operations and presence in Connecticut, it is important that the workforce powering that expansion remains free to decide whether they would like to unionize, free from any employer interference,” the lawmakers wrote. “Now more than ever, Americans recognize the important role that labor unions play in securing safe working conditions, fair pay, and respectful treatment for the workers they represent. A number of recent high profile contract negotiations have thrust labor unions into the public eye and given greater visibility of them than in years past. As more workers explore whether or not joining a union is right for them, executives like you have an important role to play in showing these workers that their rights will be respected by those in positions of authority. Your non-interference will give workers the confidence they need to make the decision that is best for them and their families,” the lawmakers added. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Mr. Neeleman, We are writing in regard to the recent news that flight attendants employed by Breeze Airways have announced a campaign to form a union with the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, AFL-CIO (AFA) and have filed for an election with the National Mediation Board. We urge you not to interfere with these organizing efforts. Breeze Airways employs nearly 600 flight attendants across the United States – including 99 based at Bradley International Airport in Connecticut. We are excited that Breeze is continuing to offer additional flights from Bradley International Airport. As you continue to expand your operations and presence in Connecticut, it is important that the workforce powering that expansion remains free to decide whether they would like to unionize, free from any employer interference. Now more than ever, Americans recognize the important role that labor unions play in securing safe working conditions, fair pay, and respectful treatment for the workers they represent. A number of recent high profile contract negotiations have thrust labor unions into the public eye and given greater visibility of them than in years past. As more workers explore whether or not joining a union is right for them, executives like you have an important role to play in showing these workers that their rights will be respected by those in positions of authority. Your non-interference will give workers the confidence they need to make the decision that is best for them and their families. Please let us know how we can be helpful as this process moves forward. ### Read less WASHINGTON— Following a massive cyberattack on Change Healthcare, U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn-05) called on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to support impacted care providers, and to hold the company accountable for the breach and ensure it provides necessary relief to those affected. In February, Change Healthcare, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group (UHG) and the largest health care payment system in the country, experienced a cyberattack that has had an immense impact on the care delivery and operations of hospitals, physician practices, and other medical providers,
...Read more including those in Connecticut, with some starting to lay off staff and others resorting to paper records and manual communications to continue patient care. “We are encouraged by the steps the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has already taken to address these financial concerns and provide greater administrative flexibility and encourage you to continue working with providers to safeguard patients and protect the financial solvency of impacted health care providers,” wrote the delegation to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra. “It is critical that Medicare advance payment requests for hospitals, physician practices, and other providers are expeditiously reviewed and that all payers, including private insurers, provide advance payments while billing issues are resolved and offer flexibility regarding procedural requirements, such as filing requirements for claims, timelines for appeals, and other policies that providers are unable to adhere to because of the current situation.” The Connecticut delegation stressed the need for HHS to hold UHG accountable for the breach and to ensure the company provides adequate support for impacted providers. “We are deeply concerned that UHG’s much touted Temporary Financial Assistance Program for providers is woefully inadequate and that other private payers are imposing stringent requirements on advance payment that put them out of reach,” the members continued. “Increased pressure from HHS, providers, and the public has led UHG to allegedly shift from a loan program to advance payments, but UHG’s history shows an unwillingness to provide robust, easy to access, and needed relief. Further, despite the change to the program being made late last week, providers in our state have yet to report any meaningful relief in a situation where every minute counts. We urge you to hold UHG accountable and ensure that UHG’s response meets the moment.” The full text of the letter can be found HERE and below. Dear Secretary Becerra, On February 21, Change Healthcare – a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group that handles as many as one of every three patient records in the country – suffered a crippling cyberattack that has left our health care system “paralyzed.”[1] Hospitals and health care providers in Connecticut are urgently concerned about the impact the attack has had on a number of critical systems for care delivery and hospital and physician practice operations, including eligibility verification, notice of admission, prior authorization/concurrent review, medical coding, claims and reimbursement processing, case management, imaging clinical decision support, and remote patient monitoring. While providers are working overtime to ensure patient care does not suffer, laboriously resorting to paper records and manual communications, they have reported serious cash flow issues resulting from an inability to bill for reimbursement for services rendered. Some independent physician practices in Connecticut have already reported laying off staff as a result. We are encouraged by the steps the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has already taken to address these financial concerns and provide greater administrative flexibility and encourage you to continue working with providers to safeguard patients and protect the financial solvency of impacted health care providers.[2] It is critical that Medicare advance payment requests for hospitals, physician practices, and other providers are expeditiously reviewed and that all payers, including private insurers, provide advance payments while billing issues are resolved and offer flexibility regarding procedural requirements, such as filing requirements for claims, timelines for appeals, and other policies that providers are unable to adhere to because of the current situation. Further, we call on you to use all powers at your disposal to hold UHG responsible for this significant breach and guarantee the company offers accessible, robust financial assistance and frequent, transparent communication. While we appreciate your March 10 letter[3] to UHG and other payers outlining HHS’ expectations going forward, we are deeply concerned that UHG’s much touted Temporary Financial Assistance Program for providers is woefully inadequate and that other private payers are imposing stringent requirements on advance payment that put them out of reach. The American Hospital Association has written to UHG stating that the assistance program “is not even a band-aid,” noting that only “an exceedingly small number of hospitals and health systems” are eligible and the terms of agreement are “shockingly onerous.”[4] In Connecticut, we know of only one hospital that has received a limited benefit from the program and are aware that others have either faced significant roadblocks in even accessing the program, not been found eligible for the program, or have determined that the program is not worth pursuing due to its limited efficacy. Increased pressure from HHS, providers, and the public has led UHG to allegedly shift from a loan program to advance payments,[5] but UHG’s history shows an unwillingness to provide robust, easy to access, and needed relief. Further, despite the change to the program being made late last week, providers in our state have yet to report any meaningful relief in a situation where every minute counts. We urge you to hold UHG accountable and ensure that UHG’s response meets the moment. Facing possibly the most significant cyberattack on the U.S. health care system in history, emergency funding and administrative flexibility must be a priority for hospitals and health care providers as they seek to weather this storm while continuing to provide care to their patients. We appreciate the steps HHS has already taken and look forward to continuing working together to protect Connecticut patients, hospitals, and health care providers. Thank you for your prompt attention to this important matter. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and 12 of his Senate colleagues in urging Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Ashish Vazirani to encourage collaboration between the Department of Defense and the Departments of Education and Labor to better recognize military service and enlistment as rewarding and successful career options. “We feel that our schools must have insight into post-high school outcomes for all students, including those who enter the military,” the senators wrote. “An educator’s ability to accurately communicate the benefits of all available career paths, including military enlistment, is essential when preparing students for college and other future careers. As senators committed to supporting
...Read more our military and educations systems, we emphasize the importance of their request and encourage the DoD to prioritize engaging with our states on this matter.” The senators were joined in sending the letter by U.S. Senators Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.). Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Mr. Vazirani, We write today to encourage the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to commit to working with state education and data officials to develop a secure, effective protocol for sharing military service data with states. We urge DoD to respond promptly to state education officials' requests to access this data and the complete information and perspective they need to maximize students' prospects for career success – including through military service. We feel that our schools must have insight into post-high school outcomes for all students, including those who enter the military. An educator's ability to accurately communicate the benefits of all available career paths, including military enlistment, is essential when preparing students for college and other future careers. To help support states in this endeavor, Federal agencies, including DoD and the U.S. Departments of Education and Labor, should collaborate with states to share necessary information about successful post-high school outcomes, such as military enlistment. State education officials have emphasized that they are hamstrung in their ability to support graduates without access to data on career outcomes for those serving in the military. The absence of military service data leaves state data systems incomplete and schools blind to whether or not they are successfully preparing students to decide to serve. It’s clear that improved data-sharing will benefit schools, high school graduates, and the military by ensuring that enlistment is more clearly recognized as a viable and rewarding career option. Students must hear this not only from military recruiters but also from their educators. On November 13, 2023, 31 U.S. state and territory chief education officers wrote to DoD, sharing the concerns discussed above and requesting the Department's collaboration in developing a data-sharing protocol to deliver accurate, timely, and secure data on military service. As Senators committed to supporting our military and education systems, we emphasize the importance of their request and encourage DoD to prioritize engaging with our states on this matter. To that end, we request an update on the status of DoD's response to this letter. Specifically, we request a written update on establishing a cross-agency working group to create a standard, secure process for states to access military enlistment data and any other data that the working group deems appropriate by April 5, 2024. We appreciate your attention to this issue and await your prompt reply. We look forward to working with you as DoD develops a path forward for better sharing of military service information between the federal government and states. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday sent a letter to Secretary of Veterans Affairs Denis McDonough requesting that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) collect and publicly report anonymized data on the number of veterans experiencing mental illness who were harmed or killed by a firearm, following the inclusion of a dangerous provision in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 that significantly weakens the background checks system and puts veterans who are experiencing a severe mental health crisis at increased risk. According to a new report from Everytown, from 2002 to 2021, nearly 87,000 veterans died by gun suicide – 16 times the number of service members killed in action over the same period. An average of 18 veterans die by suicide in the
...Read more United States each day, 13 of them by firearm. “I write today to ask the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to begin immediately collecting, and making publicly available, anonymized data that captures the number of veterans determined by the Department to be mentally incapacitated, mentally incompetent, or to be experiencing an extended loss of consciousness as a person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective (mentally incompetent), who should have been referred to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) under the law and practice as it existed prior to the enactment of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, the number of veterans who harm themselves or others with a firearm, and the total number of victims killed or harmed,” Murphy wrote. “Unfortunately, I believe the public reporting of such anonymized data will demonstrate the sad reality of the dangers of upending this critical public safety tool.” “NICS was established through The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, and requires Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), among others, to conduct background checks on gun transactions to prevent prohibited persons from obtaining a firearm. Over 90% of Americans believe that background checks are a commonsense solution to gun violence and 30 years of law have demonstrated that background checks save lives. However, Section 413 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, disrupts this precedent by requiring a separate judicial finding of dangerousness; yet at the same time, Section 413 does not create such a judicial review process, nor does it appropriate the VA additional resources to seek these judicial determinations,” Murphy continued. “I strongly believe adopting this provision leaves veterans, their families, and our communities in danger. Section 413 is also the first significant roll back of existing gun safety measures following the passage of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which makes it feel even more disappointing. I intend to work tirelessly to remove this harmful provision in future appropriations bills; however, in the meantime the collection and public reporting of the referenced data is necessary to fully understand the impact of this dangerous provision,” Murphy concluded. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary McDonough, I write today to ask the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to begin immediately collecting, and making publicly available, anonymized data that captures the number of veterans determined by the Department to be mentally incapacitated, mentally incompetent, or to be experiencing an extended loss of consciousness as a person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective (mentally incompetent), who should have been referred to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) under the law and practice as it existed prior to the enactment of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, the number of veterans who harm themselves or others with a firearm, and the total number of victims killed or harmed. Unfortunately, I believe the public reporting of such anonymized data will demonstrate the sad reality of the dangers of upending this critical public safety tool. NICS was established through The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, and requires Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), among others, to conduct background checks on gun transactions to prevent prohibited persons from obtaining a firearm. Over 90% of Americans believe that background checks are a commonsense solution to gun violence and 30 years of law have demonstrated that background checks save lives. However, Section 413 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, disrupts this precedent by requiring a separate judicial finding of dangerousness; yet at the same time, Section 413 does not create such a judicial review process, nor does it appropriate the VA additional resources to seek these judicial determinations. As we know, veterans are at increased risk of suicide, and access to a firearm increases both the odds of suicide attempts and fatal suicides when it is attempted. In fact, according to the VA, “in 2021, 6,392 Veterans died by suicide, which was an increase of 114 suicides compared to 2020. When looking at increases in rates from 2020 to 2021, the age- and sex-adjusted suicide rate among Veterans increased by 11.6%, while the age- and sex-adjusted suicide rate among non-Veteran U.S. adults increased by 4.5%. Veterans remain at elevated risk for suicide.[1]” In the context of such compelling data, I am truly saddened that the desires of the gun lobby superseded data, 30 years of law and practice, and the concerns of gun safety groups. I strongly believe adopting this provision leaves veterans, their families, and our communities in danger. Section 413 is also the first significant roll back of existing gun safety measures following the passage of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which makes it feel even more disappointing. I intend to work tirelessly to remove this harmful provision in future appropriations bills; however, in the meantime the collection and public reporting of the referenced data is necessary to fully understand the impact of this dangerous provision. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, on Monday released the following statement on the announcement that the U.S. Navy plans to procure only one Virginia-class fast-attack submarine (VCS) in fiscal year 2025: “The fiscal year 2025 budget request’s proposal to procure just one Virginia-class submarine would be a concerning departure from our two-per-year production goals, putting at risk U.S. undersea superiority and alliance commitments made under AUKUS to improve Indo-Pacific security. For years, Congress, the Department of Defense, and workers and small businesses in Connecticut have been working hard to
...Read more restore the submarine industrial base, and we cannot afford to take a step backward now. Dialing back submarine procurement in fiscal year 2025 threatens to slow progress in strengthening our nation’s submarine supplier base and workforce, making it more difficult to upgrade our submarine fleet and meet mounting global threats on the timeframe our national security requires. We can’t risk slowing the rejuvenation of the submarine industrial base, driven in no small part by local innovation and new good-paying jobs across Connecticut. We look forward to learning more from the Administration and the Navy about the rationale for this decision, and we will do everything we can in the Senate to ensure a final fiscal year 2025 budget supports the submarine industrial base, Connecticut’s world-class manufacturing workforce, and our national security goals.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Friday joined U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and 11 of his Senate colleagues in sending a letter to the Biden Administration requesting a briefing on the implementation of National Security Memorandum 20 (NSM-20), the recently released policy memorandum based on the senators’ amendment to the National Security Act. NSM-20 for the first time requires recipients of U.S. assistance to provide written assurances that they will use assistance in compliance with international law and facilitate and not restrict the delivery of humanitarian aid. It also establishes new reporting requirements to Congress on these
...Read more provisions. In their letter, the senators laid out several specific questions around the requirements included in NSM-20, including how the Administration intends to collect information and make assessments under the NSM. The senators were joined in sending the letter by U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.). The senators wrote: “We write regarding the National Security Memorandum on Safeguards and Accountability with Respect to Transferred Defense Articles and Defense Services, or NSM-20, and to request a briefing on the questions outlined below and how the Administration will collect and analyze credible reports or allegations to make the assessments and determinations required by President Biden’s new directive.” They continued: “This National Security Memorandum is a historic, substantive step aimed at ensuring that all U.S. security assistance provided by U.S. taxpayers to any country is used in accordance with our values, U.S. domestic law, and international law, including international humanitarian law. NSM-20, which is now in effect, is based on an amendment that we filed to the recently passed national security supplemental legislation and we applaud the President’s decision to issue this directive. We now look forward to working with your respective agencies to ensure the implementation of the NSM is planned and resourced effectively.” The senators highlighted the requirements of the NSM, including that, for the first time ever, recipient countries of U.S. aid are required to provide written assurances that U.S. weapons will be used in accordance with international law and that they will facilitate and not arbitrarily deny or restrict U.S.-supported humanitarian assistance. They also pointed to the robust reporting requirements to Congress on these assurances. The senators noted that each of these provisions will require the Administration to put into place new systems and mechanisms. The senators subsequently requested the Administration provide a briefing on the implementation of NSM-20, including responses to a series of questions they laid out in the letter ranging from the collection of information on potential violations of international law to the means by which assessments will be conducted. Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Secretary Blinken, Secretary Austin, and Director Haines: We write regarding the National Security Memorandum on Safeguards and Accountability with Respect to Transferred Defense Articles and Defense Services, or NSM-20, and to request a briefing on the questions outlined below and how the Administration will collect and analyze credible reports or allegations to make the assessments and determinations required by President Biden’s new directive. This National Security Memorandum is a historic, substantive step aimed at ensuring that all U.S. security assistance provided by U.S. taxpayers to any country is used in accordance with our values, U.S. domestic law, and international law, including international humanitarian law. NSM-20, which is now in effect, is based on an amendment that we filed to the recently passed national security supplemental legislation and we applaud the President’s decision to issue this directive. We now look forward to working with your respective agencies to ensure the implementation of the NSM is planned and resourced effectively. National Security Memorandum 20 requires, for the first time, that the Secretaries of State and Defense obtain credible and reliable written assurances, prior to the transfer of specified U.S.-funded security assistance. Recipient countries must agree to use these weapons in accordance with international law, including international humanitarian law, and promise to facilitate, and not arbitrarily deny or restrict, U.S.-supported efforts to provide humanitarian assistance in areas of conflict where U.S. weapons are being used. Moreover, NSM-20 requires robust reporting to Congress on the provisions referenced above, as well as assessments and determinations, based on credible reports or allegations, of whether U.S. weapons have been used in a manner inconsistent with international law and established best practices for preventing civilian harm. It also requires reporting on the extent to which recipient countries are cooperating with U.S.-supported efforts to deliver humanitarian aid into certain conflict areas, and a determination of their compliance with the Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act (Sec. 620I(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961). The first report is due to Congress on May 8th, 90 days after the NSM was issued, and will include, among other matters, assessments, analyses, and determinations regarding the use by recipient countries of U.S. weapons in areas of armed conflict since January 2023. As such, the congressional report will include the use of such weapons by Ukraine and Israel during that time period, and other such recipient countries as determined by the Administration. NSM-20 requires the Secretaries of State and Defense to submit this, and future congressional reports, “to enable meaningful oversight.” In order to achieve that purpose, it will be necessary for the Administration to develop systems and mechanisms to seek out and obtain the “credible reports or allegations” that are required to meaningfully respond to the congressional reporting requirements. While we understand that processes such as the Civilian Harm Incident Response Guidance (CHIRG) now exist at the State Department, this process is still in its infancy and lacks sufficient resourcing. We want to ensure that each of your agencies is actively working to collect all the information needed to meet the reporting requirements of NSM-20. In addition, the assurances required by NSM-20 for countries in active armed conflict using U.S.-funded security assistance are due on March 24th. However, questions remain on what form these assurances will take and how often they will be renewed. NSM-20 also creates a novel enforcement mechanism for these assurances if a country violates any of these assurances, including by potentially suspending any further transfers of defense articles or defense services. Despite the creation of this mechanism, the NSM does not outline how the administration will determine if a country has violated an assurance and if there is a process in place to track its adherence to them. We request a briefing from all of your respective agencies, by no later than two weeks from today, on the implementation of NSM-20 and we have included questions below to help inform that briefing: How does the administration define “credible reports or allegations” for the purposes of collecting and compiling the necessary information needed to make the assessments, analyses, and determinations required by the NSM?
Which offices and other entities in your respective agencies are involved in the implementation of NSM-20, especially the job of actively seeking out and collecting “credible reports or allegations” needed to make the assessments, analyses, and determinations required in the congressional report? Which offices or other entities in your respective agencies are responsible for conducting the assessments, doing the analyses, and making the determinations? Has the Administration already collected or otherwise received information that is relevant to the congressional report? Which official or agency is responsible for coordinating the production and transmission of reporting to Congress, and which agency or official will transmit and be responsible for the veracity, quality, and completeness of such reporting?
Is the Intelligence Community actively collecting information relevant to the requirements of this congressional report? How will the Intelligence Community, as well as the Departments of State and Defense, ensure that intelligence is incorporated into the assessments, analyses, and determinations required by NSM-20? Will the President consider making collection relevant to the assessments and reporting required by NSM-20 a Presidential Intelligence Requirement (PIR) for the Intelligence Community?
What processes already exist and what new mechanisms are being created to ensure that NGOs, international agencies, and humanitarian organizations can share relevant credible information about potential violations of international law, including international humanitarian law, information that recipient countries are not adhering to best practices for preventing civilian harm and/or information that recipient countries have restricted the delivery of U.S.-supported humanitarian assistance? How will the administration authenticate and assess the veracity of the information provided? Do these processes include reaching out to such entities or developing an online portal, or other reporting system, to allow easy submission of such information? Is the Department of State and/or the Department of Defense actively reaching out to such organizations, agencies, and persons to seek information relevant to the congressional report? Is the Department of State and/or the Department of Defense establishing and providing secure and reliable reporting mechanisms or points of contact for credible third parties to submit such information for review and consideration by the Administration?
NSM-20, Section 1. Policy (a) states that its requirements apply to the provision to foreign governments by the Departments of State or Defense of any defense articles funded with congressional appropriations under their respective authorities. What transfers of U.S. defense articles, if any, does the Administration maintain are not covered by the requirements of NSM-20, and why? NSM-20 clearly states that, “in addition to the requirements of this memorandum, the Secretaries of State and Defense are responsible for ensuring that all transfers of defense articles and defense services by the Departments of State and Defense under any security cooperation or security assistance authorities are conducted in a manner consistent with all applicable international and domestic law and policy…” What measures is the Administration taking to ensure that the transfers of any defense articles or services that are not covered by specific requirements of NSM-20 are nevertheless conducted in a manner consistent with all applicable international and domestic law and policy?
What tools, standards, and methodologies will you use in order to conduct the assessments, perform the analyses, and make the determinations for each of the reporting requirements NSM-20? Will the assessments and analyses required by the NSM consider trends and the frequency and severity of potential violations when making determinations? Will the Congressional Report identify all those instances where there are credible reports or allegations that U.S. defense articles have been used in a manner inconsistent with international law and/or with established best practices for mitigating civilian harm? Will the Congressional Report identify all those instances where there is a prima facie case that U.S. defense articles have been used in a manner that is inconsistent with international law and/or with established best practices for mitigating civilian harm? Where there are credible reports or prima facie evidence of uses of U.S. defense articles inconsistent with international law or without application of best practices to mitigate civilian harm, will you conduct independent investigations and inquiries, including into any affirmative defenses that a recipient country may assert? Where there are instances where a prima facie case of a violation of international law or U.S. best practice exists and it appears likely but is not immediately certain that U.S. origin weapons were involved, what steps will the Departments of State and Defense take to ascertain whether or not U.S. weapons were involved?
As you know, Leahy Law vetting does not require a determination that a foreign unit is using U.S. defense articles. It requires that no security assistance be given to any unit if the Secretary of State or Defense has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights. When, in the course of reviewing a “credible report or allegation” for the purposes of the congressional report required by NSM-20 you identify credible reports or allegations that a foreign unit has engaged in gross violations of human rights, will you use such information to inform the administration’s implementation of the Leahy Law and make publicly available, to the maximum extent practicable, the identity of those units?
As part of current end-use monitoring programs, to what extent does the United States Government track where and how U.S. defense articles are being used in current conflict areas, including in Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon? How will your agencies assess and determine whether U.S. defense articles were used in an incident where there are credible reports or allegations of violations of international law and/or best practices for mitigating civilian harm? Where a foreign unit is equipped with defense articles covered by NSM-20, how will you assess the likelihood that such equipment was used in any particular incident that may have been inconsistent with international law and/or with established best practices for mitigating civilian harm?
What form will the assurances required by Section 1 of NSM-20 take and what processes have been created to ensure that the written assurances we receive from recipient countries are adhered to? How frequently will assessments be made on a country’s adherence to these assurances? We respectfully request that we hear from your agencies as soon as possible on scheduling this briefing within the next two weeks and thank you for your quick consideration of these critical matters. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday released the following statement after President Joe Biden delivered his State of the Union Address to Congress: “Tonight’s speech laid out the historic progress of the last few years – record job creation, lower prescription drug costs, new benefits for veterans, billions to upgrade our infrastructure, and the first comprehensive gun safety bill in thirty years. But we’ve still got work to do, and President Biden provided a clear vision to keep the ball moving forward. “Too many Americans are feeling powerless. While they struggle to afford rent or find time to spend with their family, mega-corporations and the ultrarich keep getting richer. Joe Biden gets it, and that’s why his administration is laser-focused on shifting power
...Read more back to the American people by lowering costs and making sure wealthy corporations pay their fair share. “After Republicans spent decades packing the courts with right-wing judges, our fundamental rights and freedoms are at stake and the Dobbs decision was only the beginning. I’m glad the president used this moment to double down on his promise to protect reproductive rights. “President Biden believes that America is stronger when we work together, and despite Republicans tanking the strongest border security bill in decades, he is committed to finding a bipartisan fix for the crisis at the border. It’s on Republicans to get serious about the job they were elected to do. “This is a pivotal moment for democracy at home and abroad, and President Biden has proven he is the leader who can build a better future for every American.” ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, on Friday voted against the minibus appropriations package due to the inclusion of a policy rider that significantly rolls back the background checks system for firearms, puts thousands of veterans at risk, and makes it more difficult to address our nation’s gun violence epidemic. “I cannot in good conscience support a bill that includes a dangerous policy rider which jeopardizes the lives of veterans and will ultimately make communities in Connecticut and across our country less safe. This rider, pushed by House and Senate Republicans, upends the background check system that, for the last 30 years, has helped prevent veterans who are experiencing a serious mental health crisis,
...Read more including those who are actively suicidal, from purchasing firearms. It’s bad policy that puts the lives of veterans at risk, and I will fight like hell to remove it in future appropriations bills. “I want to be clear that I did not make this decision lightly. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I fought hard to make sure this bill included funding for a lot of important Connecticut priorities, including services for victims of domestic violence, affordable housing projects, conservation efforts, and support for community centers. These are projects and programs that I care about and that deserve federal support, but I refuse to allow Congress to return to a time when Republicans and the gun lobby could use appropriations bills to push through dangerous policies the American people and the people of Connecticut do not support.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue a waiver, an Administrative Order, or a No Action Assurance to allow Puerto Rico to continue using temporary generators which are critical to ensuring reliable electricity service on the island in the wake of several natural disasters that severely damaged Puerto Rico’s power grid. “Puerto Rico has been facing numerous power grid recovery challenges in the aftermath of natural disasters, most recently, Hurricane Fiona. With assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Puerto Rico has relied upon temporary generators to keep the lights on. LUMA Energy reports
...Read more that these 350 MWs of temporary generators are critical to grid reliability, because they represent 10% of the generating capacity on the island and contributed 15% of the island’s power supply, as of November 2023,” the senators wrote. “We understand that the current agreement allowing the operation of these temporary generators will expire on March 15, 2024. The Government of Puerto Rico plans to pursue a judicial consent decree that permits continued use of the generators, as Regional Administrator Lisa Garcia has advised, but expects that obtaining such a decree before March 15 is likely impossible.” “If the Government of Puerto Rico continues operating these generators without assurance from EPA that the standard emissions regulations will not be enforced, it faces severe litigation risk that could shut down service. If, instead, the Government of Puerto Rico shuts off the generators, it would imperil grid reliability across the island,” the senators added. The senators concluded: “It is imperative that the temporary generators transferred from FEMA to the Government of Puerto Rico continue to generate power in Puerto Rico. While we recognize the legitimate environmental concerns that underlie EPA’s generator-related emissions regulations, it is crucial that the agency prioritize the safety of the Americans in Puerto Rico affected by these natural disasters. Without reliable electricity, people's lives are put at risk, and recovery efforts for future disasters will be hindered. With respect to the concerns listed above, we respectfully request that EPA act swiftly and decisively to ensure that the Government of Puerto Rico may continue to operate these critical generators.” Full text of the letter is available HERE and below. Dear Administrator Regan, We are writing to urge the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue a waiver, an Administrative Order, or a No Action Assurance to allow for the continued use of temporary generators in Puerto Rico while the proper permitting for their longer-term use is finalized. Puerto Rico has been facing numerous power grid recovery challenges in the aftermath of natural disasters, most recently, Hurricane Fiona. With assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Puerto Rico has relied upon temporary generators to keep the lights on. LUMA Energy reports that these 350 MWs of temporary generators are critical to grid reliability, because they represent 10% of the generating capacity on the island and contributed 15% of the island’s power supply, as of November 2023. The Government of Puerto Rico worked quickly with FEMA to come to an agreement to acquire the generators, allowing the generators to remain in Puerto Rico for the time being. We understand that the current agreement allowing the operation of these temporary generators will expire on March 15, 2024. The Government of Puerto Rico plans to pursue a judicial consent decree that permits continued use of the generators, as Regional Administrator Lisa Garcia has advised, but expects that obtaining such a decree before March 15 is likely impossible. If the Government of Puerto Rico continues operating these generators without assurance from EPA that the standard emissions regulations will not be enforced, it faces severe litigation risk that could shut down service. If, instead, the Government of Puerto Rico shuts off the generators, it would imperil grid reliability across the island. Since 2017, several natural disasters severely damaged Puerto Rico’s power grid and the pace of recovery has been slow. Many residents have been without electricity for days, months, and sometimes even years. This lack of power has had serious consequences on the lives of the people of Puerto Rico, leading to a 270 percent spike in death rates in communities where it took more than four weeks to reestablish power. In light of these challenges, it is imperative that the temporary generators transferred from FEMA to the Government of Puerto Rico continue to generate power in Puerto Rico. While we recognize the legitimate environmental concerns that underlie Clean Air Act permitting requirements, it is crucial that the agency prioritize the safety of the Americans in Puerto Rico affected by these natural disasters. Without reliable electricity, people's lives are put at risk, and recovery efforts for future disasters will be hindered. With respect to the concerns listed above, we respectfully request that EPA act swiftly and decisively to ensure that the Government of Puerto Rico may continue to operate these critical generators. We also request a response to the following questions: 1. What steps has EPA taken already to allow for the continued use of the transferred generators in Puerto Rico? 2. What progress has been made on expediting the required permitting for the transferred generators to remain in service without a lapse? 3. Is the EPA willing to provide a No Action Assurance or other means of compliance waiver in the interim while permits are being processed? 4. Is the EPA willing to provide an Administrative Order or other means to prevent a break in service while permits are being processed? 5. What impediments is EPA facing that would prevent resolution of this issue by March 15th of this year? ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Friday joined U.S. Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) in sending a letter to the U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury) and the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS), requesting that they provide information on the expected timeline for the final guidance on the domestic content and energy communities bonus tax credits. The senators asked Treasury and the IRS to quickly release final and strengthened guidance so that states can maximize ratepayer savings and contribute to a clean energy economy. The letter was also signed by U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Jack Reed (D-R.I.). The senators wrote: “Without a clear understanding of whether—and to what extent—offshore
...Read more wind projects would qualify for the domestic content and energy community bonus tax credits, developers may be forced to bid at unnecessarily high prices or may be unable to secure needed project financing due to an inflationary market and congested supply chain. Guidance will create much needed certainty for the offshore wind industry, especially when it comes to procurement.” The senators continued: “Governors of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island have already written to you reiterating the importance of quickly finalizing the domestic content and energy community guidance and warning that inaction or delay could threaten offshore wind projects in their states. We share their concerns and urge Treasury and the IRS to promptly provide information on the guidance release timeline and strengthen the final guidance for the energy community bonus tax credit.” Full text of the letter is available here. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Thursday that 12-15 Molecular Diagnostics Inc., based in East Haven, was named “Innovator of the Month.” Founded in 2018 by Dr. Saion Sinha, 12-15 Molecular Diagnostics is a biotech company that offers next-generation testing and diagnostics solutions in three areas: point-of-care diagnostics, water quality and biodefense. Their flagship product, Veralize, is a test device designed to identify a wide range of infectious diseases faster than PCR-based tests and with more accuracy than antigen tests. Veralize can be used to test for PFOS, PFOA, lead and copper in industrial facilities, residential homes and natural water sources. It can also be used for accurate and rapid detection of potential biological threats and infections,
...Read more including those that occur in clinical settings and can hinder the recovery of patients in hospitals. “Every person deserves the peace of mind of knowing that their water is safe to drink, and their environment is free from harmful chemicals. The team at 12-15MD is leading the way in delivering innovative, lifesaving rapid testing technology to meet this need at a faster pace than ever before, and their hard work is keeping people healthy across our state. I am proud to recognize them for their ingenuity, and I look forward to watching the company continue to thrive in Connecticut,” said Murphy. “Driven by rapid advances in biotechnology and our internal R&D breakthroughs in a disruptive, new PFAS detection method, 2024 is proving to be an exciting and pivotal year for 12-15MD and we appreciate the state’s special recognition. I am incredibly proud of our young, diverse team -- 90% of which graduated from the CT University System. It's my privilege to work with and mentor ‘our best and the brightest’ and give them the opportunity to stay in CT while making their contribution to making the world a better, safer place,” said Dr. Saion Sinha, CEO and founder of 12-15 Molecular Diagnostics. 12-15MD is at the forefront of developing new technologies in the global biosensors market, which was valued at $25.69 billion in 2023 and is expected to double in the next 10 years. Biosensors are the future of detecting and measuring specific biological and chemical substances. They are used for a wide range of applications including medical diagnostics, environmental monitoring and food safety testing. The company’s portable Veralize device offers several advantages such as rapid detection, higher sensitivity, specificity and ease of use, making it a valuable tool in healthcare, agriculture, and industry. Ahead of the EPA’s first-ever PFAS regulations, 12-15’s new Water division, VeralizeH2O, is making waves in the PFAS Testing market, showing great promise in lab and field trials with PFAS detection at 1.5ppt. Disruption and innovation in PFAS testing is necessary, as the current detection method and over-burdened centralized lab system cannot accommodate the upcoming EPA regulatory requirements. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, on Wednesday announced he will vote against the minibus appropriations package due to a problematic provision that will make it more difficult for the federal government to address our nation’s gun violence epidemic. “I have some bad news – buried in the appropriations bill being voted on this week is a terrible new gun policy rider that significantly rolls back the firearms background check system. You need to know about this – it’s bad enough that I will vote against the entire bill. “Republicans (and one or two Democrats) pushed for the new rider that allows, for the first time in 30 years, veterans judged by the VA to be mentally incompetent to buy guns. These are very, very
...Read more mentally ill veterans – those at the highest risk of suicide. I can’t sugarcoat this: this provision – which could result in 20,000 new seriously mentally ill individuals being able to buy guns each year – will be a death sentence for many. It’s unacceptable this provision was pushed by Republicans. Democrats shouldn’t have acquiesced. “I voted for this appropriations bill when it cleared the Senate, hopeful I could later eliminate or modify the provision. I was unsuccessful and now I cannot vote for final passage. Not with this many lives in the balance. “The gun safety movement wins more than we lose now. The 2022 gun bill, which led to a historic 12% on year reduction in urban violence, is proof of our strength. More wins are ahead. But this setback is evidence that we must stay vigilant. Maybe we let our guard down here. “I’m voting no because I do not accept a return to a time when the gun lobby could bury gun riders in appropriations bills (which happened frequently before Sandy Hook). This cannot happen again. And it won’t. If we keep organizing and growing.” ### Read less HARTFORD– In the wake of Alabama’s State Supreme Court ruling that frozen embryos created during the IVF process are “children” under state law, U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Tuesday joined the growing support for U.S. Senators Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and Patty Murray (D-WA)’s legislation to protect access to in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and other assisted reproductive technology (ART). The Access to Family Building Act—which would establish a statutory right to access IVF for all Americans who need it to start or grow a family—now has 46 Senate cosponsors, despite Senate Republicans blocking the legislation from being passed last week. “Republicans spent decades packing the courts with right-wing judges and moving anti-choice legislation that
...Read more would dismantle reproductive rights,” said Murphy. “Now that they’ve accomplished that exact goal, they’re trying to distance themselves from the devastating consequences. This is a coordinated strategy by Donald Trump and Republicans, but the majority of Americans do not want judges and politicians making decisions about women’s bodies. I’m proud to support the Access to Family Building Act to defend against these attacks and safeguard access to reproductive care.” “What has become devastatingly and tragically clear is that the Republican Party's animosity towards women's health and women's rights doesn't stop at abortion,” said Blumenthal. “This measure very simply guarantees the right for women and families everywhere -- in Alabama and Connecticut, in every state in this country -- to access the fertility care they need to bring children into the world.” In addition to Duckworth, Murray and original cosponsors Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), the Access to Family Building Act is now co-sponsored by U.S. Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Laphonza Butler (D-CA), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tom Carper (D-DE), Bob Casey (D-PA), Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Dick Durbin (D-IL), John Fetterman (D-PA), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobucher (D-MN), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Gary Peters (D-MI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Tina Smith (D-MN), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Jon Tester (D-MT), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Ron Wyden (D-OR). Last week, Duckworth led a group of Senate Democrats, including Senator Blumenthal, in calling for the bill’s passage through unanimous consent, but U.S. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS) objected, blocking the effort. The text of the legislation can be found here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Chairwoman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights, along with 25 of their colleagues in sending a letter to U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), Chair and Vice Chair of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations; U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Jerry Moran (R-Kansas), Chair and Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies; Representatives Kay Granger (R-Texas) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), Chair and Ranking Member of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations; and U.S.
...Read more Representatives Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) and Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.), Chair and Ranking Member of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies urging them to strike parts of the Commerce, Science, and Justice (CJS) appropriation bill text regarding Antitrust Division funding in order to bring the bill into compliance with the law and congressional intent codified by the passage of the Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act. In December 2022, Congress enacted the bipartisan Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act to update the funding formula for premerger filing fees as part of the year-end government funding package. The legislation updated the merger filing fees for the first time since 2001 - lowering fees on smaller acquisitions and increasing them for the largest mergers - raising additional revenue that Congress intended to be used to strengthen enforcement of the antitrust laws. The Antitrust Division has been partially funded through these merger filing fees since 1989 when Congress amended the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act. “We write with regard to the Commerce, Science, and Justice (CJS) appropriation language released on March 3, 2024, which undermines the Congressional intent codified by the passage of the Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act, a bill originally introduced in the Senate by Senators Grassley and Klobuchar and in the House by Representatives Neguse and Spartz,” wrote the lawmakers. “The newly-released CJS bill caps appropriations to the Antitrust Division at $233 million for FY2024, regardless of fees collected. This is $45 million below the original FY2024 Congressional Budget Office fee estimate of $278 million and fails to provide any additional appropriations for non-fee-generating work, such as criminal price fixing cases and crucial monopolization cases, including the Antitrust Division’s challenges to Google’s search and online advertising monopolies.” “It was Congress’s intent, and consistent with decades-old precedent to allow the Antitrust Division to retain the increase in merger filing fees.” continued the lawmakers. “Ahead of Wednesday’s vote in the House of Representatives, we urge appropriations leadership to (1) strike the phrase “not to exceed $233,000,000 to be derived from” from the first proviso of the bill text regarding Antitrust Division funding, and strike the final proviso that states the same, and (2) strike all but the first sentence of the conference report section regarding Antitrust Division funding.” The letter was also signed by U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Representatives Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Katie Porter (D-Calif.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.), Greg Casar (D-Texas), Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.), Jesús “Chuy” García (D-Ill.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.), Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), Glenn Ivey (D-Md.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Alma Adams (D-N.C.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.). Full text of the letter is available HERE and below: Dear Chairs and Ranking Members, We write with regard to the Commerce, Science, and Justice (CJS) appropriation language released on March 3, 2024, which undermines the Congressional intent codified by the passage of the Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act, a bill originally introduced in the Senate by Senators Grassley and Klobuchar and in the House by Representatives Neguse and Spartz. The Act—along with the State Antitrust Enforcement Venue Act—was passed on an 88-8 vote in the Senate in 2022 as an amendment by Senators Klobuchar and Lee to the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023. The bill then passed the Senate on December 22, 2022 on a vote of 68-29. It passed the House a day later on a vote of 225-201 and was signed into law by the President on December 29, 2023. The Act increases the amount that merging parties are required to pay to the government for review of most mergers above $500 million in value and decreases the fees required of merging parties under $500 million. Since Congress amended the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act to add merger filing fees in 1989, the Antitrust Division of the Justice Department has received a budget made up partially of fees and partially of appropriated funds from Congress. The purpose of the recently passed legislation was to provide additional fees from merger filings to the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. The 2022 amendment received significant bipartisan support in the Senate and the clear intent of the provision was best captured by the title which states it is “to increase antitrust enforcement resources,” in order to “protect competition and promote antitrust enforcement.” The newly-released CJS bill caps appropriations to the Antitrust Division at $233 million for FY2024, regardless of fees collected. This is $45 million below the original FY2024 Congressional Budget Office fee estimate of $278 million and fails to provide any additional appropriations for non-fee-generating work, such as criminal price fixing cases and crucial monopolization cases, including the Antitrust Division’s challenges to Google’s search and online advertising monopolies. By diverting these fees from the Antitrust Division, appropriators are also imperiling the viability of future cases, including that which might stem from the reported investigation into anticompetitive behavior by Live Nation-Ticketmaster. It is also important to note that the Antitrust Division has been active in many areas outside of tech. It has secured more than $90 million in restitution in agricultural antitrust actions and brought multiple major criminal prosecutions resulting in forty criminal convictions in just the last two years. Yet, the cap on merger fees available to the Antitrust Division will tie its hands to do this work in the event of a significant increase in merger and acquisition activity because the work would increase without any commensurate increase in funds. It was Congress’s intent, and consistent with decades-old precedent to allow the Antitrust Division to retain the increase in merger filing fees. During the first year of implementation, the process designated by Congress brought in significantly more in merger fees than the original merger fee formula. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the new fee structure passed by Congress would increase $88 million in FY2024 when compared to the FY2023 estimate. These additional fees, should they materialize, should go to the Antitrust Division for enforcement activities, but the newly released appropriations language will divert these fees away from the Antitrust Division to be used for purposes unrelated to antitrust enforcement. And contrary to congressional intent, the newly released appropriations language appears to wall off merger fees collected over the $233 million cap, making them unavailable for the Antitrust Division’s use unless Congress passes a new appropriations law. This unacceptable limitation contradicts the 2022 amendment and reverses decades of precedent on how the Antitrust Division is funded and how merger fees are allocated. In addition, the conference report text includes language noting the amount appropriated to the Antitrust Division but then ties that amount to the Antitrust Division’s projected merger fee collection for FY2024. The report then claims the Antitrust Division is a “fee-funded agenc[y]” which has never been entirely the case. The report is presented as “indicat[ing] congressional intent,” and that is not true based on the 88-8 Senate vote and the on-the-record discussion leading up to the vote. The misleading report could set a harmful precedent that can be used to further divert merger fees from the Antitrust Division in the future. Ahead of Wednesday’s vote in the House of Representatives, we urge appropriations leadership to (1) strike the phrase “not to exceed $233,000,000 to be derived from” from the first proviso of the bill text regarding Antitrust Division funding, and strike the final proviso that states the same, and (2) strike all but the first sentence of the conference report section regarding Antitrust Division funding. This will bring the bill into compliance with the law and congressional intent. ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Tuesday released a statement on the Dartmouth men’s basketball team’s vote to unionize. “This is a monumental day for college sports and a huge victory for the athletes. For generations, the NCAA and its members have raked in billions of dollars on the backs of athletes but refused to pay the players or even give them a real seat at the table. Today’s decision by Dartmouth’s men’s basketball team to unionize represents a turning point in college athletics. Now it’s time for the colleges to stop wasting their time and money fighting athletes in court and lobbying Congress to roll back athletes' rights, and instead start negotiating with
...Read more athletes on revenue-sharing, health and safety protections, and more.” In December, Murphy reintroduced the College Athlete Right to Organize Act (CARO), legislation that affirms college athletes are employees under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) who are entitled to the right to organize and collectively bargain for fair compensation and better working conditions. CARO would ensure athletes have full freedom to organize at their individual colleges, either by sport or across sports, or organize across colleges to negotiate collective bargaining agreements within their athletic conferences. In 2023, Murphy also reintroduced the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act, legislation that would establish an unrestricted federal right for college athletes to market their Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL). During last year’s March Madness, Murphy wrote an op-ed in USA Today warning that college sports will destroy itself if it doesn’t get proactive about reform. ### Read less WASHINGTON— U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), and U.S. Representatives Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) and Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) on Tuesday introduced the STOP CMV Act to raise awareness of congenital Cytomegalovirus (CMV), a common virus that can cause birth defects, and to encourage increased screenings of infants for the illness to allow for early treatment and interventions. “Screenings and early treatment for babies born with congenital Cytomegalovirus can make all the difference when it comes to minimizing the long-term health impacts. I’m glad to join this bipartisan, bicameral legislation that would raise awareness, incentivize more screenings, and invest in research,” said Murphy. “This measure aims to educate, spur action,
...Read more and reduce the risks of CMV—a very serious virus affecting infants which too often goes undetected,” said Blumenthal. “Newborn screenings incentivized by this bill can help prevent a variety of really devastating, catastrophic conditions. States like Connecticut are leading the way in mandating CMV screenings for their newest residents, but our measure is needed to ensure all babies across the country are screened for this virus.” “Early detection and intervention can have a profound impact living a heathy life, especially when it comes to newborns,” said Marshall. “CMV is the most common infectious disease cause of birth defects and can have lasting impacts on a child’s health if left undetected including hearing loss, vision loss, developmental and motor delay, and seizures. Every child deserves the chance to thrive, and the STOP CMV Act moves us closer to ensuring that possibility for all newborns. Our bipartisan legislation equips healthcare providers with the tools they need to identify and treat CMV early, potentially mitigating the devastating consequences associated with this virus.” “Keeping children healthy and providing help to families is so important; that’s why this bill has bipartisan and bicameral support,” said Landsman. “When babies contract CMV and it isn’t caught in time, it can lead to long-term health issues. By increasing screenings, we can significantly reduce CMV’s negative effects. I appreciate the efforts of the advocates at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital for bringing attention to this issue, enabling more children to receive assistance and families to find answers.” “One in two hundred babies are born with congenital CMV, and 20% exhibit symptoms or long-term health problems. It is crucial that Congress invest in early intervention services to overcome these startling statistics,” said Lawler. “I’m proud to join my colleagues in introducing the bipartisan, bicameral STOP CMV Act. This legislation will improve access to screenings and invest in the critical research necessary to ensure children born with CMV grow up to live healthy lives.” CMV is a little known yet common virus that is harmless in adults but can cause birth defects like deafness, seizures and developmental delays in babies. It is the leading non-genetic cause of birth defects. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that one in 200 babies are born with CMV and 1 in 5 babies born with CMV will develop long-term health problems. The legislation is inspired by Bevin, the granddaughter of Connecticut news anchor Ann Nyberg, who was diagnosed with CMV after failing a hearing test as a newborn. “Congenital Cytomegalovirus, cCMV as it is commonly known, is an infection of pregnant mothers and a leading cause of deafness, developmental defects, and vision loss in newborn infants. This legislation will provide much needed education and attention to important early first-month treatment of newborns afflicted with cCMV to give them the best life possible,” said Ann Nyberg, WTNH News Anchor and Grandmother to a cCMV baby. The bipartisan, bicameral STOP CMV Act authorizes new funding to incentivize hospitals and other health care entities that care for children to screen babies for CMV within the first 21 days after birth. The bill also authorizes funding to collect data on CMV and to assist in the education and training of health care providers, patients, and the general public. Finally, the legislation directs the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to conduct research into congenital CMV. The STOP CMV Act is endorsed by the National CMV Foundation, the American Speech-Language-Hearing-Association (ASHA), and the American Cochlear Implant Alliance. “The National CMV Foundation fully supports the Stop CMV Act to increase research, awareness and prevention of congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV), and we thank the bipartisan sponsors in the Senate and House for introducing this important legislation,” said Mary Uran, President of the National CMV Foundation and Khaliah Fleming, Executive Director of the National CMV Foundation. “cCMV is common, serious, and preventable, and it's unacceptable that only 9% of women have heard of it. This legislation represents the first coordinated federal effort to improve and invest in CMV research, testing, education and data collection.” “The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association applauds Senators Blumenthal and Marshall for introducing the Stop CMV Act,” said 2024 ASHA President Tena McNamara, AuD, CCC-A/SLP. “This legislation will focus needed attention and resources on screening for congenital cytomegalovirus in newborns, a huge step forward in identifying children at risk for hearing loss, communication disorders and developmental delays. Congenital CMV screenings will also facilitate access to critical early intervention services provided by audiologists and speech-language pathologists.” “The American Cochlear Implant Alliance is proud to support the Stop CMV Act,” said Donna Sorkin, Executive Director of the American Cochlear Implant Alliance. “Our members – clinicians, educators of children with loss, and families impacted by CMV – have been involved in state advocacy for a number of years. We are pleased that this issue is being taken up in the US Congress as it will allow more visibility and a greater impact on the long-term health of children. Passage of this bill will ensure that many more infants are tested allowing for early identification of, and follow-up support, for CMV.” The text of the legislation can be found here. ### Read less U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-C.T.) discussed the dangers of prioritizing individualism ahead of the common good at a Harvard Institute of Politics forum on Monday. Moderated by IOP Director Setti D. Warren, the event featured Murphy and Richard J. Weissbourd, a lecturer at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and the Harvard Kennedy School. Last April, Murphy and Richard jointly penned a piece in TIME Magazine arguing against the over-prioritization of individualism. During the event, Murphy called on policymakers to focus on "prioritizing the common good," attributing compounding crises of mental health, addiction, and violence to the "hyperindividualism that has overtaken the country." "A lot of us have this sense that this country, in some
...Read more ways, is falling apart at the seams," Murphy said. "It's reached the point where I don't think it’s sufficient for people in my job to just adjust the dials of public policy on the existing machine." Weissbourd added that this hyperindividualism was the natural result of the lack of a "shared reality," suggesting that the path forward should involve more robust "social infrastructure." "Every branch of government can do something to reduce isolation and to connect people to each other," he said. Murphy also cited the "commoditization of everything in our society" as a reason "why we have become more individualistic and less concerned with the common good." In particular, he pointed to the stratifications within the airline industry that allow people to "pay to consort with only people of your income bracket." "There’s now three different lines at TSA," Murphy said. "There’s four different sections on the airplane." "And that makes us feel as if the only thing that defines us is the amount of money that we have to be able to pay for experience - rather than experiencing things together," he added. Murphy stressed the connections between hyperindividualism and hot button political issues like gun control. Despite momentum toward gun control following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Connecticut, the Senate failed to pass a background check bill in 2013. "We were just mortified by the fact that Sandy Hook didn’t change anything," Murphy said. "We realized that’s not how politics works, right?" "There’s no epiphanies in American politics," he said. "You have the power. You either have it or you don’t." During the event, Murphy also emphasized the need for the U.S. to have a coherent border policy as a "multicultural society." The U.S. must "have a real rule of law when it comes to how you become an American, when you become a member of our community," he said. Murphy criticized some of his colleagues for keeping controversial - yet resolvable — issues like the border "as an open sore, politically." At the conclusion of the event, Murphy urged his fellow legislators to take action in support of Ukraine amid the ongoing war following Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday slammed Republicans for not seeming to be interested in fixing border issues after a bipartisan deal that Murphy helped broker was scrapped. On Sunday, ABC’s “This Week” co-anchor Johnathan Karl pressed Murphy on President Biden’s response to address the flow of migrants at the border. Murphy instead insisted the blame be placed on Republicans. “Republicans have made it very clear that they have no interest in coming to the table on immigration and border reform…They want the border to be a mess. Donald Trump has told them so,” Murphy said. Murphy pointed to Biden sending “a comprehensive immigration and border reform” to Congress on his first week in office, as an example of him
...Read more attempting to act swiftly to address the border crisis. Karl pushed back saying the bill was to provide a path to citizenship, not a border security bill. “The president instituted a very tough new regulation that does stop people at the border, does the asylum calculation. It, as expected, was blocked by the courts because he needs legislative action,” Murphy responded. Karl continued to question Murphy on Biden’s effectiveness on addressing the border, citing polls that show Americans disapproval of how Biden has handled the issue. Murphy continued to place the blame on Republicans. “What we also know is that under Donald Trump’s presidency, crossings at the border were at 10-year high, and this is exactly why,” Murphy said. “I think the president and Democrats should go on the offense because the vast majority of the country believes that we should have robust legal immigration, but they want tighter control of the border. And right now, there’s only one party that can deliver that.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday released the following statement after JetBlue Airways announced it would call off its planned $3.8 billion merger with Spirit Airlines: “This is great news for every American who takes a flight to visit their family and friends, go on vacation, or travel for work because it means we’re preserving competition in the airline industry. A handful of airlines shouldn’t be able to keep prices high without any competition from smaller companies and the antidote to airline consolidation isn’t letting the big four become the big five. The Biden Administration has made it a top priority to break up monopolies and infuse competition into markets– today’s announcement proves their efforts are working.” Murphy released a video last month when a
...Read more federal judge blocked the proposed merger. Last October, Murphy hosted a social live conversation with Bill McGee, Senior Fellow for Aviation and Travel at the American Economic Liberties Project, on the proposed JetBlue-Spirit merger, its potential consequences for consumers, airline workers, and local communities, and the harms of consolidation in the airline industry. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined ABC’s This Week to discuss Republicans’ refusal to work with Democrats to pass a border bill and the latest on the humanitarian disaster in Gaza. Murphy argued Democrats’ must be proactive in talking about tackling the crisis at the border: “Democrats need to go on the offense on this question of controlling the border. The fact of the matter is we did achieve a bipartisan compromise that would give the president new powers to get the border under control, and Donald Trump killed it. Donald Trump and Republicans decided that they want the border to be chaotic because it helps them politically, and polls show that if Democrats just tell that story, if the president tells that story, Republicans' political advantage on the
...Read more border is erased.” Murphy continued: “What we also know is that under Donald Trump's presidency, crossings at the border were at a ten-year high, and this is exactly why I think the president and Democrats should go on the offense because the vast majority of the country believes that we should have robust, legal immigration, but they want tighter control of the border, and right now there's only one party that can deliver that. Only the Democrats support pathways to citizenship, support expanding legal pathways into the country, and a tough border law. Republicans use the issue of immigration to try to divide us from each other and now are on the record opposing the toughest border reform bill, the toughest border security bill in decades.” Following his statement on the deaths in Gaza City this week, Murphy called on the Biden administration to use every lever to achieve a long-term ceasefire between Israel and Hamas: I think it is time for the president to use all the levers that he has to get a long-term ceasefire. I think if that ceasefire doesn’t come, it’s in Israel’s interest for them to pause military activity to solve the humanitarian crisis. But to the extent the president is using additional leverage on Israel, he should do that for national security reasons, not for political reasons. These issues are too important to be dictated by the polls…I think you see him stepping up and using more and more pressure, but I think this is a critical moment where social order is unraveling inside Gaza, and I have both publicly and privately counselled the president to use whatever leverage he has to try to get this long-term ceasefire. It has to happen tomorrow.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on the recently announced Capital One-Discover merger:
“The Capital One-Discover merger would be a disaster for everyone but the executives and wealthy shareholders behind it. It would create the largest credit card issuer and one of the biggest banks in the nation— and then equip it with one of just four payment networks that merchants rely on to accept credit cards. By dramatically reducing competition in an already consolidated market, this new behemoth would have the power to increase fees and the cost of credit for the millions of Americans and small businesses who use their services. Regulators must block this merger.”
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Thursday released the following statement after more than 100 Palestinians were killed on Thursday morning during a delivery of humanitarian aid in Gaza City: “The death of innocent civilians seeking desperately needed food aid is completely unacceptable. While the details are still emerging, it is clear that more than 100 Palestinians in Gaza City were either shot by Israeli soldiers or trampled to death in the chaos. This situation is a result of the complete breakdown in social order in Gaza, which is spiraling out of control without a massive influx of humanitarian aid and a pause in the fighting. “To be clear,
...Read more Hamas started this war and could end it tomorrow by releasing the hostages and surrendering those responsible for the October 7th attacks. However, the appalling scenes from Gaza City today and the staggering civilian death toll that has already occurred in Gaza are not in Israel’s nor the United States’ interest, and they necessitate an urgent change in course. Israel should immediately pause military operations for a period of time necessary to get this humanitarian nightmare under control, and I would urge President Biden to use all available leverage to press Israel and those who speak to Hamas to urgently reach an agreement to secure a longer-term cessation of hostilities.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Thursday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor on Republicans’ refusal to work with Democrats to address the crisis at the border they pretend to care about because they would rather help Trump’s re-election. Murphy explained why Republicans blocked his bipartisan legislation with U.S. Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) to address the crisis at the border: “Because Republicans do not want to fix the border. The secret's out. For Republicans, the border is a moneymaking grievance machine. And if we passed our border bill and fixed the problem, Republicans literally wouldn't know what for do with their days. Fox would lose
...Read more ratings. Republican Senators would lose clicks and donors. Donald Trump would lose an issue to campaign on. What would some of my Republican Senate colleagues do with their weekends if they couldn't go down to the border and dress up as border patrol officers and scream about fake outrage? If the border bill passed, if the border was under control, Republicans might have to get hobbies. If the bipartisan bill to control our border had passed, our border would be more orderly. Our immigration system would be vastly improved. America would be better off and more secure. But, yes, Republicans would lose their moneymaking grievance machine: the broken border. That's what happened. Republicans killed the toughest bipartisan border bill that they have ever seen because they don't want to fix the border. They want to keep it a mess because they think it helps them politically.” Murphy compared President Biden’s intentions with Donald Trump’s desire to exploit the border as a political issue: “You know who does want to fix the border? President Joe Biden, Democrats in Congress. Joe Biden asked for those additional resources to hire more patrol agents, to build more detention capacity, to install more technology at the border to interrupt the fentanyl trade. Joe Biden helped write the bipartisan border bill which gave him those new powers I talked about. And today, Joe Biden is going to be at the border to talk about his agenda to put border security first, but also to make other badly needed changes to our immigration system, like improving our asylum system and getting a pathway to citizenship for people who have been living in the shadows of our society for far too long. Donald Trump is going to be at the border today, too, but for a different reason. Donald Trump does not see the border as a problem that needs to be fixed. Donald Trump sees the border as a problem to be exploited. He openly brags about instructing his followers here in the United States Senate to kill the bipartisan border bill because its passage would have been good for Joe Biden and the country. Murphy concluded: “For Joe Biden the border is a serious issue that he wants to fix. He has a plan to do it. For Donald Trump and the Republicans, the border is just a moneymaking grievance machine that they refuse to solve.” A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “So, here's a snapshot of what happened. Republicans said that fixing the border was their top priority. They appointed a hardline conservative, my friend Senator James Lankford, to come up with a bipartisan bill to fix the border. They said if Lankford can get the deal, they'd support it. “We got that deal. If it passed, it would have been the toughest border security bill in our lifetime. Arguably, it would have been the toughest border security bill ever. $20 billion for border security, more detention beds, more patrol officers, more asylum officers, more equipment to intercept fentanyl, a new power for the president to close parts of the border when crossings get too high. An end to the era in which an asylum applicant could spend ten years in the country before their application was heard. “It was tough. It would have helped to fix the border. It was a compromise. Get this: it was supported by the conservative pro-Trump Border Patrol Union and the left-leaning Association of Immigration Attorneys. The Washington Post was for it, and The Wall Street Journal was for it. It was a true compromise. “But within hours of the bill's release, Republicans killed it. When it came to the floor, only four Republicans voted for the bill they asked for. It has now been 22 days since Republicans killed the toughest border security bill of our lifetime — a bipartisan bill that would have helped us control the border. “Why did Republicans do this? Because Republicans do not want to fix the border. The secret's out. For Republicans, the border is a moneymaking grievance machine. “And if we passed our border bill and fixed the problem, Republicans literally wouldn't know what for do with their days. Fox would lose ratings. Republican Senators would lose clicks and donors. Donald Trump would lose an issue to campaign on. “What would some of my Republican Senate colleagues do with their weekends if they couldn't go down to the border and dress up as border patrol officers and scream about fake outrage? If the border bill passed, if the border was under control, Republicans might have to get hobbies. “If the bipartisan bill to control our border had passed, our border would be more orderly. Our immigration system would be vastly improved. America would be better off and more secure. But, yes, Republicans would lose their moneymaking grievance machine: the broken border. “That's what happened. Republicans killed the toughest bipartisan border bill that they have ever seen because they don't want to fix the border. They want to keep it a mess because they think it helps them politically. “22 days since Republicans killed the toughest bipartisan border security bill in over a decade. “You know who does want to fix the border? President Joe Biden, Democrats in Congress. Joe Biden asked for those additional resources to hire more patrol agents, to build more detention capacity, to install more technology at the border to interrupt the fentanyl trade. “Joe Biden helped write the bipartisan border bill which gave him those new powers I talked about. And today, Joe Biden is going to be at the border to talk about his agenda to put border security first, but also to make other badly needed changes to our immigration system, like improving our asylum system and getting a pathway to citizenship for people who have been living in the shadows of our society for far too long. “Donald Trump is going to be at the border today, too, but for a different reason. Donald Trump does not see the border as a problem that needs to be fixed. Donald Trump sees the border as a problem to be exploited. He openly brags about instructing his followers here in the United States Senate to kill the bipartisan border bill because its passage would have been good for Joe Biden and the country. “For Joe Biden the border is a serious issue that he wants to fix. He has a plan to do it. For Donald Trump and the Republicans, the border is just a moneymaking grievance machine that they refuse to solve. “The problem is that nothing can pass in Washington without Republican support. I know there are Republicans who voted for the bipartisan bill. Only four, but the rule is that Republicans refuse to support more resources, more patrol officers, more detention beds, and the rule is that they will vote against any bipartisan legislation to make the border more secure. “So, [it has been] 22 days since Republicans killed the toughest border security bill during our time in the Senate, and unfortunately the border is going to remain unresolved so long as Republicans don’t want to solve it.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Tina Smith (D-Minn.) on Thursday introduced legislation to study and address how social, environmental, and economic conditions exacerbate health inequities, which significantly affects Black, Brown, Indigenous, and people of color. These conditions, known as social determinants of health (SDOH), include institutional racism in housing, unemployment and job insecurity, education, access to affordable health care and more. While it’s often believed that good health is only due to medical care, one estimate found that clinical treatment accounts for only 10 to 20 percent of an individual’s overall health. Meanwhile, around 80 to 90
...Read more percent of health outcomes are driven by social determinants. “When you don’t have a safe, stable place to live, or you can’t find affordable, nutritious food in your neighborhood, you’re more likely to develop chronic health issues that cost you thousands in medical bills. These structural inequities disproportionately impact communities of color and can have really devastating consequences for peoples’ health. I’m glad to team up with Senator Smith on this legislation to make a worthwhile investment in helping communities create healthy environments and improve long-term health outcomes,” said Murphy. “For many Black, Brown, Indigenous and people of color, health outcomes like chronic disease and overall longevity are determined by factors out of their control, often rooted in institutional racism and lasting inequities. Supporting healthy families and communities means more than just access to medical care – it’s also having a safe place to call home, jobs, adequate food and more,” said Smith. “This legislation will help us chart a better path forward to rectify historical injustices and ensure everyone has the chance to live a healthy life.” “Social determinants of health, including housing, employment, food security, transportation, and education, contribute significantly to people’s health outcomes over their lifetime. Communities need more flexible and cross-cutting resources to address these factors that if unaddressed can lead to poor health. CDC’s SDOH program has already assisted dozens of communities in creating SDOH plans and now needs the resources to allow additional grantees to implement these community tailored plans,” said Dr. Nadine Gracia, President and CEO of Trust for America’s Health. “Public health plays an important role in convening partners from different sectors and trusted community leaders to address these non-medical drivers of health. This legislation is an important step in improving health outcomes, reducing overall healthcare spending, and helping reduce health disparities. TFAH is proud to support this bill.” The Improving Social Determinants of Health Act is endorsed by more than 158 organizations across the country. This legislation will: Authorize the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to create a program to improve health outcomes, reduce health inequities, and improve capacity of public health agencies and community organizations to address SDOHs.
Coordinate across CDC to ensure programs consider and incorporate social determinants of health in grants and activities.
Award grants to state, local, territorial, and Tribal health agencies to address social determinants of health in target communities.
Award grants to nonprofit organizations and institutions of higher education to conduct research on best practices for addressing the social determinants of health.
Coordinate, support, and align social determinant of health activities at the CDC with other federal agencies.
Collect and analyze data related to social determinant of health activities.
Authorize $50 million annually for program activities. In addition to Murphy and Smith, this legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). You can read a summary of the bill here and bill text here. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Wednesday spoke at a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on addressing Iran’s proxy network in the Middle East with former U.S. Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to the Secretary of State Brian Hook. “I thought your opening remarks sounded a lot more like a campaign speech for Donald Trump's re-election than a sober analysis of the situation on the ground in the region,” Murphy said. “Charitably, they were an attempt to rehabilitate President Trump's Iran policy that was a complete, total failure by every available metric. I wasn't coming to this hearing to rehash our policy towards
...Read more Iran from 2017 to 2020, but I think it's really important to set the record straight. Because if this committee or the American public gets the impression that what President Trump was doing was working and should be brought back as policy going into the future, we're in real trouble.” Murphy laid out the failures of the Trump administration’s Iran policy: “Here's the facts. When Donald Trump came into office, Iran was over a year from being able to achieve a nuclear weapon. By the time President Trump left office, that breakout time had dropped to months. When President Trump came to office, proxies of Iran were strong. When he left office, they were just as strong, if not stronger. This idea that Iran stopped sending money to Hezbollah during Trump's presidency is just wrong. $700 million was the annual amount of support delivered from Iran in the middle of Trump's presidency; [and] that's what was being delivered at the end of his presidency. There were no attacks on US forces in Iraq when Donald Trump became president. From 2019 to 2020, attacks on US forces in Iraq increased by 400%. It got so bad that Secretary Pompeo started to close down the embassy in Baghdad because it had become so dangerous. Attacks on US forces raised to epidemic levels from the beginning of Trump's presidency to the end. The anti-Iran coalition wasn't strengthened, it was shattered. We had Russia and China on board with the JCPOA. By the end of the Trump presidency, Europe wasn't supporting our Trump politics, our Iran policy, they were undermining it.” Murphy continued: “President Trump's policy towards Iran was a disaster. They got closer to a nuclear weapon, their proxies didn't get any weaker, US troops came under attack in a way that they were not prior to Trump's presidency, and our coalition, that had been carefully built around the nuclear agreement, ready to be used to go after Iran's ballistic missile program or their support for proxies, had vanished.” A full transcript of Murphy’s remarks can be found below: “Mr. Hook, I appreciate your service to the country. I believe you are a deep patriot. But frankly, I thought your opening remarks sounded a lot more like a campaign speech for Donald Trump's re-election than a sober analysis of the situation on the ground in the region. Charitably, they were an attempt to rehabilitate President Trump's Iran policy that was a complete, total failure by every available metric. I wasn't coming to this hearing to rehash our policy towards Iran from 2017 to 2020, but I think it's really important to set the record straight. Because if this committee or the American public gets the impression that what President Trump was doing was working and should be brought back as policy going into the future, we're in real trouble. “Here's the facts. When Donald Trump came into office, Iran was over a year from being able to achieve a nuclear weapon. By the time President Trump left office, that breakout time had dropped to months. “When President Trump came to office, proxies of Iran were strong. When he left office, they were just as strong, if not stronger. “This idea that Iran stopped sending money to Hezbollah during Trump's presidency is just wrong. $700 million was the annual amount of support delivered from Iran in the middle of Trump's presidency; [and] that's what was being delivered at the end of his presidency. “There were no attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq when Donald Trump became president. From 2019 to 2020, attacks on US forces in Iraq increased by 400%. It got so bad that Secretary Pompeo started to close down the embassy in Baghdad because it had become so dangerous. Attacks on U.S. forces raised to epidemic levels from the beginning of Trump's presidency to the end. “The anti-Iran coalition wasn't strengthened – it was shattered. We had Russia and China on board with the JCPOA. By the end of the Trump presidency, Europe wasn't supporting our Iran policy, they were undermining it. “President Trump's policy towards Iran was a disaster. They got closer to a nuclear weapon, their proxies didn't get any weaker, U.S. troops came under attack in a way that they were not prior to Trump's presidency, and our coalition, that had been carefully built around the nuclear agreement, but ready to be used to go after Iran's ballistic missile program or their support for proxies, had vanished. “And so, Mr. Hook, let me just ask you about these metrics. And I'll give you a chance to respond and tell me why I'm wrong. I mean, let me just give you four, and just tell me why I'm wrong about this. Iran was closer to a nuclear weapon at the end of Trump's presidency than at the beginning. Iran’s proxies were at least just as strong, if not stronger. Here's another stat: In 2016, there were five Houthi attacks against Saudi Arabia in the UAE. By 2020, those attacks were averaging 25 a year. Third, Iran was threatening US troops in the region by the end of Trump's presidency in a way that did not exist in 2016. And fourth, the anti-Iran coalition was weaker, not stronger. Am I wrong about any of those things? I don't think I am.” ### Read less HARTFORD — U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Tuesday praised the Department of Veterans Affairs’ announcement that all veterans who were exposed to toxins and other hazards during their service will be able to directly enroll in VA health care starting March 5. With this new expansion, all veterans who were exposed to toxins, including those who served in the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, Iraq, Afghanistan or any other combat zone after 9/11 will be able to enroll directly in VA health care without first applying for VA benefits. Veterans who never deployed but were exposed to toxins during training or active duty in the United States will also be able to enroll. “Thanks to the PACT Act, today’s announcement from the VA marks the largest-ever expansion
...Read more of veteran health care. Starting March 5th, the brave men and women who may have been exposed to toxic chemicals and burn pits during their service can skip the red tape and directly enroll in VA health care. We have a duty of care to those who served our country, and I will always fight to make sure we fulfill that promise to them,” said Murphy. “This expanded eligibility corrects this historic wrong and ensures no veteran has to fight for benefits they rightly deserve. Our nation’s veterans put their lives on the line to serve our country and it is a matter of simple justice to ensure they have the best health care possible. We fought to pass the PACT Act for years and I couldn’t be happier that the Biden Administration has expanded eligibility to ensure every veteran suffering from the horrific and insidious diseases caused by burn pits and toxic chemicals has access to treatment,” said Blumenthal. This new expansion of benefits eliminates the phased-in approach laid out in the PACT Act, which means millions of veterans are becoming eligible for health care up to eight years earlier than written into law. The PACT Act was signed into law by President Biden in August 2022 and delivers relief to post-9/11 veterans exposed to burn pits and will correct the nearly 80 percent rejection rate faced by burn pit veterans seeking claims. As of February 16, the VA has processed PACT Act claims from 694,750 veterans or surviving families. For more information about how the PACT Act is helping Veterans and their survivors, visit VA’s PACT Act Dashboard. To apply for care or benefits today, visit VA.gov/PACT or call 1-800-MYVA411. More information on eligibility can be found at VA.gov/PACT. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Tuesday held a subcommittee hearing on U.S. policy towards Yemen and security issues in the Red Sea with Timothy A. Lenderking, U.S. Special Envoy for Yemen for the Department of State, and Daniel B. Shapiro, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s Middle East Bureau. “For the better part of the last decade, Gulf nations, often assisted by the United States, have been at war in Yemen against Houthi forces that control sizable parts of the country. I have argued that it was a catastrophic mistake for the United States and our Arab partners to be part of this conflict. My belief
...Read more was that the war would simply strengthen the Houthis and strengthen Iran’s influence in Yemen,” Murphy said. “During the last several months, we have seen tragic evidence of this reality. Armed with sophisticated technology from Iran, and coordinated with the Iranian military, the Houthis have launched a dizzying barrage of attacks – missiles, underwater drones, aerial drones – against ships transiting through the Red Sea. Murphy, who supports the Biden administration’s efforts to restore maritime security in the Red Sea and prevent future attacks from the Houthis, argued that a congressional authorization is required for any future action: “The Constitution requires Congress to authorize acts of war. Period. Stop. We swore an oath to follow the Constitution. If we believe this is a just military action – and I do – then we should authorize it. But we also need to acknowledge that there is a real risk of escalation in the Red Sea, especially since Iran is unquestionably aiding the actions of the Houthis. Thus, an authorization is important to legalize the existing operations but also to guard against an unauthorized mission creep…[F]or the military campaign against the Houthis to continue, I believe that a tailored, time-bound congressional authorization is not just nice to have – it is required – to both authorize and limit the current military operation. I will be in discussions with my colleagues in the coming days to introduce such an authorization.” Murphy concluded: “The broader crisis in Yemen, and the lingering war, is not over. It is a crisis that Senator Young and I have been focused on together for years. The war that has ravaged Yemen for nearly a decade, and created the world’s worst humanitarian crisis in Yemen, has quieted, but the country is still in dire straits. The United States, through Special Envoy Lenderking, testifying before us today, regional allies, and the UN, have all been working with Yemeni leaders and citizens to find a political solution to permanently end the war and resolve Yemen’s internal conflicts. Peace will only come through political reconciliation. Our air strikes can protect U.S. assets in the region, and in the Red Sea, but they cannot bring peace to Yemen.” Last month, Murphy pressed the Biden Administration on its strategy in response to Houthi attacks in the Red Sea. A full transcript of Murphy’s opening remarks can be found below: “We are convening the subcommittee today to discuss an incredibly important topic: developments in Yemen and on the Red Sea. “For the better part of the last decade, Gulf nations, often assisted by the United States, have been at war in Yemen against Houthi forces that control sizable parts of the country. I have argued that it was a catastrophic mistake for the United States and our Arab partners to be part of this conflict. My belief was that the war would simply strengthen the Houthis and strengthen Iran’s influence in Yemen. “During the last several months, we have seen tragic evidence of this reality. Armed with sophisticated technology from Iran, and coordinated with the Iranian military, the Houthis have launched a dizzying barrage of attacks – missiles, underwater drones, aerial drones – against ships transiting through the Red Sea. “The Red Sea is one of the most important geostrategic locations in the world. 15% of international maritime commerce passes through its waters, and now 90% of Red Sea traffic has been forced to choose longer and costlier alternatives. “The cost increases to global shipping of this diversion will be significant. Consumers will bear the brunt of that. But the impact isn’t just economic. Due to the Houthis’ actions in the Red Sea, bulk container ships with food supplies for starving people in Yemen haven’t been able to make their deliveries. In Sudan, where 95% of the population can’t afford more than one meal per day, aid deliveries of food and medicine are crucially delayed and come at significantly higher costs. “I opposed the U.S. involvement in the Yemen War. I regret that the Houthis are now strong enough to attack our interests in the region. But this is where we are. And now that we are in the crosshairs, we must respond. “That’s why I have supported the President’s leadership to launch Operation Prosperity Guardian to restore maritime security in the Red Sea. I’ve also supported the President’s decision, together with our partners in the U.K., to target Houthi infrastructure in Yemen to prevent imminent attacks. That kinetic response has been paired with a targeted sanctions strategy to squeeze the Houthis’ ability to finance their operations, and increased interdiction efforts to intercept weapons coming from Iran to the Houthis. “But, this response has occurred without congressional authorization. And to my knowledge there is no existing law that would permit military action against the Houthis. “The Constitution requires Congress to authorize acts of war. Period. Stop. We swore an oath to follow the Constitution. If we believe this is a just military action – and I do – then we should authorize it. But we also need to acknowledge that there is a real risk of escalation in the Red Sea, especially since Iran is unquestionably aiding the actions of the Houthis. Thus, an authorization is important to legalize the existing operations but also to guard against an unauthorized mission creep. “Now, I want the focus of today’s hearing to be on the on-the-ground reality in the Red Sea, the scope of the threat to the United States, and the merits of our existing response plan and the options going forward. I don’t intend for this hearing to turn into a forum on congressional authorization. “But, for the military campaign against the Houthis to continue, I believe that a tailored, time-bound congressional authorization is not just nice to have – it is required – to both authorize and limit the current military operation. I will be in discussions with my colleagues in the coming days to introduce such an authorization. “This debate – if we could have it – would, importantly, help us understand both the power and the limits of American military power in and around the Red Sea. The broader crisis in Yemen, and the lingering war, is not over. It is a crisis that Senator Young and I have been focused on together for years. The war that has ravaged Yemen for nearly a decade, and created the world’s worst humanitarian crisis in Yemen, has quieted, but the country is still in dire straits. “The United States, through Special Envoy Lenderking, who will testify before us today, regional allies, and the UN, have all been working with Yemeni leaders and citizens to find a political solution to permanently end the war and resolve Yemen’s internal conflicts. Peace will only come through political reconciliation. Our airstrikes can protect U.S. assets in the region, and in the Red Sea, but they cannot bring peace to Yemen. “This is an incredibly important hearing today, and I look forward to our discussion with our witnesses to help us chart that path forward.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday released the following statement after voting to advance Julie Su’s nomination for Secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL):
“In her tenure as Acting Secretary, Julie Su has proved she is eminently qualified to continue leading the Department of Labor. We have seen record-breaking numbers of new good-paying jobs, a huge expansion of workforce development programs, and the most pro-worker agenda ever. I was proud to advance her nomination today and am hopeful for her confirmation.”
Murphy met with Su last April and spoke at her confirmation hearing.
###
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Saturday released the following statement on the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: “As we mark the second anniversary of Vladimir Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine, Republicans need to wake up to the dire situation on the ground and stop playing games. I just spent five days talking to world leaders and allies in the region who repeatedly warned that Putin will likely not stop at Ukraine. If we allow Putin to succeed in making Kyiv a Russian city, a NATO country could be next, and it won’t be just thousands of Ukrainian lives at risk – it will be millions of Americans. The Senate has done its job, and I am, once again, calling on Speaker Johnson to put the
...Read more national security supplemental on the floor for a vote.” ### Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) shot back at attacks on border policy and legislation from Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) on Tuesday, calling “bullshit” on his claims that Democrats don’t want to pursue border security measures. Scott said in a Fox News interview Monday that “the left wants an open, insecure border. The conservatives and common sense independents, we want to secure America.” Murphy instead laid blame for the failure of the bipartisan Senate border security bill, which he helped negotiate, squarely at the feet of Republicans, led in opposition by former President Trump. “We reached a bipartisan compromise to give the President enormous new powers to control the border,” Murphy wrote on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. “Almost every
...Read more single Republican – including Sen. Scott – voted against it because Trump told them to keep the border a mess because it might help him politically.” The bipartisan border security deal initially had significant support in the Senate, including from Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), but was later killed by the GOP after opposition from Trump and House Republicans. Trump warned that passing the border security bill could hand President Biden a political victory on the immigration issue, which is set to be one of the most important of the November election. The Biden administration is reportedly considering executive action to bypass the roadblocks in Congress. Read less Debate over the border bill that was killed by Republicans in the House and Senate for political reasons continued on Tuesday when Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) called out Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Ron Johnson (R-WI), and Tim Scott (R-SC) over their “bullshit” claims that President Joe Biden was responsible for closing the border himself. First, Murphy went after Scott, who claimed on Fox News that “the left wants an open, insecure border.” In a post containing the video clip, he wrote: “Bullshit. We reached a bipartisan compromise to give the President enormous new powers to control the border. Almost every single Republican – including Sen. Scott – voted against it because Trump told them to keep the border a mess
...Read more because it might help him politically.” Next up was Johnson, who tweeted that “Americans want a secure border. The recent bill would have been worse than doing nothing by codifying @POTUS’s open border policies into law. We didn’t want an immigration bill. We wanted something to force Biden to use the authority he has to secure the border. Unfortunately, the secret negotiations led to a debacle that gave Democrats political cover for their open border policies.” Again, Murphy responded: “Bullshit.” He added: “The bipartisan border bill that Sen. Johnson’s party asked for and then voted against because Trump said so would have ALLOWED THE PRESIDENT TO SECURE THE BORDER.” Blackburn, who was a member of the bipartisan coalition in the Senate along with Murphy, posted on Twitter/X on Friday a harsh judgement on the Biden administration and impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, writing: “Even Secretary Mayorkas has said what’s happening at the southern border ‘certainly is a crisis.’ It’s past time the Biden administration put a stop to this madness. CLOSE the border.” Murphy’s response to Blackburn’s claim: “[A]lso bullshit. Senator Blackburn knows the bill would have actually allowed the President to close parts of the border when crossings get too high. But who would book Republicans on cable news if the border was actually under control? That’s why they killed it.” Blackburn worked on the bill herself and touted her own amendments to it, one of them being “Limiting the number of aliens who may be paroled into the U.S. each year.” Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, joined U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), on a bipartisan Congressional delegation to Hungary, Moldova and Türkiye to engage with partners and allies and reinforce U.S. support for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The delegation comes on the heels of the Munich Security Conference and follows U.S. Senate passage of the national security supplemental funding bill. “I’m glad to be joining this bipartisan congressional delegation in Hungary, Moldova, and Turkey. Hungary and Türkiye are both important NATO allies and I look forward to discussing ways to strengthen the alliance,” said Murphy. “While we have differences on several issues,
...Read more it’s critical that we maintain a dialogue on national security matters while speaking directly about our concerns. I also look forward to meeting with President Sandhu in Chi?in?u and reaffirming U.S. support for Moldova and her government’s pro-reform agenda.” “As we approach the second anniversary of Putin’s unprovoked war in Ukraine, it’s imperative that we work with our allies and partners in the region to ensure we bolster our collective security,” said Shaheen. “That means strengthening NATO—it's important we hold our allies and partners accountable and work with them to further strengthen the most successful military alliance in history. Following the Senate’s passage of the national security supplemental funding, these visits provide us with the opportunity to reaffirm America’s commitment to our partners and allies at such a critical time.” “As co-chair of the Senate NATO Observer Group with Senator Shaheen, I want to thank Hungary for hosting our bipartisan delegation to strengthen the relationship between our two countries and discuss the importance of Sweden’s quick accession to NATO,” said Tillis. “Sweden is a committed ally who has a strong commitment to democracy, and it is imperative that Hungary upholds its public commitments to strengthen our NATO alliance and counter the growing aggression of our adversaries.” ### Read less In a December op-ed published in The New Republic, Senator Chris Murphy conceded, “Maybe I am hopelessly naïve.” If by naïve the Connecticut Democrat means his efforts to find compromise on issues important to Americans, or his talk of building a better future, or about the need to address the “spiritual rot underfoot, threatening to collapse the foundation we have built over two centuries,” then I say the nation needs more of it. Did President Obama speak naïvely when he called on people to “choose hope over fear” and to “see the future not as something out of our control, but as something we can shape for the better.” Was President Reagan naïve when he told Americans that “each generation goes further than the generation preceding it because it stands on the shoulders of that
...Read more generation. You will have opportunities beyond anything we've ever known.” Perhaps. But such statements also offered hope for a better tomorrow. People need that. Our politics desperately need it. The deep divisions, the depiction of the other party as destructive and an enemy, has left Americans deeply disillusioned. Much of the public, I believe, is yearning for national leaders who can inspire, who will provide reasons to vote for them, not simply against the other guy because he, or she, will be worse. So, when Murphy writes of the potential for the two parties “regularly working together on issues like wage growth, industrial policy, support for local economies, technology regulation, or more moral markets,” I say, dream on — and I say it in a good way. Gun reform Murphy, who should sail to re-election this year, has gained national attention as an advocate for sensible gun-control policies. He took on that role after the December 2012 massacre of first-graders and educators at the Sandy Hook school in Newtown, part of the district he then represented in Congress. At the time of the shooting, Murphy was about to join the Senate, having only a few weeks earlier captured the seat that fellow Democrat Joe Lieberman was vacating. Yet for years, Murphy’s impassioned speeches, often after another mass shooting, failed to convince Congress to act. Finally, on June 24, 2022, the U.S. House joined the Senate in voting to pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, legislation that Murphy played a key role in negotiating. Unfortunately, it took yet another horrific school shooting — the May 24, 2022 attack on a Uvalde, Texas school that left 19 students and two teachers dead — to get Congress to do something. The Safer Communities Act toughened both federal background checks and laws addressing the illicit trade of firearms across state lines. It provided financial support for state red flag laws, which give law enforcement, acting with the courts, the ability to remove guns from those whose violent actions or mental instability raise concerns. The law also increased funding for mental health services, including schools. For gun-control advocates it did not go far enough. They want Congress to again pass a federal ban on the sale of semiautomatic assault rifles. So does Murphy. So do I. But it was progress. Border deal Having seen him achieve the unlikely, Democratic Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., a few months ago gave Murphy a crack at attaining the near impossible. Murphy led the negotiations for the Democrats in the effort to find an agreement on improved security at the southern border. Republican congressional leaders had said they would not support continuing financial support for Ukraine — in its defense against Russian invaders — unless improved border security came with it. Staunch conservative Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., negotiated for his party. The third negotiator was Arizona’s independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema. To the shock of many, they reached a deal. It would have improved enforcement provisions and taken steps to expedite the glacial pace of assessing asylum claims. The conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board supported the legislation, stating it included “reforms (President) Trump never came close to getting.” So did the Washington Post and The Day editorial boards. It had the backing of the union that represents front-line Border Patrol agents. Of course, we all know how that one ended. Republicans, and their likely presidential candidate Donald Trump, did not want a solution that could improve the border situation. They wanted the border crisis to continue, giving them an issue to run on. There was not enough Republican support to get the deal out of the Senate. Abandoning a deal that would be good for the country, because Republicans saw it as bad for their election chances, is the kind of thing people hate about Washington. While exposing Republican hypocrisy in showing the party won’t accept yes, Murphy has also called on his fellow Democrats to do some soul searching, and consider why a party that was once largely backed by the working class has seen many blue-collar workers abandon it or simply give up hope it will do much for them. One problem, he sees, was the party’s embrace of neoliberalism. Beginning with the presidency of President Bill Clinton, this approach backed eliminating price controls, easing monopoly enforcement, lowering trade barriers and deregulating markets. It placed faith in corporate America to improve opportunities for workers. While the approach did indeed produce growth, it also concentrated wealth at the top of the economic ladder — producing a second Gilded Age — and led to millions of jobs being outsourced to other nations. “I was guilty of accepting this paradigm we were stuck in, and in which we assumed we had to live with this massive concentration of corporate power,” Murphy told Daily Kos. “I had no living memory of government using its power to break up monopolies.” In another interview, he commented, “When you outsource all morality to the market, and you deregulate every industry, you’re removing an opportunity for us to have a connected conversation about our morals, our values.” This challenge to corporate power, combined with Murphy’s record of being willing to try to work with his political opponents and, yes, even that measure of naïveté, could play well on a national stage as America awaits a generational change. Murphy is only 50. He has time. But not that much if it is indeed a matter of generational change. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Friday joined a bipartisan congressional delegation led by U.S. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Dan Sullivan (R-AK). to participate in this weekend’s Munich Security Conference (MSC). MSC is the world's leading forum for debating international security policy and a venue for diplomatic initiatives to address the world's most pressing security concerns. “On the heels of Senate passage of vital aid to Ukraine, I’m glad to be part of this bipartisan delegation to send the message that we remain committed to ensuring Putin never succeeds in making Kyiv a Russian city. Top leaders from across the world will be meeting in Munich, and I look forward to discussions this
...Read more weekend about how we can not only beat back Russia’s aggression, but also work together to address humanitarian needs, develop sustainable solutions to conflicts in the Middle East, and advance other U.S. national security goals,” said Murphy. Earlier this week, Murphy released a statement on Senate passage of the national security supplemental. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Friday joined MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports from the Munich Security Conference to discuss the death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny and the urgent need for continued U.S. support to Ukraine. Murphy reacted to the death of Alexei Navalny: “So, my hope – and I think Yulia’s hope – is that this puts some steel in the spine of the United States, that maybe some of these Republicans that are running away from Ukraine and to President Trump decide that democracy is worth it. Because if you abandon Ukraine, you are abandoning democracy crusaders all across the world, people like Alexei Navalny who are speaking truth to power
...Read more in dictatorial regimes throughout the world. Their light is flickering today and perhaps goes out if we abandon the legacy of Alexei Navalny and we abandon the freedom fighters in Ukraine. We can't do it.” On the cause of Navalny’s death, Murphy said: “Oh I have no doubt it was an assassination. In part because this is par for the course. Every single high profile political opponent of Putin has been murdered by this regime. And second, it comes just weeks before an election in which Putin clearly wants to send a signal that if you are even thinking of being a public opponent of me and my crowd of oligarchs, you are going to pay a price of your life. So this, to me, is an open and shut case. This is a murder, and one that has to come with consequences.” On the need for strong U.S. support for Ukraine, Murphy said: “I think it's incredibly important that we are here just days after the Senate voted 70-30 in favor of Ukraine aid. That's not enough Republicans, but it's a big bipartisan vote. It puts a lot of pressure on the House of Representatives. We need to shake some sense into the House and make them understand that if you don't stop Putin here, it is very possible that there will be U.S. troops, men and women dying fighting Putin inside Europe. We also have to make them understand, this would be a devastating blow to U.S. credibility. Just two years after Putin's invasion, we pull up stakes and tell Ukraine that they are on their own? No one will sign up for an alliance with the United States. No one will come to our defense ever again if they think that we're this kind of unreliable partner. The stakes are just enormously high, they were going into today, and with Navalny's death, they get even higher. Our hope is that the big bipartisan vote in the Senate can put some pressure on leadership in the House to at least call the bill for vote. It will pass the House if they call it for a vote. That's all they have to do.” On Trump’s recent comments about NATO, Murphy said: “Well he’s basically given a green light to Putin to continue his fight in Ukraine and he’s telegraphed to Putin that ‘if I'm President, I will wave you into Europe.’ Now Europe will fight for itself, but without the United States, it will be very difficult to maintain European security absent the United States' help. We are potentially on the verge of World War III because that message is not just to Russia, it's to China as well. They will start to move on neighboring nations if they think that Trump is not going to defend the post-World War II order.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) on Thursday released the following statement about the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) announcement clarifying that critically and chronically ill Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries are entitled to the same access to Long-Term Care Hospital (LTCH) services as traditional Medicare beneficiaries. “No one’s health should suffer because of bureaucratic red tape that delays or prevents them from getting the care they need. This CMS clarification will help remove the barriers Medicare Advantage beneficiaries have faced when it comes to accessing care at Long-Term Care Hospitals, even when they are referred by
...Read more their physician. We appreciate CMS’s commitment to addressing this problem and ensuring that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries have access to the services they are entitled to by law.” In December, Murphy and Tillis sent a letter to CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, detailing how MA plans’ prior authorization practices are used to deny coverage of medically necessary care at Long-Term Care Hospitals (LTCHs). The senators urged public clarification that critically and chronically ill MA beneficiaries should have the same access to Long-Term Care Hospital services as traditional Medicare beneficiaries, as required by law. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday joined a bipartisan group of Senators in introducing legislation to protect survivors of sexual assault and sexual harassment at the United States Coast Guard Academy (CGA) and throughout the entire Coast Guard. The Coast Guard Academy Safe-to-Report Act requires the Coast Guard to implement a safe-to-report policy to protect servicemembers and cadets from punishment for minor infractions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice when reporting incidents of sexual abuse. “The Coast Guard Academy spent decades covering up its history of harassment and sexual misconduct, and it’s devastating to think of how many more incidents went unreported for fear of punishment for minor misconduct like breaking
...Read more curfew or underage drinking. Cadets and midshipmen at every other military academy are protected by a ‘safe-to-report’ policy, and those at the Coast Guard Academy deserve those same protections. While Coast Guard leadership is finally taking steps to improve oversight, training, and support for survivors, this bipartisan legislation is necessary to protect cadets and ensure accountability,” said Murphy. “We are sounding a call to action. Coast Guard survivors of sexual assault and harassment need and deserve safeguards—long overdue protections when they come forward against their attackers,” said Blumenthal. “Survivors are now understandably afraid they’ll be punished when reporting cases of sexual misconduct. They should be supported in their recovery and pursuit of justice and receive help needed to heal. This legislation holds the Coast Guard Academy accountable by enshrining safe-to-report policies and ensuring proper protections. Recent history dramatically shows how at-risk Coast Guard members are to sexual harassment and assault—supporting prompt passage of the Coast Guard Academy Safe-to-Report Act.” Complimentary legislation is led in the House of Representatives by U.S. Representative Joe Courtney (D-CT), who introduced the bipartisan Coast Guard Academy Safe-to-Report Parity Act in August. “Safe to report policies make it easier for cadets to report wrongdoing without fear of collateral punishment. I introduced the Safe to Report Parity Act in August of 2023 to ensure cadets are afforded the same protections as other members of the military when reporting sexual assault and harassment—one of many steps I’ve taken over the last decade to institute safeguards to prevent and address sexual assault across the Coast Guard. I am pleased that Senators Blumenthal and Murphy have joined me in this effort and applaud the Coast Guard for voluntarily adopting a Safe to Report policy. I will continue leading efforts in Congress to ensure Safe to Report policies for the Coast Guard are codified into law and in place to protect cadets and Coasties for generations to come,” said Courtney. Last week, the Coast Guard established a safe-to-report policy to protect servicemembers reporting cases of sexual assault. While this policy is a positive step forward, the Coast Guard Academy Safe-to-Report Act goes further, establishing safeguards for members of the Coast Guard and Coast Guard Academy cadets who experience sexual harassment. In addition, by making this policy a statutory requirement, this legislation aligns the Coast Guard with other military services that were required to implement similar policies in the National Defense Authorization Act for 2021. By requiring the implementation of a safe-to-report policy, the Coast Guard Academy Safe-to-Report Act ensures that survivors cannot be punished for certain minor offenses, including drinking and violating curfew, when reporting cases of sexual abuse. Blumenthal and Murphy were joined by U.S. Senators Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), and Katie Britt (R-Ala.) in introducing this legislation. The text of the legislation can be found here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Wednesday joined 24 of his Senate colleagues in a letter to President Biden supporting ongoing U.S. diplomatic efforts to secure the release of Israeli hostages in tandem with the restoration of a mutual ceasefire agreement in Gaza. “Since the October 7th Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, in which Hamas abducted more than 200 civilians — including babies, young children, and the elderly — the United States has played a vital leading role in efforts to secure the release of Americans and Israelis held in Gaza,” the senators wrote. “On November 24th, an agreement brokered with your leadership by the United States, Qatar,
...Read more and Egypt secured the release of 105 hostages — all women and children — in tandem with a nine-day ceasefire. … Now 130 days since the October 7th massacre, two million Gazan civilians remain displaced in extreme danger and deprivation while hostages held by Hamas remain in life-threatening captivity. We therefore write to express our urgent support for your Administration’s ongoing diplomatic efforts to secure the release of hostages in tandem with a restored mutual ceasefire in Gaza.” “We recognize that it is in Israel’s vital national interest that Hamas — a brutal terrorist organization — be removed from power in Gaza. We continue to support Israel’s pursuit of that objective,” the senators affirmed. “We also recognize that without a break in the fighting, humanitarian conditions for civilians in Gaza will become even more catastrophic and thousands more innocents — including many children — will die.” The Wall Street Journal reported, “Central Intelligence Agency Director William Burns met with top officials from the Middle East in Cairo on Tuesday in an effort to push negotiations between Israel and Hamas toward a deal that would free hostages and pause fighting in the Gaza Strip. … The talks in the Egyptian capital are part of an intensifying effort by the Biden administration to achieve a cease-fire in Gaza and bring to a halt a conflict that has reduced much of the coastal enclave to ruins and pushed the Middle East to the brink of an all-consuming regional war.” The senators acknowledged that “such a diplomatic achievement will require the agreement of the warring parties, and that its terms remain under negotiation.” The senators added: “In our judgment, it is in our urgent national interest – and the urgent humanitarian interest of millions of innocent civilians — that these negotiations succeed.” U.S. Senators. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Angus King (I-Maine), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter can be found here and follows below: Dear Mr. President, Since the October 7th Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, in which Hamas abducted more than 200 civilians — including babies, young children, and the elderly — the United States has played a vital leading role in efforts to secure the release of Americans and Israelis held in Gaza. U.S. diplomacy has also been essential to efforts to facilitate the provision of humanitarian aid and to reaching a pause in hostilities in November of last year. On November 24th, an agreement brokered with your leadership by the United States, Qatar, and Egypt secured the release of 105 hostages — all women and children — in tandem with a nine-day ceasefire. The ceasefire between Israel and Hamas provided a vital window for humanitarian aid to reach nearly two million Gazan civilians displaced by the war, while the return to safety of those hostages — including a four-year-old American girl, Abigail Idan — gave hope to the families of others abducted by Hamas that strong U.S.-led diplomacy could secure their freedom. Now 130 days since the October 7th massacre, two million Gazan civilians remain displaced in extreme danger and deprivation while hostages held by Hamas remain in life-threatening captivity. We therefore write to express our urgent support for your Administration’s ongoing diplomatic efforts to secure the release of hostages in tandem with a restored mutual ceasefire in Gaza. We recognize that such a diplomatic achievement will require the agreement of the warring parties, and that its terms remain under negotiation. In our judgment, it is in our urgent national interest – and the urgent humanitarian interest of millions of innocent civilians — that these negotiations succeed. We recognize that it is in Israel’s vital national interest that Hamas — a brutal terrorist organization — be removed from power in Gaza. We continue to support Israel’s pursuit of that objective. We also recognize that without a break in the fighting, humanitarian conditions for civilians in Gaza will become even more catastrophic and thousands more innocents — including many children — will die. Without an agreement that secures their release, the prospects are dim for the survival of hostages who remain alive. Without the space created for regional diplomacy by a restored ceasefire, the political conditions for durable peace and security will remain unreachable, and escalating regional conflict will continue to threaten U.S. national security. Sincerely, ### Read less It wasn’t the ideal border bill—even for Chris Murphy, its lead Democratic negotiator. It didn’t provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, for instance, and Democrats gave more to Republicans than they got from it. But to the senator from Connecticut, it was the best compromise either side was going to reach, so he is appalled that Donald Trump and his allies in the GOP-held House killed it. “If Republicans couldn’t accept this deal on immigration,” he told me, “there’s no deal they’re going to accept.” In a conversation with Vanity Fair, edited for clarity and length, Murphy talked about Republicans’ bad-faith approach on the immigration issue, the stakes for American foreign policy in this November’s election, and why he thinks Democrats need to make border
...Read more security a bigger priority. “Most people in America think that we should have legal immigration but believe that our border is out of control,” Murphy said. “But they look at a political structure in which one side wants to totally shut down…and the other side sometimes doesn’t seem to care much about the border.” Vanity Fair: Do you get the sense that, when you’re negotiating with Republicans, you’re defining the “crisis” in the same way? Or does it seem like you’re talking about different things? Chris Murphy: It’s not an easy answer. It’s true that Republicans largely view the crisis as simply having to do with too many people coming into the country, whereas Democrats have viewed the issue of immigration more through the prism of the impact on the individuals who are coming. But increasingly, my party does view what is happening at the border as unsustainable. And I will say, one of my critiques of the party has been that we have sometimes exclusively focused on immigration through the lens of those that are here instead of also focusing on creating a secure border. We can do both at the same time. We can care deeply about and try to improve the lives of migrants but also make clear that the current state of the border is unacceptable. It’s probably understating it to say that you’ve been frustrated at the way Republicans tanked this bill. I’m wondering how you now view the potential for working across the aisle. When we’ve talked before, you’ve expressed confidence in the potential for bipartisanship on specific issues, even with some pretty right or even pro-Trump figures. But when you look at how much bad faith there was, even around this kind of policy they say they want, what kind of hope is there for other stuff? There are two answers to that question. I think I’ve come to the conclusion that Republicans are always going to approach the issue of immigration with bad faith. Their head may tell them they want to compromise, but their hearts are allergic to solving the problem. Republicans are deeply fearful of a day in which they can’t exploit the border as a crisis, and they are never going to take steps to let that day arrive. So maybe I was naive. Maybe I should have known this from the start. But I’ve come to the conclusion that if Republicans couldn’t accept this deal on immigration, there’s no deal they’re going to accept. But I have not given up on bipartisanship writ large. I think between now and the election, it’s pretty clear Republicans are going to fold into the Trump political operation, and the Trump political operation is not going to support any big bipartisan compromise with Democrats. So I think, unfortunately, not many big bipartisan moments are coming in the next six-to-eight months. But I still believe that this place can build compromise. And I still believe there are just enough Republicans in the Senate interested in doing deals. When you talk about not a lot of bipartisan compromises coming, does that include foreign aid? You’ve indicated some confidence that that can be passed on its own, but that would seem as vulnerable, if not more so, given the House GOP position on Ukraine, for example. Our only choice in the Senate is to pass this bill with a big bipartisan vote. And hopefully, if this passes, we’ll get 70 votes, and it will send a really important signal. (Note: After we spoke, the foreign aid package passed 70-29 in the Senate. It faces more uncertainty in the House, though Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has expressed confidence that he could get it through.) But I can’t control what happens in the House, and I can’t control what happens inside the MAGA movement. Once Trump turned his sights on the immigration deal, it was dead. My worry is that Trump and his movement are going to increase their attacks on aid for Ukraine, and the same thing that happened on the immigration deal will happen on Ukraine. So I’m definitely worried that Trump is making it increasingly clear: He wants Putin to win this war, and he’s going to instruct his movement to act accordingly. I’m sure you saw at a rally last weekend he was openly encouraging attacks on NATO. Talk a little about the stakes for November when you have Trump exerting his influence in the direction that he is. Trump has openly advertised himself as an autocrat in waiting, right? He has contempt for democracy. He has affection for dictators. And it’s pretty clear that whatever constraints existed on him in his first term will not exist in his second. In his second term, our democracy will be at risk right from the start. And he will embrace other dictators like Putin in an unbridled, enthusiastic way. I don’t think that’s hyperbole. He is very clearly signaling the direction he’s going in. There will be no Mattises, no Tillersons—there won’t even be a Sessions in his next administration. His next administration’s foreign policy infrastructure will be populated by sycophants. And that will have devastating consequences for the US position in the world. Almost 10 years into the Trump era, are you surprised at how much appetite there still seems to be for that? We’re talking about all this dysfunction on the GOP side. We’re talking not only about Trump’s authoritarian impulses, but 91 felony charges—all this stuff. And yet, we’re looking ahead at what is pretty likely to be a close election later this year. What do you make of all that? I continue to believe there is a deep dissatisfaction with the status quo in this country that Trump continues to be able to plug into. Folks are in a revolutionary mood. They do not believe that the current economic and cultural order benefits them. They want something radically different. In the middle of the pandemic, in 2020, they had second thoughts about that. But the pandemic didn’t erase peoples’ revolutionary mood. And our politics is going to have to acknowledge that. What are your thoughts on how to address that? The disillusionment has been consistent since we last spoke, but it’s playing out against a different backdrop with the election. Have your ideas crystallized more or changed in any way? They’ve certainly crystallized for me. I was drawn to work on the issue of immigration, in part because it seems to be one of those issues in which there is much more consensus out in the country that is not reflected in the political dialogue. Most people in America think that we should have legal immigration but believe that our border is out of control. They believe those things, but they look at a political structure in which one side wants to totally shut down—one side seems enthusiastic about shutting down legal immigration—and the other side sometimes doesn’t seem to care much about the border. And so I am seeking a realignment of American politics in which the big middle has a place to go. And on the issue of immigration, there weren’t a lot of folks speaking to them. Unfortunately, the result of our work was to produce a bill that I do think speaks to that big middle but ultimately couldn’t break through the current political paradigm. But I’m going to continue to work to line up our debates in Washington in a way that actually matches with the big frustrated group of Americans who are not plugged into the right or the left. Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (Conn.), the leading Democratic negotiator on the bipartisan border security bill, is advising fellow Democrats to go on the offensive when discussing border issues ahead of the 2024 election, saying in a new memo that he sees Tuesday’s Democratic victory in New York’s special election as “a roadmap for Democrats.” According to a copy of the memo shared with The Washington Post, Murphy wrote to “interested Democrats” that Tom Suozzi’s recapturing of New York’s 3rd Congressional District was “due in part to his decision to go on offense on the border and attack his opponents’ opposition to the bipartisan border deal” and “is proof that the politics of the border are changing before our eyes.” Murphy wrote that when Republicans in Congress opposed the border security bill,
...Read more “prompted solely by Donald Trump’s desire to keep the border chaotic ahead of the 2024 election, the GOP … presented Democrats with a unique, unprecedented opening to go on the offensive(.)” “Republicans can’t claim that the border is in crisis and then vote against the bipartisan bill, written by their own leadership, that would fix the problem. But their abandonment of the bill they requested presents Democrats with an opening to flip the narrative on the border … Democrats want to fix the problem. We have proof. Republicans want to exploit the problem to divide us. We have proof,” he continued. The border issue, Murphy also underscored, is Democrats’ greatest area of exposure ahead of the November. Democrats, he said, can make messaging about a pathway to citizenship more popular by “framing it inside a message that prioritizes strong and fair border policies.” Read less U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy introduced bipartisan legislation Thursday on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., that the two Connecticut Democrats say will help protect survivors of sexual assault and harassment in the United States Coast Guard, including cadets at the academy. They were joined by U.S. Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., and Katie Britt, R-Ala., in introducing the legislation. The legislation, known as the Coast Guard Academy Safe-to-Report Act, requires that the Coast Guard implement and enforce a safe-to-report policy. Under the policy, which the Coast Guard voluntarily established last week, sexual abuse victims in its ranks can no longer be punished for certain minor infractions to the Uniform Code of Military
...Read more Justice ? which previously punished offenses like drinking and violating curfew even when reporting sexual abuse cases. Blumenthal said that under the previous rules, survivors were “understandably afraid” to be punished for reporting sexual misconduct. “This legislation holds the Coast Guard Academy accountable by enshrining safe-to-report policies and ensuring proper protections,” he said. “We are sounding a call to action,” he added. “Coast Guard survivors of sexual assault and harassment need and deserve safeguards ? long overdue protections when they come forward against their attackers.” He said recent history shows how at risk Coast Guard members are to sexual harassment and assault. That history was uncovered in large part last summer, when cable news network CNN revealed the existence of the Coast Guard report “Operation Fouled Anchor,” which now-retired Adm. Karl Schultz had covered up. The report detailed decades of rapes and sexual assaults at the academy in New London. “The Coast Guard Academy spent decades covering up its history of harassment and sexual misconduct,” said Murphy. “And it’s devastating to think of how many more incidents were unreported for fear of punishment for minor misconduct like breaking curfew or underage drinking.” He said cadets and midshipmen at every other military academy are already protected by a similar “safe-to-report” policy, and Coast Guard members deserve those same protections. Other military services were required to implement similar policies in the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd District, last August introduced complementary legislation, the Coast Guard Academy Safe-to-Report Parity Act, to ensure fair treatment between Coast Guard cadets and their military counterparts. “I am pleased that Sens. Blumenthal and Murphy have joined me in this effort and applaud the Coast Guard for voluntarily adopting the Safe to Report policy,” said Courtney, adding he would continue to lead efforts in Congress that ensure protection of cadets. Additionally, Blumenthal and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., chair and ranking member of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations have opened an inquiry into the Coast Guard’s mishandling of sexual assault investigations and its failure to disclose the results of its sexual assault investigation to Congress or the public. In December, the subcommittee held a hearing with current and former cadets who experienced sexual assault, harassment or retaliation at the academy. Blumenthal has scheduled a news conference for Friday morning in which he is expected to demand answers from the Coast Guard after new documents released this week revealed what his office called “troubling information about the Coast Guard’s mishandling of Operation Fouled Anchor.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined CBS News’ Face the Nation to discuss Republicans blocking a bipartisan deal to help fix the asylum system and deliver aid to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and Gaza, and prospects for passing a national security supplemental this week. Murphy also discussed the Biden Administration’s efforts to reduce civilian casualties in Gaza and pushed back on Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report. On potential Senate passage of the national security supplemental, Murphy said: “I think we're going to pass the spending bill for Ukraine, we have already moved past several procedural hurdles that require 60 votes. I think there will be 60 votes in the end, and there has to be. On many days, Ukraine is firing one quarter of the artillery shells that
...Read more Russia is. Some days, they are only interrupting half the missiles that are being sent at Ukrainian cities. We are on the precipice of a disaster for Ukraine and for the world.” On Republicans’ blocking consideration of the bipartisan national security supplemental with border policy changes and asylum reform Murphy negotiated with U.S. Senators James Lankford (R-Okla.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), he said: “As soon as Republicans realized that it was actually going to fix the border, they voted against it en masse because they want the border to remain chaotic because it helps President Trump and his reelection efforts.” On the Biden Administration’s national security memo released last week, Murphy said: “The White House released a letter in which they made clear that if we approve new aid to Israel, they are going to make sure that it is used in compliance with U.S. and international human rights law, and I think that's incredibly important. Right now the level of civilian casualty inside Gaza is unacceptable. And it does not accrue to the national security goals of the United States, nor Israel because it is going to essentially keep Hamas in business inside Gaza and around the region as they use this grievance structure as a means to continue to recruit. So I do think that that clarification will be important. I think the President's willingness to speak up a little bit more strongly about the way in which this campaign is being conducted will likely have a change in the operational pace. And I think it's incredibly important for the United States and for Israel, for Hamas to be defeated, but for there to be a dramatic reduction in the number of civilians that are being killed.” Murphy refuted Special Counsel Robert Hur’s characterization of the president, highlighting President Biden’s role in passing landmark legislation: “Listen, I'm somebody that's worked intimately with the President. I worked with him on the bipartisan gun bill. He was involved in every step of that process. Not only constructing the bill but winning individual Republican votes. It would not have passed if not for Joe Biden. And what has happened since we passed that bill? A 12% reduction in urban homicides in this country. There are literally thousands of people alive in this nation today because Joe Biden is incredibly competent, and he's incredibly effective. And this partisan hit job by somebody that is looking for a better job in the next Trump administration is not going to dissuade Americans who actually see what the real world impact on their lives is of Joe Biden's administration.” Murphy continued: “This President is going to be able to sell a record that is extraordinary. Unemployment at record lows, factory construction booming, crime down, inflation under control, and he is also somebody that has been the only one member of our party who has effectively beaten Donald Trump in a general election. So I know that he is ready for this campaign. I have seen how effective he has been up close and personal. And I'm not going to let my constituents be distracted by a special prosecutor who's trying to gain favor within the MAGA movement.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday released the following statement on Senate passage of the national security supplemental: “As Ukraine runs out of bullets and Putin grows increasingly emboldened by Donald Trump’s reckless rhetoric, this national security supplemental comes at a dire time. I’m glad some of my Republican colleagues came to their senses and helped pass this bill today, but let’s not forget the dangerous game their party has played for the past four months. Republicans demanded we tie the fate of the free world with border security and asylum reform. Democrats came to the table, and I helped negotiate a breakthrough bipartisan deal. But within 24 hours, Republicans killed it because Donald Trump told them chaos at the border is good for his
...Read more campaign. Now, we’re back to where we started. I’m glad the Senate did our job, but Speaker Johnson, at the direction of Donald Trump, has made it clear he has little interest in doing the same. The House must pass this bill – the stakes could not be higher." ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, on Tuesday launched the “Connecticut Fund Finder” – an interactive online map detailing the federal dollars that Murphy has helped secure for Connecticut since 2020. The map features the major federal investments in Connecticut as a result of the American Rescue Plan, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and Congressionally Directed Spending. This new map will help people in Connecticut better understand and track the federal investments in their community. Throughout his time in Congress, Murphy has fought hard to bring federal money to Connecticut, and, over the last four years, has helped
...Read more secure more than $4.2 billion to support everything from major infrastructure projects like repairs to the Gold Star Bridge, to educational programming, clean energy projects, community violence intervention, and workforce development programs. “The people I talk to want to know how my work in the Senate impacts their daily lives,” said Murphy. “Federal funding can be a game changer for projects as small as a local job training program to something major like modernizing our state’s rail system, and I’m really proud that we have been able to bring billions of federal dollars back to Connecticut since 2020. I hope this map can be a useful resource that demonstrates how the work my team and I are doing in Washington directly helps communities in our state.” The map highlights Murphy’s work since 2020 and features 430 projects along with their corresponding funding bills. To learn more about the federal investments that Murphy has secured for your community, click HERE to check out the map on Murphy’s website. To view investments in your town, click on your town and then on any of the blue pins that correspond to a specific project. You can also use the search bar on the right of your screen to locate cities, towns, or specific projects by name. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Tuesday released the following statement on the recent elections in Pakistan:
“The people of Pakistan made their voices heard in long-awaited elections last week, and it is critical the election results reflect the will of the voters. I am concerned by reports of irregularities and alleged interference, including attacks on free press and restrictions to internet access, and I support the Biden administration’s call for those claims to be thoroughly investigated.”
###
The bipartisan border security bill is finally out, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has scheduled the first procedural vote for Wednesday. But the bill immediately ran into a wall of opposition from top House Republicans and some senators in both parties. Senators released the bill - which would be the most significant immigration package in decades if it passed - last night after months of negotiations between Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). Republicans had demanded policy changes to make it harder for migrants to enter the United States in exchange for supporting more aid to Ukraine, along with military aid for Israel and Taiwan and humanitarian aid for Gaza. House Speaker
...Read more Mike Johnson (R-La.) has been under tremendous pressure from his fractured and unruly conference to reject it, especially since former president Donald Trump started pushing for the bill to fail. Members on the right immediately derided the bill, calling it "a sell-out," "TRASH," an "amnesty bill" and a "complete betrayal." Republican leadership followed suit, all but killing the bill’s chances in the House. "If this bill reaches the House, it will be dead on arrival," Johnson wrote on X on Sunday, claiming it was "even worse than we expected."
Rep. Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), the No. 4 House Republican, slammed the bill as "an absolute non-starter."
"Let me be clear: The Senate Border Bill will NOT receive a vote in the House," Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) wrote on X. "I’m a little confused," Lankford shot back in a briefing with reporters. "I have to be able to get with the speaker’s team on that to be able to find out what part would be 'worse’ than what we had expected based on the actual text." "If the House wants to be able to take it up and amend it that is completely within the right of the House to be able to do that," he said in an interview with The Early. Lankford is also going to have to work to convince senators in his own conference, some of whom have come out against it, including Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who called it a joke, and Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), who called it "atrocious." Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), whose name is being floated as a potential Trump vice-presidential pick because of her early endorsement of him, put out a statement of opposition minutes after the text was released. "I, for one, think it is a mistake to send this bill to the House without a majority of the Republican conference," Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who was supportive of the border negotiations, told our colleague Liz Goodwin and Leigh Ann. Schumer called the bill "one of the most necessary and important pieces of legislation Congress has put forward in years." President Biden said he strongly supported it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a top supporter of sending more aid to Ukraine, signaled support for the deal Sunday, but few other Republicans backed it publicly. (The $118 billion bill includes $14 billion for Israel and $60 billion for Ukraine.) "The Senate must carefully consider the opportunity in front of us and prepare to act," McConnell said. What’s in the bill The 370-page bill includes a variety of changes to the immigration system. It would raise "the standard for migrants to qualify to apply for asylum and increases the capacity for detaining them," Liz and Leigh Ann write. It "also encourages quicker resolutions to asylum cases at the border and creates a new expedited removal authority to speedily remove migrants who don’t qualify for asylum."
"The bill includes a trigger mechanism that would allow the border to be effectively shut down to migrants if crossings have been particularly high for several days in a row. (A number of migrants would still be able to qualify for asylum at ports of entry.)"
"That 'border emergency’ provision, which expires in three years, would automatically kick in when crossings reached 5,000 per day for several days, but a president could choose to use the tool at a lower number, 4,000 per day. The legislation also scales back the Biden administration’s use of parole at the ports of entry and provides for the hiring of new Border Patrol and asylum officers." "This is a very comprehensive attempt to deal with the reality we are seeing today at the border," Theresa Cardinal Brown, senior adviser for immigration and border policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, wrote in an email to The Early after reviewing the text. "It tries to balance a lot of things while managing the system a lot better. It puts the processes in the hands of the experts — asylum officers — a?nd hopefully that means getting Border Patrol back to doing its job of protecting the border from threats." Some Republican lawmakers have focused their attacks on the threshold of 5,000 migrants per day, arguing that the bill would effectively greenlight that many unauthorized arrivals. Lankford called the idea "absurd and untrue" on Sunday night. Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute who led the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service during the Clinton administration, said setting the threshold at 5,000 per day was rooted in the capabilities of the current immigration system. The system "can capably process 5,000 people a day and make decisions on [which migrants] should pass the screening to be able to come into the country and finish a claim for asylum and also screen out those who are ineligible," Meissner said. Attacks from both sides Republicans aren’t the only ones deriding the bill. While it would enact many policy changes favored by Republicans and doesn’t include top Democratic immigration priorities such as the Dream Act, most Senate Democrats are expected to support it. But even a handful of Democratic defections could matter. As the number of Democratic senators who support the bill falls, more Republicans would need to vote for it to overcome a filibuster. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in an interview Sunday night that he could not support it and would lobby his colleagues against it. He argued the bill would create a system similar to Title 42, the pandemic-era policy that restricted immigration for health reasons. "The numbers were clear. The policy did not work," Padilla said. "So to try to return to a similar policy makes no sense to me." Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) was even more scathing. "If these changes were being considered under Trump, Democrats would be in outrage, but because we want to win an election Latinos and immigrants now find themselves on the altar of sacrifice," Menendez said in a statement. House strategy Meanwhile, in an attempt to undercut the Senate’s border package, Johnson released a separate bill over the weekend that would provide $14 billion for Israel with no strings attached — a shift after the House passed a similar bill in November that also included cuts to IRS funding. The earlier bill went nowhere in the Senate. But Johnson’s new effort might backfire. The House Freedom Caucus came out against Johnson’s bill on Sunday because it is not paid for. The hard-right caucus said Johnson was "reversing course" by not requiring the Israel funding to be offset. Johnson’s bill would have to be passed by suspending the rules of the House, which requires the support of two-thirds of lawmakers, including many Democrats. And that looks like a problem for its chances after House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) denounced the bill as "a cynical attempt to undermine the Senate’s bipartisan effort." Read less After months of talks, Senate negotiators on Sunday released a sweeping bipartisan border security deal that is aimed at discouraging migrants from crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. The $118 billion national security legislation also includes billions of dollars in funding for Ukraine, Israel, the Indo-Pacific and humanitarian aid, but it has a politically perilous path ahead. Even before seeing its contents, lawmakers on both the right — and, to a lesser extent, the left — flanks in Congress have slammed the measure and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) called it “dead on arrival” in the chamber. Former president Donald Trump, who has made the border a core campaign issue, opposes the deal. Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) announced that he would
...Read more hold the first procedural vote on the legislation on Wednesday, leaving the bill’s boosters little time to sell its provisions. “Senators must shut out the noise from those who want this agreement to fail for their own political agendas,” he said in a statement Sunday evening. The legislation — a top priority for President Biden — would, if passed, mark the first significant action taken by Congress on immigration in decades. It attempts to close loopholes in the asylum process, limit the use of parole for migrants at the border and give the president new authority to effectively shut down the border to migrants when attempted crossings are high. “Get it to my desk so I can sign it into law immediately,” Biden said in a statement. An administration official also said Sunday the bill would help Israel “replenish its air defenses” as it continues its offensive against Hamas in Gaza, as well as provide funds for U.S. Central Command as it defends positions in Iraq and Syria and continues to clash with Yemen’s Houthis in the Red Sea. Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), the lead Republican negotiator, called the bill’s changes to asylum “dramatic,” and predicted it would discourage migrants from attempting to come to the United States if passed. “People come in mass numbers because they’re getting released,” into the country, Lankford said in an interview Sunday. “If the word gets out immediately that it’s not true anymore, people will come in a more orderly fashion.” The proposal would make it harder for migrants to apply for and qualify for asylum. The bill also encourages quicker resolutions to asylum cases at the border and creates a new removal authority to speedily remove migrants who don’t qualify for asylum. The bill includes a trigger mechanism that would allow the border to be effectively shut down to migrants if crossings have been particularly high for several days in a row. (Around 1,400 migrants would still be able to qualify for asylum at ports of entry.) That “border emergency” provision, which expires in three years, would automatically kick in when crossings reached 5,000 per day for several days, but a president could choose to use the tool at a lower number, 4,000 per day. The legislation also scales back the Biden administration’s use of parole at land ports of entry and provides for the hiring of thousands of new Border Patrol and asylum officers, as well as increasing detention capacity. The proposal also includes some Democratic priorities, including adding thousands more family-based and employment-based visas, allowing work authorization for spouses of U.S. citizens awaiting immigrant visas and guaranteeing access to counsel for child migrants in removal proceedings. The legislation also allows for work visas for those who do qualify for asylum. Republicans initially demanded a border policy change to pass $60 billion in Ukraine aid requested by the White House last year, and the final deal contains many tough border provisions that Republicans have long hoped to implement. But the politics of the deal abruptly changed when Trump and his allies began attacking the idea of passing any border legislation — fearful that addressing the border crisis might remove a potent campaign issue for him in an election year. Many Senate Republicans have signaled that they will not support the package, and some have mischaracterized its contents as negotiators took months to finalize the bill text. “It’s remarkable that we were able to change not just policy over the course of negotiations but the politics of the Democratic base that (they) accepted border security,” said one frustrated Republican senator who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak freely about the likely Republican presidential nominee. “And here we are, Trump once again snatches defeat from the jaws of victory.” Johnson said this weekend he planned a vote in the House on billions in aid to Israel without money for Ukraine or the border, further complicating the Senate deal’s prospects. “The House is willing to lead and the reason we have to take care of this Israel situation right now is because the situation has escalated,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” before the release of the text. In a letter to his Democratic colleagues, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called Johnson’s new Israel-only bill “a cynical attempt to undermine the Senate’s bipartisan effort.” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has been supportive of the deal, however, as he publicly fights for continued aid to Ukraine as it struggles to fend off a Russian invasion. Schumer has also firmly backed negotiations led by Lankford, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and the White House, arguing that it is the Senate’s responsibility to ensure Russian President Vladimir Putin does not continue his assault on a European nation. The United States has sent $44 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since the 2022 invasion, but the Biden administration warned late last year that it had reached the end of its ability to continue to arm Ukraine absent congressional help. Republican lawmakers began to object to sending more money to the nation last year as polls showed their voters souring on the idea. “The challenges we face will not resolve themselves, nor will our adversaries wait for America to muster the resolve to meet them,” McConnell said in a statement. “The Senate must carefully consider the opportunity in front of us and prepare to act.” Border officials in December processed the most migrants ever recorded in one month — around 300,000 — and Biden has said he wants congressional help to ease the crisis. A majority of voters disapprove of his handling of the border, polls show, making the issue a potential liability for him as he seeks reelection in 2024. The overall aid package includes $14 billion in assistance for Israel, $60 billion for Ukraine and $4.83 billion to Indo-Pacific nations. It also has $9.2 billion in humanitarian aid for civilians in Gaza, the West Bank, Ukraine and other nations, as well as $20 billion in U.S. border funds. (The bill explicitly denies federal funding to UNRWA, the U.N. agency that aids Palestinians, following allegations that 12 of its 13,000 employees were involved in the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel.) Its $118 billion overall price tag is now higher than the White House’s initial request of $106 billion. The talks have been unusual, given that past efforts at bipartisan immigration reform included discussions of providing pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already living in the country demanded by Democrats, in addition to tightening border restrictions. Some immigrant rights groups expressed dismay at the border deal on Sunday. Kica Matos, president of the National Immigration Law Center, said the bill would lead to “more families separated, more children detained, and more people sent back to face persecution, torture, and even death.” “Instead of enacting draconian policies that create more chaos, we urge the White House and Senate Democrats to change course, reject this framework, and recommit to building an orderly, humane, and functioning immigration system,” she said in a statement. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said on Sunday he was opposed to the bill, comparing it to “failed Trump-era immigration policies.” Republicans who support this deal are urging their colleagues to back it, arguing there is no way they would get border restrictions even if Trump is elected president, given that Democrats are unlikely to cooperate with him without demanding legalization for undocumented immigrants as part of the process. “This is a unique moment,” Sinema said last month. “And I think we should take it.” The politics of the issue rapidly changed after Trump signaled his displeasure with a deal and as he appears primed to lock up the Republican presidential nomination. A faction of Lankford’s home-state Republican Party even voted to censure him for his role in the negotiations. “I’m an optimistic person, period,” Lankford said Thursday. “And that’s one of the reasons I’m still standing here after being hit in the face repetitively for a while.” Johnson and other Republicans opposed to the deal have incorrectly argued, even before the text was released, that the bill would let more migrants into the country. “We’ll no longer have people just entering the country, and maybe going to court in the next seven or ten years,” Sinema said Sunday on “Face the Nation” on CBS. “Instead, we’ll make swift justice. Folks who do qualify for asylum will be on a rapid path, six months or less, to start a new life in America. And those who do not qualify will quickly be returned to their home countries.” Senate Republicans have said they want at least a few days to read the legislation before voting behind closed doors to see how much support the deal has in the conference. And some senators, including Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), have said it’s unrealistic to begin voting on the legislation this week. If fewer than 25 Republicans support it, its fate is dim. “I, for one, think it is a mistake to send this bill to the House without a majority of the Republican conference,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a booster of the negotiations who has argued he believes the deal would help solve the border crisis. If the legislation does pass the Senate, it faces just a tough road in the House, where many Republicans have already come out against the legislation. The opposition puts pressure on Johnson, who is trying to corral a fragile and small GOP majority while simultaneously fending off threats to his job. He told his colleagues in a letter over the weekend that failure to include him in Senate negotiations “has eliminated the ability for swift consideration” of the bill. Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), the House majority leader, declared in a social media post on Sunday that the deal would not receive a vote in the House. Lankford responded to Johnson’s criticism on Sunday. “If the House wants to be able to take it up and amend it that is completely within the right of the House to be able to do that,” he said. Read less Let's get this straight now," Texas Representative Troy Nehls told Rolling Stone on Wednesday. "Congress doesn't have to do anything to secure our southern border." That's right: the GOP is so concerned about the country's border crisis that they are getting ready to do exactly nothing about it. Wielding a cigar, the right-winger insisted that Joe Biden could solve immigration on his own, but "he doesn’t want to fix the border"-he wants to pass a compromise bill to bolster his reelection campaign. "Now, why would I help Joe Biden improve his dismal 33 percent?" The remarks were a wide-open window into House Republicans’ thinking on the Senate’s border bill-the text of which is expected soon-and into the political dynamics that threaten to kill the proposal
...Read more and possibly make James Lankford the GOP’s latest intraparty pariah. The Oklahoma senator has been one of the lead negotiators on the forthcoming deal, along with Democrat Chris Murphy and independent Kyrsten Sinema, and has touted the work not only as necessary to easing the recent surge of border crossings, but as the very ransom Republicans had demanded in holding Ukraine aid hostage in exchange for more stringent immigration policies. "We actually locked arms together and said, 'We’re not going to give money for this. We want a change in law,’" Lankford told Fox News Sunday last week. "It’s interesting a few months later," he added, "when we’re finally getting to the end, they’re like, 'Oh, just kidding, I actually don’t want a change in law because it's a presidential election year.’" The do-nothing conference is openly seeking to obstruct Biden to help Donald Trump, who has promised to "fight [the bill] all the way." But in trying to do something, Lankford is getting caught in the crossfire-censured by the Oklahoma GOP and facing pushback from colleagues like Ted Cruz, all as Trump hints at coming attacks. "Who is negotiating this bill?" Trump asked during an appearance in Washington on Wednesday. That was surely a warning from the former president, who has made little secret of his desire to keep the border an open issue in his 2024 campaign and whose allies have dutifully lined up against the compromise. "This deal sucks," Florida Republican Byron Donalds told ABC News. "The president can put a stop to this," Louisiana’s Mike Johnson said Wednesday, in his first floor speech as House Speaker, putting the blame on Biden and Alejandro Mayorkas, the Homeland Security secretary facing articles of impeachment. "If President Biden wants us to believe he’s serious about protecting our national security, he needs to demonstrate good faith and take immediate action to secure that border." Johnson is one to talk about "good faith." For years, he and Republicans like him have been demanding laws—that is, congressional action, not the executive orders they’re calling on Biden to issue now—to tighten security at the border, as the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake pointed out Wednesday. Even Trump—Mr. Build The Wall himself—claimed as president that the "long term" responsibility for the border rested with Congress. "Democrats must change our immigration laws right now," he said in 2019 when his opponents controlled the lower chamber. Now that there’s a Democrat in the White House, though, the responsibility appears to have shifted. Part of the GOP’s game of hot potato is due to their own dysfunction; if Johnson were to take any action that upsets Trump and, by extension, any member of his conference, it could mean his job. But it’s also because the mission of the contemporary Republican Party is not to implement policy so much as it is to work to get one man elected. Anything that threatens the latter—whether it’s a tax bill or even what is likely to be a pretty stringent border proposal—is fundamentally in conflict with that purpose. And so what seems to Lankford a chance to enact more conservative immigration policy is, to Republicans like Nehls, nothing more than volunteer work for the Biden reelection campaign. For many in the GOP, accepting the deal would be to extinguish one of their favorite 2024 talking points. The Oklahoma senator is urging his fellow conservatives to "have a longer look than 10 months from now" when Trump’s authoritarian vision gets tested at the polls. But for the former president and his Capitol Hill confederates, the possibility of a win in November trumps any policy win they can notch now—even if that means "rooting for chaos," as Murphy put it last week. "They want to keep the border in a chaotic situation," the Democratic negotiator said of Trump’s allies, "for political purposes." Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced that LambdaVision, based in Farmington, was named “Innovator of the Month.” LambdaVision is a biotechnology company developing the first protein-based artificial retina to help restore vision to those who are blind due to retinal degenerative diseases. LambdaVision has secured over $10 million to date in funding, including NASA funding to conduct nine flights to the International Space Station in low-Earth orbit, where they are exploring the benefits of microgravity for on-orbit production of this revolutionary retinal technology. “Losing your sight can be devastating, especially when there are so few effective treatments for retinal degenerative diseases. I am proud to recognize LambdaVision for rethinking how we tackle
...Read more this problem. Their innovative approach has restored hope to so many families, and I look forward to seeing their continued success in Connecticut,” said Murphy. “As a UConn Technology Incubation Program company deeply embedded in our community and the thriving Connecticut biotech ecosystem, it is an honor to be recognized by Senator Murphy for our innovative work. Our hope is that our pioneering efforts in biotech research in space will lay groundwork that will improve the future for patients and change the trajectory for many industries,” said Nicole Wagner, Ph.D., CEO of LambdaVision. LambdaVision’s artificial retina is one of the first technologies being evaluated on the International Space Station that has potential for clinical use, and the established microgravity manufacturing processes, quality control methods, and laboratory techniques provide a foundation for future clinical research in space. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), along with U.S. Representatives Rosa DeLauro (CT-03), John Larson (CT-01), Joe Courtney (CT-02), Jim Himes (CT-04), and Jahana Hayes (CT-05), released today a statement in response to a report that the U.S. Army would cancel its Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) program. “We are extremely disappointed that the Army has decided to walk away from the FARA program. We have been told on multiple occasions by the Army that FARA was their number one priority. This is a complete reversal of that position. “Sikorsky has the world’s greatest workforce when it comes to vertical lift aircraft and decades of proven results when it comes to supplying the U.S. Armed Forces and militaries across the
...Read more globe with safe dependable military and commercial aircraft. We demand that the Army provides us with a detailed explanation of how they plan to achieve crucial aviation capabilities, thoughtfully prepare our national defense for the future, and utilize the exceptional and seasoned workforce at Sikorsky for generations to come.” Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke at a U.S. Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee hearing on the high cost of prescription drugs in the United States. In his questions to Johnson & Johnson CEO Joaquin Duato and Bristol Myers Squibb CEO Chris Boerner, Murphy pressed the executives on why the prices of lifesaving medications are so high for Americans as pharmaceutical companies dole out billions of dollars to shareholders. Murphy pushed back on Boerner’s claim that the U.S. health care system prioritizes patient choice, highlighting the story of a constituent on Medicare who has no choice but to pay $350 a month for a drug she relies on: “I have a constituent who needs Eliquis. This is a blood thinner that is critical to her survival. She has
...Read more priced a Medicare plan that gets her the best possible price. And that price is $350 a month. The average Social Security benefit in Connecticut is about $1,700 a month, and of course someone who is on Eliquis is likely on other drugs as well. So, here's her choice. Her choice is to pay the $350 and go without food or pay her rent late, or not take the drug and risk heart attack or stroke. Is that the choice you're talking about when you refer to a health care system that prioritizes the important role of choice?” Murphy asked Duato why Johnson & Johnson spends billions more on stock buyback and dividends than research and development: “What do you say to Americans who look at the way that you allocate revenue and wonder why, in your case for instance, you are spending $6 billion on stock buybacks, $11 billion on dividends, and $14 billion on research and development? You spend all of your advertising time talking about the research and development spent, but I think most Americans would be pretty surprised, given how much the industry talks about research and development, that you are actually spending more money shelling out money to investors and buying back stock than you are on research and development. What do you say to folks who look at that and come to the conclusion that you care much more about keeping your investors happy and keeping your executives happy than you do in researching and developing the next class of drugs that's going to help regular people?” A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Duato and Boerner: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this really important hearing. Mr. Duato, looking at your arthritis drug — and we've talked already a little in this hearing about the difference in price between the United States and other countries — annual cost is around $80,000 in the United States, $20,000 in Canada, $12,000 in France. Are the prices that you receive from a country like Canada or France, which look to me to be about one quarter of the price that you get in the United States, are those prices covering your costs?” DUATO: “Just to clarify Senator, the price in the U.S. is discounted by 70 percent. So, the appropriate comparison would be $25,000 in the case of the Stelara, if you are considering that price.” MURPHY: “Are the prices you're receiving from these other countries, so let's say France – I'll give you the benefit of your argument – France is still 50 percent of the U.S. cost that you're claiming, are those countries' prices covering your costs?” DUATO: “They do. The difference is that, for example in Canada, which was the first company quoted, Stelara, which is mainly dedicated for inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, not for arthritis, is not yet reimbursed in the public system. So Canadian patients that want to access Stelara, they cannot do it in the public system, because eight years later, it’s not yet reimbursed there.” MURPHY: “So you don't identify any free rider syndrome today in which the United States is paying higher prices, allowing other nations to receive lower prices?” DUATO: “I agree with you that the prices in the U.S. are generally higher for medicines, more aligned than what you are describing as the rest of the healthcare system prices. The percentage of pharmaceutical expenses over the total healthcare expenses in the U.S. is 14%, and that is lower than most of the advanced economies. The real difference is that in the U.S., patients get access to therapy, life-saving therapy years before they do in the countries that you mentioned.” MURPHY: “If the United States were to restrict the prices we pay, would that create a different negotiating dynamic in countries that right now, for instance, are paying 50 percent of what the United States pays? Would it allow you in your negotiations to get higher prices from other nations that right now are paying far less than the United States?” DUATO: “We believe that price caps are not the way that innovation is going to be fostered. We have worked with the United States State Department and U.S. embassies around the world to try to reject the price caps that some countries as the ones you're mentioning impose. And we welcome the support of the U.S. government in avoiding that these governments ultimately impose price caps on us that are not benefiting their patients neither.” MURPHY: “What do you say to Americans who look at the way that you allocate revenue and wonder why, in your case for instance, you are spending $6 billion on stock buybacks, $11 billion on dividends, and $14 billion on research and development? You spend all of your advertising time talking about the research and development spent, but I think most Americans would be pretty surprised, given how much the industry talks about research and development, that you are actually spending more money shelling out money to investors and buying back stock than you are on research and development. What do you say to folks who look at that and come to the conclusion that you care much more about keeping your investors happy and keeping your executives happy than you do in researching and developing the next class of drugs that's going to help regular people?” DUATO: “We care deeply about patients, Senator, and we care deeply about being able to discover the next medicines that are going to address major problems like Alzheimer’s—" MURPHY: “But explain to me how you justify that division of dividends and stock buybacks versus future development. You could just choose, instead of using $6 billion to buy back stock to put that into more research and development, but you don't.” DUATO: “Our level of R&D investment in the two years that refer to the $6 billion program buyback, which were 2022 and 2023, is six times higher. So, in that period, we invested $30 billion dollars in R&D and $6 billion in stock buybacks. So, we spent six times more in developing cures for patients than we did in stock buybacks.” MURPHY: “Well, I'm looking at 2022 profits and spending by Johnson and Johnson and it shows me $11 billion in dividends, $6 billion in stock buybacks, $45 million in executive compensation, and $14 billion in research and development. Can you understand — let me ask a different question — can you understand that one of my constituents in Connecticut would look at those numbers and think that you care more about padding the pockets of the folks that work for you and invest in you than in research and development?” DUATO: “Our priority is investing in R&D. We have spent $77 billion since 2016. And yes, we have to pay dividends because it's the only way that the company can remain operational and sustainable. Otherwise, if we are not operational and sustainable, we are not able to fulfill our mission of developing medicines for patients and making them affordable.” MURPHY: “Mr. Boerner, you talked in your testimony about how the United States has a health care system that prioritizes the important role of patient choice. I just want to present you with the case of one of my constituents and ask you about the choices that she faces. So, I have a constituent who needs Eliquis. This is a blood thinner that is critical to her survival. She has priced a Medicare plan that gets her the best possible price. And that price is $350 a month. The average Social Security benefit in Connecticut is about $1,700 a month, and of course someone who is on Eliquis is likely on other drugs as well. So, here's her choice. Her choice is to pay the $350 and go without food or pay her rent late, or not take the drug and risk heart attack or stroke. Is that the choice you're talking about when you refer to a health care system that prioritizes the important role of choice?” BOERNER: “Senator, absolutely not. And in fact, I would say on behalf of all of our employees at Bristol Myers Squibb, that is a choice that no patient should have to make.” MURPHY: “But she makes it. She makes it because you have chosen to price a drug at a point that is unaffordable.” BOERNER: “Senator, we have priced Eliquis in the U.S., in our estimation — in fact, we try to do this for all of our medicines — consistent with the value it brings. We're very happy with the fact that Eliquis is the leading anti-stroke drug.” MURPHY: “Why not take — You put $8 billion into stock buybacks. Why not do $4 billion and instead take the rest of the money and bring the price of the drug down?” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Wednesday joined 18 of his Senate colleagues in co-sponsoring an amendment to require that the weapons received by any country under the proposed national security supplemental are used in accordance with existing U.S. law, international humanitarian law, and the law of armed conflict. The amendment also requires that the president report to Congress on whether countries receiving military equipment paid for by American taxpayers meet that test and whether the use of U.S-supplied weapons comports with established presidential directives on arms transfers and Defense Department policies for reducing harm to civilians. It
...Read more would also buttress current law that prohibits U.S. security assistance to any country that prevents or restricts U.S. humanitarian assistance to those in need, subject to a presidential waiver. The amendment does not apply to funds for air defense systems or other systems that the president determines will be used for strictly defensive purposes. “The United States has a legal obligation to ensure the security assistance we send to our allies and partners abroad is used in accordance with existing U.S. law, international law, and the law of armed conflict. This amendment reaffirms those fundamental principles. “The mass slaughter, rape, and other atrocities perpetrated by Hamas on October 7 were unbelievably, shockingly brutal. Any government would be obligated to respond to such an attack, hold the perpetrators accountable, and keep its citizens safe. President Biden was right to stand in solidarity with Israel in the wake of the deadliest attack against the Jewish people since the Holocaust. I continue to strongly support Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas and other terrorist groups, and I believe Israel must eliminate the threat from Hamas and secure the release of all Israeli and American citizens being held hostage. I have spent the past four months negotiating a national security supplemental package that includes $14 billion in security assistance to Israel to advance that goal. “However, I am concerned that the way in which the Netanyahu government is currently prosecuting the war in Gaza is killing far too many civilians and risks a prolonged conflict that will engulf the region. While millions of innocent people are relying on lifesaving humanitarian aid, just a fraction of the assistance that is needed is entering Gaza. The Biden administration has repeatedly communicated these concerns both privately and publicly, and now Congress should similarly reinforce that the aid we send – even to our closest allies – is being used in a way that is consistent with our values and existing law,” said Murphy. The amendment would: Require that the weapons received by any country under this bill are used in accordance with U.S. law, international humanitarian law and the law of armed conflict.
Require that the president obtain assurances that any country receiving weapons through this bill cooperate fully with U.S.-supported efforts to provide humanitarian assistance to those in need, subject to a presidential waiver.
Require that the president report to the Congress within 30 days on whether each country receiving U.S. security assistance through this bill is:
Using U.S.-funded military equipment in accordance with:
Their intended purposes and U.S. end-use monitoring programs;
international humanitarian law, the law of armed conflict, and U.S. law;
the President’s 2023 Conventional Arms Transfer (CAT) Policy and the Defense Department’s Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Action Plan (CHMR-AP);
Fully cooperating with U.S. efforts and U.S-supported international efforts to provide humanitarian assistance to civilians.
Clarify that these provisions do not apply to funds for air defense systems or other systems that the president determines will be used for strictly defensive purposes. Text of the amendment is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Representative Alma Adams (D-N.C.-12), a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and Labor, on Wednesday reintroduced legislation to promote gender equity in college and K-12 sports. The Fair Play for Women Act would promote fairness and equity in participation opportunities and institutional support for women's and girls' sports programs, ensure transparency and public reporting of data by college and K-12 athletic programs, hold athletic programs and athletic associations more accountable for Title IX violations and discriminatory treatment, and improve education and
...Read more awareness of Title IX rights among college and K-12 athletes as well as athletics staff. U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and U.S. Representatives Lori Trahan (D-Mass.-03) and Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.-01) co-sponsored the legislation. “For every dollar colleges spend on recruiting athletes for men’s sports, they spend 58 cents recruiting for women’s sports. That statistic isn’t an outlier – it’s just one example of the huge gap in resources between women’s and men’s sports from K-12 all the way through college. I’m proud to be working with Representatives Adams, Trahan, and Bonamici on this legislation to increase accountability of schools and athletic associations, educate athletes about their Title IX rights, and most importantly, ensure that sports programs for women and girls finally get the equal support they’re entitled to and have long deserved,” said Murphy. “Sports change lives. They provide a safe harbor for the wayward energies of young people, directing them toward productive futures through diligence, endurance, good health, teamwork, sportsmanship, and fairness on the field. Sports provide a redemption from the past, a refuge for the present, and opportunities for the future. Knowing all this, how could we rest if these opportunities are not fairly provided to our girls as well as our boys? Sports are nothing if not fair. I’m proud to champion fairness on the field, and Fair Play for Women,” said Adams. The Fair Play for Women Act really is about fairness—enabling women and girls to have equitable opportunities in sports and holding schools accountable when they don’t. The stark truth is that despite progress after Title IX, women and girls still face fewer opportunities than boys to participate in sports and insufficient resources for their teams. This necessary legislation will confront the continued lack of gender equity and fairness in sports,” said Blumenthal. “Women’s sports have seen an explosion of interest over the past decade, and at the collegiate level, they’ve largely had to do it on their own. Schools have routinely exploited Title IX loopholes that deprive women athletes of roster spots while the NCAA and conferences have historically underinvested in the promotion and accessibility of women’s sporting events,” said Trahan. “The Fair Play for Women Act would build on the progress initiated by the Kaplan report by finally requiring the power brokers of college athletics to live up to the spirit of Title IX. That includes barring schools from double or triple counting women athletes, counting men’s practice players as women, and overcounting women athletes on their rosters. Any action Congress takes with respect to college sports should contain these basic reforms so women athletes have a fair chance to succeed.” “For too long, schools have fallen short of the standard of equal opportunity set by Title IX. Athletic programs routinely devote fewer resources and less support to women’s sports at every level of education, depriving women and girls of the full benefits that sports provide. The Fair Play for Women Act will strengthen Title IX protections and increase transparency so all student athletes have the same opportunities to participate and compete,” said Bonamici. Specifically, the Fair Play for Women Act would: Hold schools and athletic associations accountable for discriminatory treatment. The bill would codify that state and intercollegiate athletic associations, including the NCAA, cannot discriminate based on sex, along with asserting non-discrimination protections within all school-based athletics, including club and intramural sports. It would also provide a robust private right of action for all athletes in their discrimination claims, making it easier for athletes to push for change at their schools. The bill would authorize the Department of Education to levy civil penalties on schools that repeatedly discriminate against athletes, with and require schools to submit publicly available plans to remedy violations, providing more tools to compel compliance and resolve ongoing discrimination.
Expand reporting requirements for college and K-12 athletics data and make all information easily accessible to the public. The bill would establish a one-stop shop for key athletics data by expanding the scope and detail of reporting by colleges, extending these requirements to include athletics at elementary and secondary schools, and requiring the Secretary of Education to house all data on the same public website. The bill also requires that schools certify the data they submit and report how they are claiming Title IX compliance, and requires an annual public report by the Department of Education on gender equity. These provisions will help weed out reporting tricks by programs to skirt non-discrimination laws and make it easier for athletes and stakeholders to evaluate persisting gaps in athletic programs or use publicly available data in their claims against schools.
Improve education of Title IX rights among athletes, staff, and stakeholders. The bill would require Title IX trainings on an annual basis for all athletes, Title IX coordinators, and athletic department and athletic association staff. The bill would also establish a public database of all Title IX coordinators at colleges and K-12 schools, included in the one-stop shop for athletics data. These provisions will ensure all people involved with K-12 and college athletics understand what Title IX means and what students’ rights are under the law. A one-pager is available here. The Drake Group, Girls, Inc., National Organization for Women (NOW), National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), National Women's Political Caucus, Voice in Sport Foundation, Women's Sports Foundation endorsed the legislation. “Title IX opened many doors for women and has created tremendous progress for girls and women in sports. However, as a majority of schools in the U.S remain out of compliance, it is imperative to strengthen Title IX through education, enforcement, and data transparency. The VOICEINSPORT Foundation wholeheartedly supports the Fair Play for Women Act. Senator Murphy and Representative Adams are steadfast champions of girls and women in sports. Their continued commitment to driving equity in sports is exemplified in this bill, which will build off the work of countless women before us to create an equal playing field,” said Stef Strack, CEO and Founder of the VOICEINSPORT Foundation. "The Fair Play for Women Act is a step in the right direction to reach true equity for student-athletes," said WSF CEO Danette Leighton. "For 50 years, the Women's Sports Foundation has championed a simple message: when girls and women play, society wins. That's why we applaud the introduction of this bill, as it seeks to help more girls and women play, compete and lead -- in sports and beyond -- without barriers." "All students deserve the same opportunity to thrive in sports, regardless of gender. The Fair Play for Women Act would address existing gaps in Title IX while providing support for generations of women and girls to come. The National Women's Political Caucus is proud to support legislation that would bring us one step closer to gender equity in the United States,” said NWPC President, Deidre Malone. “The Drake Group applauds the Senator Murphy and Representative Adams' teams for stepping up to the plate to provide better Title IX compliance tools through the Fair Play for Women Act. The legislation closes significant collegiate athletics reporting loopholes and establishes long overdue K-12 reporting and training obligations. As important, the Act provides for a private right of action and civil penalties as well as clearly holding athletics governance associations accountable for discriminatory treatment. This is good, common sense gender equity legislation deserving of widespread non-partisan support,” said Donna A. Lopiano, Ph.D., President, The Drake Group. "Research shows that involvement in sports builds girls' confidence and enhances their physical and mental health," said Dr. Stephanie J. Hull, President and CEO of Girls Inc. "Improving access to athletics in schools offers benefits for girls that range from greater academic achievement and higher earning potential, to healthier life choices and reduced risk of several serious illnesses, including breast cancer and heart disease." Murphy along with U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and U.S. Representative Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.-16) introduced the College Athlete Right to Organize Act, legislation to provide collective bargaining rights for college athletes. Murphy and U.S. Representative Lori Trahan (D-Mass.-03) also wrote the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act, which grants unrestricted rights to college athletes over the use of their name, image, and likeness. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday released the following statement after Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the bipartisan national security supplemental: “Senate Republicans are now just as dysfunctional as House Republicans. I spent four months in good-faith negotiations with Senator Lankford and Senator Sinema because Republicans demanded aid to Ukraine be tied to one of our most complex domestic policy issues. We achieved what almost everyone said was impossible – the first serious bipartisan border compromise in a decade. Republicans asked for this, and yet within 24 hours, they backed down because Donald Trump told them to preserve chaos at the border because he thinks it helps him politically. The American people want us to solve tough problems
...Read more like fixing the broken asylum system, and it’s shameful Republicans would rather yell about the border on cable news than pass legislation. But the future of global stability and desperately needed humanitarian aid hangs in the balance, so I am ready to pass a supplemental funding bill with or without the border provisions.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security and a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor on Republicans blocking the national security supplemental. “We delivered a bipartisan bill to fix the border with the Republican senator appointed by the Republican caucus to cut the deal. And within 24 hours, before the ink was even dry, Republican senators decided they don't want a bipartisan bill to fix the border. They want to pretend they never asked for a bipartisan border bill. Because what they actually want is chaos. Because that's what Donald Trump says he wants,” Murphy said. Murphy continued: “How did Senate Republicans tell us they wanted a bipartisan
...Read more bill only to end up opposing the very bill that they asked for? Well, here's the simple truth, and there's no way around this. Republicans don't want to fix the border. They want the border to remain chaotic. They want the asylum system to remain broken. Because Republicans in this country don't view the border as a problem to fix anymore. They view it as a problem that needs to be exploited.” On Republicans choosing to prioritize Donald Trump’s re-election over passing a bipartisan national security supplemental: “There's only one person that matters to Republicans, and his name is Donald Trump. Donald Trump made it clear last month. He told Republicans they should oppose any bipartisan bill to fix the border, and he meant it. To Trump it didn't matter at all, what the policy, what the substance was. His only advice was 'kill any bipartisan bill.' Why? Because President Trump wants to win an election. And if the border is fixed by a bipartisan bill, then that hurts his reelection chances. Trump wants chaos at the border because it helps him personally. He asked Republicans to back him, and nearly every single senator did exactly that, less than 48 hours after introduction of this bill. This country should be outraged. Regular people out there don't think this is a game. They don't think that the only thing that matters is Donald Trump's election odds.” He concluded: “There used to be a difference between House Republicans and Senate Republicans. I used to explain this fact to my constituents all the time. I'd defend my Senate Republican colleagues; I'd explain how Trump doesn't control the Senate Republican Caucus like he controls the House. I don't think that's true any longer. I think this conference is just as big a mess as the conference in the House. And that's terrible for the border, which will remain a wreck because Republicans have just chosen to keep it that way. That's terrible for Ukraine, which will soon be overrun by Russia because Republicans have chosen to leave it undefended. And that's terrible for America because the one group of Republicans that used to be able to exercise original thought and independent judgment now just seems to be another subsidiary of the Trump campaign.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Mr. President, this is unbelievable. Like, I can't believe this is happening. We were all here. This wasn't a dream. This really happened. Republicans all stood up and said that they wanted a bipartisan bill to fix the border. The border is a priority. The border is a crisis. “We delivered a bipartisan bill to fix the border with the Republican senator appointed by the Republican caucus to cut the deal. And within 24 hours, before the ink was even dry, Republican senators decided they don't want a bipartisan bill to fix the border. They want to pretend they never asked for a bipartisan border bill. Because what they actually want is chaos. Because that's what Donald Trump says he wants. “What the hell just happened? Here's what happened. Because the facts are just the facts. In October, Republicans refused to support funding for Ukraine. They voted against stopping Putin from making Kyiv a Russian city, not because they opposed Ukrainian funding, they said. No, because they demanded that Ukraine funding be paired with bipartisan border reform. Democrats took them at their word. America took Republicans at their word. These two things had to be combined. Republicans appointed a lead negotiator, one of their most conservative members, a serious legislator: Senator Lankford, an unquestioned border hawk. I represented the Democratic caucus in those negotiations. “Now I'll be honest with you, a lot of my friends told me that I was crazy. They told me that I was hopelessly naïve. That Republicans are never going to agree to a bipartisan bill to fix the border. This is just a setup. I shouldn't go into the negotiating room. It's a trap. But I did because you know what? I am an optimist, maybe a hopeless optimist. I still believe that when people say things in this body, they mean what they say. “And I do believe that the border is a mess. It is too chaotic. We can't handle 10,000 people crossing on some days. I believe the asylum system is broken, and my constituents, whether they be right or left, believe the asylum system is broken. It shouldn't take 10 years to process an asylum claim, especially when the majority of those asylum claims are ultimately rejected. So, I went into the room skeptical that we could get a deal, but sincere, because my party actually wants to fix the problem at the border. And we are willing to reach out across the aisle and find a compromise in order to do it. “And so we met for months. Every day. We took Thanksgiving off, we took Christmas off, but that was it. Because Republicans told us that they wanted a bipartisan border deal. We met every Saturday, every Sunday. We worked straight through the holidays because we saw an opportunity to cut through the politics to get a bipartisan agreement done to finally start fixing the border. We saw that opportunity because Republican senators told the country that if we could find an agreement with their appointed negotiator on border policy, then they would support it and they would support funding for Ukraine. “And against the odds, we made the deal. We actually achieved the compromise. And here's just a snapshot of what it does. It allows the president to close portions of the border on those days when 10,000 people are crossing to funnel people who are applying for asylum in a much more orderly manner, to make sure that you don't have those chaotic scenes that we have watched on the news. It reforms the asylum system, a comprehensive reform, so that it doesn't take 10 years to get your asylum claim adjudicated. That it will take months. It screens individuals so that no longer are we going to let people into the country who don't have a likely positive claim of asylum. It allows more people to come into the country legally. “We expand visas so that folks can find non asylum pathways to come to the country to reunite with family or to work. It speaks to our values by making sure that the most vulnerable people who come to the country, like young unaccompanied kids, have an advocate standing next to them when they're making their case for an asylum claim. It honors the commitment we made to our Afghan partners by allowing those individuals who are in the country today to have a pathway to citizenship. And it speaks to the nightmare in many cities where you have immigrants who can't work on the streets and in homeless shelters. It makes sure that we get more immediate work permits to individuals who do have legitimate claims for asylum. “This bill is not comprehensive immigration reform, but it would fix the crisis at the border. It would immediately give the president tools to start better managing the border. “We released the text of the bill on Sunday night at 7pm. The first serious bipartisan compromise on border policy in a decade. A breakthrough, a real chance for this nation to come together on an issue, immigration, that too often divides us. And within 24 hours, by 7pm Monday night, almost every single Senate Republican, including the Senate Republicans who set us on the mission four months ago, declared that they wouldn't support it. “For some of them, it didn't even take that long. When the text of the bill came out, Senator Lee tweeted 'It's 370 pages long, time to start reading.' Three minutes later, he tweeted again, 'No self-respecting Senator should vote for this bill.’ That's either record time for reading a 370 page bill, or, more likely, Senator Lee didn't even open the PDF. “What happened? How did Senate Republicans tell us they wanted a bipartisan bill only to end up opposing the very bill that they asked for? Well, here's the simple truth, and there's no way around this. Republicans don't want to fix the border. They want the border to remain chaotic. They want the asylum system to remain broken. Because Republicans in this country don't view the border as a problem to fix anymore. They view it as a problem that needs to be exploited. “Senate Republicans have been pretty unapologetic about just wanting to keep this issue open as an election issue. Less than 24 hours after the text came out, one senator launched killtheborderbill.com, a website to fundraise for his campaign. Senator Barrasso said today that he can't support the bill, ‘Americans should just go to the upcoming election to solve the border crisis.’ “Maybe I'm a sucker, maybe I should be mad at myself, but yes, I believed that there are enough Senate Republicans of good faith who would actually support Senator Lankford's sincere efforts to work to achieve a bipartisan fix. But I was wrong. Senator Lankford doesn't matter. What his colleagues have put him through is unforgivable. Senator McConnell doesn't matter. The migrants and regular Americans who are getting screwed by a broken immigration system and a broken border don't matter. “There's only one person that matters to Republicans, and his name is Donald Trump. Donald Trump made it clear last month. He told Republicans they should oppose any bipartisan bill to fix the border, and he meant it. To Trump it didn't matter at all, what the policy, what the substance was. His only advice was 'kill any bipartisan bill.' Why? Because President Trump wants to win an election. And if the border is fixed by a bipartisan bill, then that hurts his reelection chances. Trump wants chaos at the border because it helps him personally. He asked Republicans to back him, and nearly every single senator did exactly that, less than 48 hours after introduction of this bill. “This country should be outraged. Regular people out there don't think this is a game. They don't think that the only thing that matters is Donald Trump's election odds. They do think the border is broken. They spent the last 40 years hearing about how the border is a problem, but they don't see any action from Congress. They're sick of this, and they want the two parties to come together to fix the problem. And they're going to be furious to find out that when Republicans here had the chance to support a bipartisan bill that they requested, that they asked for., almost every single Senate Republican opposed that bill because Donald Trump wants to keep the chaos. “There used to be a difference between House Republicans and Senate Republicans. I used to explain this fact to my constituents all the time. I'd defend my Senate Republican colleagues. I'd explain how Trump doesn't control the Senate Republican caucus like he controls the House. I don't think that's true any longer. I think this conference is just as big a mess as the conference in the House. And that's terrible for the border, which will remain a wreck because Republicans have just chosen to keep it that way. That's terrible for Ukraine, which will soon be overrun by Russia because Republicans have chosen to leave it undefended. And that's terrible for America because the one group of Republicans that used to be able to exercise original thought and independent judgment now just seems to be another subsidiary of the Trump campaign. I yield the floor.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday released the following statement on the State of Connecticut’s new social connection campaign. “People are more isolated from each other than ever before, and policymakers cannot continue to ignore the epidemic of loneliness. For over a year, I’ve been leading a conversation in Congress about how to tackle this crisis, and I’m excited to see Connecticut launch this new effort today. At every level of government, we have a role to play in building a society that makes it easier for everyone to live a happier, healthier, and more fulfilling life. I look forward to finding new ways we can work together to build connection in our communities,” said Murphy. Last month, Murphy spoke at the 92nd Winter Meeting of the United States
...Read more Conference of Mayors (USCM), a non-partisan organization of over 250 mayors from cities across the country, to discuss how cities and the federal government can work together to tackle loneliness and foster social connection in their communities. Last year, Murphy introduced the National Strategy for Social Connection Act, which would create an Office of Social Connection Policy within the White House to work across federal agencies to develop effective strategies for improved social infrastructure and issue national guidelines for social connection similar to existing guidelines on sleep, nutrition, and physical activity. It would also provide funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to better understand the epidemic of social isolation and loneliness. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security and a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Sunday released the following statement on text of the national security supplemental bill: “After months of negotiations, we have reached a landmark bipartisan agreement to better manage the border and fix our broken asylum system, while also delivering urgently needed aid to Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, and Taiwan. The current asylum system is outdated and overwhelmed, and our bill gets claims processed more fairly and more quickly. The bill also authorizes a quarter of a million more visas which will reunite thousands of families, gets asylum seekers much more immediate work permits,
...Read more establishes a right to counsel for asylum seekers in expedited removal, and for the first time ever, provides a guarantee of counsel to vulnerable children arriving at the border. We still have work to do, like providing a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and other undocumented people, but this bill is an important down payment on immigration reform. “This bill also affirms the United States’ refusal to stand by and watch Vladimir Putin annex Ukraine and upend the post-World War II order. It also provides the resources needed for the United States to lead the international community in responding to humanitarian crises around the world. The stakes are too high for Congress not to act, and I urge the Senate to vote as soon as possible.” A one pager of the national security supplemental is available here. A section-by-section is available here. Full text of the national supplemental is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security and a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Friday delivered the following remarks following the release of the national security supplemental bill: “First of all, let me say how grateful I am to the work that Senator Schumer and Senator Murray have put into this breakthrough package. Senator Schumer is right. There was not a day that went by without him being deeply connected to the talks that we had between myself, Senator Lankford, and Senator Sinema. Senator Murray had such important work to do to make sure that the funding package honored our agreement with respect to policy changes at the border. “I also want to thank Senator Sinema and
...Read more Senator Lankford. It's no secret that these negotiations were long, and at times torturous, but we produced something important – a bipartisan agreement to help fix our broken asylum system and better manage our border. “Americans know that our immigration system is broken. They see how our current laws leave the border in often chaotic conditions, and Americans have been begging Republicans and Democrats to stop just using the border as a political weapon and get something done. And that's what we did. We decided that instead of complaining about the state of the border or immigration policy, instead of just seeing this issue as unsolvable, or simple election ad fodder, we would come together and try to fix this problem. “So our bill is aggressive. We're creating bold new tools to get control of the border for the first time in a long time. But our bill does not deviate from our nation's core values. We are a nation that rescues people from terror and violence. We are a nation that is stronger because of our tradition of immigration. Our bill fixes the crisis at the border. But our bill also upholds our values as a nation of immigrants. “So here's what our bill does in a snapshot. It gives the president the ability to temporarily stop processing asylum claims but only in between the ports of entry during periods of abnormally high crosses. Importantly, even during these emergency times, the border never fully closes. The President is just better able to manage the border by moving asylum claim processing to the land ports. “The bill reforms the asylum approval process and system so that claims are heard in six months, not 10 years, as is often the case today. That's better for immigrants, but it also reduces an incentive for people with invalid claims to come to the United States knowing now that they won't have ten years inside the country before their claim is rejected. “It raises the screening standard for asylum claims to make sure that people who apply for asylum are the ones that are likely to get it. It gives near immediate work permits to asylum seekers so that we won't have migrants who can't work sleeping on the streets or crowding homeless shelters. “It expands legal pathways to come to the United States. You cannot fix the issue at the border without creating more legal pathways for people to come to United States. This bill includes 250,000 new family and employment visas over the next five years. “The bill includes the Afghan Adjustment Act, so that our brave Afghan partners can finally become citizens. “This bill fixes the problem of so called ‘Documented Dreamers.’ It provides a pathway for citizenship for the kids of H1B holders who under current law can be deported when they turn 21. “This bill includes the first ever right to legal representation for asylum seekers, and even more importantly, for the first time, requires the government to appoint and pay for every unaccompanied minor under the age of 14 to have an attorney help them during their asylum claim. “The bill clarifies that humanitarian parole at the land ports should be used for humanitarian purposes, but it specifically protects the program that President Biden has created to bring in vetted, sponsored immigrants from countries like Venezuela, Haiti, Nicaragua, Cuba, Ukraine. “Now, I'm not going to claim that this bill is comprehensive immigration reform. This bill is a compromise. It does not include things that Democrats still believe are moral imperatives, like providing a pathway to citizenship for undocumented Americans. but it also does not include many Republican priorities. There is no expansion of expedited removal in this bill. There is no increased detention authority. There's no transit ban. There’s no return of Title 42. “This bill is a compromise. But it is a breakthrough. A breakthrough many political opponents didn't think could happen. And so I just think this is a moment for us to step back and look at what we are announcing tonight – a bipartisan bill to fund Ukraine, to fund Israel, to spend billions on humanitarian relief, and pass landmark immigration and border reform. “We should not let Donald Trump or any other bad faith actor stand in the way of getting this done. We shouldn't waste this opportunity to do something good for the country. “So again, I want to thank Senator Schumer and Senator Murray for having the faith and the patience in the process that has bound Senator Lankford, Senator Sinema, and I together over the last four months. I want to thank them specifically for all the work that went into this piece of the emergency supplemental bill, and I look forward to bringing this bipartisan breakthrough products to the floor of the Senate this week.” A one pager of the national security supplemental is available here. A section-by-section is available here. Full text of the national supplemental is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) on Friday led 21 colleagues in a letter to President Biden urging the administration to encourage Israeli officials to take five specific steps to significantly increase urgently needed humanitarian aid for civilians in Gaza. “The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is dire and the civilian suffering is at an unacceptable and staggering level. Ninety-three percent of Palestinians in Gaza are facing crisis levels of hunger. Eighty-five percent of the population is displaced. Seventy percent of those killed are women and children,” the senators wrote. “
...Read more While the scale of the crisis is massive, the humanitarian assistance that is entering Gaza is just a fraction of what is needed to save lives. Since aid operations resumed on October 21, delivery of lifesaving assistance to Gaza continues to be hampered, despite no evidence of Hamas theft or diversion of humanitarian assistance provided via the United Nations or international non-governmental organizations (INGOs).” In order to significantly increase the amount of humanitarian aid entering Gaza, the senators recommended the administration work with Israeli officials to take five specific steps: Repair and open a third border crossing at Erez to provide additional aid to north Gaza. Planned missions by humanitarian actors to reach north Gaza from the south have repeatedly not been allowed to proceed by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) due to cited security concerns, leaving hundreds of thousands living there stranded without enough food, water, and medical supplies and equipment.
Streamline the convoluted inspections process for aid entering via the Rafah and Kerem Shalom border crossings, and issue a pre-approved list of items for entry.
Establish a clear, enforceable deconfliction process inside Gaza to ensure humanitarian organizations can operate safely. Hundreds of health and humanitarian workers have died in Gaza, including humanitarian aid workers who have been killed in areas deemed “safe zones” by the IDF. Israeli authorities should establish a direct line of contact for the humanitarian community to the IDF, as well as hold regular meetings to review incidents and make improvements.
Increase capacity for processing humanitarian aid and restart the import of commercial goods via the border crossing at Kerem Shalom. Before October 7th, hundreds of trucks filled with commercial goods crossed through Kerem Shalom into Gaza every day. The current humanitarian trucking operation can help reduce the suffering, but it cannot substitute for a functioning commercial sector.
Open additional supply routes for humanitarian aid to enter Gaza. Every option must be explored to increase the amount of humanitarian and commercial goods going in, including via Jordan, the West Bank, Ashdod, and maritime routes. To the extent feasible, we also encourage you to explore whether U.S. military assets could help support humanitarian deliveries, via maritime or air routes. “The largest daily amount of humanitarian aid entered Gaza on November 28th, during the seven-day humanitarian pause. Additional and longer humanitarian pauses are needed to enable a surge of assistance to enter Gaza and the safe movement of goods and people within Gaza. A humanitarian pause will also allow people to safely return to their homes in north Gaza. These steps will not solve the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, but taken together, they will alleviate the suffering for millions of people,” they concluded. U.S. Senators Tom Carper (D-Del.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Angus King (I-Maine), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Bob Casey Jr. (D-Pa.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter can be found here and follows below: Dear President Biden, The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is dire and the civilian suffering is at an unacceptable and staggering level. Ninety-three percent of Palestinians in Gaza are facing crisis levels of hunger. Eighty-five percent of the population is displaced. Seventy percent of those killed are women and children. While the scale of the crisis is massive, the humanitarian assistance that is entering Gaza is just a fraction of what is needed to save lives. Since aid operations resumed on October 21, delivery of lifesaving assistance to Gaza continues to be hampered, despite no evidence of Hamas theft or diversion of humanitarian assistance provided via the United Nations or international non-governmental organizations (INGOs). The United Nations system in Gaza, including the more than 13,000 employees of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), plays an indispensable role in providing lifesaving aid to people in need. The allegations that twelve UNRWA employees may have been involved in the October 7th terrorist attack on Israel are extremely troubling, and we welcome the announcement that those individuals were immediately terminated. Moving forward, there must be a swift and thorough investigation to ensure accountability so that the resumption of U.S. assistance through UNRWA, when appropriate, remains possible. In order to significantly increase the amount of assistance entering Gaza, we ask your administration to work with Israeli officials to take the following urgent steps: First, repair and open a third border crossing at Erez to provide additional aid to north Gaza. Planned missions by humanitarian actors to reach north Gaza from the south have repeatedly not been allowed to proceed by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) due to cited security concerns, leaving hundreds of thousands living there stranded without enough food, water, and medical supplies and equipment. Second, streamline the convoluted inspections process for aid entering via the Rafah and Kerem Shalom border crossings, and issue a pre-approved list of items for entry. During a visit to the Rafah crossing earlier this month, Senators Van Hollen and Merkley saw firsthand hundreds of trucks lined up on the side of the road, waiting in the cumbersome screening and approval process that can take more than two weeks to complete, as well as an entire warehouse full of items rejected by Israeli authorities – including water testing equipment, medical kits for delivering babies, oxygen tanks, and tents – despite those same items having received Israeli pre-clearance prior to reaching the inspection point. Third, establish a clear, enforceable deconfliction process inside Gaza to ensure humanitarian organizations can operate safely. Hundreds of health and humanitarian workers have died in Gaza, including humanitarian aid workers who have been killed in areas deemed “safe zones” by the IDF. Israeli authorities should establish a direct line of contact for the humanitarian community to the IDF, as well as hold regular meetings to review incidents and make improvements. Fourth, increase capacity for processing humanitarian aid and restart the import of commercial goods via the border crossing at Kerem Shalom. Before October 7th, hundreds of trucks filled with commercial goods crossed through Kerem Shalom into Gaza every day. The current humanitarian trucking operation can help reduce the suffering, but it cannot substitute for a functioning commercial sector. Fifth, open additional supply routes for humanitarian aid to enter Gaza. Every option must be explored to increase the amount of humanitarian and commercial goods going in, including via Jordan, the West Bank, Ashdod, and maritime routes. As conditions permit, we encourage you to sustain and expand current U.S. military support of humanitarian assistance efforts, where feasible. Finally, humanitarian organizations are limited in their reach by the ongoing conflict. The largest daily amount of humanitarian aid entered Gaza on November 28th, during the seven-day humanitarian pause. Additional and longer humanitarian pauses are needed to enable a surge of assistance to enter Gaza and the safe movement of goods and people within Gaza. A humanitarian pause will also allow people to safely return to their homes in north Gaza. These steps will not solve the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, but taken together, they will alleviate the suffering for millions of people. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on the dignified transfer of the 3 U.S. servicemembers killed in Jordan:
“I’m heartbroken by the deaths of Sergeant William J. Rivers, Specialist Kennedy L. Sanders, and Specialist Breonna A. Moffett who bravely risked their lives in service of this country. We will never forget their deep commitment to keep Americans safe and the ultimate sacrifice they made. My deepest thoughts are with their friends and family as they grieve this unthinkable loss, and I’ll be thinking of them today as their loved ones return home.”
###
WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Wednesday joined U.S. Senator Ben Cardin (D-M.D.), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, along with Representative Jim McGovern (D-Mass.-02) and U.S Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) to introduce the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act of 2024. The legislation enhances the United States’ ability to protect individuals abroad who are attacked for peacefully defending human rights and democracy. The legislation will bolster the U.S. Government’s capacity to support human rights defenders in their
...Read more efforts, including by establishing an interagency framework for doing so that will live beyond any one administration. “The United States has to do more than just talk the talk on human rights. This legislation would strengthen our support for people across the globe who put their lives at risk to fight for basic human rights and combat corruption,” said Murphy. “Human rights defenders are heroes in the fight for democracy and freedom,” said Cardin. “Yet, attacks against them are rapidly growing around the world, underscoring an urgent and critical need for the United States to do more to protect and support them. The Human Rights Defenders Protection Act will help elevate, guide, and enhance U.S. efforts to support these courageous individuals globally at a time when their efforts are more important than ever. I’d like to thank my colleagues in Congress for cosponsoring this crucial legislation, as well as our dedicated partner organizations across the global human rights community for their years of dedication and support behind this effort.” "At a time when human rights defenders are under attack all over the world, it is encouraging to see such a strong bill being introduced to the floor of the Senate,” said Mary Lawlor, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders. “If enacted, this bill would be of great support to the women and men who face risks daily as they protect and promote the universally recognised human rights of others." “Today I am proud to join Sen. Cardin in introducing the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act of 2024,” said McGovern. “We know how important human rights defenders are, and U.S. government officials often speak out in their defense all around the world. It’s good that we talk the talk, but we need to do more—we need to walk the walk. This bill makes absolutely clear that human rights defenders are key for U.S. interests by requiring concrete measures to integrate support for human rights defenders into U.S. assistance and activities abroad, assisting advocates who are forced into exile, working to end impunity for reprisals against defenders and engaging with the private sector to support and protect them. The bill’s comprehensive approach is exactly what we need to counter rising threats and attacks against human rights defenders worldwide and in every sector.” “The United States was founded on the belief that liberty and freedom are inalienable rights for all people, and I have long argued that we must consistently reflect these fundamental values in our foreign policy as well,” said Kaine. “This legislation will allow the U.S. to better support human rights defenders around the world who are taking great risks and making incredible personal sacrifices in the struggle against oppression. We must help them bring those same values home to their own communities.” “Across the globe, journalists, civil society activists, environmental advocates, and everyday people who speak truth to power are increasingly coming under attack, both in their own countries and abroad,” said Merkley. “We must strengthen our efforts to support the human rights defenders who work to make sure governments respect the rights of the people they are supposed to serve, and that those who trample on those rights and enrich themselves through corruption are held accountable for their abuses “The United States has a profound responsibility to not only advocate for human rights, but also to actively protect and defend those who champion them,” said Booker. “In the face of escalating threats against human rights defenders worldwide, this legislation is a crucial step to improving protections for those advocating for our most fundamental values.” “As a nation built on the principles of freedom and self-determination, the United States has an important role to play in safeguarding and advancing human rights worldwide,” said Van Hollen. By strengthening protections for human rights defenders facing threats and beefing up the capacity of our human rights offices, this legislation takes meaningful steps to promote essential universal rights around the globe.” “The United States has a responsibility to protect human rights, democracy, and the rule of law both at home and overseas,” said Markey. “The Human Rights Defender Protection Act strengthens the State Department’s ability to safeguard human rights, stand up to authoritarianism, and defend our fundamental principles.” “This bill addresses serious deficiencies in the way our country supports human rights around the world. We have neither the trained personnel, nor adequate resources, to ensure that U.S. weapons and munitions are not misused to commit abuses or to support the many courageous defenders of human rights whose lives are threatened,” said Welch. “By authorizing the funding to significantly strengthen the State Department’s capacity, practices, and programs to promote and support human rights, this bill reaffirms the fundamental values our country stands for.” “Human rights defenders are under threat on every continent,” said Sarah Yager, Washington Director at Human Rights Watch. “This bill not only shows US support for their invaluable work but would make a real difference in their lives when they’re at risk of being detained, arrested, or worse. Instead of more Washington platitudes about defending the defenders, this bill launches tangible and much-needed efforts to protect people on the frontlines of human rights. Any Member of Congress that cares about human rights, no matter their political affiliation, should be able to get behind this bill.” “This pivotal bill represents an important step forward in advancing a whole-of-government approach to protecting at-risk defenders and resourcing their vital work towards a just and fair global society,” said Tawanda Mutasah, Oxfam’s America Vice President of Global Partnerships and Impact. “Human rights defenders are critical in driving a just energy transition, upholding the rights of minority communities, countering democratic backsliding, and creating accountable and transparent systems of government. Oxfam America is proud to support the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act as we can only achieve a human rights-centered foreign policy if protections for at-risk rights defenders are viewed as an essential priority.” “The Human Rights Defenders Protection Act of 2024 is a critical piece of legislation that will help strengthen and improve the U.S. government’s ability to support human rights defenders around the world,” said Andrew Fandino, Advocacy Director for the Individuals at Risk Program at Amnesty International USA. “With over 401 human rights defenders killed globally in 2022 alone, now more than ever, human rights defenders need this additional support and protection.” “We welcome introduction of the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act, which would strengthen the United States’ ability to support human rights defenders (HRDs) around the world,” said Annie Boyajian, Vice President for Policy and Advocacy at Freedom House. “HRDs are on the frontlines of the struggle for freedom, working tirelessly to create a world that is safer and more prosperous for us all. All too often, they come under threat for this courageous work. The bill’s creation of a special visa for HRDs would enable them to temporarily continue their work in the United States until it becomes safe for them to return home – a powerful option that both supports HRDs and furthers efforts to counter authoritarianism. We urge Congress to pass this important legislation.” The Human Rights Defenders Protection Act of 2024 will: Require a whole-of-government approach to ensure support for human rights defenders and their protection from attacks is part of U.S. bilateral and multilateral diplomatic, development, defense, economic, security assistance, and anti-corruption activities
Create a new, limited visa category to provide up to 500 at-risk human rights defenders with a multiple-entry, multi-year visa to the United States to ensure such individuals are able to safely continue their work from abroad before returning home when it is safe to do so
Require a global strategy for human rights defenders to bolster the ability of U.S. embassies and missions to protect human rights defenders, assess available tools and resources, and reduce impunity for attacks
Require the State Department to reclassify to higher levels at least ten human rights officers at missions and embassies facing complex democracy and human rights crises.
Expand the Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellows Program through which the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) hosts up to 20 at-risk human rights defenders annually to conduct independent research, outreach, and exchange in the United States
Equip diplomats with the tools they need to respond effectively to attacks on human rights defenders by ensuring that human rights defender issues are included in each mission’s integrated country strategy and provide diplomats with the monitoring, training, reporting, and coordination tools they need to respond more effectively
Codify and strengthen existing efforts, including important guidance from the Biden administration’s Guidelines for U.S. Diplomatic Support to Civil Society and Human Rights Defenders
Improve protections for human rights defenders at multilateral and regional bodies including the United Nations
Authorize $20 million each year from FY 2024 through FY2028 to carry out this work ### Read less HARTFORD — U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Wednesday led 263 Members of Congress in submitting an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, urging the Supreme Court to reverse a stay from Texas District Court that would override the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s scientific judgment and dramatically curtail access to mifepristone—a safe and effective medication abortion drug that was approved by the FDA in 2000 and is used in more than half of all abortions in the U.S. At issue in the case are evidence-based regulatory actions the FDA took in 2016 and 2021 that broadened access to mifepristone, including extending the time frame for mifepristone use during the early stages of pregnancy and
...Read more removing onerous in-person dispensing requirements for mifepristone. If the Supreme Court affirms the Fifth Circuit’s decision upholding the district court’s stay of the FDA’s 2016 and 2021 actions, it would be effectively rolling back the clock and overriding FDA’s robust scientific approvals process—with immediate and sweeping consequences in every state on the ability of patients to access mifepristone for safe abortion care and miscarriage management. In the new amicus brief, the Members of Congress underscore that both the appeals court and the district court rulings threaten the congressionally mandated drug approval process, and pose a serious health risk to pregnant individuals by making safe abortion care more difficult to access—when access has already been seriously eroded in the aftermath of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. “FDA’s determination that mifepristone is safe and effective is based on a thorough and comprehensive review process prescribed and overseen by the legislative branch. Since mifepristone’s initial approval in 2000, FDA has repeatedly and consistently affirmed that the medication is safe and effective for its approved conditions of use. FDA’s process and conclusions have been validated by both Congress and the Government Accountability Office—and by the lived experience of over 5 million patients who have used the drug in the United States,” the Members wrote. The lawmakers go on to make clear the Fifth Circuit’s decision to maintain Judge Kacsmaryk’s stay of mifepristone’s current, FDA-approved conditions of use disrupts longstanding statutory framework. “Decades after FDA’s initial approval—yet somehow in an emergency posture—the district court and the Fifth Circuit intruded into FDA’s drug approval process, casting a shadow of uncertainty over its decisions. The perils of this unwarranted judicial intervention into science-based determinations can hardly be overstated. Researchers, health care providers, and patients suffering from a range of medical conditions rely on the integrity and stability of the rigorous science-based drug approval process. The specter of precipitous judicial meddling therefore threatens access to life-improving and lifesaving drugs,” the lawmakers wrote. If the Supreme Court upholds the Fifth Circuit’s ruling, the Members stress that not only could patients’ access in every state to the most common form of abortion care—and an important drug used in miscarriage management—be severely limited, but FDA’s authority to determine the safety and efficacy of other drugs would be put at risk, threatening patients’ access to all manner of other medications. “The consequences of the Fifth Circuit’s decision could extend far beyond mifepristone, for it undermines the science-based, expert-driven process that Congress designed for determining whether drugs are safe and effective,” the lawmakers wrote. “Providers and patients rely on the availability of thousands of FDA-approved drugs to treat or manage a range of medical conditions, including asthma, HIV, infertility, heart disease, diabetes, and more. Moreover, the prospect of courts second-guessing FDA’s rigorous drug safety and effectiveness determinations will disrupt industry expectations and could chill pharmaceutical research and development.” The lawmakers also make clear that invalidating the FDA’s current approach to regulating mifepristone would reduce access to abortion care—especially for low-income individuals and people of color—exacerbating the reproductive health care crisis the Dobbs decision unleashed: “In the aftermath of this Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, abortion has become inaccessible in much of the United States… The resulting delays and denials of care have already dangerously affected health outcomes for pregnant individuals. Some individuals report being forced to forgo cancer treatment, while others report developing sepsis, being left bleeding for days after an incomplete miscarriage, enduring the risk of rupture due to ectopic pregnancy or being forced to continue carrying a fetus diagnosed with a lethal fetal anomaly such as anencephaly. For some individuals, pregnancy is a life-threatening condition, regardless of their desire to carry their fetus to term,” the Members wrote. “The Fifth Circuit’s order will exacerbate these adverse health outcomes by limiting access to the most common method of early abortion. It will also create additional confusion on top of the post-Dobbs uncertainty surrounding the legality of different forms of reproductive health care.” The lawmakers also point out that “medication abortion using mifepristone is an important means for vulnerable groups to access medical care without having to bear the cost of long-distance travel to find access to procedural abortion and the difficulties associated with getting time off or finding child care,” making clear that “just as Dobbs upended abortion access and led to chaos following the decision, a disruption of mifepristone’s current conditions of use will further narrow options for care.” The lawmakers conclude by asking the Supreme Court to reverse the Fifth Circuit’s affirmance of the district court’s stay of the FDA’s 2016 and 2021 regulatory actions. The amicus brief was led by Senators Schumer, Murray, Sanders, Durbin and Blumenthal, and joined by 45 of their Democratic colleagues including Senators Baldwin, Bennet, Booker, Brown, Cantwell, Cardin, Carper, Casey Jr., Coons, Cortez Masto, Duckworth, Feinstein, Fetterman, Gillibrand, Hassan, Heinrich, Hickenlooper, Hirono, Kaine, Kelly, King, Klobuchar, Luján, Markey, Menendez, Merkley, Murphy, Ossoff, Padilla, Peters, Reed, Rosen, Schatz, Shaheen, Sinema, Smith, Stabenow, Tester, Van Hollen, Warner, Warnock, Warren, Welch, Whitehouse, Wyden. In the House, the brief was signed by 213 U.S. Representatives. The lawmakers’ amicus brief to the Supreme Court can be read in full HERE. ### Read less Senators could vote on a bipartisan immigration deal as soon as next week, one of the top negotiators said Sunday. But first, they have to sell it to their members. And that part is looking tricky. “Well, we do have a bipartisan deal. We’re finishing the text right now,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said during an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Senate Democrats are expected to more widely support the deal — aside from some progressives who may be turned away by the amped-up border provisions. But whether Republicans in both chambers will support the long-awaited legislation amid pressure from former President Donald Trump to deny Democrats a win is unclear. Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) went on Fox News on Sunday to defend the deal, noting that Republicans were the ones to demand
...Read more border policy changes be tied to the national security supplemental in the first place. He’s faced backlash from within his own party for his part in negotiating a deal, which some Republicans argue would hand President Joe Biden a win in an election year. “Republicans four months ago would not give funding for Ukraine for Israel and for our southern border, because we demanded changes in policy,” Lankford said. “So we actually locked arms together and said, ‘We’re not going to give you money for this. We want to change the law.’” Murphy said he’s “hopeful” enough Republican senators will be willing to sign on. “The question is whether Republicans are going to listen to Donald Trump,” Murphy said, “who wants to preserve chaos at the border, because he thinks it’s a winning political issue for him, or whether we are going to pass legislation which would be the biggest bipartisan reform of our border immigration laws in 40 years and would give the president of the United States, whether that president is a Republican or a Democrat, new, important power to be able to better manage the flow of people across the border.” Negotiators says the terms of the deal are not yet final, but it will allow the president to “shut down the border in between the ports of entry when crossings reach catastrophically high levels.” That power wouldn’t be permanent — it would last “until we are able to be able to better process people crossing the border,” Murphy said. Lankford also sought to dispel the growing belief that the border deal would allow 5,000 migrants into the country a day. “It’s definitely not going to let a bunch of people in. It’s focused on actually turning people around,” Lankford said, arguing that members have a “constitutional obligation to be able to secure our country as fast as we can secure our country.” Biden on Friday night urged Congress to pass bipartisan legislation, pledging to shut down the border the day the bill became law. The bill also seeks to shorten wait times for asylum-seekers waiting for their claims to be heard, and would help new arrivals more quickly obtain work authorizations, according to Murphy. POLITICO previously reported that the deal would also give the Department of Homeland Security expulsion authority if border encounters hit an average of 4,000-a-day over the course of a week, a metric that includes asylum appointments. That authority would become mandatory if daily crossings average more than 5,000 people for a week or crest over 8,500 a day, according to two people briefed on the emerging agreement and who were granted anonymity to discuss the details. But even if the Senate is able approve a bipartisan agreement, getting the bill through the House, where immigration reform faces stiff opposition from conservatives including House Speaker Mike Johnson, will be another challenge. In a Friday letter to senators negotiating on the border deal, Johnson wrote that even if the bipartisan deal passed through the Senate, it would be “dead on arrival” in the House. Former President Donald Trump has also criticized the deal as he seeks to deny Biden, his likely 2024 presidential opponent, a win on one of the most crucial issues facing the country ahead of the November election. “As the leader of our party, there is zero chance I will support this horrible, open borders betrayal of America. It’s not going to happen, and I’ll fight it all the way,” Trump said Saturday during a campaign event in Nevada. “I notice a lot of the senators, a lot of the senators are trying to say, respectfully, they’re blaming it on me. I said that’s OK, please blame it on me. Please, because they were getting ready to pass a very bad bill. And I’ll tell you what, a bad bill, I’d rather have no bill than a bad bill.” Read less After months of talks between Democrats and Republicans, word emerged last week that a deal, in principle at least, was in hand for Ukraine aid and a compromise to address the crisis of immigrants crossing the Mexico border. At its center is Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, the Democrats' lead negotiator. Prospects looked good at least in the Senate as President Joe Biden in recent weeks, seeing his poll numbers plummet on the border issue, suggested he'd be okay tightening asylum rights for immigrants — part of what the deal would do. The agreement would also send tens of billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine, help that should be automatic but Republicans won't do it without a clampdown on the southern border. Enter Donald Trump. Just as details started
...Read more to leak out, the former president and likely GOP nominee pressured Republicans in the House and Senate to spurn the deal outright, according to news reports. Suddenly a vote that could happen this week is cast in deeper doubt. Murphy is working to save the landmark deal, "which would be the biggest bipartisan reform of our border and immigration laws in 40 years," he told Dana Bash on CNN Sunday. The episode has Murphy as the main Democrat rebuking Trump on the meddling, and on Trump's cynical intent. He didn't hold back. "We do have a bipartisan deal," Murphy said on CNN. "We can show that Washington can still stand up and work on these big problems even if Donald Trump is rooting for chaos." To be clear, Murphy and other Democrats are saying Trump is lobbying his followers in Congress to deep-six a deal that Republicans reached, just to make sure Biden doesn't score a win on a tough issue. "And the question is whether Republicans are going to listen to Donald Trump, who wants to preserve chaos at the border because he thinks that it is a winning political issue for him, or whether we’re going to pass legislation," Murphy said. Talks continued Monday as Murphy spent the day working the phones, an aide said. He was not available to comment on the chances of a vote this week. The deal would give Biden more power to shut down out-of-control, illegal border crossings. It would make applying for asylum harder for people entering the United States, allowing border agents to turn people away at times of especially heavy border crossings. It would also speed up asylum hearings and work permits, Murphy told Bash, though he declined to give details. Some hard-left Democrats are sure to oppose the reform, which does not include a path to citizenship for the more than 12 million people in the United States without documentation. While some Republicans support the bill, hardliners, egged on by Trump, call it a disaster. "It essentially codifies illegal immigration," South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, who traveled to the Mexico border Friday, told Bash right after Murphy appeared. Bash played clips of three GOP senators who appeared to back the deal, including John Cornyn of Texas, a former attorney general and supreme court justice in his home state who has held his current seat 22 years. Noem responded, hilariously, "they do not have the knowledge and the facts." Noem, openly auditioning for the role of Trump's running mate, said Biden could shut down the border without the bill. "Why doesn’t president Biden take action today?" she asked on CNN. "He can immediately announce that he’s restarting the stay-in-Mexico policy, he can immediately announce that he’s going to refocus on building a wall… We have a president that has all the tools he needs to protect our country today and he’s refusing to do that." Um, no. Even Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., the lead GOP negotiator, pointed out on two Sunday talk shows that the deal includes border controls Trump himself requested, The New Republic reported. Murphy expressed outrage on both Ukraine, where he said Republicans are willing to let Russian President Vladimir Putin march through the nation toward Western Europe, and the border. "All of a sudden they are against border and immigration reform because they are afraid it might pass," he said on CNN. "They want to keep the border in a chaotic situation for political purposes." Trump, for his part, continues to pan the deal and doesn't deny pressuring Republicans. "I said 'That’s okay, please blame it on me.' I’d rather have no bill than a bad bill," he said at an event over the weekend. And Biden, eager for a compromise, said he would do what the GOP hardliners say he can already do. "If that bill were the law today I’d shut down the border right now and fix it quickly." Amid the debate we should not lose sight of this sickening political question. Would Republicans block an otherwise acceptable compromise to win the November election? The most horrific case of sabotage to win an election was in 1980, when operatives working for Ronald Reagan traveled to several Arab countries to get word to Iran: Don't release the 52 hostages until after the election when President Jimmy Carter loses. We will offer you a better deal. Iran released the hostages on Day 444, precisely as Reagan took the oath of office in January, 1981. And Reagan's White House did illegally and secretly sell arms to Iran, in the Iran-Contra Affair. Congressional investigations concluded there was no clear evidence Reagan's campaign had meddled in the hostage crisis. Then last spring, people involved in it admitted it was true to the New York Times and The New Republic and more evidence came out. Murphy knows this history well. He's right to accuse Trump of a cynical ploy, putting U.S. security at risk. And as with Carter in 1980, there's not much anyone can do about it. Read less Sen. Chris Murphy, a key negotiator on a possible border deal, said Sunday that text of a compromise could be ready to go to the Senate floor in the coming days. “We do have a bipartisan deal. We’re finishing the text right now,” Murphy told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union,” adding that the question remains whether Republicans are going to listen to former President Donald Trump, who has tried to tank the compromise. “We are sort of finalizing the last pieces of text right now. This bill could be ready to be on the floor of the United States Senate next week. But it won’t be if Republicans decide that they want to keep this issue unsettled for political purposes,” the Connecticut Democrat added. Murphy said he was pleased to see President Joe Biden support the emerging
...Read more deal. Biden cited the compromise at a campaign rally Saturday, saying he would shut down the US southern border if given the authority – an embrace of policies far more draconian than those he’s previously considered. “I was glad to hear the president come out and speak forcefully in favor of this bill. I’m hopeful that we will still have enough Republicans in the Senate who want to fix the problem at the border rather than just to do Donald Trump’s bidding, but we will see over the next 24 to 48 hours whether that’s true,” Murphy said. Components of the deal include a new authority that allows the president to shut down the border between ports of entry when unlawful crossings reach high levels, reforming the asylum system to resolve cases in a shorter timeframe, and expediting work permits. Under the proposed deal, the Department of Homeland Security would be granted new emergency authority to shut down the border if daily average migrants crossing unlawfully reach 4,000 over a one-week span. Certain migrants would be allowed to stay if they proved to be fleeing torture or persecution in their countries. It’s impossible to close the border to asylum seekers because of current law, despite multiple attempts by Trump to do so while he was in office. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also endorsed the deal Sunday. “This legislation is a compromise; it’s a negotiation, and that’s what we’re here to do,” the California Democrat told Bash on “State of the Union.” Comprehensive immigration reform, Pelosi noted, is “not likely with the Congress that we have right now, so we have to move forward.” Though the text is still unreleased, the authority is reminiscent of a Covid-era border restriction invoked by Trump in 2020 that allowed authorities to turn migrants away at the border. It resulted in more repeat border crossers and still placed a strain on the immigration system. House Speaker Mike Johnson warned in a letter last week that the emerging border deal is “dead on arrival” in his chamber if it resembles anything close to what has been reported. His interpretation of the proposal, however, is false, according to a source familiar with the deal. Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, said Biden should “demonstrate his good faith by taking immediate actions to secure it. He should sign an order right now to end the mass release of illegals and dangerous persons into our country.” Murphy pushed back, saying, “All of a sudden, they are against border and immigration reform because they are afraid it’s actually going to pass, and many Republicans in the House and some in the Senate actually have no plans to help the president control the border because they want to keep the border in a chaotic situation for political purposes.” Murphy underscored that the stakes of this deal – which is tied to funding for Ukraine as it fights Russia’s invasion – are high. “The consequence of failure here is not just that we keep immigration as an open issue available for Donald Trump to exploit in the next election. It is also that Ukraine loses this war, and that Russia marches its army to the edge of Europe – that would be catastrophic for the United States and for the world,” he said. Still, Murphy maintained he’s confident enough Republicans would support a deal despite internal GOP divisions and Trump’s efforts to squash a potential win for Biden. Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, another key border security negotiator, told CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday there is no vote count on the deal yet. However, he said he feels “positive about it because even the initial feedback has been good.” As for Trump’s attempts to stop the deal, Lankford said that there is a lot of misinformation about the content of the bill and that he is “looking forward” to Trump having the opportunity to read it once there is a text. Republican Sen. Rick Scott of Florida said Sunday he believes the bill needs to be tied to another measure for Biden to comply with it. Scott said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has not been supportive of including an accountability measure or tying the bill to another form of aid. “Unless there’s some accountability measure that forces Biden to secure the border, tied to Ukraine aid, tied to something else, unless there’s something like that, Biden’s not going to comply with the law,” Scott said on “Fox News Sunday.” Illustrating the divisiveness swirling around the Biden administration’s border policies as the Senate looks to pass a deal, House Republicans on Sunday released two articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who they say committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” for his “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” and for breaching the public’s trust. Mayorkas has pushed back against the criticism, and officials who work closely with him say he intends to remain in the post. Read less Connecticut’s U.S. Senators Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal have teamed with their Massachusetts colleague Elizabeth Warren on a new bill designed to update Atlantic Coast commercial fishing as it relates to climate change. The Supporting Healthy Interstate Fisheries in Transition (SHIFT) Act would require the Department of Commerce to consider the changing geographic ranges of fish populations as it oversees federal fishery management plans and quota allocations for Atlantic states. The senators stated restrictions on the species and number of fish that can be caught in Atlantic waters need to be updated because fish locations have changed in response to warming ocean temperatures and climate change. The SHIFT Act would require the Secretary of Commerce and encourage the Atlantic
...Read more States Marine Fisheries Commission to account for the impact of climate change on the current distribution of fish populations when deciding fishing quota allocations. The SHIFT Act also amends the existing Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the primary law governing marine fisheries management in U.S. federal waters, to improve upon other areas of fishery operations, including sustainability. The legislation also calls for the regular review of fisheries. “As ocean temperatures keep getting warmer, fish up and down the coast are migrating north. This makes business a lot harder for Connecticut fishermen,” said Murphy. “We should be doing everything possible to help fishermen adapt to our changing climate, and this legislation would update totally outdated policies that hurt our state.” “This legislation will help raise the tide for fishing in Connecticut and beyond, boosting the blue economy,” said Blumenthal. “Climate change has drastically altered our oceans, forcing some fishermen to travel hundreds of miles to reach their quotas or to toss valuable fish overboard. The SHIFT Act will ensure that evolving climate conditions are prioritized in fishery management, helping local fishermen, the economy, and fish populations.” The senators noted their bill has been endorsed by several environmental groups including the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the National Audubon Society. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined CNN’s State of the Union to discuss bipartisan negotiations on the national security supplemental. On the status of the bipartisan negotiations, Murphy said: “We do have a bipartisan deal…We are sort of finalizing last pieces of text right now and this bill could be ready to be on the floor of the United States Senate next week. But it won't be if Republicans decide that they want to keep this issue unsettled for political purposes. So I was glad to hear the president come out and speak forcefully in favor of this bill. I am hopeful that we will still have enough Republicans in the Senate who want to fix the problem at the border rather than just do Donald Trump's bidding, but we will see over the next 24 to 48 hours whether
...Read more that's true.” On Republican support for this bill, Murphy said: “Well, I hope that we have the Republican support for this bill. And I think that there are many Republicans in the Senate who are sincere about trying to come together and do our job. And listen, right now, the President does not have the tools that he needs in order to stop the flow of 10,000 people a day, to better manage the asylum system. So let's come together and give him those tools.” On the stakes of failure, Murphy said: “But let's also be cognizant of the fact that if we don't pass this bill, Ukraine won't get its military funding. Remember the whole reason that we are talking about the border, because the Republicans have said they will let Vladimir Putin march his army in and through Ukraine if we don't pass a bill that includes border provisions and Ukraine funding. So the consequence of failure here is not just that we keep immigration as an open issue available for Donald Trump to exploit in the next election. It is also that Ukraine loses this war, and that Russia marches its army to the edge of Europe. That would be catastrophic for the United States and for the whole world. So the stakes here are high, the consequences of failure are enormous. And I do have confidence that enough Republicans in the Senate are going to join us to pass this bipartisan legislation potentially, as early as the next week or two. And we can show that Washington can still stand up and work on these big problems, even if Donald Trump is rooting for chaos.” Murphy highlighted some of the tools this bill would give the president to better manage the asylum system: “This bill will include an ability for the President to shut down the border in between the ports of entry when crossings reach catastrophically high levels, not permanently, but until we are able to better process people that are crossing the border. It also reforms the asylum system. Right now, as you know, Dana, it takes sometimes five to 10 years for somebody to get their asylum claim heard. That's not fair to anybody, including the migrant that it takes that long. We would shorten that timeframe down to six months in some cases. And then it would get people work permits faster. Right now, what we know is that these people are coming into the country and are on our streets or in our homeless shelters. So we would make sure that folks who are coming to the country who are applying for asylum have the ability to work. That's something that our mayors and our governors really want.” Murphy pushed back on Republicans who argue President Biden has existing authorities to manage the border: “It's a political talking point. Those same Republicans in the House of Representatives who say President Biden has the tools introduced H.R. 2, which is a massive border reform bill. They said it was one of their most important priorities. And so Republicans have said openly they want to pass border and immigration reform. All of a sudden they are against border and immigration reform because they are worried it's actually going to pass. And many Republicans in the House and some in the Senate actually have no plans to help the President control the border because they want to keep the border in a chaotic situation for political purposes.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Wednesday joined U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i), who led a majority of the Senate Democratic Caucus in announcing plans to file an amendment to the forthcoming national security supplemental package that reiterates longstanding U.S. policy in support of a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. The senators were joined by 47 of their Senate colleagues, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawai‘i), Jeff
...Read more Merkley (D-Ore.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), and Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.). “The only way to achieve a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians is a two-state solution. The United States must be crystal clear in our commitment to preserving that path,” said Murphy. “A two state solution - which has been a long-standing, well-established goal for both Israel and the United States - is the only viable path to peace and stability in the region. A two state solution gives both Israel and the Palestinians the rights of dignity and self-determination that are essential to achieve peace and stability,” said Blumenthal. “The U.S. government has long supported a two-state solution as a path to a just and lasting peace in the region, and our amendment reaffirms our continued commitment to that vision,” said Schatz. “The horrors of the war on and since October 7th have underscored the fundamental reality that in order for both Israelis and Palestinians to live in safety and with dignity, they need to have distinct, inalienable, and mutually-recognized states that coexist side-by-side in peace.” “Peace in the region requires a two-state solution with Israel and a Palestinian state co-existing side-by-side with security, prosperity, and dignity,” said Schumer. “The United States must continue to be a leader on the world stage to forge a path forward for a two-state solution as we strive for stability in the Middle East.” “The best hope for ensuring that there is light at the end of this very dark tunnel is the realization of a viable two-state solution where both Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace, security, and dignity. The United States must be wholly committed to leading this effort, combined with the normalization of relations between all the Arab states and Israel, as the only path forward to durable stability and peace for Israelis, Palestinians, and the Middle East,” said Van Hollen. “For decades I have advocated for a two-state solution and the ongoing conflict in Israel and Gaza makes the need for a negotiated compromise even more urgent,” said Carper. “This is a critical moment for the U.S. to continue its leadership on the world stage and this amendment reiterates our commitment to enduring peace in the region.” “We must be unequivocal: a two-state solution is the only path to achieving lasting peace so that Israelis and Palestinians can live alongside each other with the security and dignity they deserve,” said Murray. “As we continue working to deliver much-needed humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza and support for our allies, this amendment makes clear it is the policy of the United States to support a comprehensive, negotiated solution to the conflict that ensures a peaceful and secure two-state future. Rejecting the prospect of a Palestinian state denies Palestinians the rights, dignity, and self-determination they deserve and jeopardizes Israel’s own security.” “Israel’s long-term security rests in a comprehensive, negotiated, two-state solution: a Palestinian state co-existing side by side with the state of Israel in equal measures of mutual recognition, security, prosperity, and dignity, ” said Cardin. “The United States has always stood by this policy, and we will continue to work with our partners to ensure a secure and prosperous future for Israelis and Palestinians.” “A two-state solution is an essential condition to securing Israel’s future as a Jewish, democratic state at peace with its neighbors, while recognizing Palestinian aspirations for a state of their own. I’ve said that for years. The policies of the Netanyahu government, however, have only driven the region farther away from a peaceful, negotiated solution,” said Wyden. “I am proud to cosponsor this amendment and send the message that the U.S. supports peace and stability among Israelis and Palestinians.” “A two-state solution has long been the policy of the U.S. to enable Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security,” said Hirono. “This resolution reaffirms our support for a two-state solution and the need to work toward a future in which Israel and a Palestinian state can peacefully co-exist.” “The conflict in the Middle East shows us there is only one way to break the cycle of hate and violence: two states for two peoples, with Israelis and Palestinians living side-by-side as equals,” said Merkley. “At a time when Israeli leaders are rejecting that goal, the United States must remain resolute in its commitment to ensuring Israel’s future as a democratic and Jewish state, and help fulfill the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people.” “A two-state solution is the only viable path towards long-term peace and security, dignity, and opportunity for Israelis and Palestinians alike. President Biden and Secretary Blinken have made it clear to Prime Minister Netanyahu and his extremist right-wing coalition that he must reverse his dangerous rhetoric and commit to the work of advancing a two-state solution that builds a just and stable future for all the region’s people,” said Smith. “Israel’s long-term security and regional stability depend on the creation of a Palestinian state. The United States remains deeply committed to securing an urgently needed, diplomatic solution that ends Hamas' military control over Gaza and creates a secure, democratic, Jewish state of Israel alongside a Palestinian state to achieve a lasting peace,” said Welch. “The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas that has caused so much suffering is a wakeup call on the need for a two-state solution that allows for a viable Palestinian state living in peace, side-by-side, with a secure Israel. For years, I have warned that despite heroic attempts at such an agreement, spoilers on both sides have repeatedly undermined progress. Both Israeli and Palestinian leaders must finally commit to finding a two-state peace agreement. That is the only path forward to end the suffering and bring a future of hope to both the Israeli and Palestinian people,” said Durbin. “We need to do everything we can to work through diplomatic channels to reduce and cease hostilities and encourage a two-state solution. That means addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, prioritizing the protection of innocent lives, and bringing home the hostages seized by Hamas terrorists. A two-state solution would provide stability for Israelis, Palestinians, and the region as a whole,” said Klobuchar. “A negotiated two-state solution with Israel living side by side in peace and security with a Palestinian state remains the best option for lasting stability in the region and the right policy for America. This amendment underscores the critical role U.S. diplomacy must continue to play in the effort to ensure this secure, peaceful, and prosperous future that recognizes the aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians,” said Peters. “A two-state solution, with Israel secure and at peace with a Palestinian state, remains the best chance to achieve lasting security and prosperity for Israelis, Palestinians, and the region. The Palestinians, like all people, have a right to self-determination and must have a voice in their future. The United States should focus on diplomatic efforts and humanitarian assistance as important components of returning to a two-state solution,” said Reed. “U.S. policy is longstanding and clear: the best and most viable path to long-term peace in the Middle East is a comprehensive, two-state solution that ensures the Palestinian people can fulfill their aspirations for a fully independent state and that Israel remains a secure, democratic, and Jewish state,” said Warner. “The ongoing Israel-Hamas war has made clear that peace and stability in the Middle East is more important than ever. A two-state solution remains the most realistic path towards that goal and is the best way to ensure Israel’s long term security. I’m proud to support this amendment and reiterate my support for a peaceful, secure, and democratic future for Israelis and Palestinians,” said Coons. “I firmly believe that the interests of the United States and Israel are best served by ensuring that Hamas is defeated once and for all,” said Menendez. “However, as we look to a path forward after the war is eventually over, we must work to achieve a durable two-state solution that allows Israelis and Palestinians to live side-by-side in peace, freedom, prosperity, and security.” “A two-state solution is the only viable path to achieving long-term peace for Israelis and Palestinians alike and I'm proud to join my colleagues to support this effort to reaffirm that commitment,” said Shaheen. “The only way to achieve a real and lasting peace is through the pursuit of a two-state solution that affirms and protects Israel’s right to exist as a democratic Jewish state and ensures the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and a state of their own,” said Booker. “The current Israel-Hamas war underscores why the United States must continue its work to broker and support a negotiated solution that results in two states, with Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in mutual peace, security, dignity, and recognition.” “A two-state solution is the only path to long-term peace that would ensure both the Israeli and Palestinian people can achieve self-determination and live in safety,” said Baldwin. “I have long supported a two-state solution and am proud to reaffirm my commitment to that goal because it is more important than ever that we clearly lay out a vision that will bring lasting peace, stability, and security to the region.” “The only solution to this conflict is two states for two people – and that has been the long held position of the United States. I won’t give up on peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis, which is why we must ensure that the Israeli government and all of our partners in the region work toward that end,” said Warren. “The international community has supported the rights of Israelis and Palestinians to have their own nations since 1948. It’s time to reaffirm that support and undertake the hard work with the Israeli and Palestinian people, along with other supportive nations, to make it a reality. Progress toward this goal has been stalled for too long. All must have hope for a future in the region where people can live in peace and dignity,” said Kaine. “The end to decades of conflict can only come ultimately with a solution that both ensures Israel’s security and a state for the Palestinian people,” said Butler. “These two objectives can coexist, and any effort to delegitimize either side moves us away from a lasting peace. Our democratic and American values point us to what we already know to be true: every human being deserves to live in safety with freedom and dignity.” “A two-state solution with a secure, Jewish State of Israel living side-by-side with a demilitarized Palestinian state is the best way forward,” said Rosen. “I’m proud to support this provision to reaffirm that it is official U.S. policy to support a negotiated two-state solution.” “It is more important than ever for the United States to work with Israelis, Palestinians, and like-minded partners to achieve a political solution to the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The key to a sustainable and enduring peace is two states for two peoples. I welcome Senator Schatz’s amendment and am proud to co-sponsor it, and I will continue advocating for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict that ensures a secure State of Israel and establishes an independent and sovereign state for the Palestinian people,” said Markey. “A long term two-state solution remains crucial for Palestinians’ self-determination, to promote Israel’s stability in the region, and to secure a peaceful future for both Israelis and Palestinians. We must keep working toward an enduring resolution to the underlying and longstanding conflict. That resolution must include an independent state for the Palestinian people that is free from Hamas’ rule and co-exists in peace with Israel,” said Heinrich. “Following the horrific attacks in Israel on October 7, thousands of civilian lives have been lost and dozens of hostages are still being held by Hamas. It's clear that Hamas must be held responsible for their actions, but it also remains clear that the only way to possibly solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is with a two-state solution,” said Luján. “I’m proud to cosponsor this amendment that reaffirms the U.S. commitment to a two-state solution that provides the Israeli and Palestinian people the security and dignity that they deserve.” “As we continue to support Israel’s security and the safety of Palestinian civilians, this affirms the United States’ long-standing position that a two-state solution is the best way to ensure an enduring peace for Israelis and Palestinians,” said Kelly. “In the long-term we must all recommit to a two-state solution that will preserve lives, maintain peace, and allow both Israelis and Palestinians to live with peace, security, and dignity,” said Warnock. “For decades, the two-state solution has been a bedrock of U.S. Middle East policy, and we must remain committed to that vision,” said Gillibrand. “This amendment makes clear that the U.S. will continue to pursue a two-state solution, which is the best and most realistic option to achieve long-term security in the region and a lasting peace for both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples.” “A two-state solution is vital to long-term peace and stability in the region,” said Cortez Masto. “A Palestinian state governed by Palestinians continues to be an essential part of the United States’ diplomatic efforts to support Israel’s security, eliminate Hamas terrorists, and protect innocent civilians.” “It is in the interest of Israelis, Palestinians, and Americans that Israel works with the United States and Arab partners to help create a genuine pathway toward a two-state solution. I firmly believe that such a solution is necessary for a more peaceful and prosperous Middle East,” said Bennet. “True peace for Israelis and Palestinians can only be achieved if security and self-determination are guaranteed for everyone in the region,” said Padilla. “We must remain resolutely committed to a two-state solution.” “Establishing a Palestinian nation-state alongside Israel is the only viable path to lasting peace,” said Duckworth. “A two-state solution will help keep Israelis and Palestinians safe and secure in the future, and I’m proud to join Senator Schatz in introducing this amendment. I remain committed to doing everything I can to bring about a de-escalation of tensions in the region that ultimately brings about a two-state future that strengthens the safety of Israel, eliminates the threat posed by Hamas, stops the mounting death toll and finally ends the prolonged and continuing suffering of Palestinians.” The text of the amendment is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and seven of their Senate colleagues reintroduced a resolution to officially designate January 23 as Maternal Health Awareness Day. The resolution emphasizes the importance of raising public awareness about maternal health outcomes and promotes initiatives to address and eliminate its disparities. “The United States’s maternal mortality rate is a shameful outlier among our peers. The numbers are even more devastating for Black women. The vast majority of these deaths can be prevented, and the first step is making sure every woman – no matter her zip code, race, or socioeconomic status – can access the care she needs,” said
...Read more Murphy. “The harsh reality is that the United States bears the highest maternal mortality rate among developed countries, with Black and Indigenous people disproportionately impacted,” said Booker. “It is disheartening that over 80 percent of maternal deaths in our country are preventable, further emphasizing the need to take action and guarantee equitable and comprehensive maternal care for every individual. We must urgently create and implement policies that effectively address the maternal mortality crisis and make a lasting investment in our country’s families." "In 1966, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. called injustice in health “the most shocking and the most inhuman” of all forms of inequality,” said Heidi Murkoff, author of What to Expect When You’re Expecting and Founder of the What to Expect Project. “It was and sadly, it still is, especially when it comes to maternal health, the foundation of all health. That foundation — fundamental to a healthy future — continues to crumble, allowing too many moms in the U.S., especially Black, AI/AN and rural moms, to fall through the cracks of care, far too many to receive inequitable care that is neither respectful nor responsive. That doesn’t see or hear them. As the wealthiest nation in the world, the U.S. should also be the safest place in the world to be pregnant and have a baby, but we are consistently the least safe among developed countries. It’s time to make maternal health the national priority it should be for all moms and the babies they love. That’s why this January 23rd, the WTEP and I are proud to support Maternal Health Awareness Day and honored to work beside Senator Booker and other maternal health champions —and in the spirit of Dr. King’s legacy -- in this vital call for both awareness and action. So that we can finally end our nation’s epidemic of preventable maternal deaths and injuries and deliver a healthy beginning and healthy future to every mom, everywhere." The resolution notes that more than 50,000 individuals in the United States suffer from potentially life-threatening complications that arise from labor and childbirth, and recognizes community-based maternal health models that have been proven to improve the health of birthing people throughout the country. With one-third of maternal mortality cases occurring between one week and one year postpartum, expanding access to health care after delivery nationwide is a vital step to saving the lives of birthing people. The resolution is also cosponsored by U.S. Senators Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.). The full text of the resolution can be found here. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) introduced legislation to modernize outdated regulations governing commercial fishing along the Atlantic Coast. Restrictions on the species and number of fish that can be caught in Atlantic waters haven’t been updated in decades, even as fish locations have changed dramatically in response to warming ocean temperatures and climate change. As a result, commercial fishermen are forced to travel significant distances to access these fish populations and are often forced to throw their landings back into the ocean, resulting in high mortality rates. The Supporting Healthy Interstate Fisheries in Transition (SHIFT) Act would require that the Department of Commerce consider the changing
...Read more geographic ranges of fish populations as it oversees federal fishery management plans and quota allocations for Atlantic states. “As ocean temperatures keep getting warmer, fish up and down the coast are migrating north. This makes business a lot harder for Connecticut fishermen. We should be doing everything possible to help fishermen adapt to our changing climate, and this legislation would update totally outdated policies that hurt our state,” said Murphy. “This legislation will help raise the tide for fishing in Connecticut and beyond, boosting the blue economy,” said Blumenthal. “Climate change has drastically altered our oceans, forcing some fishermen to travel hundreds of miles to reach their quotas or to toss valuable fish overboard. The SHIFT Act will ensure that evolving climate conditions are prioritized in fishery management, helping local fishermen, the economy, and fish populations.” The SHIFT Act would require the Secretary of Commerce and encourage the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission to account for the impact of climate change on the current distribution of fish populations when deciding fishing quota allocations. The SHIFT Act also amends the existing Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the primary law governing marine fisheries management in U.S. federal waters, to improve upon other areas of fishery operations, including sustainability. Finally, the legislation calls for the regular review of fisheries, ensuring their resilience for years to come. The SHIFT Act is endorsed by a number of organizations, including Oceana, Pew Charitable Trusts, Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance, Earthjustice, Ocean Conservancy, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, National Audubon Society, and American Saltwater Guides Association. The text of the legislation can be found here. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Todd Young (R-IN) on Tuesday pressed the Biden Administration on its strategy in response to Houthi attacks in the Red Sea. While the senators expressed support for smart steps to defend against and deter Houthi aggression, they also expressed concerns about the potential for escalation in the region and the risk of another war in the Middle East. They also raised questions about the extent to which the president’s constitutional authorities can be used to respond to attacks by the Houthis and underscored that any offensive or sustained military action against the
...Read more Houthis must require a vote of Congress. “We strongly condemn the repeated Houthi attacks against international cargo ships and U.S. military assets protecting those ships in the Red Sea. These actions also put lives at risk, including those of U.S. servicemembers, and we mourn the loss of two U.S. Navy SEALs who tragically died while combatting these threats,” wrote the senators. “We support smart steps to defend U.S. personnel and assets, hold the Houthis accountable for their actions, and deter additional attacks,” the senators continued. “We further believe Congress must carefully deliberate before authorizing offensive military action.” “The Administration has stated that the strikes on Houthi targets to date have not and will not deter the Houthi attacks, suggesting that we are in the midst of an ongoing regional conflict that carries the risk of escalation,” continued the senators. “As tensions in the region rise, we believe that American participation in another war in the Middle East cannot happen in the absence of authorization by Congress, following an open debate during which the American public can be informed of the benefits, risks, and consequences of such conflict.” Last week, Murphy released a statement on the U.S. and coalition airstrikes against Houthi targets in Yemen and Houthi attacks on U.S. vessels. Last Congress, Murphy introduced the National Security Powers Act, bipartisan legislation to reclaim Congress’s critical role in national security matters. Last year, Murphy supported bipartisan legislation to repeal the outdated 1991 and 2002 Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs) that Administrations of both parties have used to authorize military action abroad without congressional approval, formally end the Gulf and Iraq wars, and reassert congressional war powers. Full text of the letter is available here and below: Dear President Biden, We strongly condemn the repeated Houthi attacks against international cargo ships and U.S. military assets protecting those ships in the Red Sea. These attacks are unacceptable, unprovoked, and impede essential international commerce. These actions also put lives at risk, including those of U.S. servicemembers, and we mourn the loss of two U.S. Navy SEALs who tragically died while combatting these threats. We commend U.S. leadership of the multilateral coalition of Operation Prosperity Guardian in response to these attacks. Ensuring the safety of international shipping routes must be a shared global responsibility. As Commander-in-Chief, you have the power and responsibility to defend the United States under Article II of the Constitution. Directing military action to defend U.S. personnel and military assets from attacks and imminent attacks is clearly within the boundaries of this presidential power. It could also be argued that directing military action to defend U.S. commercial shipping is within this power. However, most vessels transiting through the Red Sea are not U.S. ships, which raises questions about the extent to which these authorities can be exercised. We support smart steps to defend U.S. personnel and assets, hold the Houthis accountable for their actions, and deter additional attacks. We further believe Congress must carefully deliberate before authorizing offensive military action. The Administration has stated that the strikes on Houthi targets to date have not and will not deter the Houthi attacks, suggesting that we are in the midst of an ongoing regional conflict that carries the risk of escalation. While the Houthis and their backers, namely Iran, bear the responsibility for escalation, unless there is a need to repel a sudden attack the Constitution requires that the United States not engage in military action absent a favorable vote of Congress. We have long advocated for deliberate congressional processes in and authorizations for decisions that put servicemembers into harm’s way overseas. There is no current congressional authorization for offensive U.S. military action against the Houthis. Protecting Americans, American interests, and our servicemembers who put their lives on the line every day remain our top priorities. Several of us are members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee you once chaired; in the interest of ensuring that our response to the unfolding situation is strategic and authorized, we request your Administration answer the following questions: 1) What is your Administration’s understanding of “self-defense” in the context of these strikes, especially if the strikes are not deterring ongoing and future attacks from the Houthis? 2) Your administration has to-date only submitted one notification to Congress under the War Powers Act, despite having conducted several rounds of strikes against Houthi targets. We request an explanation in writing of the legal authority under which the Administration has carried out each of these strikes and after carrying out any strikes against Houthi targets that occur after receipt of this letter, including any pre-emptive strikes. 3) Does your administration believe there is legal rationale for a President to unilaterally direct U.S. military action to defend ships of foreign nations? 4) On what date were U.S. forces “introduced into hostilities” in Yemen and the Red Sea? We ask these questions with a sense of urgency, and further encourage the development of a strategy that urgently reduces the risk of escalation of this crisis in the Red Sea. As tensions in the region rise, we believe that American participation in another war in the Middle East cannot happen in the absence of authorization by Congress, following an open debate during which the American public can be informed of the benefits, risks, and consequences of such conflict. Sincerely, ### Read less It’s been 10 years since 20 students and six educators were killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown. As family members grappled with grief, the shooting also spawned a political movement. U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said years of gun reform efforts culminated in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which President Biden signed into law in June. The new law enhances background checks, financially supports red flag laws and aims to crack down on gun trafficking. It also invests in mental health services and school safety. Murphy said the Sandy Hook shooting was a “tipping point” that set off years of behind-the-scenes conversations on gun reform in Washington, D.C. “What happened in Newtown changed the politics and the culture of this country,” Murphy said in an
...Read more interview with Connecticut Public. “It set in motion a political movement determined to try to make sense of the nation’s gun laws. But it also set off the gun lobby in a pretty radical direction.” Connecticut gun laws changed after Sandy Hook. Murphy says more needs to change. After Sandy Hook, Connecticut strengthened its assault weapons ban and required background checks for all firearm purchases. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes that Connecticut has one of the lowest firearm mortality rates in the nation. “That is due in part to our gun laws,” Murphy said. “In this state, it is harder to get your hands on an illegal weapon; it’s harder to get your hands on an assault weapon.” But he said the state needs to improve its red flag laws, which allow police to seize guns from people deemed a threat to themselves or others. Connecticut recently streamlined its red flag laws, but the changes have only been in effect since June. “There are probably a lot of people who are showing signs of danger to themselves or others that should have their weapons temporarily taken away,” Murphy said. “Connecticut can do better when it comes to the administration of its red flag laws.” A relatively small part of the population owns many of the guns in the U.S. About half of the nation’s guns are owned by 3% of America’s population, according to a 2016 study by Harvard and Northeastern universities. That’s about 7.7 million people possessing an average of 17 guns each, according to the study. But as NPR reports, researchers found that only one-quarter of Americans own guns, despite the country having more guns than people, according to a study of global firearm ownership. “What’s happening is that a very small number of Americans are buying lots and lots of weapons,” Murphy said. “Not all of those people are dangerous, but some of them are. And that’s what we really have to watch and track.” Murphy says gun reform takes years. And he hopes to see more changes over time. From the outside, Murphy said it looked like politicians were doing nothing as there was a string of mass shootings – shooting after shooting after shooting. “What was actually happening is that we were getting closer to passing something substantial,” Murphy said. “After each mass shooting, whether it was Las Vegas, or Orlando, or Parkland or El Paso, we had a more serious conversation with more Republican partners.” Murphy said it took years to get to the point where Republicans and Democrats could agree on a gun safety reform package like the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. “It was the moment at which we had achieved such cumulative strength over time that we were finally able to pass something,” Murphy said. “We had more activists, we had more money on the outside. But we also finally had just enough Republican partners on the inside, after building up those partnerships over 10 years, to get something serious done.” He touted $15 billion in the law to fund mental health, school and community safety, which he said will allow more counselors to help children and interrupt cycles of violence in cities. “I’m somebody that doesn’t believe our gun violence problem is primarily a mental health problem,” Murphy said. “But there’s no doubt that if you get more services to kids in crisis, it will lead to some lower levels of violence.” Murphy’s bill didn’t include other things Democrats wanted like a federal assault weapons ban or universal background checks on gun purchases. Murphy said he would still like to see those things, but “that’s just not how politics work.” “You don’t get everything all at once,” Murphy said. “You make progress. And you have faith that when people see the results of that progress, they’ll want more.” Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke at the 92nd Winter Meeting of the United States Conference of Mayors (USCM), a non-partisan organization of over 250 mayors from cities across the country, to discuss how cities and the federal government can work together to tackle loneliness and foster social connection in their communities. “What I know is that there's just something a little wrong in this country today. You're just seeing all sorts of things that are not normal. That we didn't see a quarter century ago, right. It's not normal for a woman to be shot for turning into the wrong driveway. It's not normal for thousands of people to take a drug that's designed to dull the senses and facilitate withdrawal from life. It's not normal for citizens to storm the
...Read more Capitol in a desperate attempt to keep their preferred leader in power. There are all of these things that are happening in our society today that are deeply abnormal. And so, I think this is a moment where all of us have to step back, right, and have this conversation with the country about why people are feeling so unhappy, so disconnected…I think it's a project that will bring left and right together all across the country. And if we do it right, if we find a way to help at the federal level, and the state level and the local level, build more connective tissue for the people that we serve, we will make a pretty big downpayment on addressing the spiritual, economic and cultural health of this country. On defining the problem, Murphy said: “I've struggled to find a great word for this, but it does feel like, in this country today, we're having a spiritual crisis. Right? A crisis of meaning. What's the purpose? Why are we here? And I know often that sounds like a conversation that is better for philosophers or theologians, but ultimately, what's our job as leaders, right? What's your job as a mayor, what's my job as a United States Senator? It's to create a set of rules and laws that allow people to lead a more meaningful and more purposeful, a happier life. And it just strikes me that folks are more unhappy, more anxious more on edge than ever before.” Murphy continued: “People are working longer than ever before because wages haven't caught up and we talk about wage policy as economic policy, but it's social connection policy too. If you have to work three jobs then you don't have time to belong to your church, you can't be part of a social organization. People have to work 70 hours today to make the same amount of money for their family to enjoy the same quality of life that 40 hours would have gotten you just a few decades ago. And so wage policy is not just economic policy, wage policy is social connection policy. It's one reason why you should be pushing us to do better on the minimum wage, on access to collective bargaining. Murphy highlighted the relationship between gun violence and loneliness: “I can't work on the issue of violence and specifically the issue of gun violence without reconciling the reasons that people get to this moment of desperation, where they are dealing with internal demons, and they decide to exercise those demons by turning a gun on others. So many of the shooters in this country, whether it be homicides in our cities, or whether it be mass shootings in our schools, are perpetuated by deeply disconnected and lonely people.” On working towards solutions, Murphy said: “The reason I came here today is because many of the questions about how we build connection, those are in your hands, right? A lot of what has happened over the course of the last three decades is that those third places, the places where people meet, they have just atrophied, they've become weaker. You've had a rapid decline in church membership, union halls are empty, veterans organizations are closing up shop. We can be engaged in a conversation about how through both federal and state and local support, we try to be more purposeful in keeping open and vital those third places where people meet. Downtowns are a place where connection happens. And downtowns are suffering all across the country. So, let's be in a conversation about how federal policy and local policy can revitalize those downtowns. Creating programming that builds brings people together, that's another way to solve for the loneliness crisis. Give families and kids more reason to come out of their house and be part of the community.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Really wonderful to be here with you today. I know there are a number of our Connecticut mayors out in the audience today and so I'll give a shout out to— I see Danbury and Hartford and a few other friends here. Thanks so much for asking me to come by to talk about this topic that just connects with all sorts of apolitical people out there that are desperate for what we're talking about in the halls of government to be connected to their sort of real-world problems. “I am really thrilled to have a conversation with you today, the beginning of a conversation, about the withdrawal crisis, the loneliness crisis, the social isolation crisis, in this country. Mayor Schieve was nice to reference the work that I've done on the issue of guns. “I know for many of you, you live every single day with the epidemic of gun violence in this country. But I came to this topic of loneliness through a lot of pathways. “First, I'm a parent of a teenager and a preteen and I see what's happening to our young people today as they withdraw into their screens as they spend less time with peers. But I can't work on the issue of violence and specifically the issue of gun violence without reconciling the reasons that people get to this moment of desperation, where they are dealing with internal demons, and they decide to exercise those demons by turning a gun on others. So many of the shooters in this country, whether it be homicides in our cities, or whether it be mass shootings in our schools, are perpetuated by deeply disconnected and lonely people. “But I also just spend a lot of time in my state talking to regular people. And what I know is that there's just something a little wrong in this country today. You're just seeing all sorts of things that are not normal. That we didn't see a quarter century ago, right. “It's not normal for a woman to be shot for turning into the wrong driveway. It's not normal for thousands of people to take a drug that's designed to dull the senses and facilitate withdrawal from life. It's not normal for citizens to storm the Capitol in a desperate attempt to keep their preferred leader in power. “There are all of these things that are happening in our society today that are deeply abnormal. And so, I think this is a moment where all of us have to step back, right, and have this conversation with the country about why people are feeling so unhappy, so disconnected. “I've struggled to find a great word for this, but it does feel like, in this country today, we're having a spiritual crisis. Right? A crisis of meaning. What's the purpose? Why are we here? And I know often that sounds like a conversation that is better for philosophers or theologians, but ultimately, what's our job as leaders, right? What's your job as a mayor, what's my job as a United States Senator? It's to create a set of rules and laws that allow people to lead a more meaningful and more purposeful, a happier life. “And it just strikes me that folks are more unhappy, more anxious more on edge than ever before. “And yet, there's all sorts of good news. The unemployment rate is at a structural low, GDP is growing, factory construction is booming... and yet, people are still unhappy. People are engaging in these behaviors. Violent behaviors, behaviors of self-harm, that suggest the things we are doing, the policy dials that we are turning, are not actually meeting people where they are. “There's this amazing longitudinal study that Harvard did. I think it's over 75 years of data. It tracks people all over the country, both rich and poor, educated and uneducated. And it's asking one simple question: what makes people happy? Over the course of your life, what are the factors that cause you to say, 'I am leading a life of purpose, a life of meaning, a life that that makes me content?' “And what that study shows is that the one thing that matters most to happiness is not your career, is not the amount of money you're making. It's friends, it's your connection with family. It's whether you have strong bonds with other human beings. That was the sum total of the study's findings, that it is connection that leads to happiness and fulfillment. “And so that's caused me to ask this question: Are we measuring our success as policy leaders in an accurate way if we aren't actively thinking about policies that build connection? “And I'm just going to tell you, you know this, we aren't measuring those kinds of policies. We measure our success in terms of GDP, in terms of the employment rate, in terms of test scores in our schools. “I'm not saying that all those things aren't important, but maybe we need to have a more purposeful connection about how we connect people together. Because the stats are damning right now. “As a parent of teenagers and preteens, maybe the stat that concerns me most is the number of young people, in particular young girls, who report intense feelings of loneliness. Double the number that reported that just years ago. The amount of time that our kids are spending with peers has cratered in the last 30 years, and we don't have to ask a lot of questions as to why that is. “But this is a broader epidemic. Not just of kids, but of adults as well. “Let me give you one stunning statistic. In the 1990s, three percent of adults in America said they had no friends, no friends. Today, that number is twelve percent. The number of people who say they have three or fewer friends has doubled in that same amount of time in this country. The amount of time that adults say they spend on a weekly basis with friends or with family members is half as much today as it was in the 1990s. “This is an epidemic and it's an epidemic that has happened almost overnight. “And so it just to me is not a coincidence that people are reporting feeling worse about themselves. They are engaging in these behaviors that communicate to us that they are feeling worse. And we have this crisis of connection and isolation and loneliness in this country. And so I'm here today to just ask you to be in a dialogue with leaders like me about how we do better. “The reason I came here today is because many of the questions about how we build connection, those are in your hands, right? A lot of what has happened over the course of the last three decades is that those third places, the places where people meet, they have just atrophied, they've become weaker. You've had a rapid decline in church membership, union halls are empty, veterans organizations are closing up shop. “Well, we can be engaged in a conversation about how through both federal and state and local support, we try to be more purposeful in keeping open and vital those third places where people meet. Downtowns are a place where connection happens. And downtowns are suffering all across the country. So, let's be in a conversation about how federal policy and local policy can revitalize those downtowns. “Creating programming that builds brings people together, that's another way to solve for the loneliness crisis. Give families and kids more reason to come out of their house and be part of the community. The new mayor of Hartford is here, and in our capital city, there simply aren't enough rec sports league opportunities because of how difficult it is to fund those opportunities in a low-income city. Let's build more of those places and opportunities in programming to get people out of their house. “So, we can be in a conversation about the tools that you have at your disposal to try to create connection, the places where people find connection, and we can try to find ways for the federal government to supplement that work. But I'm here also to tell you that there are elements of this solution set that aren't in your hands, that are in our hands. And I hope that you will make it part of your mission to pressure leaders like me to do our own part, right, the part that only the federal government can pursue, to try to end this crisis of withdrawal. “I'll give you two examples. One of the big problems we have today is just a crisis of free time. People are working longer than ever before because wages haven't caught up and we talk about wage policy as economic policy, but it's social connection policy too. If you have to work three jobs then you don't have time to belong to your church, you can't be part of a social organization. People have to work 70 hours today to make the same amount of money for their family to enjoy the same quality of life that 40 hours would have gotten you just a few decades ago. “And so wage policy is not just economic policy, wage policy is social connection policy. It's one reason why you should be pushing us to do better on the minimum wage, on access to collective bargaining. “But social media regulation is another place where you can't make a difference without us. We should pass legislation to restrict the addictive tools that social media companies use to pry our kids away from connection and into their rooms and into their phones. We should give parents the ability to say yes or no as to whether kids can be on these phones, empower parents to try to put their kids in a situation where there's a better chance that they will engage with peers instead of just engaging with their screens. “So, there are places that only the federal government can really step up and act when it comes to social connection policy. But what I know is that this is an absolutely vital project. “But what I also know is that there's a lot of folks who believe that there's peril in this endeavor. One headline on my work on this said, 'Chris Murphy wants to help you find friends.' And I get it, I get it, talking about friendship and social connection is not natural to political leaders. We're used to talking about jobs and schools and test scores. “But I just don't think you're going to meet the spiritual crisis in this country that we all know, you all know, exists, unless we work together on this great, grand, important, and unifying project of connecting people together. “And so I'm so thrilled, I was so excited, when I heard that you wanted to spend a little bit of time talking about this today. Because I think there is enormous important work to do here. I think it's a project that will bring left and right together all across the country. “And if we do it right, if we find a way to help at the federal level, and the state level and the local level, build more connective tissue for the people that we serve, we will make a pretty big downpayment on addressing the spiritual, economic and cultural health of this country. Thanks a lot for having me today. Appreciate it.” ### Click Here to Watch Murphy’s Speech at the Conference Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and other members of Congress on Thursday announced that they will introduce a bipartisan, bicameral concurrent resolution in support of the United States Soccer Federation's bid for the 2027 FIFA Women's World Cup, which would be hosted jointly by the United States and Mexico. The full text of the Senate Concurrent Resolution can be read here. The full text of the House Concurrent Resolution can be read here. Murphy is leading the resolution along with U.S. Senators Todd Young (R-Ind.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.). U.S. Representatives Darin LaHood (R-Ill.-16), Rick Larsen (D-Wash.-2), Don Bacon (R-Neb.-2), and Kathy Castor (D-Fla.-14), are also leading the
...Read more resolution from the side of the House of Representatives. The resolution highlights the New Heights Bid Committee's efforts to bring the 2027 FIFA Women's World Cup to the United States and Mexico and the positive impact hosting the tournament would have on the United States. "Women's soccer is one of the fastest growing sports in the world, and no country is better positioned to showcase the sport than the United States," said the members in a joint statement. "The Women's FIFA World Cup is poised to break attendance records, generate economic growth and tourism, and lead to further development in women's soccer and youth sports. With state-of-the-art infrastructure and a plethora of potential host cities, holding the tournament in the United States would set a new standard for quality and security. We look forward to working with the White House, relevant federal agencies, and our state and local partners to support the efforts of the U.S. Soccer Federation to bring the 2027 FIFA Women's World Cup to the United States." “We are incredibly thankful for the support from Congress for the U.S. Soccer’s New Heights Bid to bring the 2027 FIFA Women's World Cup to the United States and Mexico. Women’s soccer has seen increased investments and groundbreaking achievements in revenue, viewership, and participation across the globe. Our joint bid not only promises to set attendance and financial records but also underscores our commitment to gender equality by hosting back-to-back Men's and Women's World Cups. The financial success we can generate by hosting the Women’s World Cup will also have an incredible impact on women’s soccer across the globe. Our vision is to have the proceeds garnered from the tournament thoughtfully distributed to every Federation, thus propelling the advancement of the women’s game and fostering a sustained impact on the growth and development of women's soccer. We are confident the United States and Mexico can host the largest women's sporting event in history, fostering international goodwill, and inspiring young players worldwide and showcasing limitless possibilities in women's soccer," said U.S. Soccer Federation President Cindy Parlow Cone. Soccer remains one of the most popular sports in the world and in the United States, and the women's game continues to see exponential growth. The FIFA Women's World Cup is an international soccer competition featuring the Fédération Internationale de Football Association’s (FIFA) women's national teams. The United States Women's National Team (USWNT) is the most successful Women's National Team in the World, winning four Women's World Cups in 1991, 1999, 2015, and 2019. The United States previously hosted the Women's World Cup in 1999 and 2003, which are both considered successes and catalysts for increased interest in women's soccer across North America. The Congressional Soccer Caucus is an organization consisting of Members of Congress to promote, educate, and raise awareness on issues both domestic and international pertaining to sport. The Soccer Caucus coordinates a variety of briefings and events focused on creating awareness of how sports like soccer can be leveraged to transform communities and ensure that children reach their full potential. In 2018, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives agreed to a resolution in support of the U.S. Soccer Federation's successful bid for the upcoming 2026 FIFA Men's World Cup, which will be hosted in the United States, Mexico, and Canada. ### Read less Over 60 years ago, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech from the Lincoln Memorial steps. Today, his vision of America still resonates in young Connecticut residents. “I think we should all have dreams about what a better world could look like,” said 9-year-old Emma Hadari. Hadari is one of fifteen winners in a statewide essay contest asking students to reflect on their own goals and King’s legacy. For the last eight years, U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy has opened the contest to students in elementary, middle and high school. Sabrina Guerra, 11, described in their winning essay how King’s work inspires them to bring equality to marginalized people. Guerra is an autistic non-speaker and an advocate for people with disabilities. “Writing about my lived
...Read more experience is often painful, but the strength of change makers before me propels me onward,” Guerra shared. Cooper Brown, 12, another 2023 essay winner, sees the holiday as a time for introspection. “MLK Day is really a day to reflect and think about the choices that we've made, the choices that we can make for the future to help inspire change,” Brown said. In the contest, three submissions are chosen from each of the state’s congressional districts. The 2024 winning essays will be posted online on Martin Luther King Jr. Day. Read some of the winning 2023 essays below: COOPER BROWN, 12
Working to make change is like riding a bike. Sometimes you are bruised, but what matters most is to keep pedaling forward. 'My dreams aren't for myself, but for others' Bombed, battered and bruised he stood, but broken he was not. With wise words of inspiration to change, King said, “I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great of a burden to bear.” He was right. The burden of hate almost broke our bombed, battered, and bruised nation. Our bruise, the hate inflicted on this country, has turned into a scar forever marking our history. Dr. King had a dream of hope, a dream of change. He inspired people of color to take action, he inspired me. Even from Birmingham jail he tried to inspire action. He inspires me to chase my dreams everyday despite challenges. I dream of going to Yale, to become a public servant following in the footsteps of King. My dreams aren't for myself, but for others. As a politician, I want to fight for equality and uplift people who are struggling. That's why Dr. King’s mission has deep meaning to me, a kid trying to make a difference. At 9, I became student council president at my elementary school, learning of my election the same day President Biden learned about his. A year earlier during COVID lockdown, I started my own mission. As a biracial American I wanted to give back to the community like MLK. The mission was to give bikes to kids who might go their whole childhood without a bike. I partnered with a non-profit collecting bikes around the Farmington Valley and organized giveaways in Hartford. Ironically, at the time I didn't know how to ride a two-wheel bike myself. I started this project to be selfless. Selfless like King, who sacrificed his life to his mission. Working to make change is like riding a bike. Sometimes you are bruised but what matters most is to keep pedaling forward. EMMA HADARI, 9
I have a dream that one day every school will feel safe, with no practice lockdowns, no school shootings, and gun-free neighborhoods with children playing together on every street and park. 'Take his message and keep going' Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. tells people in his “I Have a Dream” speech to not judge others by the color of their skin, but to focus on their character. Racism was the focus of Dr. King's speech, but I think that we need to take his message and keep going. These are some of my dreams: I have a dream that one day this country will hold this truth to be self-evident: that all men AND WOMEN are created equal. I have a dream that one day on every playground in America, LGBTQ+ kids and straight kids will play together and hold hands on swings. I have a dream that one day every town in the U.S. will be transformed into a safe place for people with mental illness or disabilities. I have a dream that all children will one day live in a nation where they won’t be judged by how rich or poor they are, but by how honest, kind, and loving they are. I have a dream that one day boys and girls who come from other countries will be able to join hands with white boys and girls and feel like they really belong. I have a dream that one day every school will feel safe, with no practice lockdowns, no school shootings, and gun-free neighborhoods with children playing together on every street and park. I have a dream today. SABRINA GUERRA, 11
My advocacy is a fire that burns within my damaged yet proud and beautiful soul. 'An inextinguishable flame for justice' Martin Luther King Jr. aspired to bring peace and equality to oppressed people. I share this dream. I am of a marginalized group fighting for our right to be heard, the right to define ourselves, and the right to belong. I am an autistic non-speaker and I've been subjected to mistreatment and segregation because of prejudice and ignorance. Like MLK Jr., I have an inextinguishable flame for justice. Ableism is a damaging force in society, destroying souls and sowing division. Ableism looms over America's education system, saturates our medical institutions, and shrouds our media. In my lived experience ableism usurped my right to an equal education. MLK Jr. made history by a tireless campaign toward progress. He refused his challengers' insistence that he and his people patiently wait for justice. As was right and bold then, our revolution is now. Disabled voices must be amplified over those who have no authority to speak for us, define us, nor deny us access. On countless occasions my mind has sailed to feats of unyielding courage of Martin Luther King Jr. and his peers. Many stinging, similar offenses and parallel dreams tie my aspirations to their journeys and leadership. My advocacy is a fire that burns within my damaged yet proud and beautiful soul. Read less U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, both D-Conn., visited the defective Fitchville Pond Dam in Bozrah and spots along the Yantic River in Norwich where roadwork continued to repair damage and remove debris from Wednesday’s flooding. Federal, state and local leaders emphasized the chronic flooding problems along the Yantic River in Bozrah and Norwich Friday morning, in addition to concerns about the defective 19th century Fitchville Pond Dam. The senators offered their support for local municipalities and businesses that suffered flood damage in Wednesday’s early morning rain deluge. The Yantic River rose to near-record flood levels, inundating homes and businesses in the Yantic and Norwichtown areas. In addition to the river flooding, municipal leaders and emergency
...Read more responders were alarmed when a crack in a side abutment on the Fitchville Pond Dam on the Yantic River in Bozrah leaked water into the roadway. Concern that the dam might fail prompted emergency mandatory evacuations of more than 500 homes and businesses downstream in Bozrah and Norwich. The senators’ Friday morning tour started at the dam, where a contractor hired by the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection continued work started Thursday to install a cofferdam to relieve the water pressure on the dam side wall and allow engineers to inspect the dam. The dam’s listed owner is Bozrah Water Works, but DEEP officials said it is owned by Seymour’s Sand & Stone. Bozrah businessman Seymour Adelman heads both companies. Chuck Lee, DEEP assistant director for dam safety told the senators and municipal leaders and state legislators Friday that the emergency would be completed first before the state pursues enforcement action against the owner for a record of failure to comply with regulations calling for dam inspections every two years and for failing to file an emergency action plan for the Fitchville Pond Dam. Blumenthal, Murphy, Norwich Mayor Peter Nystrom and Bozrah First Selectman Glenn Pianka all praised emergency responders, town workers who first discovered the dam leak early Wednesday and firefighters in Bozrah and Norwich for their response to the flooding. Lee said he is confident the emergency work to shore up the dam will hold through Friday night’s expected storm, but crews are to be stationed at the dam overnight to monitor its condition. The Norwich area is forecast to receive another 2 inches of rain Friday night, according to the National Weather Service, which also projects the Yantic River to rise to moderate flood stage at 9.4 feet. The river reached a near record 14.23 feet Wednesday morning, just short of the all-time record of 14.9 feet. The Yantic volunteer fire department rescued business owners in Norwichtown trapped by the rapidly rising flood water Wednesday morning, and fire departments throughout the city pumped basements, some which saw 6 feet or more of water, Yantic Deputy Chief BJ Herz said. Blumenthal touted the federal Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Act and programs of the Federal Emergency Management Agency can provide funding for work, such as shoring up riverbanks, protecting homes, businesses and utility infrastructure in flood-prone areas and relocating residents or businesses. Blumenthal stressed that it’s not just the fear of the Fitchville Pond Dam, it’s the Yantic River itself, which floods frequently and threatens homes and businesses. “To put it very simply, the effects of the Yantic River have to be addressed in flooding that may be a threat to not only property, but lives,” Blumenthal said. “Federal aid is available and we’re going to fight for it. … The Yantic River is going to flood again. We’ve been here before. I’ve been here before.” Murphy, chairman of the Senate committee that writes the budget for the Department of Homeland Security, including the Building Resilient Communities account. He pledged that he and Blumenthal would seek to “plus up” that account. The committee will be writing that budget in the next two to three weeks, Murphy said, which prompted Friday’s tour to see the damage up close. “The cost of flooding can be enormous for businesses, for municipalities and for homeowners,” Murphy said. “There is more frequent and disastrous flooding happening in Connecticut and all over the country with big costs that come along with it.” Murphy said Connecticut has hundreds of old dams, many of them in private hands, in need of attention. Communities are facing what used to be called 100-year storms every year. “This has to be a national priority, especially when it comes to helping small towns and small cities bear the cost of doing the preventive maintenance on dams, building up infrastructure around waterways to try to prevent future flooding.” Norwich City Manager John Salomone said the city is preparing to file an application for a national disaster declaration to seek federal aid to cover the storm recovery costs. Mayor Nystrom said the Norwich Community Development Corp., the city’s economic development agency, is working with about two dozen businesses that suffered flooding and closures during and after the storm. Jim Burkart, father of Dixie Donuts’ owner Jennifer Baker, said workers and customers joined forces Thursday morning to clean out the main store and were ready to reopen Thursday. But city officials delayed the opening until a washed-out area of the parking lot was repaired. The shop reopened Friday morning. “The patrons here were overwhelming,” Burkart said. “They actually came down, volunteered their services. They just called my daughter up with overwhelming support and said, ‘You need help? You gotta do this. You gotta do that.’ It was just something.” Burkart said the shop, which has been on West Town Street for over 20 years, twice had water enter the building and has had a number of close calls. Salomone said Norwich Public Utilities is investigating permanent flood prevention measures at its critical Bean Hill power substation, which was taken offline Wednesday, cutting off power to about 5,000 NPU customers for most of the day Wednesday. Salomone said one expensive plan would be to build a dike around the substation, which would require federal funding. The senators visited Dixie Donuts at 275 W. Town St., Norwich, where water and mud coated the main floor inside the shop and flooded the parking lot. Across the street, state road crews worked on a washout along a state right-of-way adjacent to the Brick & Basil Wood-Fired Pizza Co. Mud still coated West Town Street Friday morning in the area, and road crews worked along a stretch about a mile from Dixie Donuts to the Interstate 395 Exit 14 ramp. “It’s not just the dam,” Mayor Nystrom said. “It’s the whole Yantic River basin.” Read less HARTFORD—In honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced on Wednesday the 15 winners of his eighth annual ‘Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Essay Contest.’ This year, Murphy received more than 1,650 entries from elementary, middle, and high school students from across Connecticut reflecting on Dr. King’s dream and their own aspirations. “As we reflect on Dr. King’s fight for equality and justice, we are reminded of the work still ahead. Every year, I am so impressed by the students from across the state who submit such thoughtful essays on what Dr. King’s legacy means to them. Their hope and determination to build a more equitable future should inspire us all,” said Murphy. The winning essays can be viewed below. Click on each student’s name
...Read more to download his or her essay. 1st Congressional District Winners: Markayla Johnson, Jumoke Academy Honors at the Hartford Conservatory Doris Lu, Renbrook School Satvik Kadappanavar, South Windsor High School 2nd Congressional District Winners: Zoey Sisley, Northeast Academy Elementary School Lillian Pascino, Captain Nathan Hale Middle School David Frazer, East Lyme High School 3rd Congressional District Winners: Summer Hazel Phelps, East Rock Magnet School Madison Persaud, James H Moran Middle School Livia Doran, Hamden High School 4th Congressional District Winners: Isabelle Babu-Boateng, Samuel Staples Elementary School Rosbin Flores, Black Rock School Misbah Sifat, Westhill High School 5th Congressional District Winners: Declan Rearick, Lake Garda Elementary School Isabella Pyo, Norton Elementary School Jorge Escalera, Bethel High School Read less Senator Chris Murphy’s indispensable watchword is “conversation”. By my count, the Connecticut Democrat used the word no fewer than 20 times in a recent phone interview, or roughly once every 90 seconds. It dawned on me that he was doing this deliberately, and with good reason: Murphy, 50, believes his party’s political salvation lies in listening to the rural and conservative swathes of the population that Democrats have too often dismissed in recent years. “I’m not saying that you’re going to steal 20 per cent of Trump’s base” by engaging such voters, he told me. “But you could have a meaningful conversation with about 10 per cent, and that would be good politics for my party, but it would also be really constructive for the country to have a conversation between people who are
...Read more traditionally thought of as Hatfields and McCoys” – a reference to a legendary family feud in 19th-century Appalachia. Such rhetoric usually gets a politician labelled a “centrist”. But if by centrism we mean merely a willingness to split the difference between two sides of an issue, Murphy is anything but. He’s a progressive whose Senate record garners him a 100 per cent rating from the National Education Association teachers’ union and a zero rating from the National Rifle Association. But he insists that the nation’s deepest crises won’t be solved by shutting out “folks in our country who may not align with us on 100 per cent of the issues we care about”. The rolling crisis that has consumed American life since the financial crash of 2008 has entered a curious stage under President Joe Biden. On paper, GDP expanded by 5 per cent in the third quarter – the sort of growth we were once told would forever elude developed countries. Construction for manufacturing is spiking, inflation is edging down, and the jobless rate remains low by historical standards. Yet polls indicate broad discontent with the economy and the president overseeing it. “I think the way we measure the health of the economy is disconnected from the way in which people experience the economy,” Murphy explained. “The unemployment rate matters. But if the jobs are all part-time, low paying and shitty, then people are going to care more about quality employment than just simple employment.” It isn’t only that flesh-and-blood people easily fall through the gaps in official statistics. It’s also that the public-policy apparatus has lost sight of what true human flourishing requires. It ignores our yearning for connection, community and belonging. Neoliberal capitalism proved especially acidic to working people’s sense of moral and material stability. And while Team Biden has been described fairly as the nation’s first post-neoliberal administration, Murphy worries his party isn’t doing enough to address working-class misery. One sign of the disconnect was “Rich Men North of Richmond”, a country song released online in August 2023 that went viral and soon topped the Billboard charts. “I’ve been sellin’ my soul, workin’ all day,” wailed singer Oliver Anthony. “Overtime hours for bullshit pay.” True, the song included a verse about fat people on welfare – a common right-wing trope – but mostly, it vented rage at business elites and the Washington ruling class. Murphy suggested that the sentiments expressed in the song should prompt his party to think hard about the dealignment between small-town America and the Democrats. For stating the obvious, he was mobbed by online lefties upset that the senator was appeasing the populist right. Yet he remains unapologetic. “I’m really proud of what Democrats passed in the first two years of the Biden administration,” he said, citing infrastructure investment and boosting the federal government’s power to negotiate drug prices with Big Pharma, among other measures. Still, he added, “after we passed all that, it didn’t feel like people were feeling any better about their lives or about government”. This should alarm Democrats because the right is doing a better job of tapping in to ordinary people’s anxieties. What launched his own “journey” on these issues was a deep reading of the New Right, most notably the Catholic political theorist Patrick Deneen. “I do think the New Right is having an energising conversation about how frustrated [Americans are] feeling with the pace of modern life,” even if he disagrees with their proposals. Yet he also looks for points of collaboration with the populist elements of the right. “I see more and more significant support for labour unions from Republicans than I did five or ten years ago.” But even on labour, Murphy’s thinking goes beyond typical Democratic talking points. “I don’t want the right to think that my conversation about economic power and loneliness is just a stalking horse to build up unions. The growth of labour unions is an integral part of the growth of other civil-society institutions like churches and synagogues and mosques where people also find connection.” Murphy is one of the lead Democratic negotiators on the US-Mexico border crisis, another source of friction between downscale Americans and his party. “Democrats might have a different idea of reform than Republicans do, but we should be reformers when it comes to our border. I’m testing the proposition that there are some new opportunities for the left and the right to find common ground.” It might be the most important conversation in the United States today. Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday joined a dozen of his Senate colleagues, including U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), in urging the top U.S. financial regulators to ensure that the forthcoming final Basel III Capital Requirements allow for continued robust private investment in America’s ongoing clean energy transition. In a letter to Federal Reserve Board Vice Chair Michael Barr, Acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael Hsu, and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, the Senators expressed support for tax equity as a primary form of capital for clean energy projects, which presents low risk to the banks that participate. In their letter, the Senators expressed support for the regulators’ work on strengthening bank capital
...Read more requirements, while urging the regulators to produce a strong final rule that accurately reflects the true nature of tax equity investment in clean energy, which has served as a key driver for transformative projects seeking the green tax incentives available through the Inflation Reduction Act. U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. “We write regarding the implementation of the final phase of the Basel III Capital Requirements as it relates to your work to continue strengthening regulation, supervision, and oversight of the banking system to better protect the American taxpayer,” the Senators began. “We are supportive of your work to continue these efforts to strengthen the banking system’s ability to withstand economic challenges and further improve the safety and soundness of our financial system.” “We appreciate the Agencies’ commitments to take into consideration the extensive comments received across multiple industries. […] Because of that, we urge you to consider an appropriate balance of strong capitalization and risk weightings that would prevent a permanent chilling effect on future clean-energy deployments. […] In light of your continued efforts, we ask that you take into consideration the role that tax equity investments play in facilitating clean energy expansion, in addition to the reduced risk profile of these investments as compared to other forms of nonpublic equity such as private equity,” they continued. “We are concerned that without recalibration, the rule could potentially have a chilling effect on clean energy financing across the country. Several institutions are beginning to shy away from tax equity-funded clean energy investments, including some multi-million-dollar clean energy projects across the nation. Developers of multiple renewable energy project sponsors across the country have expressed concerns with the sudden shift in deals failing to move forward until further notice. This is particularly alarming for smaller project sponsors who rely on this financing to remain in operation and deploy future projects,” they wrote. “We ask that you finalize a rule that reflects the low-risk profile of tax equity investments. We also ask that you work with regulated institutions in order to best minimize a disruption to clean energy investment in the interim while a rule is being finalized.” “We appreciate your thoughtful attention to comments and public feedback as you continue this work, and we applaud your efforts to continue strengthening the resilience of our financial system,” they concluded. The American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), the American Clean Power Association (ACP), and the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) have endorsed the Senators’ efforts to protect tax equity investments as a clean energy financing tool. The full letter can be viewed below and downloaded here. Dear Vice Chair Barr, Acting Comptroller Hsu, and Chairman Gruenberg: We write regarding the implementation of the final phase of the Basel III Capital Requirements as it relates to your work to continue strengthening regulation, supervision, and oversight of the banking system to better protect the American taxpayer. We support your work to finalize and implement the goals of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, whose mission has been set into motion since the financial crisis of 2008, and whose efforts to strengthen the international banking system has made significant strides in the safety and soundness of the global economy. To that end, we are supportive of your work to continue these efforts to strengthen the banking system’s ability to withstand economic challenges and further improve the safety and soundness of our financial system. We appreciate the Agencies’ commitments to take into consideration the extensive comments received across multiple industries. Furthermore, we recognize your recent extension of the comment period as a positive signal that the final rule will reflect a thoughtful, thorough analysis of the comments submitted. Because of that, we urge you to consider an appropriate balance of strong capitalization and risk weightings that would prevent a permanent chilling effect on future clean-energy deployments. We are concerned that the rule as written could result in unintended consequences on the deployment of our shared clean energy objectives, and in light of your continued efforts, we ask that you take into consideration the role that tax equity investments play in facilitating clean energy expansion, in addition to the reduced risk profile of these investments as compared to other forms of nonpublic equity such as private equity. Tax equity investments serve as a primary form of capital for clean energy projects. These investments facilitate clean energy projects by allowing the project sponsors to obtain financing from banks, which will generate enough tax liability to qualify for available tax benefits. These are the key incentives used to motivate investment into clean energy projects and further expand clean energy. The current design allows involved parties to benefit by achieving maximum scalability and taking advantage of the tax incentives that are intended to spur investment into renewable energy, while providing banks with a reliable, low-risk investment product. This maximizes the opportunities for both energy savings and expanding our country’s clean energy portfolio. The proposed rule’s treatment of all nonpublic investments would represent a considerable change in the way tax equity investments are treated by banks seeking to meet minimum capital standards under the rule. The proposed rule would remove the current 100 percent risk weight for non-significant equity exposures whose aggregate carrying value does not exceed 10 percent of the firm’s total capital and apply a 400 percent risk weight to equity investments that are not publicly traded. We are concerned that the proposed rule, if enacted as currently written, could impede the significant progress that is possible through the Inflation Reduction Act, which is currently estimated to incentivize billions of dollars in renewable energy investment in hydrogen, carbon capture, and other clean energy technologies. As a result of these changes, the risk weighting for clean energy tax equity investments would increase. In doing so, the planned rule treats tax equity investments the same as private equity, despite tax equity investments having a lower risk profile. Renewable energy tax equity investments have a risk-return profile that makes them notably different from other types of nonpublicly traded investments. For example, investors of renewable energy tax credits are repaid from a consistent stream of the tax credits. Key features of these investments, such as the absence of senior debt, limit the relative risks of tax equity investments. We are concerned that without recalibration, the rule could potentially have a chilling effect on clean energy financing across the country. Several institutions are beginning to shy away from tax equity-funded clean energy investments, including some multi-million-dollar clean energy projects across the nation. Developers of multiple renewable energy project sponsors across the country have expressed concerns with the sudden shift in deals failing to move forward until further notice. This is particularly alarming for smaller project sponsors who rely on this financing to remain in operation and deploy future projects. We are concerned about the near- and long-term implications of this uncertainty for project sponsors, which could place their financial well-being at risk and force limited activity in the clean energy financing space altogether. Given the concerns noted above, we ask that you finalize a rule that reflects the low-risk profile of tax equity investments. We also ask that you work with regulated institutions in order to best minimize a disruption to clean energy investment in the interim while a rule is being finalized. We are appreciative of your hard work to ensure that the final rule is reflective of extensive analysis and thoughtful feedback. This was reinforced in a recent hearing in the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, in response to a line of inquiry by Senator Van Hollen, reflecting the importance of these products as a resource for clean energy development. In your responses, each of you reaffirmed your commitment to considering the impact of these rules on clean energy development, and because of this, we remain confident that your work will be reflective of such consideration. We appreciate your thoughtful attention to comments and public feedback as you continue this work, and we applaud your efforts to continue strengthening the resilience of our financial system. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Tuesday released the following statement on the U.S. and coalition airstrikes against Houthi targets in Yemen and Houthi attacks on U.S. vessels. “The increasingly frequent Houthi attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea are unacceptable. In addition to the physical threat to the ships and their civilian personnel, the Houthis’ attacks undermine the recent progress made on a roadmap towards peace in Yemen, and make it even harder to deliver urgently needed humanitarian aid to both Yemen and Gaza. The U.S. and coalition strikes over the past few days were necessary, and I urge the Administration to intensify their
...Read more diplomatic efforts to prevent further regional escalation. While I support the Administration’s limited action, I expect to be briefed by the White House in the coming days on the scope of these strikes and the plan ahead. The Administration is legally required to seek congressional authorization for sustained hostilities against Houthi forces under the War Powers Resolution.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, joined U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and his Senate colleagues in filing an amendment to maintain the congressional notification requirement for all U.S. assistance to foreign militaries. Specifically, the amendment would strike a provision in the proposed national security supplemental funding bill that waives oversight requirements for U.S. funding for Israel under the Foreign Military Financing Program. If passed, the amendment would prevent the administration from bypassing congressional review of arms sales to Israel, just as required for all other nations. “This amendment is critical to maintain Congress’s oversight
...Read more responsibility over international arms sales. It simply maintains the current notification process for U.S. arms sales above a certain threshold, which is crucial to ensuring transparency for U.S. arms sales abroad. Israel and other close allies enjoy a shorter notification timeframe, but it would be problematic to eliminate that notification entirely for any country,” said Murphy. The amendment is also sponsored by U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Rev. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor on the stakes of the supplemental negotiations. Murphy made the case for funding Ukraine in its hour of need while also working to find a compromise with Republicans that both helps the Administration better manage the border and lives up to fundamental American values. On the stakes in Ukraine, Murphy said: “Never before in our lifetime has a large nuclear-armed nation like Russia invaded a neighboring country with the sole purpose of destruction, annihilation, and annexation. If they succeed, if Kyiv does become a Russian city, the post-World War II order is over. And no one here is really prepared to deal and live with those consequences. The rules that have governed the past seventy years,
...Read more that have provided us with relative global stability, the rules that have protected our country and our economy, which relies on a stable global system, they will all be permanently broken. Consider the Pandora’s box open.” He continued: “I wish it were hyperbole to say that the fate of the free world is at stake. And I wish we weren’t in a position where my Republican colleagues, who say that they support Ukraine, weren’t making funding for Ukraine dependent on solving one of the most vexing, most difficult political issues in American politics: the issue of immigration and border policy.” On the importance of the asylum system, Murphy said: “I think it’s easy for us here in Washington to forget when we’re talking about asylum, that we’re often talking about a life and death choice for people. We’re talking about men and women and children who are not safe in their home countries — who will die if they stay —who don’t want to leave their family, their neighbors, everything they know, but they are so desperate that they feel they have no choice but to make the often life-threatening journey to the United States of America.” Murphy pushed back on Republicans’ criticism of parole authority: “The Uniting for Ukraine and Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Venezuela parole programs have enabled more than a quarter of a million people to come to the United States safely after having passed an extensive vetting and background check process and also obtaining private sponsorship—[from] families here in the United States. They have the ability to work, and they are not forced to take the dangerous journey to the southern border. It denies smugglers and cartels the ability to exploit all of these people. It gives us a chance to vet those individuals before they show up at the United States. And what has happened since these programs have been put into place? A significant drop in unlawful encounters at the southern border from individuals from these countries. Unlawful crossings of Venezuelans are down 50%. Unlawful crossings of Cubans, Nicaraguans, and Haitians are down 90%. This is stunning but important progress.” “In November of last year, for instance, Border Patrol encountered 34,000 Nicaraguans on the border. A year and a half ago. This past November, Border Patrol encountered 4,000. 34,000 before parole, 4,000 after parole. No other tool at the President’s disposal has been so effective in reducing unauthorized crossings as has parole. Limiting this ability will only push more people to cross in between the ports of entry, exacerbating the very problem that Republicans claim they want to solve,” he added. Murphy concluded: “I think we all do agree that what is happening at the southwest border today – the number of people that are crossing every day compared to the resources we have – it’s untenable. And Democrats, we do want to give the Administration tools to better manage the border. But we’re not interested in taking away tools that have a proven track record of success.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “The weapons that we send to Ukraine—they aren’t used in military parades; they don’t sit in warehouses. They are used by the Ukrainians to fend off the brutal Russian invasion of that country. They are used by Ukraine to maintain that country’s sovereignty and independence. “At the height of the summer offensive, Russia was firing 10,000 artillery rounds per day at Ukraine. In response, Ukraine was firing back 7,000 rounds per day. But by the end of last year, just a few weeks ago, Ukraine’s stocks were so low that they were firing just 2,000 rounds per day. Russia is still firing 10,000 rounds per day. “I want my colleagues to step back for a moment, and imagine you are in a duel with an opponent where in each round, your opponent has five bullets for every one that you have. You’re not going to survive that fight. That’s not a fair fight. Soon you won’t even have one bullet. How long do you think that fight continues for you? “Right now, ammunition levels are so low that a Ukrainian artillery brigade that used to fire 50 to 90 shells per day is now forced to ration its supplies, down to 10 to 20 shells per day. That is barely enough for them to just defend themselves, let alone push forward or reclaim any additional territory. “And it’s not just ammunition that Ukraine desperately needs right now – it’s supplies for their air defense systems as well. For two years now, Russia has not had air superiority, except once, in the city of Mariupol. And there, Russian bombers flattened the city. In two months, 95 percent of the city was destroyed, and 25,000 people were killed. “But elsewhere in Ukraine, the casualties are much more limited because Russian planes were being shot down. “So perhaps it’s no coincidence that just a few days ago, Russia launched a major missile barrage at Kyiv in what was the single largest attack since the start of the war. Why do I say that perhaps it wasn’t a coincidence? “Well maybe it’s because Russia is pushing all of its chips in on a bet that Ukraine is not only going to run out of ammunition, it’s going to run out of air defense missiles. And with no American funding to replenish those systems, Russia would then be able to destroy the missile defense batteries themselves, finally giving them a free hand to completely decimate every single Ukrainian city. “They will apply the Mariupol tactics, the Mariupol playbook, to Odessa, to Kharkiv, and to Kyiv, and millions will die and Kyiv will become a Russian city. “While this body hesitates to resupply Ukraine, Russia is putting one-third of its entire budget for 2024 toward its war effort. Russia is receiving new ballistic missiles, artillery rounds, military equipment, and attack drones from its allies: North Korea, China, and Iran. “And yet we are still deciding whether we, as Ukraine’s primary ally, are going to support them in the fight to come. I just want to remind my colleagues what’s at stake in this fight. We are making a decision as we speak right now as to whether Ukraine is an independent sovereign nation or whether Ukraine, once again, is a Russian state, a Russian vassal, a Russian province. Whether Kyiv is an independent city or whether Kyiv is a Russian city. “Never before in our lifetime has a large nuclear-armed nation like Russia invaded a neighboring country with the sole purpose of destruction, annihilation, and annexation. If they succeed, if Kyiv does become a Russian city, the post-World War II order is over. Is over. And no one here is really prepared to deal and live with those consequences. “The rules that have governed the past seventy years, that have provided us with relative global stability, the rules that have protected our country and our economy, which relies on a stable global system, they will all be permanently broken. Consider the Pandora’s box open. “I wish it were hyperbole to say that the fate of the free world is at stake. And I wish we weren’t in a position where my Republican colleagues, who say that they support Ukraine, weren’t making funding for Ukraine dependent on solving one of the most vexing, most difficult political issues in American politics: the issue of immigration and border policy. “But that’s where we are. My Republican colleagues say they will let Vladimir Putin destroy and occupy Ukraine if we can’t come to a conclusion on immigration policy and border policy. I wish we weren’t here, but we are. “And so Democrats are at the table, trying to find a compromise that helps the Biden Administration and future administrations better manage the situation at the border, while also living up to our fundamental American values. “I wish we weren’t here. I wish we could just all say that we believe that it is in the interest of the United States of America to support Ukraine, to make sure that they have what they need to defend themselves, and that we are going to get that job done. And we are going to sit down and try to work together on the crisis over the broken immigration system. Tying the two together in this way threatens to become the biggest gift America has ever given Vladimir Putin. “And so I want to focus the remaining part of my remarks today on what I think we can do to help the Administration manage the border. But I also want to tell you what I think we cannot, and should not, do. The changes to immigration law that would fundamentally compromise our nation’s values and moral underpinnings, as a nation built by immigrants. “I think it’s easy for us here in Washington to forget when we’re talking about asylum, that we’re often talking about a life and death choice for people. We’re talking about men and women and children who are not safe in their home countries - who will die if they stay - who don’t want to leave their family, their neighbors, everything they know, but they are so desperate that they feel they have no choice but to make the often life-threatening journey to the United States of America. “We’re talking about people like Sandra Gutierrez. She lived in Honduras, and like any parent, Sandra wanted to make sure that her kids were safe at the school they attended every day. But they weren’t. They were under regular threat from armed gangs. So she joined together with her local parent board in her Honduran town, and started working with other moms to try to get the violent gangs that were a constant presence at her kids’ school away from campus. “But guess what happened to Sandra? That work made Sandra a target. These armed gangs stalked her, they hunted her, they threatened to kill her and her children if she didn’t stop and if she didn’t meet their demands. And so she did what any of us would do, what any parent would do. She protected her children. She left Honduras, where she would be hunted by these gangs, and she came to find asylum in the United States of America. “It’s people like Aliyah, a journalist in Cameroon who wrote powerful stories exposing discrimination by the Cameroonian government and sexual assaults committed by powerful people in her country. She reported the truth, and that made her a target. She was attacked, beaten, detained, imprisoned. Not by gangs—by her own government. After she escaped and fled her country – the place she had lived her entire life, where she had built a reputation, a career – she found asylum here in the United States of America. “It is true that many people who come to the United States seeking asylum do not have a story like Sandra or Aliyah. It is true that many immigrants seeking asylum are actually here as economic migrants. And so, I agree that we should come together and do what we can to provide a fully funded and much more effective and efficient asylum system to determine which people showing up at our border are like Sandra and Aliyah with legitimate asylum cases where the United States of America is the place where they can have their life saved versus the people who are just trying to use the asylum system to find work. “And so I support building a better system. But I don’t support proposals that completely shut off the ability of completely the ability for people to come to the United States to save their lives. “And I think it’s really important that we understand when you’re talking about asylum, we are talking about a system that works for thousands of people who are fleeing terror and torture. It does not work when many people are using it as an end-route to come to the United States to work. But we can solve that problem, we can fix that system, while still allowing people like those brave women that I talked about to have the ability to come to the United States to save their life. “We’re also talking about another topic. A topic that a lot of Republicans are discussing in the hallways these days. And that’s parole. It’s one of the most important tools that the administration has at its disposal to respond to humanitarian crises all around the world and to manage the flow of individuals at the border. “Immigration parole authority has been used by every single president in the last 70 years to provide relief for individuals who are fleeing danger and persecution. Republican and Democratic presidents have used this authority to protect Soviet Jews fleeing persecution, Cubans during the Cold War, and most recently, Ukrainians and Afghans fleeing violence and unrest. “Despite what some Republicans will have you believe, the Biden Administration’s use of parole has created more – not less – order at the border. The Uniting for Ukraine and Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Venezuela parole programs have enabled more than a quarter of a million people to come to the United States safely after having passed an extensive vetting and background check process and also obtaining private sponsorship—families here in the United States. They have the ability to work, and they are not forced to take the dangerous journey to the southern border. It denies smugglers and cartels the ability to exploit all of these people. It gives us a chance to vet those individuals before they show up at the United States. “And what has happened since these programs have been put into place? A significant drop in unlawful encounters at the southern border from individuals from these countries. Unlawful crossings of Venezuelans are down 50%. Unlawful crossings of Cubans, Nicaraguans, and Haitians are down 90%. This is stunning but important progress. “In November of last year, for instance, Border Patrol encountered 34,000 Nicaraguans on the border. A year and a half ago. This past November, Border Patrol encountered 4,000. 34,000 before parole, 4,000 after parole. “No other tool at the President’s disposal has been so effective in reducing unauthorized crossings as has parole. Limiting this ability will only push more people to cross in between the ports of entry, exacerbating the very problem that Republicans claim they want to solve. “I’m not saying that we shouldn’t have a conversation about reforming this practice. I’m at the table. But to completely deny the President the ability to use parole is to make the situation at the southwest border more unmanageable, not less unmanageable. “I think we all do agree that what is happening at the southwest border today – the number of people that are crossing every day compared to the resources we have – it’s untenable. And Democrats, we do want to give the Administration tools to better manage the border. But we’re not interested in taking away tools that have a proven track record of success. “This work is not easy. I wish we weren’t here. I wish we were passing immigration reform and moving funding for Ukraine, that the two hadn’t been tied together. But I accept that this is what has been made necessary by Republicans to get Ukraine the funding it needs. “And I’m really grateful for the progress that we have been able to make. Senator Lankford, Senator Sinema, myself, the White House, members of leadership have been working together throughout the holiday, nonstop every single day trying to find a compromise that lets us fund Ukraine, that lets us fund Israel, that gives the President new tools to manage the southwest border, but that also respects fundamental American values. That honors our tradition of immigration. “We’re not there yet but we’re close. And to get to that finish line, so that we can all join together in the effort to support Ukraine, that’s going to mean that both Democrats and Republicans have to compromise. Neither side is going to get everything that they want. I wish Republicans would choose to support Ukraine just because it’s the right thing to do. But we are where we are, we’ve made a lot of progress, and to me, the stakes are just far too high to give up.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, on Friday led 15 senators in urging Senate Appropriations leadership to support funding for the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail (IPR) grant program in the fiscal year 2024 spending legislation. While the committee-passed U.S. Senate Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill included $100 million for this account, House Republicans have proposed zeroing it out, which would dramatically hinder ongoing work to improve rail infrastructure in the Northeast and across the country. “While the Infrastructure Investment & Jobs Act (IIJA) provided five years of guaranteed funding for the Federal-State
...Read more Partnership grant program, this funding was always intended to be supplemental to annually appropriated dollars. The IIJA also authorized up to $1.5 billion for IPR grants in fiscal year 2024. The IIJA investment alone is not sufficient to fully address the nation’s rail state-of-good-repair (SOGR) backlog nor to fully improve and expand intercity passenger rail in a way that America deserves,” the senators wrote. The senators highlighted the importance of funding projects in the Northeast Corridor: “The NEC’s SOGR backlog stands at well over $40 billion, representing a serious threat to the nation’s economy. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Amtrak and commuter railroads on the NEC transported more than 800,000 people per weekday, and the workforce that travels on the NEC contributes roughly $50 billion annually to the economy. However, the specter of the SOGR backlog causing delays or track closures is a constant concern. According to the Northeast Corridor Commission, “[t]he loss of the NEC for a single day could cost the country $100 million in added congestion, productivity losses, and other transportation impacts.” If Congress does not make the necessary investments, disruptions will become more frequent and more severe over time.” The senators concluded: “On behalf of our millions of constituents who depend on a safe and reliable passenger rail network and also those who deserve access to passenger rail but do not have it as a meaningful option today, we urge the Subcommittee to vigorously defend the $100 million appropriation for FY 2024 for the Federal-State Partnership for IPR program.” U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Angus King (I-Maine), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available here and below. Chairs Murray and Schatz and Ranking Members Collins and Hyde-Smith, As you work to finalize the fiscal year (FY) 2024 spending legislation, we urge you to support no less than $100 million for the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail (IPR) grant program—the amount included in the committee-passed Senate Transportation, Housing and Urban Development bill. The House of Representatives has proposed zeroing out this account. Eliminating funding for the IPR grant would hinder ongoing work to improve rail infrastructure in the Northeast and across the country. The IPR was reauthorized in the IIJA “to fund capital projects that reduce the state of good repair backlog, improve performance, or expand or establish new intercity passenger rail service.” In general, not less than 45% of annual funding is reserved for projects along the Northeast Corridor (NEC), which are to be consistent with the most current NEC Service Development Plan. In addition, not less than 45% of annual funding is reserved for projects not located along the NEC, with preference given to projects included in a corridor development (i.e., service improvement and expansion) plan previously selected by the FRA. In addition, a share of the funding provided to non-NEC projects must also benefit, in whole or in part, one of Amtrak’s fifteen Long-Distance routes. While the Infrastructure Investment & Jobs Act (IIJA) provided five years of guaranteed funding for the Federal-State Partnership grant program, this funding was always intended to be supplemental to annually appropriated dollars. The IIJA also authorized up to $1.5 billion for IPR grants in fiscal year 2024. The IIJA investment alone is not sufficient to fully address the nation’s rail state-of-good-repair (SOGR) backlog nor to fully improve and expand intercity passenger rail in a way that America deserves. Why the Northeast Corridor needs robust funding The NEC’s SOGR backlog stands at well over $40 billion, representing a serious threat to the nation’s economy. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Amtrak and commuter railroads on the NEC transported more than 800,000 people per weekday, and the workforce that travels on the NEC contributes roughly $50 billion annually to the economy. However, the specter of the SOGR backlog causing delays or track closures is a constant concern. According to the Northeast Corridor Commission, “[t]he loss of the NEC for a single day could cost the country $100 million in added congestion, productivity losses, and other transportation impacts.” If Congress does not make the necessary investments, disruptions will become more frequent and more severe over time. While the IIJA made a significant down payment to help address this SOGR backlog, it is simply not enough given the years of underinvestment and the age of the assets. Without sufficient annual appropriations to supplement the IIJA, many of the NEC’s most critical projects will not advance. Below are just a few examples of NEC projects that FRA Project Inventory has identified to begin construction by 2025: Connecticut River Bridge Replacement Project in Connecticut;
Stamford Station Improvements in Connecticut;
Norwalk River (Walk) Bridge Replacement Project in Connecticut;
East River Tunnel Rehabilitation Project in New York;
Elements of the Gateway Program in New York and New Jersey;
Harrisburg Line Interlocking, Catenary and Signal projects in Pennsylvania;
Philadelphia Gray 30th Street Station Improvements in Pennsylvania;
Susquehanna River Bridge Replacement Program Phase 1 in Maryland;
Baltimore Penn Station Improvements in Maryland;
B&P Tunnel Replacement Project (Frederick Douglass Tunnel) in Maryland; and
Washington Union Station Improvements in the District of Columbia Why non-NEC projects need robust funding In 2021, Amtrak released a $75 billion, 15-year vision to bring more trains to more people across the nation. This vision was meant to start an important conversation about the need for robust federal investment in passenger rail, especially in underserved and unserved communities. Congress responded by authorizing the FRA Corridor Identification and Development Program and the IIJA provided $12 billion via the Federal-State Partnership grant program as in initial down payment on non-NEC rail expansion. While this IIJA funding is a critical first step, to fully realize the type of passenger rail network that the country deserves, the Federal-State Partnership grant program will require robust additional funding in FY24 and beyond. Below is an illustrative list of types of non-NEC corridor development and related projects that federal investment could advance, assuming support from relevant states and communities and approval by the FRA: Vermonter route expansion to Montreal;
Chicago Access Program projects in Illinois to reduce trip times and improve capacity for existing and future Midwest routes and connections to the south and east;
More frequencies and enhanced service on Cascades Corridor in Washington and Oregon;
A new Front Range Corridor in Colorado and Wyoming connecting Denver, Colorado Springs, Pueblo and Cheyenne;
A new Massachusetts Inland Route service;
More frequencies on the Hiawatha Corridor in Wisconsin and Illinois and extension to Madison, Green Bay, and Eau Claire, Wisconsin, as well as St. Paul, Minnesota;
A new Phoenix-to-Tucson corridor in Arizona;
More frequencies on the Downeaster Corridor in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine;
A new “3C+D Corridor” in Ohio connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati;
Rebuilding of an abandoned higher-speed rail corridor between Richmond, Virginia, and Raleigh, North Carolina;
Heartland Flyer route extension to connect Kansas communities, including Wichita, with Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and Fort Worth, Texas;
Upgrades to the rail corridor between Chicago, Indianapolis and Cincinnati, potentially including new service to Louisville;
A new corridor in Texas, connecting Dallas/Ft. Worth, Austin, and San Antonio;
Multiple new rail connections in California; and,
A multi-corridor network from a new Atlanta Hub station, including new corridors to Nashville, Tennessee; Charlotte, North Carolina; and Savannah, Georgia; and elsewhere in the South.
Reestablish passenger rail service between Scranton and New York via New Jersey. On behalf of our millions of constituents who depend on a safe and reliable passenger rail network and also those who deserve access to passenger rail but do not have it as a meaningful option today, we urge the Subcommittee to vigorously defend the $100 million appropriation for FY 2024 for the Federal-State Partnership for IPR program. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday held a press conference with Amazon Teamsters, as well as U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), to announce a new effort calling out Amazon for its mistreatment of drivers in the company’s Delivery Service Partner (DSP) program. In a bipartisan letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, Murphy and 28 senators requested information about the DSP program, including Amazon’s justification for refusing to bargain with union representatives of DSP employees and requiring DPSs to sign non-poaching agreements. “All throughout the holiday season, houses, apartment buildings all across the country were visited by Amazon delivery trucks. Out of those Amazon delivery trucks came friendly men and women dressed in
...Read more Amazon uniforms, delivering Amazon packages. But what you likely didn't know is that those delivery drivers who were so essential to your holiday season working out don't work for Amazon. They're wearing an Amazon uniform, they're delivering an Amazon package, they're walking out of an Amazon branded vehicle, but they don't work for Amazon. And that is intentional. Because Amazon doesn't want to have responsibility for the often abysmal wages and working conditions that these drivers are laboring under every single day,” Murphy said. Murphy highlighted the drivers’ working conditions: “Drivers have been forced to endure terrible working conditions, including 12-hour shifts with no brakes working in extreme heat, working through hazardous conditions, working without proper safety measures. And the results unfortunately speak for themselves. Delivery drivers working for these companies have an injury and accident rate of 20%. That is a stunning number. If you were applying for a job, and you were told that there was a 20% chance that by showing up for work, you are going to become injured so badly that you couldn't continue you wouldn't take that job. We don't accept that anywhere in our economy today.” Murphy continued: “Instead of outsourcing that responsibility. They need to take joint responsibility, either making these drivers employees of Amazon, or entering into new agreements with the subcontractors so that Amazon has direct responsibility for those working conditions.” On Amazon’s response to one DSP’s efforts to unionize, Murphy said: “Amazon had a pretty simple message for them. If you stand up for yourself, you're never working for Amazon. As soon as those workers began to organize, Amazon began to cut back on the routes that it gave to that company, ultimately terminating their contract. And let's be clear, that message was heard by every other company that works for Amazon. It was likely unfortunately heard by many other workers, that if you are a delivery driver that stands up for yourself, that demands better working conditions, Amazon doesn't want anything to do with you. There will be consequences for you, for the company that you work for. That’s unacceptable.” On the growing bipartisan coalition to support workers, Murphy said: “I'm really glad to say that this is a bipartisan letter. There are Republicans and Democrats in the Senate that have signed on to make these demands and to ask these questions, and I think it is a sign that there is a growing bipartisan coalition in the United States Senate to make sure that workers are not continually abused by these kind of corporate tactics.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Good morning, everyone. My name is Chris Murphy, I have the honor of representing Connecticut in the United States Senate. I'm here with two of my fantastic colleagues, Senator Warren, Senator Blumenthal, along with a group of really important workers and advocates who are joining us today to deliver a simple message to Amazon: that it's time for Amazon to do the right thing and take responsibility for the work conditions of some of its most important employees. “All throughout the holiday season, houses, apartment buildings all across the country were visited by Amazon delivery trucks. Out of those Amazon delivery trucks came friendly men and women dressed in Amazon uniforms, delivering Amazon packages. “But what you likely didn't know is that those delivery drivers who were so essential to your holiday season working out don't work for Amazon. They're wearing an Amazon uniform, they're delivering an Amazon package, they're walking out of an Amazon branded vehicle, but they don't work for Amazon. “And that is intentional. Because Amazon doesn't want to have responsibility for the often abysmal wages and working conditions that these drivers are laboring under every single day. “And so we're here today to talk about the real life of Amazon delivery drivers. Why, as consumers, you shouldn't accept what is going on today when it comes to how Amazon treats these delivery drivers, and why it needs to change. “So here's the reality. These drivers work for a myriad of independent companies all across the country, and Amazon contracts with those companies in order to get these packages delivered. Even though they look like Amazon employees, they are not Amazon employees. “But Amazon pays these companies so little, that the conditions that these drivers often work under are unconscionable. Drivers have been forced to endure terrible working conditions, including 12-hour shifts with no breaks working in extreme heat, working through hazardous conditions, working without proper safety measures. And the results, unfortunately, speak for themselves. “Delivery drivers working for these companies have an injury and accident rate of 20%. That is a stunning number. If you were applying for a job, and you were told that there was a 20% chance that by showing up for work, you are going to become injured so badly that you couldn't continue, you wouldn't take that job. We don't accept that anywhere in our economy today. “But for Amazon delivery drivers, because of the conditions they work under, there is a 20% injury rate. And so what we are here to say is that it is time for Amazon to take responsibility for the conditions that their drivers are working under instead of outsourcing that responsibility. They need to take joint responsibility, either making these drivers employees of Amazon, or entering into new agreements with the subcontractors so that Amazon has direct responsibility for those working conditions. “The last thing to say is this before I turn it over to Senator Warren: workers have stood up for themselves to try to improve these conditions. In fact, you'll hear a story today about a group of workers in California who are working for one of these delivery companies who decided to take matters into their own hands, decided to form a union, organize, to make sure that if Amazon wasn't going to protect them that they would protect themselves. “When they did that Amazon had a pretty simple message for them: if you stand up for yourself, you're never working for Amazon. As soon as those workers began to organize, Amazon began to cut back on the routes that it gave to that company, ultimately terminating their contract. And let's be clear, that message was heard by every other company that works for Amazon. It was likely, unfortunately, heard by many other workers, that if you are a delivery driver that stands up for yourself, that demands better working conditions, Amazon doesn't want anything to do with you. There will be consequences for you, for the company that you work for. “That's unacceptable. That is unacceptable. And so the second part of our message is that Amazon needs to stop these union-busting techniques, needs to stop punishing workers who stand up for themselves, when they are trying to get better conditions when it comes to delivering these packages. “So I really want to thank all of our brothers and sisters who are here who are going to talk a little bit about their stories and their perspective working for and with Amazon and why it's time for Amazon to do better. “Unfortunately, this is not a problem exclusive to Amazon. We're talking about Amazon today. But this is a tactic employed by big companies, big corporations all across this country, where they outsource work to subcontractors. They refuse to take responsibility for the conditions and the wages. “And it's something that as Americans, and as members of Congress, we do not need to accept. We have sent a letter to Amazon demanding them to answer a set of questions about these practices. I'm really glad to say that this is a bipartisan letter. There are Republicans and Democrats in the Senate that have signed on to make these demands and to ask these questions, and I think it is a sign that there is a growing bipartisan coalition in the United States Senate to make sure that workers are not continually abused by these kind of corporate tactics.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Thursday released the following statement:
“I am deeply concerned by the scenes of violence coming out of Ecuador this week. The U.S. stands with the people of Ecuador and will support President Noboa’s efforts to restore safety and security. My office is continuing to monitor the situation and will be ready to help those in Connecticut with family and loved ones in the country.”
###
WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday led 28 of his Senate colleagues in sending a bipartisan letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy requesting information about the company’s Delivery Service Partner (DSP) program and its efforts to avoid legal liability for the persistent mistreatment of DSP drivers. The senators are also seeking information regarding Amazon’s justification for refusing to bargain with union representatives of DSP employees and requiring DPSs to sign non-poaching agreements. “Amazon’s freight truck drivers haul a variety of goods across highways every day, and their branded delivery vehicles are a virtually unavoidable feature in neighborhoods all over the country. Though
...Read more nearly all Americans are familiar with and reliant on the services of Amazon- branded vehicles – which are operated by drivers in Amazon-branded vests who exclusively deliver packages with big, bold Amazon labels – few realize that Amazon refuses to acknowledge the workers who operate these vehicles as its legal employees,” the senators wrote. The senators detailed the dangerous working conditions of DSP drivers: “An overwhelming body of reporting suggests this system of control without responsibility exacts an awful toll on drivers. Drivers have been made to work in extreme heat without air conditioning, forced to make deliveries in the snow without proper safety equipment like snow tires or chains, and are often pressured to skip breaks. In some instances, drivers have been forced to work for nearly twelve hours without access to a restroom. In 2021, researchers used publicly disclosed OSHA 300A summary data to estimate that DSP drivers were injured at a rate of 18.3 injuries per 100 workers in 2021. In other words, nearly one in five drivers was injured on the job. This represented a shocking 38% increase over the 2020 injury rate. “Amazon is also facing numerous allegations of flagrant violations of the National Labor Relations Act, including refusal to recognize and bargain with workers who recently voted to unionize with the Teamsters, holding captive audience meetings to stifle worker organizing efforts, reducing DSP routes in response to union activity, and terminating DSP employees in retaliation for union organizing and other protected activities,” the senators added. U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Maizie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Roger Marshall (R-Kansas), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) Tina Smith (D-Minn.), J.D. Vance (R-Ohio.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available here and below: Dear Mr. Jassy, We write to express concerns regarding reports that Amazon inflicts persistent mistreatment on its Delivery Service Partner (DSP) drivers and to request further information regarding Amazon’s DSP program. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee Chair Sanders recently launched an investigation into “the abysmal safety record in Amazon’s warehouses and the company’s treatment of workers who are injured in those warehouses.” In response to a growing body of public reporting, expert analyses, and constituent concerns shared with our offices, we are conducting a similar but distinct oversight inquiry into Amazon’s DSP program. Amazon’s freight truck drivers haul a variety of goods across highways every day, and their branded delivery vehicles are a virtually unavoidable feature in neighborhoods all over the country. Though nearly all Americans are familiar with and reliant on the services of Amazon- branded vehicles – which are operated by drivers in Amazon-branded vests who exclusively deliver packages with big, bold Amazon labels – few realize that Amazon refuses to acknowledge the workers who operate these vehicles as its legal employees. Even though Amazon reportedly exercises near-total control over the wages and working conditions of its delivery drivers, it appears to avoid legal liability through a network of delivery service partners – supposedly independent businesses that contract with Amazon. On paper, Amazon claims that these DSPs are the real employers of its delivery drivers. But as has been reported, DSPs have little discretion over key aspects of their businesses, which means that Amazon may be required to shoulder legal responsibility as an employer of DSP drivers. An overwhelming body of reporting suggests this system of control without responsibility exacts an awful toll on drivers. Drivers have been made to work in extreme heat without air conditioning, forced to make deliveries in the snow without proper safety equipment like snow tires or chains, and are often pressured to skip breaks. In some instances, drivers have been forced to work for nearly twelve hours without access to a restroom. In 2021, researchers used publicly disclosed OSHA 300A summary data to estimate that DSP drivers were injured at a rate of 18.3 injuries per 100 workers in 2021. In other words, nearly one in five drivers was injured on the job. This represented a shocking 38% increase over the 2020 injury rate. Over the last few years, reports of unsafe and unfair working conditions have demonstrated that widespread safety and labor violations appear to be a feature, not a bug, of the DSP program. As a result, Amazon drivers and dispatchers have picketed 25 Amazon warehouses across nine states over the past several months, including Connecticut, California, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey. Amazon is also facing numerous allegations of flagrant violations of the National Labor Relations Act, including refusal to recognize and bargain with workers who recently voted to unionize with the Teamsters, holding captive audience meetings to stifle worker organizing efforts, reducing DSP routes in response to union activity, and terminating DSP employees in retaliation for union organizing and other protected activities. In addition to being dangerous for workers, the structure of Amazon’s DSP program may help Amazon escape regulatory scrutiny. The DSP program is a highly fragmented, captive business model, characterized by its use of leased vans and other vehicles under 10,000 pounds. Because these vehicles are not subject to certain commercial vehicle regulations, it is nearly impossible to conduct oversight or regulatory efforts to analyze and understand the full universe of DSP operations. And while Amazon reportedly contracts with a workforce that is nearly as large as the U.S. Postal Service, there is no clear reporting requirement that would enable regulators to effectively identify all DSPs. Clearly, further Senate oversight of Amazon’s DSP program is overdue. In furtherance of this inquiry, we request answers to the following questions by February 10, 2024: What is Amazon management’s justification for insisting it is not obligated to bargain with union representatives of DSP employees, given the control Amazon wields over the terms and conditions of DSP employees, such as their wages, working conditions, routes, and hours of availability?
What is the justification for Amazon's requirement that several DSPs sign non-poaching agreements, in light of the company’s claim that it does not control the working conditions of its DSP’s employees?
Under what circumstances might an Amazon DSP possess a U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) number and be subject to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) inspection? Under what circumstances might an Amazon DSP operate under an Amazon DOT number?
If DSPs are indeed independent entities, are DSPs permitted to work with Amazon’s direct package delivery competitors? Why, or why not? If so, what percentage of current DSPs work directly with Amazon’s competitors?
Is Amazon responsible for the provision and maintenance of DSP vehicles and other safety and health conditions at its DSPs? If so, what is Amazon's process for ensuring compliance with state and federal regulations?
On average, at what percentage or dollar amount does Amazon subsidize the costs of vehicles and equipment for DSPs? What additional details can you provide as to the vehicle and operations financing model Amazon offers to prospective DSPs?
Does Amazon limit the number of delivery stations a DSP may operate out of or restrict how much DSPs can scale operations within the Amazon network?
What companies has Amazon contracted with as a part of its DSP program? Where are these companies operating their DSP programs?
Does Amazon have a standard lease agreement that DSP companies must sign to receive vehicle fleets? Please provide a copy of the standard lease agreement or copies of your 10 most recently entered lease agreements.
Does Amazon possess copies of OSHA 300A and OSHA 300 filings for all currently active DSP companies for the past 3 years (2020-2023)? If so, please provide this information. If no, please explain why Amazon does not collect this information.
What is the DSP turnover rate, and how many DSPs have stopped participating in the DSP program since 2018? Please provide this information by calendar year.
Does Amazon collect data on the automobile crash rates involving DSPs over the last 10 years (2013-2023)? If so, please provide this information. If not, please explain why Amazon does not collect this information. We look forward to your prompt attention to this request. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released the following statement on news that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has successfully denied more than 500 illegal gun purchases by prospective buyers through the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act’s enhanced background check for buyers under 21 years of age. “The evidence is clear: the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is working. More than 500 illegal gun purchases were stopped solely because of our legislation’s enhanced background check for under-21 buyers. It can be difficult to measure success in terms of tragedies prevented, but there is no doubt that stopping these 500 guns from landing in the hands of someone who poses a danger to themselves or others has saved lives. This milestone is just one example of
...Read more how our bill has kept people safe – a big drop in the murder rate, hundreds of new gun trafficking prosecutions, and hundreds of denials for firearm purchases by dangerous individuals. We know what works, and I’ll keep pushing for more commonsense gun safety legislation,” said Murphy. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 33 of their Senate colleagues in a letter to 13 non-unionized automakers urging them not to illegally block United Auto Workers’ (UAW) unionization efforts at their manufacturing plants. After the ratification of historic agreements between UAW and the Big Three automakers in Detroit, thousands of non-union autoworkers are publicly organizing to join the UAW. “We are concerned by reporting at numerous automakers that management has acted illegally to block unionization efforts,” the senators wrote in a letter to the chief executive officers of Tesla, Rivian, Lucid, BMW, Honda, Hyundai, Mazda, Mercedes, Nissan, Subaru, Toyota,
...Read more Volkswagen, and Volvo. “…These retaliatory actions are hostile to workers’ rights and must not be repeated if further organizing efforts are made by these companies’ workers. We therefore urge you all to commit to implementation of a neutrality agreement at your manufacturing plants.” “Your commitment to neutrality would ensure that management does not pressure workers into voting against unionization or delaying the election process. We believe a neutrality agreement is the bare minimum standard manufacturers should meet in respecting workers’ rights, especially as companies receive and benefit from federal funds related to the electric vehicle transition,” they continued. “All workers, no matter what states they live in, should have a free and unhindered opportunity to join a union. We strongly urge you to implement a neutrality agreement at all of your plants and commit to negotiating in good faith if your employees do elect to unionize with the UAW,” the senators concluded. “Every autoworker in this country deserves their fair share of the auto industry’s record profits, whether at the Big Three or the Non-Union Thirteen. We applaud these US Senators for standing with workers who are standing up for economic justice on the job. It’s time for the auto companies to stop breaking the law and take their boot off the neck of the American autoworker, whether they’re at Volkswagen, Toyota, Tesla, or any other corporation doing business in this country,” said UAW President Shawn Fain. U.S. Senators Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) also signed the letter. Text of the letter can be found here and below: Dear Mr. Zipse, Mr. Mibe, Mr. Muñoz, Mr. Rawlinson, Mr. Moro, Mr. Källenius, Mr. Uchida, Mr. Saringe, Mr. Osaki, Mr. Musk, Mr. Sat?, Dr. Blume, Mr. Rowan: We applaud the United Auto Workers’ (UAW) historic agreements with GM, Ford, and Stellantis—the Big Three—which are a testament to how powerful workers are when they come together to collectively bargain. Many workers had concerns that the transition to electric vehicles would translate to fewer jobs, plant closures, or lower pay. However, the UAW’s securing of a just transition ensures workers at electric vehicle battery plants can earn the same high wages other UAW members earn. It further demonstrates that the electric vehicle transition can and must create good-paying jobs. It is time now for non-union automakers across the United States to demonstrate that same commitment by pledging not to interfere in any organizing activities occurring at its plants through the implementation of neutrality agreements. We understand that UAW has begun organizing efforts at 13 non-unionized automakers: Tesla, Rivian, Lucid, BMW, Honda, Hyundai, Mazda, Mercedes, Nissan, Subaru, Toyota, Volkswagen, and Volvo Cars. We are concerned by reporting at numerous automakers that management has acted illegally to block unionization efforts. For example, according to employee accounts, Volkswagen managers confiscated and destroyed pro-union materials and Hyundai supervisors unlawfully banned pro-union materials in non-work areas outside of normal working hours. In addition, the National Labor Relations Board found that Tesla employed multiple illegal tactics aimed at stopping organizing efforts including online harassment, employee interrogations, and retaliatory firings. These retaliatory actions are hostile to workers’ rights and must not be repeated if further organizing efforts are made by these companies’ workers. We therefore urge you to commit to implementation of a neutrality agreement at your manufacturing plants. A neutrality agreement solely consists of an employer agreeing not to engage in pre-election activities that influence workers’ freedom to form a union. Your commitment to neutrality would ensure that management does not pressure workers into voting against unionization or delaying the election process. We believe a neutrality agreement is the bare minimum standard manufacturers should meet in respecting workers’ rights, especially as companies receive and benefit from federal funds related to the electric vehicle transition. The Inflation Reduction Act is the most significant clean energy and climate change legislation in our nation’s history. However, in order for the electric vehicle transition to be a success for our economy and climate, we must make sure it includes a just transition for workers, not just for workers at the Big Three. We believe the electric vehicle transition will not and cannot come at the expense of workers’ ability to form a union and collectively bargain for the fair wages, affordable health care, dignified retirement, and job security necessary for the continued strength of the U.S. auto industry. All workers, no matter what states they live in, should have a free and unhindered opportunity to join a union. We strongly urge you to implement a neutrality agreement at your plants and commit to negotiating in good faith if your employees do elect to unionize with the UAW. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined CNN’s State of the Union to discuss how government can help tackle the loneliness epidemic and why it’s important for Americans to have a national conversation about rebuilding community and connection. “Last year, we had more suicides in the United States than in any year in our lifetime. Rising rates of violence. More people taking withdrawal drugs and overdosing. It feels like people are having a harder time finding purpose and meaning than ever before. And part of the reason for that – a lot of people are lonely and feeling alone. 20 years ago, only 3% of Americans reported having no friends. Today, 12% of Americans say they have not a single friend. We report spending half as much time as we used to on a daily basis with
...Read more family and friends. We’re withdrawing into ourselves, and with that comes a real sickness, emotionally, spiritually, physically. And it's something that I think political leaders need to start talking about because it impacts everybody in this country on the right and the left. And it's actually a wonderful unifying conversation because everyone in this country is feeling alone,” said Murphy. On bipartisan support for regulating social media, Murphy said: “The social media companies absolutely are determined to protect their addictive technology. Their entire business model is centered around trying to get us to look at our phones six to eight hours a day. They make less money if we're talking to each other rather than looking at our phones. But the good news is this conversation about social media regulation is one that actually brings Republicans and Democrats, the right and the left together. You talk to parents out there – it really has nothing to do with their ideology as to whether or not they want more help in trying to keep their kids off of TikTok, off of Instagram, especially when they see those sites really taking their children into a dark rabbit hole.” Murphy discussed how the political discourse is disconnected from what Americans are really feeling: “I think when you don't have leaders that are sticking up for you and plugging into the things that matter most to you, that makes you feel alone, right? You want a champion. You want somebody that understands what you're going through and is fighting for you. That's why I think we have to talk about the emotional state of America because that's a way for political leaders to directly plug into the actual things that people are feeling. And so when we just sort of talk about the price of health care or the unemployment rate – that isn't directly connected to the spiritual, emotional state of the country in a way a conversation about loneliness or purpose or meaning would be. I know that those are topics that feel very unfamiliar and distant to political leadership, but it actually, I think, would scratch the American public where they itch and make them feel less alone if they thought political leaders were actually talking about the way that they feel.” Murphy added: “You can’t just have a conversation simply about how people are feeling. You’ve got to say ‘how are you feeling,’ and then what can government do to make it better. If you talk about loneliness, part of the policy is social media regulation, but it's also free time and leisure time, right? Giving people the space where they can go join a church or a social club. It's about connection. I want a four-day work week. I want more functional third places. I want more community pools. And I want more vibrant churches. I want places where people can meet. You have to start the conversation around purpose and meaning and connection, but then I think you need to move pretty quickly to policy, but make sure that that's one conversation.” Earlier this month, Murphy authored an op-ed for the New Republic to make the case for a political realignment oriented around a set of solutions that would address America’s spiritual unspooling and enable Americans to have more economic control over their lives, more social connection, and more moral markets. Murphy and U.S. Senator Bob Casey (D-Pa.) introduced the Addressing Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults (SILO) Act, legislation to establish a grant and training program for community-based organizations working to address social isolation among older adults and adults with disabilities – two populations at greater risk for loneliness. Earlier this year, Murphy introduced the National Strategy for Social Connection Act, which would create an Office of Social Connection Policy within the White House to work across federal agencies to develop effective strategies for improved social infrastructure and issue national guidelines for social connection similar to existing guidelines on sleep, nutrition, and physical activity. It would also provide funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to better understand the epidemic of social isolation and loneliness. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday released his End of Year Report outlining the work he’s done for the people of Connecticut during 2023. The report details Murphy’s legislative priorities this year, including implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, tackling the fentanyl crisis, rebuilding community and connection, protecting kids and holding social media companies accountable, supporting workers, making housing more affordable, and more. Murphy also helped deliver billions of federal dollars from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act to create good-paying jobs in Connecticut. This year, Murphy and his office: Introduced or co-sponsored more than 200 pieces of legislation, including 24 bills or resolutions
...Read more as the lead sponsor.
Completed his seventh Walk Across Connecticut: four days, 67 miles, 17 towns, and hundreds of people along the way.
Traveled across the state, hosting 139 town halls, roundtables, listening sessions and more with Connecticut residents.
Responded and reached out to Connecticut residents through over 529,883 calls, emails, and letters.
Returned $3,189,384 to constituents, including owed Social Security payments, veterans’ benefits, tax refunds, and other savings from federal agencies.
Helped over 8,100 constituents work through federal issues and get their owed benefits. Click here to download Senator Murphy’s 2023 End of Year Report. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) sent a letter to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure urging public clarification that critically and chronically ill Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries will have the same access to Long-Term Care Hospital services as traditional Medicare beneficiaries, as required by law. Murphy and Tillis detail how MA plans’ prior authorization practices are used to deny coverage of medically necessary care at Long-Term Care Hospitals (LTCHs). “Long-Term Care Hospitals (LTCHs) are hospitals that provide specialized care for high-acuity patients who require an extended hospital
...Read more stay. These facilities are designed to care for severely ill patients who require complex medical treatment, such as mechanical ventilation and wound care. To be recognized as an LTCH, CMS requires hospitals to satisfy the conditions of participation of a short-term acute care hospital (STACH) but have an average Medicare length of stay greater than 25 days. In contrast, the average Medicare length of stay in a STACH is about 5 days,” the senators wrote. “Medicare Advantage beneficiaries are less than half as likely to receive LTCH care compared to traditional Medicare beneficiaries. Recent research suggests that these practices may be worsening the outcomes of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries; a 2021 peer-reviewed study found that delays in the transfer of mechanically ventilated patients to an LTCH decreased a patient’s likelihood of being successfully weaned from the ventilator and breathing on his or her own. “ “We have heard concerns from LTCHs in our states, as well as patients, that LTCHs regularly receive denial letters from Medicare Advantage plans stating that an LTCH transfer was not required because the patient could receive all necessary services in the short-term acute care hospital, even though the provider referred the patient to an LTCH and the patient met all of the medical necessity requirements for LTCH care,” the senators added. The senators concluded: “We write to ask CMS to confirm this interpretation is correct and to request such information be publicly clarified to eliminate confusion for Medicare Advantage plans and ensure that LTCHs are treated the same as any other post-acute care provider under the Medicare Advantage regulations. We appreciate CMS’s commitment to improving Medicare Advantage enrollees’ access to Medicare-covered benefits and we look forward to working with you to ensure that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries have access to the services they are entitled to by law.” Full text of the letter is available hereand below. Dear Administrator Brooks-LaSure: We thank the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for taking steps to ensure that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries receive the same services they would under traditional Medicare, as required by law. With the Contract Year 2024 Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage and Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Programs Final Rule (CMS-4201-F) (the Final Rule) taking effect January 1, 2024, we are writing to ensure that critically and chronically ill Medicare Advantage beneficiaries will have the same access to Long-Term Care Hospital services as traditional Medicare beneficiaries. Long-Term Care Hospitals (LTCHs) are hospitals that provide specialized care for high-acuity patients who require an extended hospital stay. These facilities are designed to care for severely ill patients who require complex medical treatment, such as mechanical ventilation and wound care. To be recognized as an LTCH, CMS requires hospitals to satisfy the conditions of participation of a short-term acute care hospital (STACH) but have an average Medicare length of stay greater than 25 days. In contrast, the average Medicare length of stay in a STACH is about 5 days. Unfortunately, Medicare Advantage plan prior authorization practices are creating significant barriers to LTCH care for critically and chronically ill patients. A 2022 report by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General concluded that Medicare Advantage Organizations “sometimes delayed or denied Medicare Advantage beneficiaries' access to services, even though the requests met Medicare coverage rules” and that these denials sometimes delayed beneficiaries from receiving medically necessary care or prevented them from receiving the care altogether. Sadly, LTCHs are also subject to this trend. Medicare Advantage beneficiaries are less than half as likely to receive LTCH care compared to traditional Medicare beneficiaries. Recent research suggests that these practices may be worsening the outcomes of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries; a 2021 peer-reviewed study found that delays in the transfer of mechanically ventilated patients to an LTCH decreased a patient’s likelihood of being successfully weaned from the ventilator and breathing on his or her own. We were pleased to see CMS respond to these practices by including language in the April 2023 Final Rule that specifies that Medicare Advantage plans must comply with general coverage and benefit conditions included in traditional Medicare coverage policies. The Final Rule also codifies previously released CMS guidance that Medicare Advantage plans must: (1) make medical necessity determinations based on traditional Medicare coverage criteria; 2) consider if a service is reasonable and necessary; 3) consider the patient’s medical history when making medical necessity determinations; and 4) where appropriate, plans’ medical directors must be involved in ensuring the clinical accuracy of medical necessity determinations. The statute allows Medicare Advantage plans to create contracted networks, but the Final Rule specifies that Medicare Advantage plans must align with traditional Medicare in terms of covering different provider types and settings. This means that if care can be delivered in more than one way or in more than one setting, and a practitioner has ordered a covered item or service for a Medicare Advantage enrollee, then the Medicare Advantage plan cannot deny coverage. CMS provides the following example in the Final Rule: “[I]f an MA patient is being discharged from an acute care hospital and the attending physician orders post-acute care at a SNF because the patient requires skilled nursing care on a daily basis in an institutional setting, the MA organization cannot deny coverage for the SNF care and redirect the patient to home health care services unless the patient does not meet the coverage criteria required for SNF care….” See 88 Fed. Reg. at 22190 (April 12, 2023). We have heard concerns from LTCHs in our states, as well as patients, that LTCHs regularly receive denial letters from Medicare Advantage plans stating that an LTCH transfer was not required because the patient could receive all necessary services in the short-term acute care hospital, even though the provider referred the patient to an LTCH, and the patient met all the medical necessity requirements for LTCH care. Based on the specifications included in the Final Rule and given that 42 CFR §412.3 covers admissions to an LTCH, we write to ensure that the Final Rule requires Medicare Advantage plans to apply traditional Medicare standards and requirements in assessing prior authorization requests for LTCH admissions. That is, a Medicare Advantage plan – like a traditional Medicare plan – cannot deny admission to an LTCH if the patient is being discharged from an acute care hospital, the patient’s attending physician orders post-acute care in an LTCH, and the patient meets the coverage criteria for inpatient admissions under 42 CFR §412.3. We write to ask CMS to confirm this interpretation is correct and to request such information be publicly clarified to eliminate confusion for Medicare Advantage plans and ensure that LTCHs are treated the same as any other post-acute care provider under the Medicare Advantage regulations. We appreciate CMS’s commitment to improving Medicare Advantage enrollees’ access to Medicare-covered benefits and we look forward to working with you to ensure that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries have access to the services they are entitled to by law. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Mike Braun (R-Ind.), both members of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday introduced bipartisan legislation directing the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to establish a plan to review all currently approved opioid medications. The Opioid Review Act would require the FDA to consider information that was not available when the drugs were first approved, such as addiction and overdose rates, and to publish a public report detailing next steps. “The United States is five percent of the world’s population, and yet we account for between 70 and 80 percent of the world’s opioid prescriptions. In the years since these drugs were first approved by the FDA, we’ve learned just how addictive they are and
...Read more far too many families have paid the price. Taking a hard look at whether the current guidance needs updating is one way we can begin to tackle this crisis. I’m glad our bipartisan bill was included in this year’s SUPPORT Act reauthorization, and I’ll keep pushing to ensure it lands on President Biden’s desk,” said Murphy. “Drug overdose deaths continue to rise in the United States and we urgently need to take action to stop these devastating and preventable deaths. The bipartisan Opioid Review Act would direct the FDA to review approved opioids while considering important public health implications, like addiction and overdose rates,” said Braun. Specifically, FDA’s report must be published online and must include: Public comment on the FDA’s regulation of opioid drugs
An explanation of the actions the FDA has already taken to review the effectiveness, safety, benefit-risk profile, and use of approved opioid analgesic drugs
A timeline for an assessment of the potential need for changes in an opioid drugs’ labeling, revised or additional post marketing requirements, enforcement actions, or withdrawals from market
An overview of the steps that the FDA has taken to support the development and approval of non-addictive medical products intended to treat pain or addiction, and actions planned to further support the development and approval of such products
An overview of the consideration by the FDA of clinical trial methodologies for analgesic drugs, including the enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal methodology, and the benefits and drawbacks associated with different trial methodologies for such drugs, incorporating any public input received The Opioid Review Act was included in committee passage of the SUPPORT Act Reauthorization last week. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 48 of their Senate colleagues in a letter to U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Vice Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) urging them to reject any new poison pill policy riders in the fiscal year 2024 appropriations bills, including the anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-abortion policy provisions that House Republicans inserted into their appropriations bills. “The Senate has had tremendous success both passing bipartisan bills in committee and on the Senate floor because these bills are free of new poison pill riders. Unfortunately, the House appropriations bills are filled with new highly partisan provisions, including anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ+ riders, that should be removed
...Read more from any final appropriations bills,” write the Senators. These poison pill policy riders aim to make changes to laws that would fail to withstand scrutiny of congressional debate by attaching them to “must-pass” measures like appropriation bills. “Our country is facing a reproductive health care crisis, one that has been accelerated by the Supreme Court’s extremist decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,” the Senators write. “House Republicans have proposed several new anti-abortion policy riders. These riders include a provision to force back in place medically unnecessary restrictions on medication abortion, a measure to stop the implementation of the Biden administration’s executive orders to protect access to abortion care, and a measure that would jeopardize access to essential postgraduate medical training in abortion care,” their letter continues. “House Republicans have used the appropriations process to push extremist anti-LGBTQ+ measures, which threaten to disrupt the lives and fundamental dignity of the LGBTQ+ community,” the letter states. “Against this backdrop, House Republicans have introduced more than 50 anti-LGBTQ+ provisions across all 12 appropriations bills. These provisions include those allowing the government to discriminate against married same-sex couples as well as language to prevent the administration from enforcing laws to protect LGBTQ+ people from discrimination. Seven of the House’s twelve appropriations bills also contain dangerous riders that ban access to gender-affirming care, which would deprive transgender people of medically necessary and often life-saving healthcare,” the Senators note. U.S. Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Luján (D-N.M.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter. The letter is endorsed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Guttmacher Institute, Human Rights Campaign, National Center for Transgender Equality, National Council of Jewish Women, National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, National Women’s Law Center, Physicians for Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Reproductive Freedom for All (formerly NARAL Pro-Choice America), Whitman-Walker Institute. Full text of the letter can be found here and follows below: Dear Chair Murray and Vice Chair Collins: We write to urge you to keep the FY24 appropriations bills free of any new poison pill policy riders. Partisan, discriminatory, and harmful policy riders have no place in appropriations bills. The Senate has had tremendous success both passing bipartisan bills in committee and on the Senate floor because these bills are free of new poison pill riders. Unfortunately, the House appropriations bills are filled with new highly partisan provisions, including anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ+ riders, that should be removed from any final appropriations bills. Our country is facing a reproductive health care crisis, one that has been accelerated by the Supreme Court’s extremist decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. As of November 7, 2023, 14 states are enforcing abortion bans at any point in pregnancy and seven states have imposed abortion bans with limits that range from six to 18 weeks. These bans leave 1 in 3 women, as well as transgender and nonbinary people, without access to abortion and disproportionately impact people of color, people with disabilities, young people, people living in rural areas, and people with low incomes. Yet in the midst of this crisis, House Republicans have proposed several new anti-abortion policy riders. These riders include a provision to force back in place medically unnecessary restrictions on medication abortion, a measure to stop the implementation of the Biden administration’s executive orders to protect access to abortion care, and a measure that would jeopardize access to essential postgraduate medical training in abortion care. If adopted, these provisions would seriously undermine pregnant people’s ability to make decisions about their bodies and providers’ ability to provide necessary care. At the same time, House Republicans have used the appropriations process to push extremist anti-LGBTQ+ measures, which threaten to disrupt the lives and fundamental dignity of the LGBTQ+ community. Anti-LGBTQ+ legislation is already on the rise; in 2023 alone, more than 575 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been introduced across 41 state legislatures, and more than 80 of those bills have been signed into law. Against this backdrop, House Republicans have introduced more than 50 anti-LGBTQ+ provisions across all 12 appropriations bills. These provisions include those allowing the government to discriminate against married same-sex couples as well as language to prevent the administration from enforcing laws to protect LGBTQ+ people from discrimination. Seven of the House’s twelve appropriations bills also contain dangerous riders that ban access to gender-affirming care, which would deprive transgender people of medically necessary and often life-saving healthcare. Controversial poison pill provisions like those riddled throughout the House appropriations bills will severely undermine Congress’ ability to push forward must-pass funding measures to keep the government open and working for the American people. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 38 of their Democratic Senate colleagues in introducing a resolution in support of equitable, science-based policies governing access to medication abortion. Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, reproductive rights have been increasingly under attack, with more than a dozen states banning or restricting access to abortion care, and anti-abortion extremists attempting to ban medication abortion nationwide. Medication abortion is currently used for over half of all abortions. This resolution expresses the sense of Congress that the scientific judgment of the FDA that mifepristone is safe and effective should be respected, and that law and policy governing access to life-saving, time-sensitive
...Read more medication abortion care in the United States should be equitable and based on science. The resolution affirms that mifepristone is safe and effective, while acknowledging the significant harm that would be posed to both health care providers and patients across the nation if mifepristone were sharply curtailed. This action comes as Americans continue to grapple with the reversal of Roe v. Wade, and follows this week’s announcement that the Supreme Court will hear a challenge to medication abortion access. “Mifepristone is a safe, effective drug approved by the FDA more than 20 years ago that millions of women rely on, so it should come as no surprise it’s been chosen as the right wing’s next target. Cutting off access to medication abortion would bring us one step closer to a national abortion ban. I will keep fighting to keep government out of women’s health care,” said Murphy. “Our resolution resoundingly reaffirms the need for abortion medication to remain accessible. This medication has been used safely and effectively for twenty years, and is the most common form of abortion care. With Republicans imposing draconian restrictions on reproductive care across the country, we must ensure abortion medication remains available to all who need it,” said Blumenthal. “I am fed up with extremists trying to turn back the clock and deny women reproductive health care – especially after decades of science that show that medication abortion is safe and effective. Any threat to the accessibility of this drug would be devastating to both health care providers and patients across the country, and Senate Democrats are demonstrating with this resolution that we're determined to fight back,” said Warren. “In Wisconsin and across the country, the right to comprehensive health care is under attack. We need to fight on all fronts to restore and protect the freedom of every American to make their own health care decisions, and that includes protecting access to medication abortion. Mifepristone is a safe, effective, and sometimes lifesaving medication, and it’s high time politicians and judges leave women alone and allow Americans to make their own decisions about their health, families, and future,” said Baldwin. “MAGA Republicans have been clear they’ll stop at nothing to enact a national abortion plan – even questioning the scientific expertise of FDA. Make no mistake, Mifepristone is safe and effective. And Congress gave FDA the authority to evaluate and ensure the safety and efficacy of drugs. Democrats will never stop fighting for women’s health,” said Schumer. "The district court's decision earlier this year to invalidate longstanding approval for mifepristone contradicts scientific evidence and threatens Americans' access to essential health care. Medication abortion remains safe and legal in Colorado, and I'll keep fighting to keep it that way,” said Bennet. “In a post-Roe world, we must follow the science and maintain access to lifesaving abortion medication,” said Butler. “Generations of women are watching their rights get stripped away in real-time, and this resolution underscores the need to protect their reproductive freedom. The Supreme Court must preserve access to essential reproductive health care and the right to bodily autonomy.” “Health care decisions should be made between women and their doctors, and we must protect women’s access to all FDA-approved treatments, including Mifepristone,” said Carper. “This resolution reaffirms that access to lifesaving, time-sensitive medication should be equitable and based on science.” “More than two decades ago, the FDA determined mifepristone to be safe and effective. Since then, this medication has been widely and safely used by women to end early stage pregnancies and help manage miscarriages,” said Durbin. “If the Supreme Court upholds the Fifth Circuit’s decision, which ignored science and the law in turning back the clock on mifepristone regulations, it would upend the FDA review process, jeopardize access to a host of critically important medications, and impose new restrictions on abortions even in states where the procedure remains legal. This Resolution restates the obvious: that the FDA, not politically-motivated organizations, should be trusted to make determinations about what drugs are safe and effective. And that, ultimately, reproductive health care decisions ought to be made between women and their doctors, not politicians or judges.” “It’s plain and simple: abortion is health care, and health care is a human right,” said Markey. “Pregnant people and their health care providers are facing escalating attacks on their care including the criminalization of abortions. Our government has a moral obligation to protect not only the right but also the ability to access abortion medication — safe and effective medication that is backed by science. Let’s keep medical decisions between patients and doctors—not between patients and the GOP.” “Reproductive freedom is a fundamental right, and we must stand resolute in affirming access to lifesaving abortion care,” said Padilla. “With the Supreme Court and MAGA Republicans constantly threatening longstanding, essential reproductive freedoms, it’s imperative that safe, science-based drugs like mifepristone are equitably accessible and protected to the fullest extent under the rule of law.” “Mifepristone is a safe, effective, and FDA-approved drug. I helped introduce this resolution because it is dangerous to restrict access to this critical medication,” said Stabenow. “Individuals’ health care decisions should be grounded in science and made along with their doctors – not left to the whims of far-right judges and politicians. As Trump-appointed judges and Republican lawmakers continue their ruthless attacks on reproductive freedoms – and the health care providers and resources that support them – we will keep fighting to ensure scientifically tested, safe, and effective options remain accessible to everyone who needs them,” said Van Hollen. The resolution was also co-sponored by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Angus King (I-Maine), Ron Wyden (D-Wyo.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-N.M.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.). The resolution has been endorsed by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Physicians for Reproductive Health, Power to Decide, National Council of Jewish Women, The Century Foundation’s Health Equity and Reform Team, National Partnership for Women and Families, Guttmacher Institute, Center for Reproductive Rights, Reproductive Freedom for All (formerly NARAL Pro-Choice America), In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda, and the EMAA Project. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor on the eleventh anniversary of the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School to honor the twenty children and six educators who were senselessly killed that day. “Today is a day when we are thinking about all of those parents, about all of those brothers and sisters who this morning had to relive the morning that they went through 11 years ago, December 14, 2012, when 20 sets of parents kissed their first graders goodbye. They dropped them off for school. And never ever saw them again,” Murphy said. “It's a fate that none of us would ever wish on another human being. For those of us who have never experienced the death of a child, there's no way for us to understand what those parents and what
...Read more those families are going through.” He continued: “And in Connecticut, we wear our hearts really heavy, but we also get to celebrate all of the things that have happened because so many of these families took their grief and they turned it into action, and they turned it into change. So many of these families have started not-for-profit organizations, have started charities to try to change other people's lives. Many of these families have been deeply engaged in the work of trying to make sure that mass shootings never happen again. There has been a lot of joy and many miracles that have resulted from this awful tragedy. It does not square the moral order of the universe, but it is important to pay tribute to the way in which so many members of the Sandy Hook and Newtown community as well as so many families who are directly affected by this shooting have been able to manage through the grief and perform miracles at the same time.” On the work ahead and reasons for hope, Murphy said: “This is also a day in which I recommit myself to the notion that I, as a member of the United States Senate, have something to contribute to the work necessary to make sure that kids never, ever, ever face this fate again. And today on the 11th anniversary, I have a little bit more hope than I had on the 10th, or the ninth, or the eighth, or the seventh to the sixth, the fifth of the fourth, [the third], the second, or the first anniversary. Why? Because last year, Republicans and Democrats came together in this Senate in the wake of another mass school shooting, tragically reminiscent of Sandy Hook, the shooting in Uvalde, Texas, and we acted. We put aside our political differences. We passed the first serious gun safety measure in 30 years.” “And why this year I feel more hopeful and more confident is because we now have data, we now have results in the wake of the passage of last year's legislation. Right now, as we speak, we are tracking for there to be a 12 percent reduction in gun murders in this country from 2022 to 2023. That would be the biggest ever one-year reduction in gun murders in our lifetime,” he added. Murphy concluded: “So today is a day when I relive that moment 11 years ago today. It's a day when I reach out to my friends in Sandy Hook to tell them how much of my heart is with them. But this year, on the 11th anniversary, it's a day in which I have confidence that if we continue to do the hard work of changing our gun laws to make it harder for dangerous people to have weapons and harder for anybody to have the most dangerous weapons, the kind of weapons that were used to kill these kids and teachers, than we can save lives. In one year, we've seen the biggest drop in gun murders in our lifetime. It's a result of legislation that we passed, and it is a signal to us of what we can achieve in the future.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “A few days ago, I was with one of the parents from Sandy Hook Elementary School who lost her son 11 years ago today. And she talked about this being the time of the year where she starts to spiral. “Today is a day when we are thinking about all of those parents, about all of those brothers and sisters who this morning had to relive the morning that they went through 11 years ago, December 14, 2012, when 20 sets of parents kissed their first graders goodbye. They dropped them off for school. And never ever saw them again. “It's a fate that none of us would ever wish on another human being. For those of us who have never experienced the death of a child, there's no way for us to understand what those parents and what those families are going through. “One mother of a child who was lost in Sandy Hook had a tactic that she would use in those early days. She would pretend that her son was just at a friend's house on a playdate. She convinced herself, as best she could, that he wasn't dead, that he was just visiting a friend around the corner. It was the only way that she could clean up the house, get through her daily work. “But then all of a sudden, it would come flooding back to her. He wasn't at a friend's house; he wasn't around the corner. He was never ever coming home. The things that you have to do on a daily basis to try to process the loss of a child, they are unfathomable to most of us. “Mr. President, I've kind of run out of things to say about these amazing kids and these amazing adults. The adults who protected them that day, the children who would be turning 18 this year. And in Connecticut, we wear our hearts really heavy, but we also get to celebrate all of the things that have happened because so many of these families took their grief and they turned it into action, and they turned it into change. “So many of these families have started not-for-profit organizations, have started charities to try to change other people's lives. Many of these families have been deeply engaged in the work of trying to make sure that mass shootings never happen again. “There has been a lot of joy and many miracles that have resulted from this awful tragedy. It does not square the moral order of the universe, but it is important to pay tribute to the way in which so many members of the Sandy Hook and Newtown community as well as so many families who are directly affected by this shooting have been able to manage through the grief and perform miracles at the same time. “We just need to make a decision as a country as to whether we want to live in a world in which this carnage continues. This isn't an accident; it isn't bad luck. It's a choice. It's just a choice we've made to put our kids in jeopardy every single day that they go to school. For kids that live in my neighborhood in the south end of Hartford, to put them in jeopardy every day when they walk to and from school. It's a choice that we make, and we could make a different choice. “So today is a day for me that I think about all of my friends in Sandy Hook, that I think back on that day being there at the firehouse that was serving as the emergency response hub, being outside the room as parents were told that their children are lying down on the floor of their elementary school. “But it's also a day in which I remember that we are not helpless. This is also a day in which I recommit myself to the notion that I, as a member of the United States Senate, have something to contribute to the work necessary to make sure that kids never, ever, ever face this fate again. “And today on the 11th anniversary, I have a little bit more hope than I had on the 10th, or the ninth, or the eighth of the seventh to the sixth, the fifth of the fourth, the second, [the third], or the first anniversary. “Why? Because last year, Republicans and Democrats came together in this Senate in the wake of another mass school shooting, tragically reminiscent of Sandy Hook, the shooting in Uvalde, Texas, and we acted. We put aside our political differences. We passed the first serious gun safety measure in 30 years. Even though forces outside of this building opposed it, we decided to come together. “Because we thought we had an obligation to make this country safer, to try to make it a little bit less likely that a parent has to wake up on a morning of the anniversary of their child's death and try to figure out how to survive it. “And why this year I feel more hopeful and more confident is because we now have data, we now have results in the wake of the passage of last year's legislation. Right now, as we speak, we are tracking for there to be a 12 percent reduction in gun murders in this country from 2022 to 2023. That would be the biggest ever one-year reduction in gun murders in our lifetime. “Now, what does that mean? It means that eight or ten fewer people are dying every day from gun violence. What does that mean? 110 rather than 120 people are dying of gun violence. That's not an acceptable result, but it is proof of concept. When we change the laws to honor the death of so many innocents, we prevent the death of innocents in the future. “So today is a day when I relive that moment 11 years ago today. It's a day when I reach out to my friends and Sandy Hook to tell them how much of my heart is with them. But this year, on the 11th anniversary, it's a day in which I have confidence that if we continue to do the hard work of changing our gun laws to make it harder for dangerous people to have weapons and harder for anybody to have the most dangerous weapons, the kind of weapons that were used to kill these kids and teachers, that we can save lives. “In one year, we've seen the biggest drop in gun murders in our lifetime. It's a result of legislation that we passed, and it is a signal to us of what we can achieve in the future. “I thank my colleagues for what we did last year. I thank my colleagues for making it possible to show the families in Newtown, the victims of gun violence all across this country what's possible, and on the 11-year mark of that tragedy in Sandy Hook, I compel my friends in the Senate to do more.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday joined 13 of their colleagues in sending a letter to Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona and Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Shalanda Young, urging the agency leaders to include strong funding for the Open Textbooks Pilot (Pilot) in the Biden Administration’s Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) budget request. The Pilot is a competitive grant program to support the creation and expansion of open college textbooks – textbooks that are freely available under an open license, allowing professors, students, researchers, and others to freely access the materials. The grant program aims to
...Read more significantly reduce the cost of higher education for students. The Senators began their letter by emphasizing the importance of open textbooks and how they lower financial barriers to accessing higher education. According to the College Board, the average student at a four-year public college spends roughly $1,240 on books and class supplies. Additionally, U.S. PIRG found in a 2020 survey that 65 percent of students skipped buying a textbook because of the cost, and 90 percent of those students were worried it would affect their grade negatively. “As the cost of college continues to rise, it is crucial to ensure college is affordable for all students. With a single textbook potentially costing hundreds of dollars, textbook costs, unlike tuition and other college costs, are often overlooked. However, they can create an unnecessary barrier to attaining a college education,” the Senators wrote. “The high cost of textbooks disproportionately impacts low-income students and students of color who are unable to purchase required course materials, placing them at an academic disadvantage.” The Senators reminded Secretary Cardona and Director Young that open textbooks offer benefits to students and faculty while promoting competition in the textbook market. “Open textbooks—education resources that are licensed under an open license and made available free of charge to the public—offer quality, cost-effective alternatives to traditional textbooks. When open textbooks are used, students save money. Further, faculty members have greater flexibility to adapt and customize materials to meet their specific needs. The expanded use of open textbooks also has the potential to promote healthy competition in the traditional textbook market, which would reduce prices overall,” the Senators wrote in the letter. The Senators concluded their letter, highlighting the popularity of open textbook programs and urging the Biden Administration to consider the Pilot as a strong priority while drafting the FY25 budget. “Colleges and universities increasingly are seeking to utilize open textbooks programs, such as those supported by the Pilot. Since the creation of the Pilot in FY 2018, the Department of Education has received 69 applications for projects while only being able to fund 18 projects. Further, programs supported by the Pilot are estimated to have saved students $250 million,” the Senators wrote. “Additional funding would increase these savings for students.” “We urge you to continue to work to make college affordable for students by including robust funding for the Pilot in the Administration’s FY 2025 budget request,” the letter concluded. U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Angus King (I-Maine), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) also signed the letter. Full text of the letter is available here and below: Dear Secretary Cardona and Director Young: We write to request that you include robust funding for the Open Textbooks Pilot (Pilot) in the Administration’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 budget request. As the cost of college continues to rise, it is crucial to ensure college is affordable for all students. With a single textbook potentially costing hundreds of dollars, textbook costs, unlike tuition and other college costs, are often overlooked. However, they can create an unnecessary barrier to attaining a college education. According to the College Board, the average student at a four-year public college spends approximately $1,240 on books and supplies. According to a 2020 survey by U.S. PIRG, 65 percent of students skipped buying a textbook because of the cost, and 90 percent of those students were worried it would affect their grade negatively. The high cost of textbooks disproportionately impacts low-income students and students of color who are unable to purchase required course materials, placing them at an academic disadvantage. Open textbooks—education resources that are licensed under an open license and made available free of charge to the public—offer quality, cost-effective alternatives to traditional textbooks. When open textbooks are used, students save money. Further, faculty members have greater flexibility to adapt and customize materials to meet their specific needs. The expanded use of open textbooks also has the potential to promote healthy competition in the traditional textbook market, which would reduce prices overall. Colleges and universities increasingly are seeking to utilize open textbooks programs, such as those supported by the Pilot. Since the creation of the Pilot in FY 2018, the Department of Education has received 69 applications for projects while only being able to fund 18 projects. Further, programs supported by the Pilot are estimated to have saved students $250 million. Additional funding would increase these savings for students. We urge you to continue to work to make college affordable for students by including robust funding for the Pilot in the Administration’s FY 2025 budget request. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Tim Kaine (D-Va.), and Tina Smith (D-Minn.) reintroduced the Improving Data Accessibility Through Advancements (DATA) in Public Health Act, legislation to modernize our nation’s public health data infrastructure. This bill would increase timely and accurate information sharing between local, state, and federal public health departments to improve our preparedness and response to emerging public health threats. “Accurate, real-time data is key to an effective public health strategy – a major lesson learned from the pandemic. This legislation would bring our public health data infrastructure into the 21st century and make sure local, state, and federal public
...Read more health departments have the information they need to monitor and quickly respond to future emergencies,” said Murphy. “The pandemic underscored the importance of having an effective public health data sharing system for tracking cases, responding to public health emergencies, and providing live-saving care for those in need,” said Kaine. “While we’ve made some progress to strengthen public health data sharing since COVID, we still have much more to do to better connect local, state, and federal public health systems. The Improving DATA in Public Health Act would help us do that.” “We need collaboration across all levels of government to ensure that our public health experts have the information they need to make the best decisions,” said Smith. “Addressing the information gaps in public health data is crucial, and this bill provides a much-needed update to the way local, federal, and tribal authorities communicate, ensuring that we are ready to respond to the next public health crisis and keep our communities safe.” The United States’ early response to the COVID-19 pandemic was hindered by gaps in public health data, varying definitions of data across government agencies, and difficulties accessing data. These barriers made it more difficult for health care professionals to access the data they needed to make timely, evidence-based clinical decisions, and prevented public health officials from accurately monitoring and responding to disease outbreaks. Our public health system learned from these gaps in data and we must make permanent these data sharing requirements. The Improving DATA in Public Health Act would help save lives and prepare the U.S. for future public health crises. Specifically, the Improving DATA in Public Health Act would improve public health data sharing by: Directing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to establish uniform data standards for sharing public health data across local, state, and federal public health systems. Without uniform standards, it’s difficult for federal agencies like the CDC to aggregate public health data and for local and state health systems across the country to respond to public health threats;
Allowing the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to strengthen data sharing processes between public health entities, like health care facilities, laboratories, and public health departments;
Creating a grant program for health care providers, academic medical centers, and state and local public health systems to develop best practices on soliciting demographic information used for public health purposes to strengthen the quality and completeness of demographic data collection; and
Establishing an advisory committee of experts to ensure that public health data reporting processes are carried out effectively. Full text of the bill is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday authored an op-ed for the New Republic to make the case for a political realignment oriented around a set of solutions that would address America’s spiritual unspooling and enable Americans to have more economic control over their lives, more social connection, and more moral markets. First, Murphy lays out the four sources of our collective unease: a loss of control over economic and family life; an acute loneliness and disconnection from community; a frustration with the pace and nature of technological change; and an exhaustion with suffocating consumerism. Murphy argues Democrats should seize the growing opportunity for left-right convergence to build new coalitions that will advance policies to raise wages, support families,
...Read more rein in Big Tech, and promote connection. “I think that rather than continuing this alternating obsession with intractable partisan battles and issues that feel distant from their quality of life, Americans want their political leaders to take a step back and ask two simple questions: What makes a good life, filled with purpose, meaning, and happiness? And what does government need to do—and not do—so that more people have access to this life? If more of us asked these questions, we might find that America is not actually as divided as the outrage industry would have us believe. Indeed, there exists a set of shared feelings and fears, on both the right and the left, that could provide a road map for anyone committed to developing policies that address the spiritual unspooling that is happening in many Americans’ lives,” Murphy wrote. On the opportunity to find left-right consensus on a different set of issues than those that have traditionally divided the two parties, Murphy wrote: “To resolve this growing crisis of spiritual health, I believe Americans badly want our politics to be organized around a shared national project. Instead, our politics today are ordered to serve a set of issues where the two sides—right and left—are hopelessly divided. Abortion and reproductive rights, immigration, and health care are all vital issues, and as a progressive who believes in LGBTQ rights, reproductive freedom, and universal health care, I don’t plan on backing down on any of these fights. But our decision to base our political groupings on these issues masks a potentially massive, hidden alignment between Americans on both the right and left—an alignment that could potentially address the set of spiritual problems I have outlined here. “ He added: “Still, the fact that growing constituencies on both the right and left—whether secular or religious—are calling for the elevation of nonmarket values and the centering of the common good in our national life suggests an opportunity to find common ground. We should not be so certain that there is not some overlapping space in the Venn diagram of virtues that the right and left hold sacred.” “Maybe I am hopelessly naïve. Maybe too many on the right are so stubbornly wedded to their anti-gay, anti-choice, pro-gun, or patriarchal views that they will not entertain overtures to join our coalition. Again, I am not suggesting that the left compromise our commitment to equality or justice for women, children, or LGBTQ individuals in order to expand our coalition. What I am proposing is that outreach is worth the try, even if the chances of success are far from certain. What I’m guessing is that some conservative voters who might not agree with me on the question of an assault weapons ban might actually be more concerned with higher wages than with access to AR-15s. Instead of dismissing such people, we should try to win them over,” he wrote. Murphy concluded: “Imagining and executing a political realignment to address our spiritual unspooling will not be easy. But our great nation is coming apart at the seams; too many of our people are unhappy and unfulfilled, ready to be set against their fellow Americans over the slightest grievance by unscrupulous demagogues. Americans on the right and left want a politics built around a new set of issues that can unite, not divide, our nation. A realignment that will infuse vibrancy and relevancy back into our politics is there for taking. We should stop ignoring it.” Read the full op-ed here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) this weekend authored an op-ed with former U.S. Representative Tim Ryan (D-Ohio-13) for MSNBC making the case for a new economic vision that recognizes the importance of leisure and free time. Thanks in part to longer work hours and wages that haven’t kept up with living standards, Americans have fewer hours to spend with friends and family, engage in hobbies, and build community which comes at a cost to our mental, physical, and spiritual health. “People today feel like they’re stuck on a hamster wheel. As corporate profits soar, wages have failed to keep pace. Millions of Americans juggle multiple jobs to make ends meet. Today, the average worker has to clock 70 hours a week to sustain the same quality of life that 40 hours of work afforded
...Read more 50 years ago. And for many, cellphones and laptops have made it impossible to ever escape the grip of work, even at home. With one income no longer enough to sustain an average family budget, parents’ days are lengthened by the extra time necessary to shuttle children to and from child care,” Murphy and Ryan wrote. “Less and less free time leaves Americans feeling more on edge, more anxious, and more alone than ever before. We are disconnected from each other mentally, physically and emotionally, and we witness the ripple effects in the erosion of civility, the growth of fringe politics, and the increase in violence, suicide and overdose rates. The nation’s emotional health is spiraling in part because there is less and less time for leisure and connection,” they continued. Murphy and Ryan laid out a series of policies to build community and give people back their free time: “To return to a time when work matters less and leisure matters more, we need to build a new economy where a full-time job provides a living wage. One 40-hour-a-week income should be able to support a family of four. This would assure the worker has adequate free time, and allow one parent in two-parent households, should he or she choose, to be out of the workforce and engaged in full-time family work. The easiest way to reach this goal would be to raise the federal minimum wage. If the federal minimum wage had simply kept up with inflation, today it would be $27 an hour, instead of the current $7.25. Perhaps a nearly $20 increase would be unrealistic, but we need an aggressive effort to help workers make up for all this lost ground.” They added: “We can give unions the boost they need by ensuring federal dollars support union jobs, repealing so-called right-to-work laws that undermine workers, and passing the PRO Act. And we can build on a famous union victory — the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, which set up the 40-hour workweek.” On restoring third places, they wrote: “We also need a national strategy to reinvest in the physical infrastructure that connects communities. We need public investments and tax incentives to rebuild and reinvigorate old downtowns, expand neighborhood parks and athletic facilities, build bike and walking trails, and clean our waters to encourage outdoor activities like hiking, kayaking and canoeing. In other words, invest in the projects that get people out of their homes and offer opportunities for us to connect with each other in communal spaces — all while creating a good number of jobs.” “Finally, we also need to acknowledge that there is a growing industry devoted to exploiting our leisure time. Social media platforms are obsessed with occupying every second of our free time and profiting off the data they collect on us. Recent advancements in AI have only accelerated this trend. In 2013, the average American spent about four hours per week on social media and 6 ½ hours per week with close friends. By 2021, we were spending almost 16 hours per week on social media and just 2 hours and 45 minutes with our friends. Regulating social media and artificial intelligence to make these products less addictive can restore leisure time that enhances spiritual health, rather than companies’ bottom lines,” they wrote. They concluded: “For too long, policy has failed to realize the metaphysical value of free time and play — even for adults. We need a new economic vision that prioritizes leisure and social connection. That’s the only path to recover the spiritual health of our nation.” Read the full op-ed here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Sunday joined NBC’s Meet the Press with Kristen Welker to discuss talks with Republicans on immigration reform, the dire situation in Ukraine, and the stakes of the 2024 election. “First, I think it's absolutely tragic that Republicans are tying the resolution of maybe the most difficult issue in American politics, immigration, to support for Ukraine and Israel. Vladimir Putin is delighting right now in Republicans’ insistence that we get a deal on immigration reform. And if we don't, then they are going to allow Vladimir Putin to march into Ukraine and perhaps into Europe. I think this is one of the most dangerous moments that I've ever faced in American politics, and I wish Republicans weren't holding Israel aid and aid to Ukraine
...Read more hostage to the resolution of immigration reform,” said Murphy. Murphy continued: “That being said, we are still in the room trying to deal with Republican demands. We are not going to put Donald Trump's immigration policies into statute. We're not going to do that. That would be bad for the country. But we do need to do something to try to resolve this crisis at the border. We have too many people crossing, too many people that don't have valid asylum claims. And if Republicans are serious about trying to control that crisis, while also still allowing into the country people who are legitimately fleeing terror and torture and violence, then we can come to a resolution.” On the state of negotiations, Murphy said: “Right now, Republican demands are unreasonable. They don't actually get Democratic votes. If I were a cynic, I would say that Republicans have decided to tie support for Ukraine to immigration reform because they want Ukraine aid to fail. But, I'm not a cynic. And so we are still trying to resolve some pretty big differences that remain.” “I think the bottom line for Democrats and the bottom line for my constituents is pretty simple. We don't want to shut off the United States of America to people who are coming here to be rescued from dangerous, miserable circumstances in which their life is in jeopardy. That's the best of America is that you can come here to be rescued from terror and torture. So we are not going to support anything that shuts down the border completely to people who are legitimately coming here to have their lives rescued. But we are willing to talk about tightening some of the rules so that you don't have 10,000 people arriving a day. Our resources are not equipped to be able to handle that number of people. So let's reduce the number of people who are coming here, but let's not shut down the border completely to legitimate claims,” Murphy added. Murphy highlighted the importance of getting aid to Ukraine in this moment: “It can change the outcome of this war because at the very same time that we are making a renewed commitment to Ukraine, Russia's ability to continue to fight this war is in jeopardy. You look at the revenues from oil sales, the projections for the next year, Russia is going to have a hard time coming up with the resources necessary to keep this fight going. In the end, will there likely have to be a negotiated solution? Absolutely. But if we cut off Ukraine now, the outcome is certain. The outcome is certain. Ukraine loses this war, maybe not next month, but sometime next year, because Europe will not stick with us if the United States abandons Ukraine. This is a decision moment for Ukraine, for the United States, and for the world.” On the stakes of the 2024 presidential election, Murphy said: “What I am absolutely certain of is that the American public are going to see a distinct contrast between Joe Biden and Donald Trump and are not going to be interested in a Trump presidency that's going to criminalize abortion, that’s going to give more handouts to billionaires and the wealthy. They're going to see President Biden who has invested in the middle class, who has helped this economy recover. That will be the contrast that will matter to the American people.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Bob Casey (D-Pa.) on Thursday introduced the Addressing Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults (SILO) Act, legislation to establish a grant and training program for community-based organizations working to address social isolation among older adults and adults with disabilities – two populations at greater risk for loneliness. “The COVID-19 pandemic showed us all just how devastating social isolation can be for our mental and physical health,” said Casey. “However, for older Americans and people with disabilities, isolation and loneliness have long been serious issues. The Addressing SILO Act will fund new programs to improve social connection and reduce loneliness among older Americans and help ensure that Americans do not have
...Read more to spend their golden years isolated and alone.” More than 1 in 3 adults aged 45 and older feel lonely, and forty percent of adults with a disability reporting feeling lonely or socially isolated. This comes with serious health impacts, including an increased risk of heart disease and stroke, by 29% and 32% respectively, and an increased risk of developing dementia by approximately 50% in older adults. Social isolation among older adults accounts for an estimated $6.7 billion in annual excess Medicare spending. Specifically, the Addressing SILO Act provides $62.5 million in annual funding to support community-based organizations’ work to: Train their staff to better address and prevent social isolation and loneliness;
Conduct outreach to individuals at-risk for social isolation and loneliness;?
Develop community-based interventions to mitigate social isolation and loneliness;?
Connect at-risk individuals with social and clinical supports; and??
Evaluate the effectiveness of the programs developed and implemented through the grants.?? Earlier this year, Murphy introduced the National Strategy for Social Connection Act, which would create an Office of Social Connection Policy within the White House to work across federal agencies to develop effective strategies for improved social infrastructure and issue national guidelines for social connection similar to existing guidelines on sleep, nutrition, and physical activity. It would also provide funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to better understand the epidemic of social isolation and loneliness. A one pager is available here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to seek unanimous consent to pass the Background Check Expansion Act, legislation to expand federal background checks to nearly all gun sales. Senate Republicans blocked his request. “I have lost count of the number of times I've come down to the floor of the Senate to talk about this immoral anomaly in which you are subject to the risk of death by gunshot wound in the United States at a rate ten times higher than any other high-income nation,” Murphy said. Murphy highlighted the popularity of background checks among Americans: “90 percent of Americans supporting universal background checks, checks on every gun sale. 89 percent of Republicans, 89 percent of gun owners, 70 percent of the NRA members.
...Read more Because even the gun owners, even the people who feel so fired up about this issue that they want to come talk to me in the middle of a county fair, we're not disagreeing about that simple policy: just make sure that people who shouldn't have guns don't get their hands on them.” Murphy detailed how criminals use loopholes in the background checks system to illegally buy guns online or at gun shows: “One study showed that there were 1.2 million online ads offering firearms for sale that would not require a background check to be done. That same study showed that one in nine prospective buyers of guns online would not pass a background check. That is a rate seven times higher than the denial rate of gun stores. And the reason is that criminals are going online and going to the gun shows because they know they will fail the background check if they go to a brick-and-mortar store. Murphy continued: “That's what Seth Ator did. He failed a background check when he tried to purchase a gun in 2014. But he went to a private seller online. He bought a gun, and then he used it to kill seven people and wound 25 others in a mass shooting in Odessa. This is not theoretical. This happens. How do you think all these guns get into our cities? It's because the criminal traffickers who have serious criminal records who can’t buy guns at a brick-and-mortar store go to a state that doesn't have universal checks. The criminals, the traffickers buy the guns online or at a gun show and then they drive them up to Hartford, Connecticut, and they sell them on the black market.” On how background checks save lives, Murphy said: “The data just tells us that people believe in background checks. They want us to pass universal background checks, and the data also tells us that it works. And the numbers vary, but even the least generous studies tell us that in states that have universal background checks like Connecticut, 10 percent less people are dying from gun homicides. And of course my law can’t fully protect the people in my state because those guns get trafficked into Connecticut from states that don't have universal background checks. And so the numbers would be even bigger if we didn't have all these loopholes.” Murphy concluded: “I got to tell you; something does seem pretty wrong if democracy can't deliver on a 90 percent consensus. And not a 90 percent consensus about whether your road gets paved. A 90 percent consensus on whether kids live or die. 90 percent consensus on an existential question of survival.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “I’d like to thank Senator Warnock and others for coming to the floor today to raise this truly existential crisis put it in front of our colleagues. I have lost count of the number of times I've come down to the floor of the Senate to talk about this immoral anomaly in which you are subject to the risk of death by gunshot wound in the United States at a rate ten times higher than any other high-income nation. “I wish there was a truly complicated set of factors that play into the reason why we have so much more gun violence here than in other nations, but it probably isn't that complicated. We don't have more mental illness in this country. We don't spend less money on law enforcement. We don't have angrier people. “We just have a lot more guns, and we are much more permissive in this country about allowing felons, dangerous people, the mentally ill to get their hands on guns. And we are much more permissive around the question of which kind of guns get in the hands of private citizens, especially guns that are designed to kill as many human beings as quickly as possible. “As you can imagine, because I have a pretty high profile on this issue when I'm back in my state, I get confronted a lot by supporters of the Second Amendment, NRA members, you know who want to have a conversation with me about why I believe what I believe. And that conversation normally starts with the assumption that I want to take guns away or ammunition away from law abiding gun owners. “And almost without exception, when I get confronted by somebody who wants to talk about guns with me, who comes from that gun rights side of the debate, as quickly as I can get the debate to background checks is when we start agreeing. “Because I have found very few of those conversations in Connecticut, where even in the most heated of arguments, we don't find quick agreement on the simple idea that before you buy a gun, you should have to prove that you're not a criminal or you're not seriously mentally ill. Why? Because law abiding gun owners have gone through background checks. “They know that in 90 percent of the cases those background checks are processed instantaneously while you are in the store. And for most of the people who are talking to me who aren't mentally ill and don't have criminal histories, that's their only experience – is that the background check is not a barrier to purchasing a gun. “And so it's just not surprising to me to hear the data that Senator Warnock is talking about. 90 percent of Americans supporting universal background checks, checks on every gun sale. 89 percent of Republicans, 89 percent of gun owners, 70 percent of the NRA members. Because even the gun owners, even the people who feel so fired up about this issue that they want to come talk to me in the middle of a county fair, we're not disagreeing about that simple policy: just make sure that people who shouldn't have guns don't get their hands on them. “Some people will say, well, it's a hassle. It's an unreasonable barrier. Well, I just told you that in 90 percent of the cases, they're resolved instantaneously. In the ten percent of cases where it takes more than five minutes that's normally because there's something on that person's record that we need to find out. And what we know is that there have been millions of gun purchases that have been denied because felons or seriously mentally ill individuals did try to buy those guns. “But we also know that 99 percent of Americans live within ten miles of a gun store. There are 60,000 licensed gun dealers across this country who can perform background checks. That's four times the number of McDonald's restaurants in America. It's just not true that this is an unreasonable restriction of your liberty to just make sure you get a background check before you buy a gun. “Now, what are we talking about? We're talking about guns that are largely sold online and through gun shows. Because the law today, the federal law, that I think we still all agree on. I don't hear a lot of my Republican colleagues proposing legislation to repeal the requirement that you should get a background check if you go into a gun store. All we're talking about is extending that requirement to the place where a lot of guns are now sold in a way they weren't when we pass the National Instant Criminal Background Check law in the early 90s. Today a lot more guns are sold to gun stores. A lot more guns are sold online. “And the studies that have been done about gun sales online are really troubling. One study showed that there were 1.2 million online ads offering firearms for sale that would not require a background check to be done. That same study showed that one in nine prospective buyers of guns online would not pass a background check. That is a rate seven times higher than the denial rate of gun stores. And the reason is that criminals are going online and going to the gun shows because they know they will fail the background check if they go to a brick-and-mortar store. “That's what Seth Ator did. He failed a background check when he tried to purchase a gun in 2014. But he went to a private seller online. He bought a gun, and then he used it to kill seven people and wound 25 others in a mass shooting in Odessa. “This is not theoretical. This happens. How do you think all these guns get into our cities? It's because the criminal traffickers who have serious criminal records who can’t buy guns at a brick-and-mortar store go to a state that doesn't have universal checks. The criminals, the traffickers buy the guns online or at a gun show and then they drive them up to Hartford, Connecticut, and they sell them on the black market. “The data just tells us that people believe in background checks. They want us to pass universal background checks, and the data also tells us that it works. And the numbers vary, but even the least generous studies tell us that in states that have universal background checks like Connecticut, 10 percent less people are dying from gun homicides. And of course my law can’t fully protect the people in my state because those guns get trafficked into Connecticut from states that don't have universal background checks. And so the numbers would be even bigger if we didn't have all these loopholes. “And so, I agree with Senator Warnock. This just feels like a test of democracy. It really does. How does democracy survive if 90 percent of Americans, 90 percent of Republicans 90 percent of Democrats want something and we can't deliver it? “You want to know why people are flirting with autocracy and dictatorship? It's because even when they agree and a 90 percent rate, they can't get what they want from their government. I got to tell you; something does seem pretty wrong if democracy can't deliver on a 90 percent consensus. And not a 90 percent consensus about whether your road gets paved. A 90 percent consensus on whether kids live or die. 90 percent consensus on an existential question of survival. “And so, Mr. President, as in legislative session, I'm going to ask Mr. President that we pass a bill that will require universal background checks in this country. I'm going to ask my colleagues to respect the wishes of 90 percent of Americans and do something that we know works. So I'm going to ask as in legislative session for unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 494 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and motion to reconsider be considered made, and laid upon the table.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday submitted a public comment in support of the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) proposed new rule to specify the definition of “engaged in the business” as a dealer in firearms. Murphy’s Bipartisan Safer Communities Act clarified the definition of who is “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms as a person doing so with the intent to “predominately earn a profit.” The proposed rule amends the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) regulations to conform with the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, clarifying who must register as a federally licensed firearms dealer and conduct background checks on gun sales. The public comment period ends today, and the rule is expected to be finalized
...Read more sometime in the new year. “I co-led a bipartisan group of members of Congress who negotiated the eventual legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by President Biden in June 2022, which included changes to the statute that are the subject of the EITB NPRM. I write in strong support of the proposed rule, which will increase the efficacy of BSCA, strengthen our background check system, and keep firearms out of the hands of individuals who should not have them, exactly as Congress intended when it enacted BSCA,” he wrote. Murphy highlighted the deadly toll of current loopholes in our background checks system, writing: “Ultimately, this resulted in countless firearms sales to persons who should not have had access to a gun, which sadly became a common and deadly occurrence. For example, one study in 2017 found that one in five gun sales occurred outside the background check system, predominantly carried out by individuals who did not believe they were engaged in the business of dealing firearms.” Murphy, in his role as the lead Democratic negotiator, also made clear Congress’ intent in passing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, noting: “Clearly, Congress meant something when it changed the definition of who was engaged in the business, and merely restating existing law seems inconsistent for the product of a bipartisan negotiation. I made public comments during the BSCA negotiations which helped clarify what that something was and which provided additional clarity about the tough negotiated outcome in BSCA: something substantially less than universal background checks, but something more than current law at the time.” He added: “I am pleased to see the ATF propose a rule interpreting this section of the law as a direct result of BSCA negotiations. This rule is an important and necessary step to ensuring our background check system works as effectively as possible. Based on the text alone, it is plainly obvious that this NPRM aligns with our intent in BSCA.” The full text of the public comment can be found here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Wednesday released the following statement on release of the U.S. Coast Guard’s Accountability and Transparency Review (ATR) report: “Released one week after we learned the Coast Guard spent eight years covering up additional evidence of harassment, discrimination, and assault within the organization, this new report still does not hold anyone accountable for past failures—particularly those at the Coast Guard Academy. It does lay out a modest plan to improve oversight, training, and support for survivors, but a report is nothing more than paper until concrete steps are taken. I look forward to receiving detailed updates from leadership on implementation of these
...Read more recommendations and their continued commitment to reforming the organization’s culture of cover-up.” Murphy has a long pushed the U.S. Coast Guard to deal with harassment and bullying at the Coast Guard Academy. Last week, Murphy released a statement on statement on reporting about the Coast Guard’s 2015 “Culture of Respect” study, which details a culture of racism, hazing, discrimination, and sexual assault across the agency and was kept from the public. Earlier this year, Murphy released a statement on the report detailing decades of sexual misconduct at the Coast Guard Academy. In 2019, he criticized the Coast Guard for covering up allegations of harassment and for failing to appear before the U.S. House of Representatives Homeland Security and Oversight Committees investigating the allegations. That same year, following an OIG Whistleblower Retaliation Investigation and other reports of bullying, harassment and retaliation at the United States Coast Guard Academy, Murphy wrote a letter to the Coast Guard Commandant demanding reforms to the Academy’s climate of bullying, harassment and retaliation. In 2018, Murphy along with U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Rep. Joe Courtney (CT-02) wrote to Admiral Schultz seeking information on racial disparities at the Coast Guard Academy. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Wednesday reintroduced the College Athlete Right to Organize Act (CARO), legislation that affirms college athletes are employees under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) who are entitled to the right to organize and collectively bargain for fair compensation and better working conditions. CARO would ensure athletes have full freedom to organize at their individual colleges, either by sport or across sports, or organize across colleges to negotiate collective bargaining agreements within their athletic conferences. U.S.
...Read more Representative Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.-16) introduced companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives. “All the breathless attention on this weekend’s College Football Playoff selection is a reminder that college sports are anything but amateur. There is no college sports industry and its $16 billion in annual revenues without the athletes' labor. It’s past time they get a seat at the negotiating table. Instead of fighting athletes' rights in courts and spending millions on lobbying Congress, the NCAA and its members should start negotiating directly with players on revenue-sharing, health and safety protections, and more. This legislation would make it easier for the athletes to realize their power, form unions, and start to collectively bargain,” said Murphy. “We cannot wait for the NCAA to share its billions with the workers who create it,” said Sanders. “And those workers are college athletes. The College Athlete Right to Organize Act is a step in the right direction to giving these workers the rights and protections that they deserve.” “College athletes put their lives and well-being on the line to make their schools and the NCAA billions of dollars each year – of course they should be able to unionize and make sure they’re paid their fair share of that pot. The College Athlete Right to Organize Act is a common sense next step to protect the young workers powering this industry and give them the rights they deserve,” said Warren. “College athletes are workers, period. They are skilled and disciplined young people who deserve so much more than to be treated as sources of revenue by the colleges and universities they attend. Their lack of collective bargaining rights, pay, and ownership of their own image is a labor and civil rights issue that requires our immediate action. The College Athlete Right to Organize Act is the first step in bringing college sports into the 21st century by ensuring college athletes have the right to collectively bargain across teams and conferences, and that they are able to advocate for rights, protections, and compensation commensurate with the value they undeniably provide. College athletics are a billion dollar industry, and it’s time to treat those who make it run with the respect, rights, and pay they deserve,” said Bowman. The legislation is newly endorsed by the major professional players associations including the Major League Baseball Players Association, Major League Soccer Players Association, National Basketball Players Association, National Football League Players Association, National Hockey League Players Association, and United Soccer League Players Association. Actors’ Equity Association, American Association of University Professors, AFL-CIO, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, American Federation of Teachers, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers National Employment Law Project, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and United Steelworkers (USW) also endorsed the bill. "Collective bargaining has immeasurably benefitted the workers we represent and professional sports as a whole. Athletes enjoy elevated health and safety standards, medical benefits, fair compensation, and other rights both on and off the field. Leagues and teams can negotiate roster construction, player reserve, and other competitive regulations. And fans receive the most compelling entertainment product in the world. The same result is achievable at the collegiate level, and we applaud Sen. Murphy for his continued efforts in support of organizing and collective bargaining,” said the Major League Baseball Players Association, Major League Soccer Players Association, National Basketball Players Association, National Football League Players Association, and National Hockey League Players Association. U.S. Representatives Emanuel Cleaver, II (D-Mo.-5), Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.-10), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.-4), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.-14), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.-5), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.-3), Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.-13), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12) co-sponsored the legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives. Earlier this year, Murphy also reintroduced the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act, legislation that would establish an unrestricted federal right for college athletes to market their Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL).During March Madness, Murphy wrote an op-ed in USA Today warning that college sports will destroy itself if it doesn’t get proactive about reform. Full text of the bill is available HERE. Fact sheet of the bill is available HERE. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday released the following statement after Senate Republicans blocked passage of the national security supplemental, which included aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, funding for border security, and support for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program:
“Republicans are playing a dangerous game with the fate of the free world. It's so reckless that they have decided to tie the future of Ukraine and U.S. support for Israel to their hardline demands to shut down the border. The stakes could not be higher, and so I am willing to continue working to find an actual compromise. But it’s time for Republicans to stop playing politics, ditch their unserious proposals, and come to the table with reasonable expectations.”
###
Congress has yet to approve additional aid for Ukraine, and an effort to do that before years end seems to have fallen apart for now. Republicans have said they will not approve that aid unless the bill also includes money for an unrelated crackdown on migration at the U.S.-Mexico border. An administration briefing on Ukraine seems to have dissolved into a shouting match last evening. U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, was there for some of it. He spoke with NPR's Steve Inskeep on "Morning Edition" to talk about the apparent stalemate. Steve Inskeep: What happened? Sen. Murphy: Well, you are very right that Republicans are playing a dangerous game with security of the world. They are refusing to support additional aid to Ukraine, despite the fact that they say they
...Read more believe it's important, until we make major hardline changes on immigration policy. Now, there's lots of unrelated issues that I care about, you know, I care deeply about the gun violence crisis in this country. But I'm not making demands that we solve that in order to get my vote on Ukraine because I think it's important for the security of the world to make sure that Vladimir Putin doesn't march through Ukraine and into Europe. Inskeep: How did people end up shouting at each other last night? Sen. Murphy: It looked to me like pretty planned theatrics and I think Republicans are coming face to face with the real dangerous nature of the demands that they have made. We're willing to talk to them about changes in border policy, but we can't implement hardline changes that completely shut down the border. If they want to be reasonable about changes in immigration policy, then I think we can probably get to a point where they get something and then they also are in a position to vote for Ukraine aid. I wish they weren't putting us in this position. I wish they weren't holding Ukraine aid hostage to this domestic political issue, but that's where we are. Democrats are trying to be responsible and negotiate with them. They just haven't been terribly reasonable in their demands. Inskeep: Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader — who has been very strong, among others in his party on aid to Ukraine — has said he simply will not allow Ukraine aid to pass without a border crackdown of the kind that Republicans want. Given McConnell's broad support for Ukraine, is that not something you need to take seriously? Sen. Murphy: But if you broadly support Ukraine, if you think it is important for the United States and for the world to stop Vladimir Putin from marching into Europe, why condition your support for that vital investment upon the resolution of maybe the most difficult domestic political issue that we face, immigration. A cynic would say that, in fact, that's a way to guarantee that Putin wins, to suggest that Ukraine won't get their money unless Congress unwinds the vexing 40 year problem of immigration reform. So I hope Mitch McConnell is telling the truth when he says that he supports Ukraine, but it's certainly a curious way to support Ukraine, to say that they will only get their money if my hardline demands on a completely unrelated issue get met. Inskeep: I want to figure out what the hardline demands are, you referred to a threat to a demand to shut down the border, to resolving a 40 year crisis. But I don't feel I have a clear idea of what you believe Republicans want, that you could not accept. Are their demands really that sweeping? And are they specific at all? Sen. Murphy: I certainly have been reluctant to negotiate in public as the lead democratic negotiator on this question of border policy changes. But I think I can characterize it this way. I and Democrats acknowledged that right now there are far too many people crossing the border and being released into the country, many of them don't have a legitimate claim of asylum. We want to change the laws and surge resources to the border so that far fewer people are crossing and far fewer people are released into the country that don't have a legitimate claim of asylum. Republicans want to close the border, just close it, so that even people who are legitimately fleeing terror and torture, have no opportunity to present their case. Now, that's a demand that sounds familiar, because it's what Donald Trump ran on. But I don't think it's in the best traditions of this country to deny people with legitimate claims of asylum access to the United States. And I don't think that that's what the American people support. So that's where we are stuck. The Democrats are willing to make significant progress, changing the law and resources to reduce the number of people being led into the interior. Republicans are making much more hardline demands. Inskeep: Are you essentially alleging that Republicans have taken the position that they will not vote for something they want, unless they also get something that they also want? That's essentially what they're saying to you? Sen. Murphy: I think that's exactly what they're saying. They are also making it clear that they are only going to vote for Ukraine with hardline immigration policy changes and that's something they know probably can't pass Congress right now. Read less U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut is reintroducing the College Athlete Right to Organize Act (CARO) legislation, a bill that will enable college athletes to unionize. The bill will amend the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to classify college athletes as employees who are entitled to the right to organize and collectively bargain for fair compensation and better working conditions. The NLRA would also be ammended to define public colleges, alongside private institutions, as employers "within the context of intercollegiate sports, allowing athletes to collectively bargain at any college, regardless of
state laws that restrict their basic labor rights or potential state laws that define athletes as nonemployees." The Act would also ensure athletes have full freedom to organize
...Read more at their individual colleges, either by sport or across sports, or organize across colleges to negotiate collective bargaining agreements within their respective athletic conferences. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) co-sponsored the bill. Sanders is the Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. U.S. Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y) is introducing companion legislation in Congress. “All the breathless attention on this weekend’s College Football Playoff selection is a reminder that college sports are anything but amateur. There is no college sports industry and its $16 billion in annual revenues without the athletes' labor. It’s past time they get a seat at the negotiating table. Instead of fighting athletes' rights in courts and spending millions on lobbying Congress, the NCAA and its members should start negotiating directly with players on revenue-sharing, health and safety protections, and more. This legislation would make it easier for the athletes to realize their power, form unions, and start to collectively bargain,” Murphy said in a release. Murphy, a vocal UConn sports fans, has been critical of the NCAA in the past. He previously co-sponsored the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act with Massachusetts Rep. Lori Trahan. The legislation focused on a name, image and likeness opportunities for student-athletes. Read less Good morning, Early Birds. On this day in 1792, President George Washington was reelected to serve a second term. Tips: earlytips@washpost.com. Was this forwarded to you? Sign up here. Thanks for waking up with us. In today’s edition … What we’re watching: Wray testifies … Liz Cheney, outspoken Trump critic, weighs third-party presidential run … Four GOP presidential candidates qualify for fourth primary debate … but first … On the Hill
Democrats turn up the heat on Ukraine supplemental The Biden administration and Senate Democrats are increasing pressure on Republicans, daring them to oppose a national security supplemental for Ukraine and Israel as skepticism is growing on Capitol Hill that a supplemental can pass. Senate Majority Leader Charles E.
...Read more Schumer (D-N.Y.) and President Biden invited Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to address senators this afternoon via video conference at a classified briefing where he is expected to spell out the dire need for military aid in their fight against Russia that is stalemated. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Charles Q. Brown and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines are expected to present the latest on the status of the war at the classified briefing. The address by Zelensky and the classified briefing come just one day before Schumer will hold a procedural vote on Biden’s $106 billion supplemental request, which includes $60 billion for Ukraine, $14 billion for Israel as well as funding for border security and Taiwan. The vote is expected to fail. Nearly every Republican — if not all — will vote against it because there has been no agreement between Senate Republicans and Democrats on border policy. “History will render harsh judgment on those who abandon democracy,” Schumer said. “I urge all senators to work with us to move forward on a national security supplemental.” Broken down border talks Republicans continue to insist that the border must be secured with changes to asylum and parole policy before they provide billions more dollars in aid to Ukraine. But a group of bipartisan negotiators working on border policy for several weeks are stuck, unable to agree on if they are still negotiating. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), one of the negotiators, said talks have broken down. “We have not been negotiating since Friday,” he said.
Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), the lead Republican in the talks, said the stalemate is “news to me. Several of us talked through the weekend.”
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), another negotiator, said that Murphy said they're at an “impasse.” She said they're waiting for Lankford to send over his latest proposal. “I would say we're still working.” Democrats say Republicans are only moving further to the right, pushing for policies of mass detention for migrants seeking parole and asylum and unwilling to rule out proposals that Democrats could never support. Lankford said the negotiations are being taken out of context. But the reality is Congress has been unable to make major changes to border policy despite multiple attempts over nearly 20 years. The dynamics Republicans think they have the upper hand in negotiations given Democrats’ belief that support for Ukraine is necessary and urgent. The supplemental is “a unique opportunity” for Republicans “to insist” on border policy changes, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) told us Monday night. But Democrats are losing patience, united in their support for Ukraine funding and frustrated with Republican attempts to leverage Ukraine in exchange for a conservative overhaul of border policy. They believe that dismissing Ukraine’s request would make it more likely for Ukraine to lose the war and vindicate Russian President Vladimir Putin’s strategy. Republicans are holding Ukraine aid “hostage,” Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said. Ukraine aid is a tough vote for many Republicans who could risk primary challenges and backlash because their base is increasingly opposed to sending an additional $60 billion — on top of more than $110 billion the United States has already allocated — to Ukraine. “If Republicans take down the Ukraine bill because of their disagreement over a totally unrelated policy fight, then they own the global cataclysm that will be created because of their political gamesmanship,” Murphy said. That calculation is difficult for some Republicans. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who is an ardent supporter of Ukraine funding, said she is “definitely leaning toward” voting against Wednesday's procedural vote without border policy changes. A new deadline In another attempt to pressure Republicans, as we reported Monday, Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young sent a letter to the top four congressional leaders saying money will run out for Ukraine “by the end of the year.” The letter caught the attention of Republicans. Cornyn said she “makes a compelling case that we need to do Ukraine aid” and Lankford said it’s “the most definitive statement I’ve heard from the White House” on Ukraine funding timing, adding that Congress works better with a deadline and this might give them added pressure. In her letter, Young named states that benefit the most from the production of military equipment for Ukraine. Axios writes that Arkansas, the home of one of the Republican negotiators, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), has received $2.3 billion in investments from previous Ukraine funding. The most optimistic senators think a failed procedural vote this week won't end the prospects for a supplemental but will revive efforts. It’s “a necessary next step,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said. “Then we can go from there.” Share this articleShare
What we're watching
On the Hill FBI Directory Christopher A. Wray will testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he’ll push for the reauthorization of Section 702, which allows for the surveillance of foreign citizens outside the United States. He’ll say the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court reported that recent changes to the policy “are having a desired effect,” according to prepared remarks of his testimony. “Stripping the FBI of its 702 authorities would be a form of unilateral disarmament,” Wray will say. We’ll be watching to see if his testimony leads to any changes of position. Conservatives and some liberals are opposed to an extension of the policy, which expires at the end of the year, or are demanding major changes. (We doubt it.) Harvard President Claudine Gay, University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill and Massachusetts Institute of Technology President Sally Kornbluth will testify today before the House Education Committee in a hearing “holding campus leaders accountable and confronting antisemitism.” Pamela Nadell, professor of history and Jewish studies at American University, will also testify. Two IRS whistleblowers, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, will testify again about the Hunter Biden tax investigation. They previously testified before the House Oversight Committee. This time, they’ll appear before the House Ways and Means Committee. At the Supreme Court Today, the nine justices will hear oral arguments for Moore v. United States, which challenges Congress’s authority to impose a tax on offshore earnings. The provision helped fund former president Donald Trump’s 2017 tax cut. A ruling in favor of Charles and Kathleen Moore “could preemptively bar other taxes that Congress has not previously tried to impose, including a tax on wealth that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and others on the left have pushed as an equitable way to generate new funds for government spending,” per our colleagues Ann E. Marimow and Julie Zauzmer Weil. For that reason, “an unusual political coalition has come together to defend the offshore-earnings tax, from the Biden administration to conservatives including former House speaker Paul D. Ryan. Not because they favor a wealth tax, but because they worry a ruling against one little-known provision could undermine vast swaths of existing taxes on investments, partnerships and foreign income, which together raise billions or even trillions in revenue.” But two issues have arisen since the high court announced in June that it would hear the case. Alito’s interviews: Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. has rebuffed calls to recuse himself from the tax case over his ties to a member of the pair’s legal team. The lawyer, David B. Rivkin Jr., interviewed Alito twice for articles that appeared on the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Alito defended the relationship, saying that he and Rivkin have not discussed the case.
Inconsistencies in the couple’s stories: “The case has also exposed questions about the accuracy of the personal story a Washington state couple presented to the court in making their constitutional challenge to the tax, a one-time levy on offshore earnings,” Ann and Julie write. “Charles and Kathleen Moore appear to have closer ties to the company central to the case than they disclosed in court filings. Among other things, Charles Moore served on its board for five years and made a significant cash contribution to the company, records show.”
Mindy Herzfeld, a tax policy expert at the University of Florida who has written extensively about the case, urged the court in a recent column in Tax Notes not to decide a constitutional question based on “an inaccurate set of facts.” Doing so “risks undermining the Court’s legitimacy and creating the impression that its docket and its decisions are too easily manipulated by politically motivated interest groups.”
Mindy Herzfeld, a tax policy expert at the University of Florida who has written extensively about the case, urged the court in a recent column in Tax Notes not to decide a constitutional question based on “an inaccurate set of facts.” Doing so “risks undermining the Court’s legitimacy and creating the impression that its docket and its decisions are too easily manipulated by politically motivated interest groups.”
The campaign
Liz Cheney, outspoken Trump critic, weighs third-party presidential run Our colleague Maeve Reston sat down with former Wyoming congresswoman Liz Cheney (R), who is promoting her new book “Oath and Honor: A Memoir and a Warning.” The pair talked about Trump, a potential third-party campaign for president and voting for Biden during the interview. Here’s an excerpt: “Cheney, one of the most vociferous critics of Donald Trump in the Republican Party, says she is weighing whether to mount her own third-party candidacy for the White House, as she vows to do ‘whatever it takes’ to prevent the former president from returning to office,” Maeve writes. Cheney warns that “Trump could transform America’s democracy into a dictatorship if he is reelected; anticipating, she said, that he would attempt to stay longer than his term.” “Several years ago, I would not have contemplated a third-party run,” Cheney said in a Monday interview with The Washington Post. But, she said, “I happen to think democracy is at risk at home, obviously, as a result of Donald Trump’s continued grip on the Republican Party, and I think democracy is at risk internationally as well.” “Given her appeal to independents, former Republicans and some Democrats, many Trump critics in both parties have noted that a presidential run by Cheney could undercut her stated goal of defeating Trump, because it could draw some votes away from President Biden,” Maeve writes. “Cheney said those considerations would all be part of her analysis, and underscored that she would not do anything that would help Trump return to the White House.” Four GOP presidential candidates qualify for fourth primary debate Former United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former New Jersey governor Chris Christie and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy have all qualified for the fourth primary debate which will take place in Tuscaloosa, Ala., on Wednesday night, our colleague Dylan Wells reports. Former president Donald Trump will once again skip the event. “Haley has emerged as the most viable alternative candidate to Trump in recent weeks, surpassing or tying DeSantis for second place in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Last week, she won the endorsement of the political network led by conservative billionaire Charles Koch. DeSantis’s campaign and the super PAC supporting him have faced recent drama, with the PAC that has overseen much of his presidential operation firing its CEO less than two weeks after the previous chief executive resigned.”
“With the Iowa caucuses just six weeks away, Christie and Haley have both made inroads with independents and anti-Trump Republicans voters, but the overlapping pool of supporters complicates both of their paths in New Hampshire. Haley currently is polling second in the state, but Christie is pulling more than 10 percent of potential primary voters — a share that could prove essential to GOP consolidation efforts against Trump.”
Meanwhile, the Republican National Committee this week is set to decide on whether to allow candidates to participate in presidential debates that have not been approved by the national party. The proposal would give candidates, including Trump who has boycotted the debates, the opportunity to confront one another in additional forums. Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced that SKYRE, based in East Hartford, was named “Innovator of the Month.” SKYRE uses patented electrochemical technology to build innovative, efficient clean energy products, working to decarbonize the energy system through hydrogen recycling, green hydrogen production, and carbon utilization. “We need big, bold ideas to tackle the climate crisis, and the team at SKYRE is doing just that. It’s incredible to see how Connecticut’s talented workforce and experience at the forefront of innovation in this industry have helped SKYRE grow and thrive. I’m proud to recognize their work and look forward to seeing all that they accomplish,” said Murphy. “Decarbonization initiatives are central to the majority of corporate and economic growth
...Read more strategies. SKYRE's sole mission is to advance decarbonization through electrolysis to reliably produce ultra low-cost green hydrogen and fuels and chemicals. SKYRE's products function at the intersection of clean hydrogen and carbon reduction, helping customers address vital industrial productivity and energy challenges. The foundational technology for hydrogen and fuel cells, originated and refined in Connecticut, was initially developed for manned space flight and nuclear submarines. This rich history has allowed SKYRE to tap into a highly skilled workforce. We're grateful to have access to Connecticut's flagship university, UConn. Its second to none in experiential learning approach, enables us to hire graduates who can seamlessly integrate into our business. And we partner with the outstanding UCONN faculty members whose ideas have advanced our products – thus introducing new capabilities and improving overall performance. Connecticut's ready access to capital markets – including various investor networks, institutional funds, and Connecticut Innovations – has provided us with visibility that wouldn't be possible in other states. This remarkable ecosystem has played a crucial role in our successful growth and innovation journey,” said Trent Molter, founder and CEO of SKYRE. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act and the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, on Wednesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor about the urgent need for Congress to take action to address the worsening child care crisis. “When you are living on a more modest salary, not a poverty wage, but just a modest, lower- to middle-income salary, your entire world could fall apart if you lose access to a quality child care environment. People have to quit their jobs. They have to move back in with their parents. They have to move their entire family to a different city or a different state. Your entire life gets upended when you can't find care for your child. Because you will upend your entire life for your child. Nothing matters more than making sure that
...Read more your child is safe,” said Murphy. “And so, what we are forcing our families to do, simply because we don't choose to do the right thing and provide funding to make sure that there are affordable, quality child care centers available, is sending our families into unnecessary crisis all over this country.” Murphy laid out just how dire affording child care can be for a family in Connecticut making $42,000: “Let's say a family makes $42,000, doesn't qualify for our subsidy, is spending $22,000 a year on rent, is spending $15,000 a year on childcare, that's $37,000 a year. They make $42,000. $5,000 left. [$100] a week for everything else. For food, for your cell phone, for your clothes for your kid. If you're making above the rate of subsidy in Connecticut, just the cost of child care and rent, will leave you with just [$100] a week to survive. In the richest, most affluent country in the world, how can we justify leaving families who are doing the right thing, who are working in that position?” Murphy concluded: “That's why I'm so glad to be here on the floor with my colleagues pleading with our Republican friends to do the right thing and support the President's proposed plan to support child care, affordable, quality child care in this country for the families I represent Connecticut.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Thank you, Madam President. I'm so glad to join my colleagues on the floor today to really emphasize how a family's life falls apart when they don't have access to good child care. I'm one of a handful of parents of young kids. I have no complaints. Obviously my wife and I make enough money so that we've been able to provide quality child care for our kids as we both been working throughout their life. “But when you are living on a more modest salary, not a poverty wage, but just a modest, lower to middle income salary, your entire world could fall apart when you lose access to a quality child care environment. People have to quit their jobs. They have to move back in with their parents. They have to move their entire family to a different city or a different state. Your entire life gets upended when you can't find care for your child. Because you will have in your entire life for your child. Nothing matters more than making sure that your child is safe. “And so, what we are forcing our families to do, simply because we don't choose to do the right thing and provide funding to make sure that there are affordable child care qualities available, it is sending our families into unnecessary crisis all over this country. “In my state, I've had 124,000 parents report that their work has been disrupted by child care issues. That they've had to leave work. That they have had to leave employments because of interruption in child care. Our child care centers in Connecticut. We're a high cost child care state. We're a high cost state in general. 89 percent of them report that they've had difficulty hiring staff. 60 percent of them say that right now they are understaffed. And 70 percent of them say that they have waitlists for new families, which just shows you that all over Connecticut, we have a total mismatch between the number of slots and the number of families that need those slots. “And of course, that delivers an enormous harm to families but also to our workforce. I met a young woman a few weeks ago who lives in Hartford, and she's got a very young child. They are on the waitlist for a subsidized child care slot. She wants to actually be a child care worker. She wants to help solve the workforce shortage, but she can't get into the workforce. Why? Because she has to stay home to take care of her young child. “And so this cycle that ends up impacting not just families, but our economy writ-large is one that we have to break. “I just want to leave you with this one last piece of math to just explain how serious the situation is in my state. So in Connecticut, we have a program called Care for Kids. And this is a program that does for lower income families try to give them some subsidy so that they can afford child care. But that program cuts off for a one child family at $41,500 a year in income. Now that's a lower middle income salary in Connecticut. That's a salary that's not unfamiliar in my state. “Let me just do the very quick math for you. For a family of three, a two bedroom, a one bedroom house can be about $1,800 a month. Child care in Connecticut on average is going to be about $15,000 a year. Total of just the costs for a family that makes just above the threshold to qualify for our subsidy programs. Let's say a family makes $42,000, doesn't qualify for our subsidy, is spending $22,000 a year on rent, is spending $15,000 a year on childcare, that's $37,000 a year. They make $42,000. $5,000 left. [$100] a week for everything else. “For food, for your cell phone, for your clothes for your kid. If you're making above the rate of subsidy in Connecticut, just the cost of child care and rent, will leave you with just [$100] a week to survive. In the richest, most affluent country in the world, how can we justify leaving families who are doing the right thing, who are working in that position. “That's why I'm so glad to be here on the floor with my colleagues pleading with our Republican friends to do the right thing and support the President's proposed plan to support child care, affordable, quality child care in this country for the families I represent Connecticut.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Thursday released the following statement on reporting about the Coast Guard’s 2015 “Culture of Respect” study, which details a culture of racism, hazing, discrimination, and sexual assault across the agency and was kept from the public. “I am in disbelief that we are once again having a conversation about Coast Guard leadership covering up evidence of pervasive harassment, discrimination, racism, sexism, and assault within its organization. How many more of these damning reports have been kept from Congress? This culture to avoidance and cover-up needs to end.” Murphy has a long pushed the U.S. Coast Guard to deal with harassment and bullying at the Coast Guard
...Read more Academy. Earlier this year, Murphy released a statement on the report detailing decades of sexual misconduct at the Coast Guard Academy. In 2019, he criticized the Coast Guard for covering up allegations of harassment and for failing to appear before the U.S. House of Representatives Homeland Security and Oversight Committees investigating the allegations. That same year, following an OIG Whistleblower Retaliation Investigation and other reports of bullying, harassment and retaliation at the United States Coast Guard Academy, Murphy wrote a letter to the Coast Guard Commandant demanding reforms to the Academy’s climate of bullying, harassment and retaliation. In 2018, Murphy along with U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and U.S. Representative Joe Courtney (CT-02) wrote to Admiral Schultz seeking information on racial disparities at the Coast Guard Academy. ### Read less Millions of people are traveling this Thanksgiving week. If you're taking the train, the trip could get a lot faster in the next few years – thanks to $2 billion headed to Connecticut from Washington.
If the trip over the river and through the woods to Grandmother's house takes you on the train, you'd better pack some patience.
"Sometimes there's a lot of delays, but usually it's fair," said Bethany de los Santos, of Bridgeport.
Many of those delays are because of aging rail bridges – like the Devon bridge in Milford, built 117 years ago. It's so old that trains have to slow down to 45 miles per hour to cross it safely.
"Some days it'll be delays," said Najee Gathers, of Milford. "You'll have to wait, like, 20 minutes for my train to come."
It won't happen this Thanksgiving, or
...Read more even this decade, but 8 rail bridges across Connecticut will get replaced. It's all thanks to almost $2 billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
"They'll be able to speed up going across this bridge from 45 to 75 miles an hour, taking about two or three minutes off the commute," said Gov. Ned Lamont. "And we've got eight of these other bridges. That's going to be 20 minutes' savings."
In addition to the Devon bridge, Metro-North's New Haven Line will get $210 million in upgrades, including new tracks and power stations. In Norwalk, almost half a billion dollars is going to replace the Walk Bridge, which sometimes gets stuck, snarling Amtrak traffic across the Northeast. And in Westport, the Saugatuck Bridge is getting $23 million.
"Within the next 10 years, with this investment, we will be able to move people from Bridgeport to New York City 20 minutes faster," said Sen. Chris Murphy.
But some slowdowns happen outside of Connecticut – in New York.
“There are investments in the state of New York that are necessary to be able to make the New Haven Line more resilient,” said Metro-North president Catherine Rinaldi. "We have flooding issues in the Bronx that affect the reliability of the service that we provide to our New Haven Line customers.”
In addition to Connecticut, the feds are sending New York $1.6 billion for Metro-North upgrades, including a new destination at Penn Station and new stops in the Bronx.
But riders said any improvement will encourage them to ride more often. Good news, since ridership is still struggling to return to pre-pandemic levels.
"That's a lot better," said Gathers.
The Devon Rail Bridge won't be replaced until the year 2035, but repairs will be done in just three years, which could mean a faster commute for many riders. Read less Connecticut’s rail passengers can expect to see shorter travel times to and from New York as a result of $2 billion in federal funds. That’s according to Senator Chris Murphy who joined several federal, state and local officials at a press conference by the Devon rail bridge in Milford Monday. “Within the next 10 years with this investment, we will be able to move people from Bridgeport to New York City 20 minutes faster,” Murphy said. The faster travel times aren’t a result of getting faster trains but upgrading and replacing several aging rail bridges in the state, according to officials. The money is coming from the federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. But officials say it’s not just going to result in faster trains, but will bring in well paying union jobs and further entice
...Read more companies to set up business within the state. The Devon Bridge will get interim repairs but will eventually be replaced, Senator Richard Blumenthal said. “They are both necessary because this bridge is 118 years old, and it’s outlived its safe and useful life and so have 24 other bridges and projects in Connecticut, every one of the 25 projects funded by this measure are 100 years old or more,” Blumenthal said. It will cost $119 million to repair the Devon Bridge and another $245 million to replace it, according to Governor Ned Lamont’s office. And Murphy said the projects will attract good paying jobs. “It just means a lot of jobs… you’re talking about tens of thousands of good paying union jobs with decent wages and benefits and pensions that are going to come to Connecticut in order to get this work done,” Murphy said. Other bridges in the state such as ones near Saugatuck, Old Saybrook and Old Lyme, will be replaced as well according to Garrett T. Eucalitto, Connecticut Department of Transportation Commissioner. Those projects will get most of the funding at $826 million. Read less The fragile pause in Israel’s onslaught against Hamas in Gaza, which has enabled the release so far of 58 hostages, has been surprisingly enduring given that neither side is in direct contact and each is bent on obliterating the other. The question now is how long the intersection of interests that led to the deal will prevail, allowing the return of more of those abducted in the Hamas terror attacks in Israel and the entry into Gaza of more trucks of desperately needed aid. While Americans celebrated Thanksgiving, a rush of developments in the Middle East led to emotional reunions among hostages and their families. But the plight of the majority still in captivity and that of Palestinian civilians underscored the brutal toll of the war. And with President Joe Biden back in
...Read more Washington after his holiday weekend in Nantucket, Massachusetts, medium- and longer-term factors are coming into view that suggest the fighting could soon be raging again – and become even more intractable and costly. Still, hopes are rising that after the agreed four-day span of releases, the deal will not end as scheduled on Monday. Hamas is pushing to enact a clause in the original arrangement that would see extra days of pauses in Israeli strikes in return for the freeing of each group of 10 hostages. The Israeli Cabinet has discussed the idea and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Biden in a call Sunday an extension would be welcome, his office said in a statement. And the US and Qatar – the two critical intermediaries in the deal – are seeking to use the momentum of the pause to create a foundation for a more permanent end to the fighting that could see more hostages freed and civilians shielded in Gaza. In the short term, Israel and Hamas both appear to have strong reasons to continue the truce. Netanyahu, who has been under extreme pressure from the families of those held captive, may get a measure of political relief as more hostages come home. Hamas, meanwhile, has benefited from the halt in Israeli airstrikes and ground operations that is likely to enable it to regroup and prepare for an expected widened Israeli assault on its southern strongholds. The US is seeking the return of Americans held or unaccounted for after the Hamas raids on October 7, and Biden has a strong imperative in delaying or preventing more civilian carnage in Gaza – both for humanitarian reasons and to temper a domestic political backlash from young and progressive voters who have condemned his unshakable support for Israel. And there’s pain far away from Gaza and Israel. A suspect was arrested in the shooting of three Palestinian college students in Vermont. Jason J. Eaton, 48, was arrested Sunday afternoon near the scene of the attack, the Burlington Police Department said in a news release. Police did not detail early Monday what charges he was facing. CNN has been unable to establish whether Eaton has a lawyer. The attack follows an upsurge of antisemitism that has also made American Jews feel less safe. An extended pause in the fighting would play into humanitarian aims, but time may be short before the strategic goals of Israel or Hamas shift. That means the fate of the remaining hostages – including a large group of young males and some members of the Israeli security forces – remains deeply uncertain. The current situation, for instance, means that Hamas has regained the capacity to set the tempo of the conflict by using hostages as leverage to shape Israeli responses and military activity. The pause is complicating what Israel vows will be a drive to wipe out the Islamist movement. And the fate of remaining hostages balanced against the wider goals of the Israeli military will increasingly pose a stark moral dilemma for Netanyahu’s government. The time may also be approaching when the lopsided nature of the exchanges – three Palestinians released from Israeli prisons in exchange for each hostage – may become politically unsustainable for Netanyahu, whose reeling government relies on a coalition of hawkish far-right parties. As the numbers of its hostages slowly dwindles, Hamas may eventually lose the incentive to free large groups as it seeks to retain leverage. One uncertainty from the US perspective is how much pressure Biden, who spoke again to Netanyahu on Sunday, will impose on the Israelis to continue the pause as long as is possible. But, if the pause ends, would US support for Israel’s right to target Hamas be just as strong as it was before the truce? The delicate US-Israel dynamic explains why it makes sense for Hamas to hold onto some American hostages in the hope of forcing Biden to constrain Israel. “If they keep holding American hostages, that will keep the US focused on this and keep the US keeping pressure on the Israelis,” retired US Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges told CNN on Sunday. A return to battle might also weaken Israel’s already shaky international backing. Biden national security adviser Jake Sullivan encapsulated the balancing act the president would face in such circumstances without indicating exactly how he would respond. “President Biden believes any country, including Israel, has a right and responsibility to defend itself against that kind of enemy,” Sullivan said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. “He also believes that any military operations have to be conducted in a way that protects civilians, that distinguishes terrorists from civilians, and that ensures that those civilians have safe places to be and access to lifesaving humanitarian aid.” While strategic choices ahead are acute, the releases of hostages so far – and the more than 100 trucks of humanitarian aid that have entered Gaza – have represented a rare moment of hope and relief in a horrendous conflict. Among those released on Sunday was 4-year-old Abigail Edan, who was the youngest American held and the first US citizen freed since the start of the truce. Biden spoke with the family of the girl, whose parents were both murdered on October 7, and told Americans that though she was safe, she’d been through “a terrible trauma.” Biden’s address was a welcome break in a crisis that has caused him considerable political damage. But beset by low approval ratings and political attacks from all sides as he seeks reelection, the president faces a perilous road ahead – especially if the fighting resumes in Gaza. Biden has faced sharp criticism from inside the Democratic Party over his refusal to call for a permanent ceasefire in a war that has revealed splits in his electoral coalition. Younger, progressive voters – whose turnout is key for Biden next year – have been critical of Israel’s response to the terror attack, while anger is also growing among Arab Americans, who are key to the Democrats’ hopes in the swing state of Michigan. But the president is also attracting critiques from the right. While GOP presidential candidate Chris Christie said the president deserved some credit for brokering the deal, he told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” that he was concerned Biden was leaning too strongly on Netanyahu. Christie warned that Biden was starting to wrongly “err” into saying that he hopes the truce continues. “He can’t be doing that kind of stuff, in my view, publicly,” the former New Jersey governor said. “His voice has to be just purely supportive of what Israel is doing to try to protect its territorial integrity and the safety and security of its 9 million citizens.” Biden has been calling for weeks for Congress to pass $14.3 billion in emergency aid for Israel. And Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer told his Democratic colleagues in a letter Sunday that he’ll bring to the floor a national security package that ties together Israel and Ukraine funding as soon as next week. But such a measure would still face tough challenges in the GOP-controlled House. House Republicans did pass their own measure but, in a political stunt, attached cuts to Internal Revenue Service funding that they knew were unacceptable to Democrats, who run the Senate. Pro-Donald Trump Republicans, meanwhile, oppose efforts from some Democrats and Senate Republicans to twin the measure with a new $60 billion aid package for Ukraine. And any package is in jeopardy because of the narrow House GOP majority, which is effectively controlled by hardliners. That means the only way Republicans would be likely to vote for a measure is if it includes Democratic concessions on the southern border. House Intelligence Chairman Mike Turner told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday he’s not optimistic the measure will pass this year. “I think it’d be very difficult to get it done by the end of the year. And the impediment currently is the White House policy on the southern border,” the Ohio Republican said. In another sign that differences over the package could lead to further delays, Sen. Chris Murphy said he’d be open to conditioning Israeli aid on the protection of Palestinian civilians. “We regularly condition our aid to allies based upon compliance with US law and international law,” the Connecticut Democrat said on “State of the Union.” “And so I think it’s very consistent with the ways in which we have dispensed aid, especially during wartime, to allies.” The political strategizing taking place in Israel, the United States and beyond has not begun to consider what the region might look like after the war. The Biden administration is reiterating support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that looks more distant than ever after the October 7 attacks. And Israeli President Isaac Herzog told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer in an interview Sunday that he supported the idea for an “international coalition” to monitor Gaza after Hamas had been eradicated in the war. But that is all in the far distant. For now, the key question is how long the war will be paused and whether hostages will keep being sent to freedom and safety. Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and U.S. Representative Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04) announced that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has selected a project in Bridgeport to receive $47,528,246 from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to accelerate clean energy manufacturing in Connecticut. The grant will help fund the construction of Nanoramic Laboratories’ new facility in Bridgeport, Connecticut to manufacture lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery electrodes for grid storage. This project is one of the seven selected by DOE for this award. “This award is yet another example of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law making transformational investments in Connecticut. A new battery manufacturing facility in Bridgeport is going to create
...Read more hundreds of good-paying jobs, bring a major economic boost to the community, and help us reach our climate goals. I’ll continue pushing for federal funding that will help ensure our state stays at the forefront of the clean energy economy,” said Murphy. “The magnitude of this $47.5 million federal investment is truly breathtaking in importance and impact. It means significant progress in clean energy, manufacturing growth, good jobs, national security and much more. Nanoramic Labs will become a national center for lithium-ion battery development and production— immensely important to our nation’s future. I’m thrilled by President Biden’s continued commitment to Connecticut innovation and American clean energy,” said Blumenthal. “I’m extremely pleased to help deliver $47 million in federal funding to an innovative and future-oriented company in Bridgeport. Connecticut has long been a leader in clean energy technology, and this manufacturing facility will further that mission while bringing jobs and opportunity to a formerly industrial community in Southwest Connecticut,” said Himes. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, on Sunday joined CNN’s State of the Union to discuss the Israel-Hamas hostage agreement and the rise of antisemitism on college campuses. Murphy highlighted President Biden’s role in securing the release of at least 50 Israeli hostages: “Let's give credit where credit is due. President Biden and his team worked 24/7 with partners in the region to make sure that this release was possible and to set a framework through which we can see more hostages released. This is a president who is right now showing the American people what real leadership looks like. Hopefully, Hamas will accept the conditions that have been laid down
...Read more that will allow for more hostages to be released. But if they don't, ultimately Hamas is going to be defeated. That's in Israel's interest. But it's also in the interest of the United States. We do not want terrorist organizations believing they can get away with the kind of murder that Hamas did on October 7.” On his call for Israel to do more to minimize civilian harm, Murphy said: “I do believe that the level of civilian harm inside Gaza has been unacceptable and is unsustainable. I think there's both a moral cost to this many civilians, innocent civilians, children often losing their lives, but I think there's a strategic cost. Ultimately, Hamas will get stronger, not weaker in the long run, if all of this civilian death allows them to recruit more effectively and ably inside Gaza.” On a two-state future, Murphy said: “My hope is that when [Israelis] do go to the polls that they choose leadership that is going to make good on the only future that guarantees the survival of a Jewish state in the Middle East, and that is a Palestinian state. Benjamin Netanyahu believed that you could ignore the Palestinians, that you could try to squash their desires for a state, and ultimately that would bring peace to the region of Israel. That's just not the case. Ultimately, the next government is going to have to put us back on a path to have a Palestinian state. That's not easy. But it is the only way forward for Israel is the only way forward for long term peace.” On the rise of antisemitism on college campuses: “There's a direct line between some of the most vicious antisemitic speech happening on our campuses and threats of violence to synagogues and Jewish communities. I ultimately think we need to sort of think really hard about the way in which our young people are receiving information about this conflict. We need to hold accountable the social media sites, in particular TikTok, which is just full of virulent pro-Hamas and antisemitic material. The college campuses need to have a better means of accountability for this kind of hate speech. But we also have to recognize that these young people are getting their information from somewhere, often from a Chinese-controlled social media platform that has in its interest, trying to turn America against each other and one of the means they may be doing that is trying to promote a lot of pretty hateful and divisive material about the conflict in Gaza.” Last week, Murphy released a statement on the announcement of the Israel-Hamas hostage agreement. ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, released the following statement: “This agreement represents a huge diplomatic breakthrough and is a testament to President Biden’s leadership and strong relationships in the region. Since Hamas’ horrific terrorist attack on October 7, hundreds of families have lived through the unimaginable nightmare of not knowing where their loved ones are or whether they will ever be returned. This deal will reunite dozens of families and lay the groundwork to bring more hostages home. We must urgently work to ensure everyone single one is released. Meanwhile, innocent Palestinians are struggling to survive the growing humanitarian
...Read more catastrophe in Gaza. A four-day pause in the fighting will enable significantly increased amounts of desperately needed humanitarian aid to reach people in need. I am hopeful this agreement will serve as a foundation for a path forward to end this conflict and ensures the long term safety and security of both Israelis and Palestinians.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor in opposition to a Senate Republican effort that would abandon Ukraine, eliminate all humanitarian aid to Gaza, and protect billionaire tax cheats by cutting funding for the IRS. On Republicans’ plan to tie aid to Israel to a giveaway for ultra-rich tax cheats: “I don't think you can ignore the fact that a large swath of the Republican Party is using this crisis in Israel in order to deliver yet another gift to the very small slice of Americans who don't need any more gifts. There are 700 billionaires in this country who have more net worth than 50% of all Americans. The rules are already rigged in favor of the super wealthy. And so the idea
...Read more that we would facilitate a plan in the House of Representatives to use Israel aid as a means to continue to rig the rules in favor of those ultra-rich Americans is just incredibly distasteful. And it's a signal about where the Republican Party priorities are today.” Murphy pushed back on Republicans’ fatalistic view of the war in Ukraine and the United States’ ability to help: “America's greatness is connected to our willingness to stand up and lead in moments of crisis. And this is a unique moment of crisis without precedent, which is why it requires the United States to stand against Russia's aggression. Listen, for thousands of years, we know this because you read about it in your history books growing up, for thousands of years prior to the establishment of the post-World-War II order, this world was defined by state-on-state, civilization-on-civilization violence and conflict. People labored under the constant threat that their entire world would be ended by another one of these civilization-on-civilization conflicts.” “We live in a very different era today, where we frankly have to be more, not less worried, not permissive and fatalistic about the consequences of re-entering a world and a paradigm in which states enter into conflict against other states. Why? Because we now live in a world filled with weapons of mass destruction. Not just nuclear weapons, but other highly sophisticated weapons,” Murphy added. “And so now, this kind of conflict that Russia and Ukraine are engaged in, that's the kind of conflict that can wipe out millions in a day. That's why the United States of America has stood up for the post-World War II order. That's why we have fought and sometimes died to maintain it. And this is the most significant affront to that order. An order that has protected this country. An order that has protected our economy. An order that has saved millions of lives in our lifetime. Murphy concluded: “In a short term 'satisfy me now' culture, I understand that many of my Republican [colleagues] get phone calls from their constituents saying 'Ukraine hasn't won this war tomorrow, I’m not interested any longer', but this conflict matters and it matters that we stick with Ukraine. Because if we lose, if we lose, we're living in an entirely new world. The cap is off on state-on-state violence and pretty soon America will be in one of those conflicts with another nuclear nation. We won't be talking about thousands of Ukrainians dying. We will be talking about millions of Americans.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Thank you very much, Mr. President. I want to thank Senator Murray and Senator Reed for leading us in this time. I want to make two relatively brief points to that the discussion, and then I'll turn it over to others of my colleagues. “First, I understand that my Republican colleagues want to avoid the question of Republican priorities. The fact of the matter is an Israel only funding bill passed through the House of Representatives and attached to it was a massive giveaway for the richest Americans – millionaires and billionaires who don't pay their taxes. “And so, as we chart the path forward for a bill that only funds Israel we know that in the House of Representatives it has to be matched with a massive, massive giveaway for millionaires and billionaires. And I don't think you can ignore that fact that a large swath of the Republican Party is using this crisis in Israel in order to deliver yet another gift to the very small slice of Americans who don't need any more gifts. “There are 700 billionaires in this country who have more net worth than 50% of all Americans. The rules are already rigged in favor of the super wealthy. And so the idea that we would facilitate a plan in the House of Representatives to use Israel aid as a means to continue to rig the rules in favor of those ultra-rich Americans is just incredibly distasteful. And it's a signal about where the Republican Party priorities are today. “Second, I do want to talk about what Senator Vance and others talked about – about the lazy precedent-referencing, sloganeering that they accuse Democrats of engaging in. “So it is correct that what is happening today in Ukraine does not have a modern precedent. Because never before in our lifetime, in the post-World War II order, has a large nuclear nation like Russia invaded another large neighboring nation with the purpose of annexation. What Russia is trying to do is to fundamentally change the rules, fundamentally shift international norms that have been in place since World War II. At the foundation of it is that countries don't change their borders [through] force, through aggression. “It is important to understand that these are the rules that undergirded the last 70 years of U.S. growth and U.S. national security. So we don't believe that we should support Ukraine because we just believe that Vladimir Putin is Adolf Hitler. We don't believe we should support Ukraine to perpetuate some slogan about American greatness. No, we believe that we have an interest – because as the most powerful nation in the world, as the nation that has benefited most from the post-World War II order – to defend those rules because if we don't, no one else will. “And it just strikes me that my Republican colleagues who have this fatalistic view of what is going to happen in Ukraine just really view America as weak, as impotent, and as [powerless] in the face of this unprecedented aggression from Vladimir Putin. “America's greatness is connected to our willingness to stand up and lead in moments of crisis. And this is a unique moment of crisis without precedent, which is why it requires the United States to stand against Russia's aggression. Listen for thousands of years, we know this because you read about it in your history books growing up, for thousands of years prior to the establishment of the post-World-War II order, this world was defined by state-on-state, civilization-on-civilization violence and conflict. People labored under the constant threat that their entire world would be ended by another one of these civilization-on-civilization conflicts. “But this was back in the time when weapons were crude. They were swords. They were bows and arrows, and then, they were simple firearms. Millions died, but millions also survived. We live in a very different era today, where we frankly have to be more, not less worried, not permissive and fatalistic about the consequences of re-entering a world and a paradigm in which states enter into conflict against other states. “Why? Because we now live in a world filled with weapons of mass destruction. Not just nuclear weapons, but other highly sophisticated weapons. And so now, this kind of conflict that Russia and Ukraine are engaged in, that's the kind of conflict that can wipe out millions in a day. That's why the United States of America has stood up for the post-World War II order. That's why we have fought and sometimes died to maintain it. And this is the most significant affront to that order. An order that has protected this country. An order that has protected our economy. An order that has saved millions of lives in our lifetime. “It is hard. Ukraine's mission is difficult. In a short term 'satisfy me now' culture, I understand that many of my Republican [colleagues] get phone calls from their constituents saying 'Ukraine hasn't won this war tomorrow, I’m not interested any longer', but this conflict matters and it matters that we stick with Ukraine. Because if we lose, if we lose, we're living in an entirely new world. The cap is off on state-on-state violence and pretty soon America will be in one of those conflicts with another nuclear nation. We won't be talking about thousands of Ukrainians dying. We will be talking about millions of Americans. “So I appreciate my colleagues being here today, and I think this is as important as it gets. I think we really are deciding the future of this world and the rules that govern it. And I join my colleagues in objecting to this motion.” ### Read less Chris Murphy had barely taken his seat at the head of the table when he was hit with a little history. "That's Bobby Kennedy touring the Delta, and later he toured Appalachia," Tim Nolan, a nurse practitioner on the front lines of the opioid epidemic in North Carolina, said as the senator looked down at the photo. Those trips in 1967 and 1968, Nolan said, sparked a "conversion," awakening Kennedy to the crisis of poverty in America. "I hope your tour," he told Murphy, "is as rich."
It was a cool day in early August. Murphy-wearing striped socks, dark jeans, and a slate sport coat-seemed slightly uncomfortable with the comparison. He looked up to Kennedy. But he was not surveying shotgun shacks in Mississippi; he was sitting in an unassuming community center conference room
...Read more on the outskirts of Boone, North Carolina, a college town about 100 miles northwest of Charlotte and a short drive from the Tennessee border. "I don't think I could ever hold a candle to the work that he and others were doing," he told me afterward. But for an ambitious New England Democrat in Appalachia, perhaps it was difficult to avoid the parallel. What, exactly, was the junior senator from Connecticut—best known for the decade-long gun safety crusade he launched after the Sandy Hook shooting—doing at this roundtable 400 miles from Washington and 700 from his home state, asking questions about opioids, struggling factory towns, loneliness, and the ills of social media."There are just real practical impacts to people feeling lonely and disconnected," Murphy told the crowd of community leaders. "Political instability and polarization is driven by people feeling upset and angry when they can’t find positive connection and they go find it in darker, more dangerous places. But I think as I get older, and I get deeper into this job, I just have come to the conclusion that it’s not good enough for me just to kind of adjust the dials of public policy, and as a policymaker I have to step back and ask questions about how people are feeling."
If you know Murphy, it’s probably as Capitol Hill’s conscience amid this country’s never-ending plague of gun violence. The guy giving impassioned Senate floor speeches calling on his colleagues to offer more than "thoughts and prayers" to the victims of the latest mass shooting. The guy who, after the Uvalde, Texas, massacre last year, pulled off what might count as a political miracle in this era of profound polarization: the passage of a bipartisan gun safety bill, the most significant such legislation in three decades.
But Murphy, who was turning 50 that day in Boone, has lately become as passionate about the nation’s need for what he calls a "spiritual renaissance" as he is about his signature issue. He hasn’t abandoned that long-standing fight for a new one; he’s significantly expanded the scope of it. "You can’t spend 10 years thinking about violence in America," he had told me a month earlier, in his hideaway office, where he had hashed out much of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, "without trying to grapple with the underlying emotional state of a country in which people shoot first and think later."
The country appeared to him to be sickened somehow—in the throes of an amorphous ailment manifesting all across our culture and politics. And while the right was offering snake-oil cures, pushed by the most dangerous political huckster in recent American history, it seemed to Murphy that the left was treating the symptoms and ignoring the disease entirely. Worse yet, the malady was threatening to metastasize: Donald Trump was running to reclaim the White House on an explicitly authoritarian platform with help from the Republican allies whose politics of division had contributed to this national disorder. It had become Murphy’s mission, as he put it, to "diagnose and treat the metaphysical state of America."
It’s a big task, one not typically in the job description of a senator. It is also, by his own admission, politically fraught, and his efforts have already been met in some corners with resistance: In July, when he introduced the National Strategy for Social Connection Act—a bill that would, among other things, establish an "Office of Social Connection Policy" in the White House—the right cast Murphy as a big-government liberal working to mandate friendship through bureaucracy. There was also some suspicion from progressives, who bristled at the outreach to conservatives he considered necessary to his project.These days, he’s feeling inspired by Michael Sandel, Alexis de Tocqueville, and Richard Ben Cramer.He is convinced there is a growing "realignment" across the right and left around questions of "first principles, the good life," hints of which can be seen in the skepticism of Big Tech and neoliberalism that has been brewing on different sides of the political spectrum. He was taking something of a political trust fall—and had come to Boone not only in search of solutions, but to begin building a grassroots consensus around loneliness and disillusionment. "Some of what I’m doing is unfamiliar," he admitted. "What I’m trying to do is a little bit outside of the traditional sandbox that we tend to play in."The question hovering above all of this, like the fog that had been hanging low over the Blue Ridge Mountains all day: Is Murphy a visionary rising star spending hard-earned political capital on an issue at the root of so many others? Or is he squandering it on a hobbyhorse—tapping not into a new phenomenon, but a worry about the future that every generation seems to indulge at one point or another?
Acouple weeks earlier, I was sitting with Murphy at the Monocle, an old-school bar in the shadow of the Capitol. The senator had a Tito’s and soda with a splash of cranberry juice. Sinatra crooned from the speakers, and the conversation turned to God.
Murphy had just cowritten an op-ed with philosopher Ian Marcus Corbin, who has become a friend of his, calling for a "spiritual renaissance" in America, particularly on the left. I was curious as to whether he was religious. He isn’t, exactly. Murphy had been part of youth ministry as a high schooler. As an adult, he still isn’t quite sure what he believes. For the last six months, though, he has been attending church regularly again. He’s enjoyed getting back into the rituals—"I forgot how comforting they are," he told me. But more importantly, he believes that houses of worship could play a crucial role in strengthening community bonds and the common good. "All our other temples—social media, consumerism, a 'me first’ individualism—are just telling you to be you."
That includes what Murphy describes as a "culture of therapy," which he believes has had its benefits but is also encouraging Americans to "look only inwards to address the anxieties of life" rather than outward at "structural unhappiness" in the country. "There have been decisions by governments that have caused our social fabric to disintegrate," Murphy told me later, describing more systemic issues weighing on the nation’s psyche. "And I think people on the right and the left are really unhappy with that."
He had come to this conclusion about a year earlier, not long after the biggest legislative victory of his career. The movement he had arguably been the congressional face of since the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting—which occurred in the Connecticut district he then represented in Congress—had broken a three-decade logjam. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, and several other Democratic accomplishments in the first stretch of Joe Biden’s presidency, should have been a major cause for celebration. "And yet, people weren’t feeling any better," Murphy recalled. "The national mood seemed very stuck."
US Senator Chris Murphy. Murphy has no illusions about the challenges of his next undertaking. "I don’t know that I’m the right person to foster a conversation about the spiritual health of the country," he admits.The symptoms of that malaise seemed especially acute to him in the lives of kids, who he had seen "disappearing into their phones…being co-opted by this all-consuming consumer culture." They seem to "feel the weight of the world on their shoulders and have less sort of optimism and hope than my generation did," Murphy told me. "It’s not a coincidence that I’m thinking a lot more about the emotional health of the country as my kids get closer to adulthood," he added. "I’m worried about the world that they are walking into."
We live in a period of rapidly advancing technology—some of which is being decried as a threat to human existence by the very people pushing it forward—and looming climate disaster. We also live in a country in which democracy may be running out of runway. Polls today paint a picture of a nation gripped by anxiety, depression, and uncertainty. The surgeon general’s advisory on loneliness, issued in May of this year, noted that Americans are spending more time alone than they were two decades ago, have fewer close friends, and trust each other and institutions far less than they did half a century ago. And while Americans might not agree on much ideologically, they do all seem united in their pessimism with politics: In an August New York Times poll, nearly two thirds of respondents said that the country was headed in the "wrong direction." Just 23 percent said it was on the right track.
Much of the ennui was surely brought on by the pandemic, but things have been trending this way for a while: Back in 2000, Robert D. Putnam warned in Bowling Alone of a sharp decline in civic and community involvement, that the bonds that once held us together seemed to be breaking. It seems to Murphy that those ties—the ones he’d watched hold a tragedy-scarred Newtown together after Sandy Hook—are now in danger of being ripped apart completely. The problem runs deeper than infrastructure or climate change or even gun safety: Americans are "worn out," "overwhelmed," and their leadership feels "mechanical," he told me. "The project of trying to address this unspooling of America that’s happened is really enormous," Murphy said. "And I think that that’s caused a lot of leaders to just not try."hy grew up in Wethersfield, Connecticut—the same town where his parents met in high school. His father’s family, he said, went back generations and was well-off. But his mother lived in public housing in nearby New Britain and moved to town when she was in elementary school. "My mother always reminded me that her life was very different than my life," Murphy told me. "That was very formative for me—the understanding of just how lucky I was."
His good fortune, as he saw it, came with a civic obligation—a "responsibility to serve"—and politics seemed a natural way to fulfill it. "I think I was just kind of an organizer out of the womb," he said.
But he struggled upon arriving at Williams College in Massachusetts for undergrad: He was "overwhelmed from the start" academically, he told me, and lost his race for freshman representative to the college council. I "got skunked," he recalled. "I was definitely on my back feet, sort of wondering whether I was good enough to continue to pursue the things I wanted to pursue, which was a life in public service."
Then he read What It Takes, the late Richard Ben Cramer’s classic on the inner lives of 1988 presidential aspirants, which Murphy describes as "the most important book" he’s ever read: "That book just knocked me off my feet," he said. "I was once again hooked by this idea that there was a nobleness to public service." (Murphy now gifts the book to each of his Senate interns every year: "I think that I, today, probably contribute 50 percent of the proceeds to Richard Ben Cramer’s estate," Murphy joked. "I buy, like, 60 copies of What It Takes every year.)
Murphy was elected to the Connecticut House of Representatives at 25, the state Senate at 29, and the United States Congress at 33. But while Murphy was a talented politician, he was not particularly ideological or especially well-known when he mounted a run for the Senate seat Joe Lieberman was vacating in 2012. "He was really a backbencher in Congress," said Gary Rose, a professor of political science at Sacred Heart University who wrote a book on the 2012 Senate race, in which Murphy defeated former WWE CEO Linda McMahon. "He was not considered a major force."
Sandy Hook changed that. "My life took a hard about-face," Murphy wrote in his 2020 book, The Violence Inside Us. "I now had my calling…my mission in life." He would spend the next decade in the Senate fighting the formidable gun lobby and helping build a movement that is starting to prove equally formidable.
"He was an extraordinary quarterback," Senator Cory Booker, one of his closest friends in the Senate, told me. "He was just a Joe Montana–type tactician working the ball down the field and did something a lot of people can’t speak to as a senator, which is putting points on the board." Or maybe he was more like a hockey player, with a "real ability to see around corners and see ahead for where the puck is going, not where it is right now," as Senator Richard Blumenthal, his fellow Nutmegger, described him. Or perhaps more of a point guard? "He’s been amazing to watch," says Golden State Warriors coach Steve Kerr, an admirer of Murphy’s who told me his own gun safety activism—which included an impassioned pregame speech after Uvalde—has been inspired by the Connecticut senator. "I think the hope is that we are going to tip the scales as a country, where we can actually get a group of like-minded government officials to make some real change."
US Senator Chris MurphyMurphy believes there is a burgeoning "realignment" between people on either side of the political spectrum.Of course, Murphy remains committed to that change. He’s still in regular contact with grassroots leaders, as well as the Sandy Hook families he met in the immediate aftermath of that tragedy—some of whom he counts among his closest friends. "He is just as dedicated, just as smart, just as compassionate, just as genuine as the Chris Murphy you see in the United States Senate," said Mark Barden, whose seven-year-old son, Daniel, was killed at Sandy Hook. "He just seems like one of the most genuine politicians I’ve ever met," said Sari Kaufman, a Parkland survivor who was an intern in Murphy’s office at the time of the Uvalde shooting and describes the senator as a personal hero. "It’s like knowing that you have a teammate in the most important place you can have one."
But his political identity is evolving. The success of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act lent him a new degree of political capital, earned him credibility with some Republicans, and has made the senator a key surrogate for Biden’s reelection campaign. The president worked closely with Murphy on the legislation, appearing with him at a June summit the senator hosted in Hartford commemorating the one-year anniversary of its enactment. Murphy is a "national leader," Minnesota attorney general Keith Ellison, who served in Congress with Murphy, told me on the sidelines of the Safer Communities Summit in June. "This guy has it all."
Now, Murphy is trying to leverage his rising star to combat the Great Unraveling. He read cultural critiques from across the political spectrum, from Patrick Deneen to Michael Sandel. He returned to Alexis de Tocqueville, who he feels has been "particularly relevant to this question of the stitches that keep America together." And he reached out to philosophers, including Corbin, a research affiliate at the Human Flourishing Program at Harvard University and a senior fellow at the nonpartisan think tank Capita, which hosted the roundtable discussion in Boone. "Our understanding at the time was that it was going to be a policy call, that the senator was interested in finding ways that the federal government can mitigate some of these problems that we’re seeing," Corbin told me. "Then, on the call, I think the first words that Chris said were, 'I need to figure out how to talk about metaphysics on the Senate floor.’ "
He gave it a more official shot in June, when he took to the floor—where he’d delivered some of his most impassioned speeches—to talk about loneliness. "I really believe Congress can get something done," he told his colleagues. "Right now, I’d argue we just need a starting point."
Acouple weeks later, he told me what that starting point could be: legislation calling for a sweeping national strategy to address the crisis. He had already hinted at it, both in his floor speech and in a series of essays he had been publishing over the past several months, which he said had led to "more interesting and louder feedback" than anything else he had published as a senator. "It struck a nerve," he told me. He already has some allies within his party—Minnesota senator Tina Smith, who has been outspoken about her own experience with depression and has put forth a bill of her own to address loneliness among seniors, citing the COVID-19 pandemic as a factor, would cosponsor the bill—but admitted that he would need to do more to build support both on the Hill and outside of Washington. That would include, he said, some outreach to Republicans whose views on issues like economic nationalism, technology, and social media seemed to align with his cause.
US Senator Chris MurphyThe senator doesn’t have any White House ambitions for the moment. But still, he said, "It’s silly to rule anything out." As we talked, a man came over to our table—he and his husband were visiting the Capitol from Connecticut, he said, and he just wanted to tell his senator that he was "grateful" for the work he had done. "God bless you," the man told him. The man didn’t say exactly what work he was talking about, but I wondered if, in his effort to find common cause with right-wing senators like J.D. Vance on certain issues, Murphy risked alienating constituents like this, who had come to know him as a key ally in the Senate on gun control and other progressive causes. "He’s asking the right questions and reaching out in really constructive ways to folks all over the political spectrum," Oren Cass, a former adviser to Mitt Romney and a leading conservative critic of neoliberalism, told me. "I’m just very curious to know what his compatriots in the Democratic Party or left of center are going to do with that."
Murphy himself has his doubts. "I don’t know that I’m the right person to foster a conversation about the spiritual health of the country," he told me in one conversation. "This might be beyond my capacities."
But it seems that he has at the very least gotten at something important: If it felt, in the Trump years, as though the country was imploding, it seems that Americans are now living in the wreckage. Could Murphy be to that national weariness something like what Bobby Kennedy was to poverty? It’s hard to say. The kind of earnestness and ambition of his effort had been so absent from our politics as to seem quaint. But he had already pulled off one remarkable political feat on gun reform. Maybe he could do it again? "It’s said about athletes—you can see an athlete when they are in the zone," said Booker. "And Chris Murphy is living that kind of authentic life right now, where he is finding his zone."
For the most part, his bill to address social isolation—which, as Jillian Racoosin, executive director of the Coalition to End Social Isolation and Loneliness, said was unprecedented in the United States in its scope—was well-received save for some mockery from the online right. "Senator Murphy’s proposal is an important and needed policy step forward," Laurie Santos, a professor of psychology at Yale University and host of the popular Happiness Lab podcast, told me. "We need more leaders in government like Senator Murphy, who recognize just how common and consequential loneliness is and recognize that there is a role for government in helping support communities and building stronger connections," echoed Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, whose May advisory on loneliness helped form the framework for Murphy’s legislation. But some of Murphy’s messaging around the issue seemed to draw strong negative reactions online, which he told me he was paying more attention to this time around.
In July, for instance, he wondered on Twitter—which he himself operates with little to no staff input, to their occasional chagrin—if it would "be a good idea to have [social conservatives] a part of a Democratic/left coalition and accept a bit more intra-movement friction on culture issues as a consequence." Pushback quickly followed. "Whose rights is it acceptable to bargain away?" the prominent Twitter journalist Aaron Rupar responded. "Women? LGBTs? Minorities?"
"I knew what I was doing," Murphy told me of the post in question, which he had published while at the beach with his family: He was testing the waters, trying to get a sense of what direction the currents were headed.
He stirred up a similar backlash ahead of his trip to North Carolina: Liberals online suggested he had lost the plot, while conservatives noted that Boone—which he described as the "heart of Southern Appalachia"—was more of a hippie college town than the red, rural community "wrecked by disappearing quality jobs, increasing drug addiction, and epidemic levels of loneliness" he cast it as. In fact, the organizers had initially intended to host the roundtable in conservative Wilkesboro, more politically representative of the region, but became concerned that participants would be unwilling to meet with a Democratic senator from Connecticut there.
When Murphy arrived at the roundtable, he was seated with a range of local leaders from the region, as well as members of Murphy’s staff, Corbin, and Richard Reeves, a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institute and president of the American Institute for Boys and Men, whose 2022 book Murphy read and publicly praised in July. At one end was a small stage; at the other, a kitchen with demo mirrors for cooking classes. Through slats of the cloth blinds, a heavy rain was falling. The conversation was heavy too: They talked about the opioid crisis in Appalachia; about the furniture industry that the region once relied on, and the economic precarity it had left in its wake. They talked about technology that was supposedly meant to connect us—phones a local pastor dubbed "isolating devices"—but instead seemed to drive everyone further apart. They talked about what it was like to be a queer kid and an immigrant—especially an undocumented immigrant—in Appalachia. They talked about a country that was deeply "broken" but whose leaders appeared willing to treat only the surface-level symptoms of the disorder. "If dudes ran around breaking legs, we wouldn’t just keep [putting them in casts]," said LB Prevette, a queer advocate in Appalachia and owner of a Wilkesboro cocktail bar. We would try, Prevette said, to figure out what the deal was with all the leg breaking.
"What I’m trying to do is a little bit outside of the traditional sandbox that we tend to play in," Murphy admits.The conversation tapped right into that sense of "powerlessness," Murphy said, that a lot of Americans are feeling. But what, I wondered, was he going to do with all this? How could he translate such varied concerns into policy? That’s hard to say, a senior Murphy staffer told me after the Boone roundtable. Even though Murphy and his team had been working on this project for the better part of a year now, they were still trying to get a feel for the contours of the issue—which is challenging, they said, but also exciting. "Chris is a different kind of lawmaker than anyone I’ve worked with," the staffer told me. "It’s a thrill."
The roundtable wrapped, and we headed for dinner. It was locals night at Hellbender Bed & Beverage—$12 for a discounted burger and a beer—in Blowing Rock, a nearby tourist town popular with Floridians fleeing all the snowbirds. We weren’t locals, but Capita cofounder Joe Waters was, and he served as a capable tour guide as he drove us over, meeting Murphy’s every question—and he had a lot—with an interesting answer. He gave us some history about the Blue Ridge Parkway, which was slick with rain and still veiled by a low-hanging fog. He gave us a primer on the tensions between Appalachian State University and the longtime locals, who said they were increasingly being priced out of the area. He told us about the Wild West show at the Tweetsie Railroad, a bit of frontier kitsch we rode past. "It’s a part of our history that people have forgotten," Murphy marveled. "All these small, little permanent amusement parks where people went on, like, Thursday nights."
Half of Waters’s SUV was taken up by a car seat, and the floor was coated in dog hair. Murphy had two cats, but he and his wife, Cathy, had narrowly avoided getting a dog: "We have enough without a dog," he said, "especially when we live in two places."
During Murphy’s time in Congress, the family had mostly resided in Connecticut, with Murphy traveling back and forth to DC for work. That had made him, as he recalled in his book, something of an "absentee husband and father." Cathy, traveling with Murphy that day, remembers their oldest son, now 15, circling days of the calendar when his father would actually be home. Moving to Washington had allowed them to be a normal family in most respects, Cathy told me—Murphy coached Little League and participated in the PTA—but they seemed to me not entirely comfortable in their adopted hometown: They had both grown up in Connecticut. Their roots were there. But the demands of DC always seem to be beckoning.
Murphy freely admits to being a picky eater and "addicted" to Diet Mountain Dew, which he surreptitiously drinks from a coffee cup. (The senator’s palate, as one staffer put it, is like that of a "14-year-old.") Along with his dinner, a chicken sandwich and vodka soda, Murphy received for his birthday a can of Hard Mountain Dew, which he disliked. Later, on the way to get ice cream, Corbin asked Cathy how she would feel about the prospect of being married to a presidential candidate. "I’ll just stay married to Chris," she replied as her husband ordered himself a double scoop.
Bobby Kennedy—who was said to have been left "ashen faced" with horror at what he saw during his tour of the Delta and Appalachia—announced his 1968 presidential campaign not long after. But Murphy isn’t so sure. His kids are still young. And besides, he has finally, after a decade, started to figure out how to navigate the Senate. "It’s silly to rule anything out in the future," Murphy told me later. "I spent a big portion of my life looking for and running for the next thing," he added. "As hard as it is to believe, given how many senators end up running for something else, I’m really happy in this job." But that doesn’t mean he isn't looking at the future. In a gig that is "constantly inflicted by short-termism," he told me, he’s planning "for the next 10 to 15 years."Chris Murphy had barely taken his seat at the head of the table when he was hit with a little history. "That’s Bobby Kennedy touring the Delta, and later he toured Appalachia," Tim Nolan, a nurse practitioner on the front lines of the opioid epidemic in North Carolina, said as the senator looked down at the photo. Those trips in 1967 and 1968, Nolan said, sparked a "conversion," awakening Kennedy to the crisis of poverty in America. "I hope your tour," he told Murphy, "is as rich."It was a cool day in early August. Murphy—wearing striped socks, dark jeans, and a slate sport coat—seemed slightly uncomfortable with the comparison. He looked up to Kennedy. But he was not surveying shotgun shacks in Mississippi; he was sitting in an unassuming community center conference room on the outskirts of Boone, North Carolina, a college town about 100 miles northwest of Charlotte and a short drive from the Tennessee border. "I don’t think I could ever hold a candle to the work that he and others were doing," he told me afterward. But for an ambitious New England Democrat in Appalachia, perhaps it was difficult to avoid the parallel. What, exactly, was the junior senator from Connecticut—best known for the decade-long gun safety crusade he launched after the Sandy Hook shooting—doing at this roundtable 400 miles from Washington and 700 from his home state, asking questions about opioids, struggling factory towns, loneliness, and the ills of social media? Read less Sen. Chris Murphy looks at us and doesn’t like what he sees. We don’t get out enough and it’s no wonder considering the amount of time we spend on our phones. We haven’t gotten back to our pre-pandemic social routines and it shows: While 1 in 2 Americans reported being lonely prior to 2020, Covid turbocharged the problem. The Connecticut Democrat calls loneliness “one of the most important political issues of our time” and he’s at the head of an unspoken alliance of policymakers who see it as a key post-pandemic public health issue. The surgeon general, a Republican House member from small-town Nebraska, and the GOP governor of Utah are among those on a mission to help us reconnect. They admit there’s no quick fix, so they are batting around ideas, from funding community groups
...Read more to regulating social media, as they grapple with how government can help us break out of our malaise. “I care about it,” Murphy said. “And I’m willing to spend the time to try to understand it.” This year, Murphy’s written op-eds on isolation and technology. He’s held roundtables. In July, he introduced legislation with fellow Democrat Tina Smith of Minnesota laying out a government strategy to advance social connection, proposing a White House office, an advisory council, and $5 million in research funding. Murphy’s taking cues from Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, who’s also made combating loneliness his cause coming out of the pandemic, holding friendship-building rallies on college campuses and encouraging Americans to reconnect on his “House Calls” podcast. Recent episodes have explored questions like “Why Are Boys and Men Struggling for Connection?” with American Institute for Boys and Men President Richard Reeves, and subjects such as “Walking a Spiritual Path in a Lonely World” with Rainn Wilson, the actor who played the socially awkward Dwight Schrute on “The Office.” In Utah, Republican Gov. Spencer Cox used public records to make a list of strangers with one common characteristic, like couples married for more than 50 years, or people who held lifetime fishing licenses. Then he invited them to a dinner party at the governor’s mansion as part of a campaign to encourage kindness. Back in Washington, Rep. Mike Flood, a small-town Nebraskan elected in a 2022 special election after hosting a television show called “Quarantine Tonight,” has proposed a resolution endorsing Murthy’s mission and he plans to introduce legislation soon tasking the Department of Health and Human Services with gathering more data on Americans’ social isolation. “It’s obvious to me that social connection equals health,” he said. Murphy explained his philosophy during a two-mile stroll through the business district and decaying south end of his hometown, the state capital, Hartford. He walked along the overgrown sidewalk dotted with Red Stripe beer bottles and talked with anyone on his route about their day-to-day problems, such as being unable to afford housing and needing better jobs. Unshaven and outfitted in athletic gear for his annual walk across his state, Murphy was emphatic that despite being an imperfect messenger, he felt compelled to lead. “What the government is supposed to do is create the rules of the economy and society, which makes it easier for us all to live happier, healthier, fuller lives,” he said. While Murphy worries about America’s unmooring, he maintains that it’s not personal. Yes, he’s worried about his pre-teen and teenage sons and their friends, who are grappling with how to have healthy relationships with technology. He suspects there’s a connection, if only a weak one, between loneliness and gun violence, which he cares about deeply after responding to the school shooting at Sandy Hook a decade ago. And he’s confused. Even with a growing economy and record low unemployment, his constituents say they feel shaky about their lives and the country despite legislation Democrats passed last year aimed at helping them. Lawmakers need to back up and figure out what’s going on, he said. A hint came when he published an op-ed on loneliness on the conservative news site The Bulwark last year and got more positive feedback in Connecticut than anything he’d ever written on foreign policy, guns or health care. It made him question his approach as a lawmaker. “It was a language they understood. Their kids are lonely. They’re feeling lonely,” he told a forum on building connected communities at Harvard in October. As Murphy sees it, Americans feel exhausted and overwhelmed. They’re working longer and can’t disconnect from their jobs. They have fewer friends and it’s harder to carve out time for those they do have. They’re exhausted by how fast technology is evolving and the unforeseen mental health impacts of social media, leaving them — and their kids — vulnerable. He sees an opportunity for bipartisan work in that shared reality. Murphy’s first attempt at loneliness policy, the “National Strategy for Social Connection Act,” was born out of those realizations. The bill calls for creating an office of social connection, with a director who would advise the president and create a national strategy combining public health, technology and social infrastructure to foster social connection. An advisory council with members from the departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Veterans Affairs, Education, Commerce and other agencies would help assess and implement the plan. So far, it’s just an idea. A step. Murphy is the first to say he doesn’t have all the answers. “I will admit that I don’t know how much of the decline in friendship and increase in loneliness is reversible. But I don’t think the answer is to not try.” Loneliness is associated with a raft of physical and mental health problems, some life-threatening. A growing body of evidence links loneliness and isolation to a greater risk of cardiovascular disease, dementia, stroke, depression and anxiety. While suicide is complex, with no single cause, more than 100 years of research suggest a strong link between suicide and lack of social connection. In a systematic review of 40 studies on older adults an increase in loneliness was one of the primary motivations behind self-harm. Those forces cost the U.S. $6.7 billion in excess Medicare spending and $154 billion in stress-related absenteeism attributed to loneliness each year, according to research Murthy has cited. His recent surgeon general’s advisory report warned that loneliness and isolation pose a profound threat to the nation’s health and well-being. Such advisories aren’t issued frivolously or frequently. A few have influenced the course of public health, like Surgeon General Luther Terry’s 1964 report on cigarettes, which is credited with changing Americans’ perceptions of smoking. “Given the profound consequences of loneliness and isolation, we have an opportunity, and an obligation, to make the same investments in addressing social connection that we have made in addressing tobacco use, obesity, and the addiction crisis,” Murthy wrote in the report. He’s a very different messenger from Murphy, more soft-spoken and introspective — Murthy describes a good Saturday morning as one that begins with yoga and meditation followed by work besides his slumbering cat. At the moment, he’s on a social connection tour for college students, where he’s asking them to join what he calls the 5-for-5 connection challenge: five actions to forge connection — like expressing gratitude, offering support or asking for help — for five days. During a phone conversation in August he described loneliness as a “very personal” issue for him, something he’s struggled with many times, both during childhood, when he felt intensely ashamed of being lonely, and as an adult during his first tenure as surgeon general when Barack Obama was president. He has a plan and tools for helping him through lonely moments. He’s built a few close friendships over the years with people he can confide in, and on bad days, he’ll reach out with a phone call or a text: “Hey, I’m feeling a bit down today. Would love to connect or talk.” “They respond because we’ve talked about this before,” he said. “We’ve built an understanding that we all actually from time to time struggle with loneliness and we can be there for each other.” Murthy has big-picture plans for addressing loneliness, outlined in the advisory report, including a six-pillar plan for building social connection. Public policy is the second pillar. Policymakers should recognize that every policy is infused with social connection choices, the report said, from transportation to zoning to nutrition to labor. The reverse is also true. “Government has a responsibility to use its authority to monitor and mitigate the public health harm caused by policies, products, and services that drive social disconnection,” the report said. But while Murthy can proselytize and suggest, Murphy can propose and help make law. “He and I can make a pretty good team on this,” Murphy said of Murthy, explaining that there’s also a limit to what the surgeon general can do. “He can’t go out and build a political coalition. He can’t do hand-to-hand combat inside the Congress.” There, Murphy sees a need for more social media regulation, economic policy to provide more free time and direct support for the types of social organizations people used to belong to in droves. While he expects difficulty in directing money to barber shops or bowling alleys, he sees growing consensus around regulating social media. On that, Murphy has proposed a bipartisan bill with Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Katie Britt (R-Ala.) to regulate teenagers’ access to Facebook, TikTok and other sites, and ban kids younger than 13 from the platforms. “There’s no question that it’s not too late to properly regulate social media,” Murphy said. “We haven’t tried.” On the other side of the Capitol, Rep. Flood also sees a role for Congress. The success of his nightly variety show during the pandemic brought home for him people’s need to connect. He got more than 4,000 handwritten letters in response to the show, he said, a good number of them from widows. They wrote to tell him how sad and isolated they were. They missed their husbands. They weren’t talking with anyone. Some waited all day for the mail carrier to come. It recalled for Flood his dad’s isolation after his mother passed away. But “Quarantine Tonight” brought his audience joy. They felt like part of a community, they wrote, and that they still mattered. After the surgeon general’s advisory, Flood proposed a resolution that would recognize loneliness’ role in public health. “I dipped my toe in the water,” he said. Soon, he plans to dip further, by introducing companion legislation with another Nebraska Republican, Sen. Pete Ricketts, who serves on the Special Committee on Aging. Flood’s bill is narrower than Murphy’s, focusing on collecting data before investing in policy. His focus, on isolated older Americans, is narrower too. The bill calls on Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra to convene a working group to develop unified definitions for loneliness and isolation and how to measure them. “I’m intentionally not at the solution phase,” Flood said. “This is the necessary first step, so that when we do get the data, we can act upon it.” By any measure, Murphy has led a charmed life. But when he started at the elite Williams College, he felt mediocre, he said. So did jumping into politics, even though Murphy won his first seat in the Connecticut statehouse when he was just 25 and joined the U.S. Senate at 39 after winning a 2012 election to replace Joe Lieberman. “My experience over the past 10 years has more been one of managing a crippling fear of failure,” he said, mentioning his work combating gun violence. “I’ve often felt very frightened that I’m not going to be able to deliver.” To help, he’s making an effort to broaden his social circle. “We’ve become so obsessed with our own success and individual achievement and wealth. We’ve lost a sense that we should feel better the healthier our community is doing,” he said. In Hartford, Murphy stopped across the street from a red-brick building topped with a cross. “It’s convenient that we’re walking by my new church,” he said. Over the past two years, Murphy’s joined not one, but two churches, one in Hartford and one in Washington, where his wife and kids live. He said he wants to meet people he wouldn’t normally connect with through work or his personal life. “Churches are places that I think do a good job of speaking that language,” he said. “That’s another way to feel less lonely.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) on Tuesday reintroduced the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups (HALOS) Act, legislation that would ensure that individuals who want to invest in startups do not face burdensome regulations, and allow those startups to get the investments they need to grow their business and create jobs. In order for startups to secure capital and grow their businesses, entrepreneurs commonly attend “demo days”, or conferences that allow startups to showcase their business model in front of valuable startup investors, such as “angel investors.” The HALOS Act would codify provisions finalized in SEC rules to ensure that startups can continue to present at demo days without facing onerous regulations, and
...Read more instead preserve the same investor vetting process that angel investors have been using at demo days for years. This bipartisan legislation will enable startups to continue to get the investments they need to grow and create new jobs. “Startups play an important role in Connecticut’s economy, creating hundreds of new jobs each year and securing our state’s future as a national center for innovation. Getting a new business off the ground is tough work and requires capital – that’s where angel investors come in. This bipartisan legislation will make it easier for local entrepreneurs to get the support they need to grow and thrive,” said Murphy. “Arizona is home to the best growing and innovative startups. Our bill makes it easier for entrepreneurs and small business owners to access investments so they can open their doors, grow our economy, and create strong careers for Arizonans,” said Sinema. “Small business investors play a crucial role in allowing start-ups to grow and create more jobs, but too often face unnecessary regulatory requirements that deter investment,” said Tillis. “This bipartisan legislation will remove burdensome regulations so we can invest in our small business and continue to grow our economy.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday released the following statement on the Supreme Court’s adoption of a binding code of conduct: “Trust in the Supreme Court is at an all-time low because justices on this increasingly radical Court have seized every opportunity to roll back racial equality, reproductive rights, LGTBQ rights, and more while hiding their conflicts of interest and accepting luxury vacations and trips on private jets. This new code shows the Chief Justice is beginning to understand the seriousness of having a Supreme Court so lacking in credibility and is a good first step toward restoring public confidence. I have introduced legislation every Congress since 2011 to increase transparency and enforce accountability for the Court, and now is the time to
...Read more pass the Supreme Court Ethics Act to create an enforcement mechanism for this new code of ethics.” Murphy has introduced legislation to apply a code of conduct to the Supreme Court every Congress since 2011. Most recently, he introduced the Supreme Court Ethics Act, requiring the Judicial Conference of the United States to create a code of ethical conduct for the Supreme Court of the United States. It would also require the appointment of an Ethics Investigations Counsel and require justices to publicly disclose recusal decisions. ### Read less WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, Peter Welch (D-Vt.) Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) sent a letter to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Thomas Vilsack and U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator (USAID) Samantha Power to request the immediate release of crucial food aid administered by the agencies, including from the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust, for Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Programs such as the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust were created to respond to food relief needs
...Read more internationally in times of crisis. Over half of Gaza’s population was food-insecure before October 7. The conflict following Hamas’ brutal attack on Israel has displaced one and a half million Gazans and Israel’s limitation of aid trucks has put civilian Palestinians at risk of starvation. “Gaza is home to approximately two million Palestinian civilians, including more than one million children. Since Hamas’s brutal October 7th attacks on Israel, and the ensuing war in Gaza, more than one and a half million Gazans have been displaced. In addition, Israel’s near-total siege of Gaza and the ongoing bombing campaign has turned a humanitarian crisis into a full-blown catastrophe with acute shortages of water, food, medicine, and fuel,” wrote the Senators. “We need to facilitate and provide additional emergency assistance to Gaza to prevent a deepening of the humanitarian disaster and help save countless lives. “Though the United States has provided financial assistance for humanitarian relief in Gaza and the West Bank, additional aid is necessary to address the intensifying food emergency faced by Palestinians in Gaza. We should do all we can to alleviate that burden,” the Senators wrote. “We strongly urge you to utilize the [Bill Emerson Humanitarian] Trust and other available resources to save the lives of Palestinian citizens during this unprecedented time.” According to the United Nations’ World Food Programme (WFP), stocks of some essential food items in Gaza, including rice, vegetable oil, and pulses, are nearing depletion. Even prior to October 7th, 63% of Gazan residents were food insecure, and 80% of Gaza’s population relied on humanitarian assistance. The WFP, which is already facing funding shortages, recently warned that an additional $74 million is needed in the next three months to provide necessary food assistance for Gaza. The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to release resources from the Trust, at the request of the USAID Administrator. Read the full text of the letter here and below: Dear Secretary Vilsack and Administrator Power, We are writing to request the immediate release of resources from the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust, along with other resources available to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), to provide food aid to Palestinians in Gaza. We believe the current situation in Gaza necessitates the utilization of the Trust, which was established to provide emergency assistance for populations facing acute hunger needs, among other resources created to address acute hunger needs. Gaza is home to approximately two million Palestinian civilians, including more than one million children. Since Hamas’s brutal October 7th attacks on Israel, and the ensuing war in Gaza, more than one and a half million Gazans have been displaced. In addition, Israel’s near total siege of Gaza and the ongoing bombing campaign has turned a humanitarian crisis into a full-blown catastrophe with acute shortages of water, food, medicine, and fuel. According to the United Nations’ World Food Programme (WFP), stocks of some essential food items in Gaza, including rice, vegetable oil, and pulses, are nearing depletion. Even prior to October 7th, sixty-three percent of Gazan residents were food insecure, and eighty percent of Gaza’s population relied on humanitarian assistance. We need to facilitate and provide additional emergency assistance to Gaza to prevent a deepening of the humanitarian disaster and help save countless lives. The Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust was created to respond to aberrant food security needs in times of unparalleled food crisis abroad. The WFP, which is already facing funding shortages, recently warned that an additional $74 million is needed in the next three months to provide necessary food assistance for Gaza. Though the United States has provided financial assistance for humanitarian relief in Gaza and the West Bank, additional aid is necessary to address the intensifying food emergency faced by Palestinians in Gaza. We should do all we can to alleviate that burden. The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to release resources from the Trust, at the request of the USAID Administrator. We strongly urge you to utilize the Trust and other available resources to save the lives of Palestinian citizens during this unprecedented time. We also ask that your agencies provide a staff-level briefing by Wednesday, November 22nd to explain the steps you have taken, and plan to take, to provide food and other humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism, joined 25 colleagues in sending a letter to Democratic and Republican Senate and Appropriations leadership urging the inclusion of the full $10 billion in humanitarian assistance requested by President Biden in the national security supplemental. “Beyond the moral significance of continuing our country’s tradition as the world’s leader in delivering life-saving humanitarian aid, this assistance promotes global stability and security by helping manage and provide for displaced populations, preventing recruitment to extremism, and mitigating economic pressure on partner governments,” wrote the Senators.
...Read more The letter highlights the ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East and the devastating impacts these global crises have on millions of innocent civilians caught in the middle. The Senators urge U.S. leadership in ensuring aid reaches sick, wounded, and displaced civilians. “Without these funds, global efforts led by the United States to address ongoing and expanded crises in Sudan, Nagorno-Karabakh, Burma, Syria, and other humanitarian responses will suffer reductions in support. This would directly threaten U.S. national security and the security of our partners,” the letter continues. The letter was signed by Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii),Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). Full text of the letter can be found here and follows below: Dear Majority Leader Schumer, Minority Leader McConnell, Chair Murray, and Vice Chair Collins: We urge you to ensure that the final package for the national security supplemental includes the full $10 billion in humanitarian assistance requested by the President, including for refugee and emergency food aid. This funding would roughly match U.S. emergency spending on humanitarian assistance appropriated since the beginning of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and would come at a time when global needs are only rising. Beyond the moral significance of continuing our country’s tradition as the world’s leader in delivering life-saving humanitarian aid, this assistance promotes global stability and security by helping manage and provide for displaced populations, preventing recruitment to extremism, and mitigating economic pressure on partner governments. Without these funds, global efforts led by the United States to address ongoing and expanded crises in Sudan, Nagorno-Karabakh, Burma, Syria, and other humanitarian responses will suffer reductions in support. This would directly threaten U.S. national security and the security of our partners. If these funds are not included, U.S. assistance for displaced Ukrainians could be reduced by as much as 75 percent. As you know, Ukrainians have valiantly fought against Vladimir Putin’s unjust and unprovoked invasion of their country. To sustain their heroic struggle, Ukrainians not only need weapons and ammunition, but also basic humanitarian support for the families and communities they are fighting to defend. An estimated 16 million people in Ukraine and more than 6.3 million Ukrainian refugees in the region rely on humanitarian assistance.[1] While other donors have provided the majority of total humanitarian and economic assistance that has been delivered to Ukraine (roughly double U.S. support), U.S. leadership has been critical in this effort. We must continue to lead the way in ensuring aid reaches sick, wounded, and displaced Ukrainians suffering as a result of Putin’s brutality. As supporters of a strong U.S.-Israel relationship, we believe Israel has the right and obligation to defend itself against Hamas – a terrorist organization whose horrific attacks on October 7 and long history of violence against Israelis and Palestinians make clear its total disregard for innocent human life. We also know from our country’s own experiences that protecting civilians and ensuring access to desperately needed food, water, medical care, and shelter for innocent civilians caught in the middle of conflict is critical for strategic success. Preventing Hamas from ever again threatening Israeli lives does not depend solely on Israel’s ability to degrade Hamas militarily. It also requires giving Palestinians hope for a better future, starting with making sure that humanitarian aid continuously reaches vulnerable civilians in Gaza. This is why the United States and our implementing partners, working closely with the Israeli government, undertake extensive oversight procedures so that U.S. assistance flows only to its intended recipients. The ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East have impacts beyond their borders. The proliferation of global crises is putting pressure on millions of innocent civilians who are bearing the brunt of the fighting, and key U.S. partners, including in Europe and the Middle East, continue to grapple with how to manage the outbreak of violence in their regions. These realities underscore the importance of the United States maintaining its indispensable leadership role in support of assistance that effectively responds to dire humanitarian needs and prevents further instability. We thank you for your consideration of this important request. Sincerely, ### [1] OMB, President’s request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 emergency supplemental funding, (October 20, 2023), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Letter-regarding-critical-national-security-funding-needs-for-FY-2024.pdf Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, joined U.S. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Chair of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, and 105 of their colleagues in a bicameral letter to President Joe Biden calling on his Administration to designate the Palestinian territories for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and/or authorize Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) for Palestinians present in the United States. TPS and DED offer temporary relief from removal and work authorization for eligible foreign nationals already in the United States who are unable to return safely to their home country. “In light of ongoing armed conflict,
...Read more Palestinians already in the United States should not be forced to return to the Palestinian territories, consistent with President Biden’s stated commitment to protecting Palestinian civilians,” the lawmakers wrote. Following the horrific October 7 terrorist attack by Hamas and Israel’s ensuing military response, conditions in the Palestinian territories have greatly deteriorated. According to reports from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), as of November 6, at least 10,000 Palestinians have been killed. This includes more than 4,100 children, which, according to Save the Children, is more than the number of children killed in all of the world’s armed conflicts on an annual basis since 2019. The United Nations reports that almost 1.5 million of Gaza’s population of 2.2 million have been displaced. Thousands are unable to access clean water and nutrition; access to medical care has become increasingly difficult, with some health facilities in Gaza hit by bombardment and many others crippled by a lack of fuel for electricity. And in the West Bank, unrest and settler violence have resulted in the deaths of 149 Palestinians and the forcible displacement of hundreds more. “Given these conditions, it is no surprise that the U.S. Department of State extended a Level 4 Travel Advisory for Gaza due to ‘terrorism, civil unrest and armed conflict’ and a Level 3 Travel Advisory for the West Bank earlier this month for terrorism and civil unrest,” the lawmakers wrote. “Providing TPS and/or authorizing DED would protect Palestinians in the United States from being forced to return to these clearly dangerous conditions.” The lawmakers’ letter continues, “U.S. Department of State statistics indicate that 7,241 nonimmigrant visas were issued to individuals holding Palestinian Authority (PA) travel documents in 2022, the most recent year for which such data is available. While the number of non-immigrant visas issued cannot provide an exact approximation of the number of Palestinians that would be eligible for TPS or DED, it makes clear that the number of beneficiaries would be small, while the benefit could be lifesaving. TPS or DED would enable Palestinians currently present in the U.S., including students, tourists, and workers, to be protected from a dangerous return to their homeland while affording them the ability to remain safely in the U.S. and to work legally to support themselves and their families.” The lawmakers’ letter concludes, “As such, we urge your Administration to designate the Palestinian territories for TPS and/or to authorize DED for Palestinians in the United States without delay.” Along with Murphy and Durbin, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.). The letter is endorsed by the following organizations: Arab American Institute, African Communities Together, American Civil Liberties Union, American Friends Service Committee, American Immigration Council, American Immigration Lawyers Association, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, American Muslim Empowerment Network, Americans for Peace Now, America's Voice, Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, Church World Service, Climate Refugees, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, Communities United for Status & Protection, Every Campus A Refuge, Friends United Meeting, Immigration Hub, Indivisible, International Refugee Assistance Project, J Street, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, MPower Change Action Fund, National Network for Arab American Communities, Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, OneAmerica, People's Action, Refugees International, TPS-DED Administrative Advocacy Coalition, T’ruah, and UndocuBlack Network. Full text of the letter is available here and below: Dear President Biden: We urge your Administration to designate the Palestinian territories for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and/or authorize Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) for Palestinians present in the United States. As you know, TPS and DED offer temporary relief from removal and work authorization for eligible foreign nationals who are unable to return safely to their home countries or part of a country. In light of ongoing armed conflict, Palestinians already in the United States should not be forced to return to the Palestinian territories, consistent with President Biden’s stated commitment to protecting Palestinian civilians. Following the horrific October 7 terrorist attack by Hamas and Israel’s ensuing military response, conditions in the Palestinian territories have greatly deteriorated. According to reports from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), as of November 6, at least 10,000 Palestinians have been killed. This includes more than 4,100 children, which, according to Save the Children, is more than the number of children killed in all of the world’s armed conflicts on an annual basis since 2019. The United Nations reports that almost 1.5 million of Gaza’s population of 2.2 million have been displaced of which nearly 725,000 are sheltering in 149 UNRWA [United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East] installations” across the Gaza Strip. Further, OCHA reports at least 42 percent of all housing units in the Gaza strip as damaged or destroyed since October 7. Thousands are unable to access clean water and nutrition; access to medical care has become increasingly difficult, with some health facilities in Gaza hit by bombardment and many others crippled by a lack of fuel for electricity. And in the West Bank, unrest and settler violence have resulted in the deaths of 149 Palestinians and the forcible displacement of hundreds more. Such forcible displacement from the West Bank is of serious concern, and we also share the Administration’s opposition to the “displacement of Palestinians from Gaza.” At the same time, we believe that Palestinians currently in the United States who cannot safely return home at this time should have the option of seeking temporary protection. Given these conditions, it is no surprise that the U.S. Department of State extended a Level 4 Travel Advisory for Gaza due to “terrorism, civil unrest and armed conflict” and a Level 3 Travel Advisory for the West Bank earlier this month for terrorism and civil unrest. Providing TPS and/or authorizing DED would protect Palestinians in the United States from being forced to return to these clearly dangerous conditions. There is precedent for analogous designations. In 1998, there was a designation of only the Province of Kosovo in light of ongoing armed conflict. Montserrat was designated for TPS in 1997 when volcanic eruptions caused nearly two-thirds of its population to flee. At the time, Montserrat was a colony of the United Kingdom, and Montserratians did not enjoy British residency rights or citizenship. Similarly, DED is currently authorized to defer the removal of certain residents of Hong Kong present in the United States. U.S. Department of State statistics indicate that 7,241 nonimmigrant visas were issued to individuals holding Palestinian Authority (PA) travel documents in 2022, the most recent year for which such data is available. While the number of non-immigrant visas issued cannot provide an exact approximation of the number of Palestinians that would be eligible for TPS or DED, it makes clear that the number of beneficiaries would be small, while the benefit could be lifesaving. TPS or DED would enable Palestinians currently present in the U.S., including students, tourists, and workers, to be protected from a dangerous return to their homeland while affording them the ability to remain safely in the U.S. and to work legally to support themselves and their families. As such, we urge your Administration to designate the Palestinian territories for TPS and/or to authorize DED for Palestinians in the United States without delay. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, on Wednesday spoke at a U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on the Biden administration’s supplemental request for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Murphy discussed the role of FEMA’s Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP) in keeping communities safe as well as the Department’s request for increased USCIS funding to improve efficiency in the asylum system. Amid the rise in antisemitism and Islamophobia, Murphy raised the importance of increased funding for NSGP: “I know how much you believe in this. I know that you have been very vocal about the incredible increase in antisemitic rhetoric and violence as
...Read more well as threats of violence against our Muslim communities. This program is badly underfunded compared to the amount of need. Talk to us about the gap that exists right now between the amount of money that's in that account and the amount of demand in particular from synagogues, Jewish community centers, and mosques to upgrade their security.” Mayorkas emphasized the demand for the program: “The Nonprofit Security Grant Program is tremendously oversubscribed. The demand for these funds from large and small institutions of all faiths far exceeds the amount of funding that we have. And it is critical funding that enables faith based institutions and other nonprofit organizations to secure their facilities – it’s places of worship, it’s religious schools, and the like – whether it's personnel, cameras, gating, whatever the needs are in a particular jurisdiction, the demand is extraordinary in all sized institutions.” On Congress’s failure to pass any meaningful legislation on immigration in 40 years, Murphy said: “We have tried many times to engage in that process, most recently in 2013 when we came to a conclusion in the Senate, but Republicans in the House of Representatives refused to take up our measure. This could all be a lot easier if we would decide together to come together and fix part of this problem, half this problem, all of this problem, but most of the complaints here are because these laws haven't been updated in 40 years. And this administration, and every administration has been stuck with a mess caused by congressional inaction. And so this is a little bit of transference, as they say, in the discipline of psychology.” As Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, Murphy has led bipartisan efforts to increase funding for NSGP, calling for additional funding for FEMA’s Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP) to be included in any supplemental funding package Congress may consider. A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Secretary Mayorkas: MURPHY: “Thank you for being here to both of you. That’s the first time that I've heard a four second interrupted answer be described as a filibuster. I mean I think the most important part of these hearings is hearing the answers from our witnesses. I don't know that it serves this committee very well to give you literally three seconds to answer very complicated questions before asking the next one. “And so I'm going to ask you a question, Secretary Mayorkas, and I'm going to give you the time to answer it. I think that you get a lot of criticism for implementing the law. It's been 40 years since we've come to a bipartisan agreement on how to change the law. We have tried many times to engage in that process, most recently in 2013 when we came to a conclusion in the Senate, but Republicans in the House of Representatives refused to take up our measure. This could all be a lot easier if we would decide together to come together and fix part of this problem, half this problem, all of this problem, but most of the complaints here are because these laws haven't been updated in 40 years. And this administration, and every administration has been stuck with a mess caused by congressional inaction. And so this is a little bit of transference, as they say, in the discipline of psychology. “So you've asked for $745 million for [United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)] in this budget. Typically, when we have been trying to push for money for this account in prior years, and I know this as chairman of the subcommittee that oversees the Department of Homeland Security, it has been Republicans who have pushed back. But tell us the consequences of underfunding USCIS at the level that it is underfunded today. Tell us how your hands are tied to try to efficiently manage the border if you don't have the resources you need to properly do all of the functions that USCIS is engaged in at the border and throughout our legal immigration system. Why is this really important? And why is it important for Republicans and Democrats to come together to support that funding? MAYORKAS: “Senator, thank you for your inquiry. When we have more asylum officers, and when we have more support personnel to assist them in accomplishing the mission that they are expert in performing, then what we are able to do is drive greater efficiency in the asylum system, including shortening the time in between the time of the credible fear interview and the ultimate adjudication, including in between the time of initial encounter and the credible fear interview. “We can conduct more credible fear interviews, and we can advance the system because we have discussed already in this hearing the unacceptable fact that it is far too slow process, the asylum adjudication process, that is because the system is broken. And critically, we are terribly underfunded and under resourced, And this supplemental gets to that latter point.” MURPHY: “One of the things my Republican colleagues have talked about in this hearing is adjustments to the asylum standard. And I think that's a legitimate conversation to have, but that will necessitate to the extent that there is more or different work being done by USCIS some pretty significant new resources. And so I just put that on the table for my Republican colleagues who are coming to the table in good faith for a conversation about changing the laws. “Last question, Secretary Mayorkas, just to talk for a minute about the Nonprofit Security Grant Program. I know how much you believe in this. I know that you have been very vocal about the incredible increase in antisemitic rhetoric and violence as well as threats of violence against our Muslim communities. This program is badly underfunded compared to the amount of need. Talk to us about the gap that exists right now between the amount of money that's in that account and the amount of demand in particular from synagogues, Jewish community centers, and mosques to upgrade their security.” MAYORKAS: “Senator, very, very quickly. The rise in antisemitism, the latest data point I saw is that it is increased 388% since October 7. The Nonprofit Security Grant Program is tremendously oversubscribed. The demand for these funds from large and small institutions of all faiths far exceeds the amount of funding that we have. And it is critical funding that enables faith based institutions and other nonprofit organizations to secure their facilities – it’s places of worship, it’s religious schools, and the like – whether it's personnel, cameras, gating, whatever the needs are in a particular jurisdiction, the demand is extraordinary in all sized institutions.” ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Wednesday spoke at a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on U.S. national security interests in Ukraine. In his question to Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs James O’Brien and Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources Geoffrey Pyatt, Murphy asked how the United States can support Ukraine by making it more difficult for Russia to be able to sustain the current level of their military operation. Murphy highlighted the urgent need to support Ukraine: “Listen, I don't understand the games our Republican friends are playing with Ukraine aid. I think this is an existential moment. We're at the zero hour with respect to Ukraine's needs.” On Russia’s reliance on oil and gas revenue to finance its war effort, Murphy
...Read more said: “Russia started out spending about 4% of GDP on military endeavors. This budget for the upcoming year will have them spending 6% of GDP on their military. That puts them in the top five in the entire world in terms of the percentage of their economy dedicated to military spending. Note that number one on that list is Ukraine, that is spending 33% of its GDP. Thirty-three percent of its GDP on the military. But the IEA projects Russia’s share of globally traded oil is going to fall 50% by 2030, and their net income from gas sales is going to fall from $75 billion to $30 billion. You're spending already 6% of your GDP, and you have a potentially catastrophic fall coming in oil and gas revenue. That is one of the things, maybe the primary factor that may push Russia to the table to try to drive a conclusion to this conflict. A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with O’Brien and Pyatt: MURPHY: “Thank you very much, Senator Shaheen. Thanks to all three of you for being here today and for your great work on behalf of the United States in our interest in supporting an independent and sovereign Ukraine. “Listen, I don't understand the games our Republican friends are playing with Ukraine aid. I think this is an existential moment. We're at the zero hour with respect to Ukraine's needs. I want to pass comprehensive bipartisan immigration reform as badly as anyone, but to hold Ukraine hostage to unlocking that very difficult knot is dangerous for us and the world. But I'm there in good faith trying to listen to my Republican friends to try to find a path forward here. “But this is really one side of the equation, the support Ukraine needs, and I hope that we find a path in the next two weeks to be able to get Ukraine the supplemental assistance it needs. The other side of this equation is what we can do to make it harder for Russia to be able to sustain this level of operation. And so I wanted to ask maybe both you, Ambassador Pyatt and Ambassador O'Brien, about how Russia's long term prospects look to be able to afford this war and what the United States can do. “Here’s a note, Russia started out spending about 4% of GDP on military endeavors. This budget for the upcoming year will have them spending 6% of GDP on their military. That puts them in the top five in the entire world in terms of the percentage of their economy dedicated to military spending. Note that number one on that list is Ukraine that is spending 33% of its GDP. Thirty-three percent of its GDP on the military. “But the IEA projects Russia’s share of globally traded oil is going to fall by 50% by 2030, and their net income from gas sales is going to fall from $75 billion to $30 billion. You're spending already 6% of your GDP, and you have a potentially catastrophic fall coming in oil and gas revenue. That is one of the things, maybe the primary factor that may push Russia to the table to try to drive a conclusion to this conflict. So what can we do as members of Congress? And how can we support your efforts to continue to make it harder for Russia to finance this war? And how much of that is dependent on our allies in India and our adversaries in China making different decisions than they are today? I'll stop there and ask both of you to comment on that quickly. PYATT: “So quickly, Senator, thank you for the question. And you're exactly right, in terms of the structural decline in oil and gas revenue that Russia is confronting. We are working as hard as we can to accelerate that trend. We do that through two mechanisms; One is by accelerating our energy transition, both here in the United States but also globally, as the Biden administration has done through the Inflation Reduction Act to reduce the dependence on fossil fuels. “But the other aspect of this is what we are doing systematically to reduce Russia's future energy revenue. Just last week, for instance, we leveled new sanctions against a project in the Arctic, Arctic LNG 2, which is Novatech's flagship LNG project, which Novatech set in motion with the aspiration of developing Russia as the largest LNG exporter in the world. Our objective is to kill that project. And we're doing that through our sanctions working with our partners in the G7 and beyond. “I think the other aspect of this, and it goes back to Senator Shaheen’s point about the Black Sea, is how we work with the countries that have historically depended on Russia and on Russian energy and have been paying into the Kremlin's resources. We have done that quite successfully in Europe. We need to keep focusing on the on the Asian front. We do that through the price cap coalition. And I think it's important also to recognize that the price cap has worked in its dual objectives of reducing the Kremlin's revenues, while also keeping Russian crude oil on global markets in order not to destabilize further a global energy market that the Kremlin has profoundly destabilized. But let me invite Jim to add.” O’BRIEN: “I completely agree with what Geoff has just said. I'll try to focus a little more on the future here that Russia's losing its lucrative markets. That's what got it rich enough to afford this war. It's losing out in the sectors of innovation that are going to drive economic development in the future. “So we look at this and say, ‘does it put pressure on Putin to get to the table?’ Well, yes, it does. It's going to take a little time. He started the war with $640 billion in a rainy day fund. By the start of this year, despite record profits last year, he was down around $580 billion. We immobilized $300 billion of that, and he spent down further from there. So that gives him a year, two years maybe of run room on that rainy day fund that all came from selling oil and gas. So that's gone. “The second thing is that we don't see Russia able to play in the sectors that are going to drive innovation and economic growth in the future. The areas of quantum mechanics, artificial intelligence, the energy transition, including the new nuclear technologies that are coming on board, and Senator Risch, your work on this I really appreciate because Russia entangled countries in these long term networks of corruption, with generation-long ROSATOM contracts. We're now competing for those again and taking those sectors away from Russia. That changes the long term prospect from what it was. “The result of all this is we anticipate that Russia's GDP is going to be at least 20% smaller by 2030 than it would be if Putin had not started this war. So it's a long term strategic loss for him, and it creates a great opportunity for us in a number of important sectors.” Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Thursday joined U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) in leading the majority of the Senate Democratic Caucus in a letter to President Biden condemning the brutal terror attacks by Hamas, expressing support for immediate funding to replenish Israel’s defensive systems, and seeking information on two clear U.S. priorities: supporting an Israeli strategy that will effectively degrade and defeat the threat from Hamas and taking all possible measures to protect civilians in Gaza. In addition to Murphy, Van Hollen, Schatz, and Reed, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Peter
...Read more Welch (D-Vt.), Angus King (I-Maine), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.). “We have joined you in condemning the brutal terror attacks that Hamas conducted against Israel and agree with you that Israel has the right to defend itself and hold Hamas accountable. We applaud your actions to secure the release of two American citizens held hostage and support your continued efforts to free the remaining hostages. In the days and weeks since these attacks, you have rightly demonstrated America’s commitment to support Israel in this dark hour,” the Senators begin. They continue, “The attacks of October 7th brought back chilling memories of the United States’ own confrontation with terror twenty-two years ago. In light of our own experience, we want to underscore how critical it is that Israel: (1) learn from the mistakes the United States made in our fight against terrorism by focusing on realistic and achievable military goals; and (2) abide by the laws of war, including the protection of civilians. Doing so also offers Israel the very best chance of success against Hamas in the days and weeks ahead. These steps are also necessary to create the conditions for a lasting peace, including two states for two peoples.” “We believe the United States should immediately provide Israel with the funding it needs to replenish its defensive systems, including Iron Dome and other air defense capabilities. But to better understand the efficacy of U.S. funding that supports Israel’s operations inside Gaza, we respectfully ask your team to provide us with information relative to these two clear U.S. priorities: supporting an Israeli strategy that will effectively degrade and defeat the threat from Hamas and taking all possible measures to protect civilians in Gaza,” the Senators write. The Senators go on to ask for responses on a series of wide-ranging points, including an assessment of the viability of Israel’s military strategy in Gaza, and whether it prioritizes the release of hostages, whether there is an achievable plan for governing Gaza when the Israeli military operation ends, and if Israel supports the conditions necessary to ultimately achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Senators also ask what specific mechanisms the Administration is putting in place to ensure that Israeli military operations conducted inside Gaza are carried out in accordance with international humanitarian law and to ensure that any U.S.-provided equipment is used in a manner consistent with U.S. law. They request an assessment of whether Israel’s military rules of engagement, particularly regarding mitigation of civilian casualties, align with U.S. policy and practice. And they ask the Administration to seek immediate public assurances from Prime Minister Netanyahu that his coalition government will immediately stop the escalating extremist settler violence directed against unprotected Palestinians there, as well as assurances from President Abbas that his government take steps to quell any violence against Israelis. Lastly, in their letter, the Senators press for answers on how assistance will advance our efforts to engage with Israel, Egypt, and the broader international community to address the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, noting, “we must not only do our part to provide urgently needed humanitarian relief to Gaza, but also insist that Israel take all necessary measures to help us facilitate such relief to the two million civilians living there, half of them children. That includes fully restoring water, electricity, and communication services, expediting fuel deliveries through already well-established systems for avoiding diversion to Hamas, and opening the Kerem Shalom crossing in southern Israel to increase urgently needed humanitarian relief to Gaza. Aid workers and civilian sites like schools, hospitals, and UN facilities must be protected.” They close, “We support additional assistance to Israel that: 1) aligns with an Israeli strategy that you believe will effectively degrade and defeat the threat from Hamas; 2) prioritizes the release of hostages; 3) advances a viable and achievable military plan that supports a long-term vision for peace, security and Palestinian self-determination in the form of a two-state solution; 4) abides by U.S. and international law, including the protection of civilians; and 5) advances efforts to provide desperately needed humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza. The information requested in this letter will help us assure that U.S support for Israel’s operations inside Gaza achieves these objectives.” The full text of the letter is available here and below. Dear President Biden: We have joined you in condemning the brutal terror attacks that Hamas conducted against Israel and agree with you that Israel has the right to defend itself and hold Hamas accountable. We applaud your actions to secure the release of two American citizens held hostage and support your continued efforts to free the remaining hostages. In the days and weeks since these attacks, you have rightly demonstrated America’s commitment to support Israel in this dark hour. The attacks of October 7th brought back chilling memories of the United States’ own confrontation with terror twenty-two years ago. In light of our own experience, we want to underscore how critical it is that Israel: (1) learn from the mistakes the United States made in our fight against terrorism by focusing on realistic and achievable military goals; and (2) abide by the laws of war, including the protection of civilians. Doing so also offers Israel the very best chance of success against Hamas in the days and weeks ahead. These steps are also necessary to create the conditions for a lasting peace, including two states for two peoples. We believe the United States should immediately provide Israel with the funding it needs to replenish its defensive systems, including Iron Dome and other air defense capabilities. But to better understand the efficacy of U.S. funding that supports Israel’s operations inside Gaza, we respectfully ask your team to provide us with information relative to these two clear U.S. priorities: supporting an Israeli strategy that will effectively degrade and defeat the threat from Hamas and taking all possible measures to protect civilians in Gaza. First, it is in America’s interest to ensure that any military plans to fight Hamas do not produce the same strategic mistakes as many U.S. military operations over the past few decades. As we review the Administration’s supplemental request for military assistance to Israel, we respectfully ask that you share with us your assessment of the viability of Israel’s military strategy in Gaza, and whether it prioritizes the release of hostages. We would also like to better understand whether there is an achievable plan for governing Gaza when the Israeli military operation ends. We further seek to understand if Israel supports the conditions necessary to ultimately achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Second, we ask you to inform us about what specific mechanisms you are putting in place to ensure that Israeli military operations conducted inside Gaza are carried out in accordance with international humanitarian law and to ensure that any U.S.-provided equipment is used in a manner consistent with U.S. law. Relatedly, we would like to know your assessment of whether Israel’s military rules of engagement, particularly regarding mitigation of civilian casualties, align with U.S. policy and practice. In addition, to prevent another front from opening in the West Bank, we ask that you obtain public assurances from Prime Minister Netanyahu that his coalition government will immediately stop the escalating extremist settler violence directed against unprotected Palestinians there, as well as assurances from President Abbas that his government take steps to quell any violence against Israelis. Finally, we request information on how our assistance will advance our efforts to engage with Israel, Egypt, and the broader international community to address the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. As we consider additional military assistance to Israel, we must not only do our part to provide urgently needed humanitarian relief to Gaza, but also insist that Israel take all necessary measures to help us facilitate such relief to the two million civilians living there, half of them children. That includes fully restoring water, electricity, and communication services, expediting fuel deliveries through already well-established systems for avoiding diversion to Hamas, and opening the Kerem Shalom crossing in southern Israel to increase urgently needed humanitarian relief to Gaza. Aid workers and civilian sites like schools, hospitals, and UN facilities must be protected. We support additional assistance to Israel that: 1) aligns with an Israeli strategy that you believe will effectively degrade and defeat the threat from Hamas; 2) prioritizes the release of hostages; 3) advances a viable and achievable military plan that supports a long-term vision for peace, security and Palestinian self-determination in the form of a two-state solution; 4) abides by U.S. and international law, including the protection of civilians; and 5) advances efforts to provide desperately needed humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza. The information requested in this letter will help us assure that U.S support for Israel’s operations inside Gaza achieves these objectives. Mr. President, your leadership at this time of crisis has been vital. We appreciate your attention to these urgent matters. Sincerely, ### Read less WASHINGTON–At a press conference today in Washington, DC, U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and joined U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Puerto Rico Governor Pedro Pierluisi and several colleagues to introduce the Puerto Rico Status Act, legislation that lays out a process for the people of Puerto Rico to determine the future of the island’s political status. “Puerto Rico’s political status is a decision for the people of Puerto Rico. Too often, the Puerto Rican community in Connecticut has watched the federal government fall short of supporting their friends and family on the Island when faced with devastating natural disasters and economic crises. This bill is a commonsense compromise that would ensure Puerto Ricans are no longer relegated to second-
...Read more class citizenship and are granted the long overdue right to self-determination,” said Murphy. “This important legislation empowers the people of Puerto Rico to decide what future they want for themselves – bringing together a wide variety of stakeholders on one path forward,” Blumenthal said. “Whether the people of Puerto Rico choose statehood, independence, or sovereignty, they deserve the full benefits of citizenship.” The legislation is co-led by U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.). U.S. Representatives Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Nydia M. Velázquez (D-N.Y.), Darren Soto (D-Fla.), Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), and Resident Commissioner Jenniffer González Colón (R-P.R.) introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives. The Puerto Rico Status Act authorizes a federally sponsored plebiscite to resolve Puerto Rico’s political status. The legislation details the transition to and implementation of a non-territory status for Puerto Rico – Statehood, Independence, or Sovereignty in Free Association with the United States – that is chosen by a majority of voters in Puerto Rico. The Puerto Rico Status Act was drafted with extensive input from members of Congress; local elected government officials; citizenship, immigration, and constitutional law experts; and hundreds of residents of Puerto Rico. More information on the Puerto Rico Status Act, including a fact sheet, bill text, and one-page explainer of the legislation, can be found here. Read less Vanity Fair: Chris Murphy Wants to Make America a Little Less Lonely By Eric Lutz November 7, 2023 […] “There are just real practical impacts to people feeling lonely and disconnected,” Murphy told the crowd of community leaders. “Political instability and polarization is driven by people feeling upset and angry when they can’t find positive connection and they go find it in darker, more dangerous places. But I think as I get older, and I get deeper into this job, I just have come to the conclusion that it’s not good enough for me just to kind of adjust the dials of public policy, and as a policymaker I have to step back and ask questions about how people are feeling.” If you know Murphy, it’s probably as Capitol Hill’s conscience amid this country’s never-ending plague of gun violence.
...Read more The guy giving impassioned Senate floor speeches calling on his colleagues to offer more than “thoughts and prayers” to the victims of the latest mass shooting. The guy who, after the Uvalde, Texas, massacre last year, pulled off what might count as a political miracle in this era of profound polarization: the passage of a bipartisan gun safety bill, the most significant such legislation in three decades. But Murphy, who was turning 50 that day in Boone, has lately become as passionate about the nation’s need for what he calls a “spiritual renaissance” as he is about his signature issue. He hasn’t abandoned that long-standing fight for a new one; he’s significantly expanded the scope of it. “You can’t spend 10 years thinking about violence in America,” he had told me a month earlier, in his hideaway office, where he had hashed out much of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, “without trying to grapple with the underlying emotional state of a country in which people shoot first and think later.” The country appeared to him to be sickened somehow—in the throes of an amorphous ailment manifesting all across our culture and politics. And while the right was offering snake-oil cures, pushed by the most dangerous political huckster in recent American history, it seemed to Murphy that the left was treating the symptoms and ignoring the disease entirely. Worse yet, the malady was threatening to metastasize: Donald Trump was running to reclaim the White House on an explicitly authoritarian platform with help from the Republican allies whose politics of division had contributed to this national disorder. It had become Murphy’s mission, as he put it, to “diagnose and treat the metaphysical state of America.” It’s a big task, one not typically in the job description of a senator. It is also, by his own admission, politically fraught, and his efforts have already been met in some corners with resistance: In July, when he introduced the National Strategy for Social Connection Act—a bill that would, among other things, establish an “Office of Social Connection Policy” in the White House—the right cast Murphy as a big-government liberal working to mandate friendship through bureaucracy. There was also some suspicion from progressives, who bristled at the outreach to conservatives he considered necessary to his project. He is convinced there is a growing “realignment” across the right and left around questions of “first principles, the good life,” hints of which can be seen in the skepticism of Big Tech and neoliberalism that has been brewing on different sides of the political spectrum. He was taking something of a political trust fall—and had come to Boone not only in search of solutions, but to begin building a grassroots consensus around loneliness and disillusionment. “Some of what I’m doing is unfamiliar,” he admitted. “What I’m trying to do is a little bit outside of the traditional sandbox that we tend to play in.” […] There have been decisions by governments that have caused our social fabric to disintegrate,” Murphy told me later, describing more systemic issues weighing on the nation’s psyche. “And I think people on the right and the left are really unhappy with that.” He had come to this conclusion about a year earlier, not long after the biggest legislative victory of his career. The movement he had arguably been the congressional face of since the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting—which occurred in the Connecticut district he then represented in Congress—had broken a three-decade logjam. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, and several other Democratic accomplishments in the first stretch of Joe Biden’s presidency, should have been a major cause for celebration. “And yet, people weren’t feeling any better,” Murphy recalled. “The national mood seemed very stuck.” The symptoms of that malaise seemed especially acute to him in the lives of kids, who he had seen “disappearing into their phones…being co-opted by this all-consuming consumer culture.” They seem to “feel the weight of the world on their shoulders and have less sort of optimism and hope than my generation did,” Murphy told me. “It’s not a coincidence that I’m thinking a lot more about the emotional health of the country as my kids get closer to adulthood,” he added. “I’m worried about the world that they are walking into.” […] “He was really a backbencher in Congress,” said Gary Rose, a professor of political science at Sacred Heart University who wrote a book on the 2012 Senate race, in which Murphy defeated former WWE CEO Linda McMahon. “He was not considered a major force.” Sandy Hook changed that. “My life took a hard about-face,” Murphy wrote in his 2020 book, The Violence Inside Us. “I now had my calling…my mission in life.” He would spend the next decade in the Senate fighting the formidable gun lobby and helping build a movement that is starting to prove equally formidable. “He was an extraordinary quarterback,” Senator Cory Booker, one of his closest friends in the Senate, told me. “He was just a Joe Montana–type tactician working the ball down the field and did something a lot of people can’t speak to as a senator, which is putting points on the board.” Or maybe he was more like a hockey player, with a “real ability to see around corners and see ahead for where the puck is going, not where it is right now,” as Senator Richard Blumenthal, his fellow Nutmegger, described him. Or perhaps more of a point guard? “He’s been amazing to watch,” says Golden State Warriors coach Steve Kerr, an admirer of Murphy’s who told me his own gun safety activism—which included an impassioned pregame speech after Uvalde—has been inspired by the Connecticut senator. “I think the hope is that we are going to tip the scales as a country, where we can actually get a group of like-minded government officials to make some real change.” Of course, Murphy remains committed to that change. He’s still in regular contact with grassroots leaders, as well as the Sandy Hook families he met in the immediate aftermath of that tragedy—some of whom he counts among his closest friends. “He is just as dedicated, just as smart, just as compassionate, just as genuine as the Chris Murphy you see in the United States Senate,” said Mark Barden, whose seven-year-old son, Daniel, was killed at Sandy Hook. “He just seems like one of the most genuine politicians I’ve ever met,” said Sari Kaufman, a Parkland survivor who was an intern in Murphy’s office at the time of the Uvalde shooting and describes the senator as a personal hero. “It’s like knowing that you have a teammate in the most important place you can have one.” But his political identity is evolving. The success of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act lent him a new degree of political capital, earned him credibility with some Republicans, and has made the senator a key surrogate for Biden’s reelection campaign. The president worked closely with Murphy on the legislation, appearing with him at a June summit the senator hosted in Hartford commemorating the one-year anniversary of its enactment. Murphy is a “national leader,” Minnesota attorney general Keith Ellison, who served in Congress with Murphy, told me on the sidelines of the Safer Communities Summit in June. “This guy has it all.” […] For the most part, his bill to address social isolation—which, as Jillian Racoosin, executive director of the Coalition to End Social Isolation and Loneliness, said was unprecedented in the United States in its scope—was well-received save for some mockery from the online right. “Senator Murphy’s proposal is an important and needed policy step forward,” Laurie Santos, a professor of psychology at Yale University and host of the popular Happiness Lab podcast, told me. “We need more leaders in government like Senator Murphy, who recognize just how common and consequential loneliness is and recognize that there is a role for government in helping support communities and building stronger connections,” echoed Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, whose May advisory on loneliness helped form the framework for Murphy’s legislation. Click here to read the full story. This summer, Murphy introduced the National Strategy for Social Connection Act, legislation to combat America’s epidemic of loneliness and promote social connection in our communities. Earlier this year, Murphy co-wrote an op-ed in the Daily Beast with Ian Marcus Corbin, a philosopher at Harvard Medical School and a Senior Fellow at the think tank Capita, to call for a spiritual renaissance in American politics. In April, Murphy also authored an op-ed in TIME with Richard Weissbourd, a Senior Lecturer and the faculty director of the Making Caring Common Project at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, on how America’s obsession with individual success has come at the expense of our sense of community and the collective good. Murphy first outlined the politics of loneliness in a piece for the Bulwark last year. ### Read less U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, said residents feel the effects of the Israel-Hamas conflict personally for both Palestinians and the Israelis, as advocates across the state held several rallies in response to the war. The U.S. government is staunchly pro-Israel, but Murphy told Connecticut Public’s "All Things Considered" how he sees his role to represent constituents with varied opinions. John Henry Smith: How do you and your colleagues walk that fine line? Sen. Chris Murphy: Well, I mean, this is deeply personal to the people in Connecticut. I, over the last week, have spoken with a woman whose sister is likely held hostage inside Gaza — potentially dead. I spoke to a gentleman whose uncle and his nephew were killed by a bomb inside Gaza, though they
...Read more had nothing to do with Hamas. The scope of this tragedy is so enormous that it impacts every state, including Connecticut. Hamas needs to be held accountable, and I'm not shy about my belief that Israel has a right to defend itself, just like we had a right to defend ourselves and take out the Taliban after September 11th. But Israel has to be very careful about the number of civilian casualties, and you've seen those numbers rise to pretty disturbing levels in the last few days, not just because there's a moral requirement to keep civilians free of harm, but because Hamas in the long run and extremist groups in the long run get stronger if civilians ultimately are the casualty of these military operations. That's what we saw in Afghanistan. That's why the Taliban got stronger over the time, didn't get weaker, and we've got to be clear with Israel about the consequences if they are too permissive of civilian casualties inside Gaza. With your support of Israel, how do you strike the balance of supporting them while at the same time trying to keep things from escalating [more broadly]? A really important question ... and probably in some ways the most (important) for U.S. national security concerns because we have a lot of troops in the Middle East. Many of them are actually getting targeted right now by Iranian-affiliated groups in the region. One, we want to support the more moderate Palestinian leadership. So this is a time to get funding into the West Bank to try to stabilize the West Bank to make sure that it doesn't explode. Second, we want to send a deterrent message to Iran and that's why you've seen these carrier battle groups move into the region. Third, we just want to engage in good old fashioned diplomacy. So, you've seen [U.S. Secretary of State Antony] Blinken essentially be in the region non-stop. I have been on the phone with my colleagues in the Middle East, whether it be the Jordanians or the Qataris, trying to send messages about how we can de-escalate in Lebanon … in the West Bank. So, it's an all-above strategy to try to make sure that this conflict stays limited to the conflict in Gaza. There are 2 billion Muslims worldwide, and we've seen so many protesting in the streets here and abroad about what they see as decades-long, American-funded disenfranchisement against Muslims in Gaza and in the West Bank. To what degree are you and your colleagues supporting a historically reliable ally while keeping an eye towards trying not to create the next generation of Muslim people with a grudge against the West? I have probably been one of the most vocal members of the Senate pushing for a Palestinian state next to Israel. I have been, you know, critical of Democratic administrations and Republican administrations. I think it should be a priority of U.S. foreign policy. Just days before this conflict erupted, I led a letter from 20 of my colleagues to President Biden telling him that if he was going to lead diplomacy around a normalization agreement between Saudi Arabia and Israel, a component of that agreement had to be steps taken by Israel to guarantee a Palestinian state. So, I'm willing to sort of tell the truth to Democrats and Republicans on the importance of having a Palestinian state. That being said, there is no justification for terrorist violence. Yes, the progress towards a two-state solution has been far too slow, but under no circumstances does that provide license to Hamas to round up women and children inside Israel and murder them in cold blood. Read less The Biden administration pushed Congress Tuesday to approve its $105 billion national security supplemental request that includes support for both Israel and Ukraine as the House of Representatives prepares to consider legislation that would only support Israel. Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned that separating funding for Ukraine from support for Israel could embolden adversaries like Russia and Iran. "For our adversaries — be they states or non-states — this is all one fight and we have to respond in a way that recognizes that," Blinken told a Senate panel Tuesday. "If we start to peel off pieces of this package, they'll see that. They'll understand that we are playing whack-a-mole while they cooperate increasingly." The request includes $61.4 billion for
...Read more Ukraine and $14.3 billion for Israel, as well as funding for border security, humanitarian aid, and Indo-Pacific initiatives. The buckets for Ukraine and Israel include funding to give their militaries weapons from the Defense Department. Several senators expressed concern that the nearly $10 billion for humanitarian aid in the request could end up in the hands of Hamas. "We are working with the Israeli government, with Egypt, with the UN agencies as well as with other actors to try and make sure that assistance could get to people who need it in Gaza, but get in a way that doesn't go to the people who don't need it, and that's Hamas," said Blinken. Blinken was asked if he can guarantee that no U.S. taxpayer dollars going to humanitarian aid for Gaza would be used by Hamas. Blinken did not answer directly but said there is a "robust inspection" of any aid money. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, testifying alongside Blinken, made the case for keeping up support for Ukraine in its counteroffensive against Russia. "I can guarantee you that without our support, Putin will be successful," Austin told the senators, warning that Putin is hoping the U.S. loses interest in the long-run. Sen. Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, pressed for Ukraine aid not to be forgotten, warning that Ukraine could now see "the bottom of the barrel" and that soon there would not be any bullets left in their guns. The Pentagon has provided Ukraine with about $44 billion worth of equipment in drawdowns from Defense Department stocks since Russia invaded in February 2022. Those drawdowns have continued since the end of the fiscal year, but the Pentagon said Tuesday there is only about $5.4 billion in drawdown authority left until Congress passes more funding. The push for Ukraine aid in Tuesday's Senate hearing comes as Republicans in Congress are divided over whether to pair funding for Ukraine with support for Israel. House Speaker Mike Johnson, who's been in the job for a few days, has voted against Ukraine aid in the past, and House Republicans released a measure this week that would provide support for just Israel. But Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday he believes the challenges Ukraine and Israel pose are connected and should be funded together, along with money for border security and the Indo-Pacific. Blinken also provided more detail about Americans stranded in Gaza who remain unable to depart through the Rafah border crossing connecting Gaza to Egypt. He told lawmakers there are currently about 400 U.S. citizens — 1,000 people, including the citizens' family members — trying to leave Gaza. The State Department has reached out to American citizens either through phone calls, emails or What's App, Blinken said. Sen. Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon, said one Oregon family received three separate text notifications from the State Department to go to the Rafah border crossing. But each time the family went to the border crossing, the gate never opened. Blinken blamed Hamas for being an "impediment" to allowing American citizens to leave. There were occasions the State Department thought it would be able to evacuate Americans, only to find that the procedures to enable them to leave were blocked by Hamas, according to Blinken. Blinken was interrupted several times during his opening remarks by protesters shouting "ceasefire now" and "the U.S. is supporting a brutal massacre." Blinken acknowledged these protestors at the end of his statement. "I also hear very much the passions expressed in this room and outside this room," he said. "All of us are committed to the protection of civilian life. All of us know the suffering that is taking place as we speak. All of us are determined to see it end." Read less Nearly all of Connecticut’s congressional delegation is calling for “humanitarian pauses” in the Middle East as part of the U.S. strategy to ensure the flow of more aid into Gaza as well as the release of hostages captured by Hamas. That support for a temporary halt, which aligns with a growing number of Democrats in Congress and the Biden administration, comes as the U.S. navigates the threats posed to civilian life in what could be a protracted conflict between Israel and Hamas. No federal lawmakers from Connecticut have joined the group of Democrats in their party that is pushing for a ceasefire. They have repeatedly affirmed Israel’s right to defend itself and hold Hamas accountable for its attack on Oct. 7 that killed about 1,400 people in Israel and took a few hundred hostage. But
...Read more they are voicing concerns about Palestinian civilians’ ability to relocate to avoid Israeli airstrikes, plus the need for more access to food, water and fuel in Gaza. And they view a strategic pause in those strikes and fighting as a way of negotiating the safe release of Israeli and non-Israeli hostages captured by Hamas, which includes those with ties to Connecticut. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., was the first in the state’s delegation to publicly announce his support for a pause in the region. He recently authored a statement with nine other Democratic senators asking for swift aid to Gaza — where thousands have died — and the “immediate, unconditional release” of hostages. Murphy has been vocal about pressing the Biden administration to increase humanitarian aid. According to the White House, the president urged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to ramp up the flow of aid into Gaza over the weekend. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said 100 trucks are expected to go to the area a day but believes more assistance is needed. While neither senator supports a ceasefire, Murphy argued that Israel must conduct its operations without causing unnecessary harm to innocent civilians — something he believes the country needs to address. “I don’t believe that holding Hamas accountable and being serious about preventing civilian harm are mutually exclusive. I don’t think you have to make a choice,” Murphy said in an interview. “I think you have to hold Hamas accountable, but you can do that in a way that doesn’t unduly hurt civilians,” he added. “I don’t think Israel has gotten this balance right all the time. I think it’s really important for us to press Israel to do better, especially as we are considering putting money into this operation.” Blumenthal had not joined the senators’ statement on Friday but said in an interview he supports a pause “if it helps free the hostages and provide more humanitarian aid and a corridor for Americans to escape from Gaza.” The senator, who recently returned from a trip to Israel, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, has been an ardent defender of Israel. He is prepping bipartisan legislation to strengthen and enforce sanctions against Iran, which has supported and funded Hamas. But Blumenthal echoed a similar sentiment about minimizing civilian casualties and enhancing aid. He argued they are both moral and strategic interests “because Israel has to think about the day after and the numbers of additional young people who will be attracted to terrorism if their family and friends perish.” Murphy raised a similar point about the consequences of a “long term, open-ended conflict.” He warned Israel against “potentially walking into a trap set by Hamas,” adding that he hopes other countries can learn the lessons of America’s long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The focus on humanitarian pauses illustrates the modest shift in how the U.S. sees its role in supporting Israel’s war to defeat Hamas. Two weeks ago, the U.S. vetoed a resolution before the United Nations Security Council on a temporary halt because it reportedly did not mention Israel’s right to defend itself. The U.S. now has its own resolution seeking “all measures, specifically to include humanitarian pauses” for getting aid into Gaza. And members of the Biden administration, including Secretary of State Antony Blinken, publicly addressed the idea of pursuing such a path. But officials have said it is a work in progress as they privately talk with Israel. Netanyahu has rejected calls for a ceasefire as Israeli forces go further into Gaza. On the House side, Connecticut lawmakers are almost all in agreement with a brief pause in fighting and airstrikes. Rep. John Larson, D-1st District, said he has spoken with constituents about the conflict for the past three weeks. He highlighted a meeting this week with the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ chapter in Connecticut. CAIR, which advocates for Muslim civil rights, supports a ceasefire. But Larson, like others in the delegation, has not backed those calls within Congress. “I join the Biden Administration in calling for humanitarian pauses to allow for the safe passage of civilians, secure the release of all hostages and ensure humanitarian assistance can enter Gaza without delay,” Larson said in a statement. “I have supported and will continue to support Israel and their right to self-defense, as well as the need to prevent further loss of innocent life and ensure basic necessities are available to civilians in Gaza,” Larson added. “There is no excuse for Hamas’s actions, and it is vital to emphasize that Hamas and the Palestinian people are not one and the same.” Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd District; Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3rd District; and Rep. Jim Himes, D-4th District, reiterated similar positions on aligning with the Biden administration on pauses and support for Israel. Himes said he will keep pressing Israel to defend itself “in a way that is consistent with the international laws of armed conflict and with deep regard for humanitarian concerns and minimizing civilian deaths.” And DeLauro urged people to not equate Hamas to Palestinian civilians, who have “sadly have lost communities, neighborhoods, and loved ones because of this conflict and Hamas’s atrocities.” Rep. Jahana Hayes, D-5th District, declined to comment on whether she supports humanitarian pauses. In a past statement, she raised concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. “Two things can be true. While I condemn the horrific attack by Hamas, I am deeply concerned about the unfolding humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the assault on innocent Palestinians,” Hayes said in an Oct. 14 statement. “As this war continues, international humanitarian laws must be observed and innocent civilians must be protected.” While Connecticut Democrats are largely unified on the issue, differences have emerged within the party at large over the past few weeks. The vast majority of House Democrats, including Connecticut’s five lawmakers, voted for a resolution last week condemning Hamas for the Oct. 7 attack. But a handful of members did not vote for the legislation. Progressive lawmakers and advocacy groups argue that a humanitarian pause is not enough. They continue to press the Biden administration to back a ceasefire and have introduced a resolution seeking de-escalation and an immediate ceasefire in Israel and Gaza. “War and retaliatory violence doesn’t achieve accountability or justice; it only leads to more death and human suffering,” Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., said when introducing the resolution. “The United States bears a unique responsibility to exhaust every diplomatic tool at our disposal to prevent mass atrocities and save lives.” Meanwhile, Republicans, under the new leadership of House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., are pushing forward this week with legislation providing security aid for Israel — and separating it from other key funding priorities such as Ukraine. Democrats appear largely opposed to the structure of Republicans’ standalone bill, which seeks to pay for it by carving out money from a Democratic bill passed last year to boost IRS enforcement. Johnson pushed back on Fox News that he is not trying “not to use [aid for Israel] for any partisan political gamesmanship.” But Courtney and others in Connecticut’s delegation hope Congress pursues Biden’s national security funding request that packages together aid for border security, Ukraine, Israel and humanitarian aid for places like Gaza. “Speaker Johnson’s disappointing, one-sided bill falls far short of the gravity of this moment,” Courtney said in a statement. “It’s time the House Republican majority stops putting politics above the survival of innocent lives.” Blumenthal said he expects the GOP bill on separate funding for Israel to face resistance in the Democratic-controlled Senate, even among some Republicans who also want to approve assistance for Ukraine. He still wants both funding streams to pass together but emphasized the urgency of getting something done for Israel. “If push comes to shove and it’s Israel aid or nothing, I would vote for Israel aid,” Blumenthal said, “with the understanding that the Senate would move forward and get some commitment the House would put [Ukraine aid] to a vote.” Read less WASHINGTON–As oral arguments in U.S. v. Rahimi (Rahimi) began today, U.S Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to call attention the stakes of this case and what it would mean if the Supreme Court sides with Rahimi and overturns commonsense, popular legislation to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers. Today, the Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in Rahimi, a case which could impact whether domestic abusers subject to protection orders have a right to own a gun. Zackey Rahimi was a drug dealer with a history of armed violence towards intimate partners and a history of firing guns in public places. In the winter of 2019, Rahimi had an argument with his girlfriend in a parking lot and when she tried to leave, he grabbed her wrist, knocked her to the
...Read more ground, threw her into his vehicle, and caused her to hit her head. Upon realizing that a person witnessed the assault, Rahimi retrieved a gun and fired a shot, during which, his girlfriend escaped. After the assault, Rahimi called her and threatened to shoot her if she disclosed the assault. In the spring of 2020, Rahimi was the subject of a restraining order, valid for two years. The court found that Rahimi had committed family violence, that such violence was likely to occur again, and prohibited him from possessing a firearm. He violated the protective order multiple times, in addition to threatening another woman with a gun and participating in five shootings in public places. Murphy laid out the harrowing scope of domestic abuse in the United States: “I wish this were not true – it’s true in the United States and nowhere else – but on average, 70 women across this country are killed each month by a husband or partner. A husband or a boyfriend mostly. And most all of those murders are at the hands of a perpetrator with a firearm. In the United States, women are 21 times more likely to be killed by a gun than women living in any other high income nation. I get that the numbers that we throw round when talking about the gun violence epidemic sometimes can get a little numbing and overwhelming, but that's a really damning, unconscionable statistic.” Murphy highlighted progress made in last year’s Bipartisan Safer Communities Act: “We made progress last year because Republicans and Democrats came together and said 'you shouldn't be able to have a gun anywhere in this country if you have a judicial history, if you have a conviction related to domestic violence.' And so, we changed the law. We eliminated something called the 'boyfriend loophole' so that whether you are a spouse or an intimate partner or a dating partner, you now can’t get your hands on a weapon, you can't buy one, you can't have a weapon, if you have been convicted of a domestic violence charge. That was good news. And the reason that we did that, despite the fact that the gun lobby opposed it, is because the American public have just made up their mind on this question. Now in general, on most questions about keeping dangerous weapons away from dangerous people, 80-90% of Americans have already decided that they just would rather we err on the side of caution.” “But here's the problem with the state of American politics today. There are now two legislative lawmaking bodies. One of them is the United States Congress. The other is across the street at the Supreme Court,” Murphy said. “And so over and over again when an industry or a right wing interest group can't move the laws of Congress in their favor because the American public is so wildly against their priority, they just shift the venue of the fight across the street to the Supreme Court. And that is what is happening right now as we speak on this question of keeping guns away from domestic abusers.” On the implications of U.S. v. Rahimi, Murphy said: “If this case is decided in his favor, it is not just an outrage, it is not just dangerous, it is a frontal assault on democracy. Because what it would say is that the Supreme Court, not the United States Congress, not the elected branch of government, is going to micromanage the decisions as to who can have a gun and who can't have a gun. They will decide who's dangerous and who's not dangerous. And that should make you really nervous if the outcome of this case is to decide that Zackey Rahimi is a responsible individual capable of owning and possessing more weapons.” Murphy concluded: “[T]his country needs to understand the gravity of the decision that is being made and the wholesale shift that will occur in legislating on the question of gun safety. If Rahimi wins this case, we're no longer in charge. The Supreme Court will now, on a case by case basis, decide who can have a gun and who can’t. Frankly, that's bad for progressives and supporters of gun violence [prevention]. That's bad for conservatives as well. Because once the Supreme Court gets in the business of that kind of micromanaging, we are all out of jobs. We'll just show up to work, punch our clock, but have really nothing to do because they ultimately will pull the strings they will substitute themselves as the new governing, policymaking body in this country. And with the stakes so high for women's safety in this country, with 70 women dying every month at the hands of an intimate partner, we cannot let that happen.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Mr. President, I wish this were not true – it’s true in the United States and nowhere else – but on average, 70 women across this country are killed each month by a husband or partner. A Husband or a boyfriend mostly. And most all of those murders are at the hands of a perpetrator with a firearm. “In the United States, women are 21 times more likely to be killed by a gun than women living in any other high income nation. I get that the numbers that we throw round when talking about the gun violence epidemic sometimes can get a little numbing and overwhelming, but that's a really damning, unconscionable statistic. “You live in America as a woman – the most affluent, most powerful country in the world – you are not twice as likely to die as women in other countries at the hands of a firearm. You're not five times more likely. You're not 10 times more likely. You are 21 times more likely living in the United States of America to die from a gunshot wound as a woman than women living in any other high income country. I'm not talking about comparing the United States to some war ravaged, developing nation in the middle of civil conflict. I'm talking about comparing the United States to other peer nations. That's unacceptable. “And we made progress last year. We made progress last year because Republicans and Democrats came together and said 'you shouldn't be able to have a gun anywhere in this country if you have a judicial history, if you have a conviction related to domestic violence.' And so, we changed the law. We eliminated something called the 'boyfriend loophole' so that whether you are a spouse or an intimate partner or a dating partner, you now can’t get your hands on a weapon, you can't buy one, you can't have a weapon, if you have been convicted of a domestic violence charge. “That was good news. And the reason that we did that, despite the fact that the gun lobby opposed it, is because the American public have just made up their mind on this question. Now in general, on most questions about keeping dangerous weapons away from dangerous people, 80-90% of Americans have already decided that they just would rather we err on the side of caution. “Specifically, on this question of prohibiting abusers, domestic abusers, from owning guns: 83% of Americans support that. It's really hard to get 83% of Americans to support a thing in this country. This is maybe the most popular public policy intervention in America today – stopping domestic abusers from getting firearms. “And so, the gun lobby and the gun industry, which wants to sell weapons to everybody regardless of their criminal status, cannot win that fight here In the United States Senate. They lost that fight last year because the American public have made up their mind. You are likely not getting reelected to Congress from a swing state or a swing district if you are voting against measures to take guns away from domestic abusers. “But here's the problem with the state of American politics today. There are now two legislative lawmaking bodies. One of them is the United States Congress. The other is across the street at the Supreme Court. And so over and over again when an industry or a right wing interest group can't move the laws of Congress in their favor because the American public is so wildly against their priority, they just shift the venue of the fight across the street to the Supreme Court. And that is what is happening right now as we speak on this question of keeping guns away from domestic abusers. “Today, the Supreme Court is hearing the case of United States v. Rahimi. Let me tell you a little bit about Zackey Rahimi. He was a drug dealer. With a history of armed violence towards intimate partners and a history of firing guns in public places. In the winter of 2019, Rahimi had an argument with his girlfriend in a parking lot. She tried to walk away from that argument knowing about his penchant for violence. But he grabbed her wrist, he knocked her to the ground. He then dragged her back to the car, picking her up and throwing her into the vehicle, causing her to hit her head on the side of the vehicle. Upon realizing that a person witnessed the assault where he retrieved a gun and fired a shot into the air during which time his girlfriend escaped. “It won't surprise you that his girlfriend went and got a restraining order against him. He was vicious and violent, firing guns in public into the air as a means to threaten her. She went and got a restraining order. That restraining order required Rahimi to be noticed to the criminal background check system so that he couldn't own or buy guns. “83% of Americans think that's a great idea. Somebody with that kind of dangerous history with an active restraining order against them should not be able to buy a gun or possess guns. That was the law in Texas at the time. It worked for this woman who is being badly abused, and her life was unquestionably under threat. “Rahimi thinks that he should have the guns. He thinks that notwithstanding his long criminal history, the restraining order, that the Constitution requires him, a domestic abuser, to have weapons. And so he has brought a case that has reached the Supreme Court asking to invalidate all laws that keep weapons away from domestic abusers who are subject of restraining orders. “If this case is decided in his favor, it is not just an outrage, it is not just dangerous, it is a frontal assault on democracy. Because what it would say is that the Supreme Court, not the United States Congress, not the elected branch of government, is going to micromanage the decisions as to who can have a gun and who can't have a gun. They will decide who's dangerous and who's not dangerous. And that should make you really nervous if the outcome of this case is to decide that Zackey Rahimi is a responsible individual capable of owning and possessing more weapons. “Later in that year, Rahimi threatened another woman with a gun, which resulted that time in a charge of aggravated assault. Rahimi then participated in five separate shootings – five separate shootings – all of which result were in public places. Rahimi was arrested, convicted of possessing a firearm, and he was ultimately sentenced for these crimes for a long time in jail. “So restraining orders are designed to look at someone, assess their penchant for violence, and then take guns away from them to protect a spouse or a woman or a girlfriend. Rahimi was violent. He was wildly violent after the restraining order. This is exactly who the law in Texas is designed to protect us from. And yet we are perhaps weeks away from the Supreme Court, invalidating that law, invalidating Connecticut's law, invalidating Georgia’s laws, so that domestic abusers with histories of vicious assault can get their hands back on weapons. “But this should come as no surprise to Americans because we have won this fight – this fight to start moving the laws of this country towards common sense. We want people have a right to own firearms. I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe the Second Amendment protects the right to private gun ownership. I do. But I think that there's a class of individuals, a pretty small class of individuals, who have demonstrated so clearly that they are so dangerous and so irresponsible firearms that they should not have them. It is a small class of individuals. But Zackey Rahimi is clearly in that class, and the idea that we are weeks away from somebody like him being able to get gun again should shake this country to its foundation. “Maybe the Supreme Court listens to America, maybe they don't. But this country needs to understand the gravity of the decision that is being made and the wholesale shift that will occur in legislating on the question of gun safety. “If Rahimi wins this case, we're no longer in charge. The Supreme Court will now on a case by case basis decide who can have a gun and who can’t. Frankly, that's bad for progressives and supporters of gun violence [prevention]. That's bad for conservatives as well. Because once the Supreme Court gets in the business of that kind of micromanaging, we are all out of jobs. We'll just show up to work, punch our clock, but have really nothing to do because they ultimately will pull the strings they will substitute themselves as the new governing, policymaking body in this country. “And with the stakes so high for women's safety in this country, with 70 women dying every month at the hands of an intimate partner, we cannot let that happen. We cannot let that happen. “I yield the floor.” ### Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), U.S. Representatives John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.-02), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.-03), Jim Himes (D-Conn.-04), and Jahana Hayes (D-Conn.-5), and Governor Ned Lamont on Monday announced the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has selected 10 projects in Connecticut for a total of nearly $2 billion in federal funding from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The grants are funded through the Northeast Corridor (NEC) Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Program, which received an increase of $24 billion thanks to the IIJA. “When Congress was writing the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, my number one priority was making sure any legislation we passed made long-term,
...Read more historic investments in modernizing the Northeast Corridor. I’m thrilled that Connecticut is receiving $2 billion in federal funding to make our rail system faster, safer, and more advanced. Investing in the future of rail in Connecticut is a no-brainer – it makes life easier for travelers and commuters, boosts economic growth, creates good-paying jobs, and helps fight the climate crisis. I will always be a champion for the NEC in Washington,” said Murphy. “This massive, history-making rail money— a federal $2 billion investment— means faster train trips and more good-paying construction jobs for Connecticut. It will be strikingly visible and impactful in our everyday lives— replacing aged bridges and unsteady tracks, vastly enhancing safety and reliability, promoting more on time, affordable travel. It will empower a transportation transformation, bringing our rail system into the 21st century. Federal investment in our crumbling infrastructure is long overdue, and I’m thrilled that our delegation has fought hard and successfully for dollars our state needs and deserves,” said Blumenthal. “The Hartford Line unites the cities of Springfield, Hartford, and New Haven via passenger rail, expanding transit connections and economic opportunity for residents and businesses across our ‘Knowledge Corridor,’” said Larson. “I am thrilled to announce record infrastructure funding the Connecticut delegation secured for track repairs and expansions across the Northeast Corridor, including more than $100 million dedicated to Hartford Line improvements. These investments will support more frequent and reliable passenger rail service to better connect residents across the region.” “This long overdue transformational grant for the Connecticut River Bridge comes after a determination in 2006 that the bridge was ‘structurally deficient’ and repair work was no longer capable of keeping it functional. Despite chronic underfunding of Amtrak’s capital accounts, I have worked with my colleagues in the Connecticut delegation since 2007 to secure initial funding of $130.4 million for design and planning of this project,” said Courtney. “Today’s announcement of an additional $826 million federal grant ensures that the entire construction phase will be fully funded, and not delayed any more by incremental piecemeal grants. This development will provide a stable horizon for contractors to acquire materials and workforce, and is a testament to the importance of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passed in 2021 that provided a historic level of resources to Amtrak. Make no mistake – this monumental investment was only possible because of this law. When this new bridge is finished, rail traffic will be safer and faster, for passengers on the Northeast Corridor-Acela Express, Northeast Regional, and Shoreline East, as well as freight traffic. It is a generational investment for the most heavily traveled rail system in America that will pay dividends for decades to come.” “I’m proud to join Governor Lamont today to celebrate the bold investment of $2 billion in Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding across the state of Connecticut,” said DeLauro. “These upgrades being announced today will ensure that rail infrastructure will continue to be recognized as a critical component in statewide and regional transportation. When I was Chair of the House Appropriations Committee I helped pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act so government could enhance accessibility, mobility, and the customer experience for thousands of New Haven County residents who use this mode of transportation every day. When we invest in our public transit system, we ensure that everyone has access to opportunity which is vital in amplifying economic activity along Connecticut’s shoreline.” “After years in Congress fighting for federal money to upgrade and replace Norwalk’s Walk Bridge and the Westport Saugatuck River Bridge, I am elated to have helped secure nearly $500 million to bring these projects across the finish line. I spend much of my time as a Representative thinking about how to modernize the rail systems and bridges in our community, but the best part about receiving a grant like this is knowing that eventually my constituents won’t have to think about infrastructure at all. Rather than stressing about traffic delays or train disruptions, commuters will be free to think about that big project at work, an upcoming homework assignment, or whatever else matters most in their lives. Today is one of those moments when we get to celebrate real progress that will make a difference for the next hundred years,” said Himes. "The monumental investments of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) continue to truly impact the day-to-day life of residents across the state. This time it’s $2 billion for Connecticut rail and bridge projects to connect more communities. Great to see the IIJA transform our state through improved infrastructure and good-paying jobs,” said Hayes. “President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law continues delivering for Connecticut and the entire region. The Northeast Corridor is the busiest rail line in the nation, and improvements here mean more jobs, continued economic growth, and improved quality of life. Many of our railroad bridges are more than 100 years old, and this major investment of funding ensures that trains can operate with higher speeds and fewer disruptions well into the future. I applaud and thank President Biden and the members of Connecticut’s Congressional delegation for working with our administration to secure this funding for our state,” said Lamont. “This grant funding helps address a backlog of major projects and improvements that will help enhance the safety and reliability of rail service, offer operational flexibility, and provide for increased capacity, speed, and efficiencies of rail transportation along the entire Northeast Corridor. Thank you to the FRA for supporting these projects, our Congressional delegation for passing the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and thank you to the Governor and state legislature for ensuring we had the matching funds ready to go with our grant applications,” said Connecticut Department of Transportation Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto. Connecticut will receive a total of $1,998,799,600 in funding for 10 projects, including: $826.65m for the Connecticut River Bridge Replacement Project
This project includes construction to replace the existing 116-year-old Connecticut River bridge between Old Saybrook and Old Lyme, CT, with a modern and resilient new moveable bridge immediately to the south of the existing structure. The bridge serves the NEC main line as well as Amtrak’s intercity services, Connecticut Shore Line East commuter service, and freight operators.
$465m for the WALK Bridge Replacement Project
This project will replace the existing deteriorated bridge with a resilient bridge structure to improve safety and reliability of rail service along the New Haven Line and NEC, while improving navigational capacity and dependability for marine traffic in the Norwalk River.
$245.92m for the Devon Bridge Replacement Project
This project will provide a safe and reliable bridge crossing for rail over the river and marine navigation under the rail. The Devon Bridge serves as a critical transportation link between Stamford and New Haven on MNR’s New Haven Line and between New York and Boston on Amtrak’s NEC and carries 6,300 passengers every day
$122.8m for the New Haven Line Power Improvement Program
This project is a phased approach to replace power equipment across three areas of the New Haven Line Power System, including replacement of two signal substations, two balancing substations, and power apparatus at three supply substations.
$119.32m for Devon Bridge Interim Repairs
This project will ensure the bridge can be structurally reliable until a major rehabilitation or replacement can occur as described in the Devon Bridge Replacement description above.
$104.87m for the Hartford Line Rail Program Double Track Phase 3B Project
This project will improve three single-track sections (totaling approximately 6.2 miles of track improvements) to double track sections to increase the frequency and speed of passenger rail service and to address the intercity transportation needs of Connecticut, Central Massachusetts, Boston, and Vermont.
$71.65m for the New Haven Line Track Improvement and Mobility Enhancement Part 1 and 3
This project includes project development and final design for track improvements between mileposts 56.8 and 60.1 on the New Haven Line in Connecticut as well as reconstruction of seven rail overpass bridges and upgrade of all tracks to FRA Class 6 standards, track realignments, installation of a new interlocking, replacement of catenary system components, and railbed drainage improvements
$23.2m for the Saugatuck River Bridge Replacement
This project will replace the bascule bridge which carries four railroad tracks over the Saugatuck River in Westport, CT, which will improve safety and allow increases to the maximum authorized speed through this section of track.
$15.4m for the New Haven Line Network Infrastructure Upgrade Project
This project will provide security infrastructure upgrades at stations throughout Metro-North Railroad territory and at Cos Cob bridge and network connectivity at 60 locations by connecting them into the 144-fiber optic back bone.
$4m for the New Haven to Providence Capacity Planning Study
This project is a planning study for future infrastructure, speed, and capacity improvement options between New Haven, CT and Providence, RI. The total NEC Fed-State Partnership investment in Connecticut is more than $1.9 billion and will be supported by nearly $400 million in state funding that Governor Lamont and members of the State Bond Commission voted to approve in October. In addition to the $1.1 billion received by CTDOT in this round of grants, the FRA has also provided a Letter of Intent committing upwards of $2 billion for the future construction of the Devon Bridge Replacement Project. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Grant Program funds capital projects that reduce the state of good repair backlog, improve performance, or expand or establish new intercity passenger rail service, including privately operated intercity passenger rail service. ### Read less Politico: ‘I care about it’: Sen. Chris Murphy’s battle against loneliness By Erin Schumaker November 5, 2023 HARTFORD, Conn. — Sen. Chris Murphy looks at us and doesn’t like what he sees. We don’t get out enough and it’s no wonder considering the amount of time we spend on our phones. We haven’t gotten back to our pre-pandemic social routines and it shows: While 1 in 2 Americans reported being lonely prior to 2020, Covid turbocharged the problem. The Connecticut Democrat calls loneliness “one of the most important political issues of our time” and he’s at the head of an unspoken alliance of policymakers who see it as a key post-pandemic public health issue. The surgeon general, a Republican House member from small-town Nebraska, and the GOP governor of Utah are among those on a
...Read more mission to help us reconnect. They admit there’s no quick fix, so they are batting around ideas, from funding community groups to regulating social media, as they grapple with how government can help us break out of our malaise. “I care about it,” Murphy said. “And I’m willing to spend the time to try to understand it.” This year, Murphy’s written op-eds on isolation and technology. He’s held roundtables. In July, he introduced legislation with fellow Democrat Tina Smith of Minnesota laying out a government strategy to advance social connection, proposing a White House office, an advisory council, and $5 million in research funding. […] Murphy explained his philosophy during a two-mile stroll through the business district and decaying south end of his hometown, the state capital, Hartford. He walked along the overgrown sidewalk dotted with Red Stripe beer bottles and talked with anyone on his route about their day-to-day problems, such as being unable to afford housing and needing better jobs. Unshaven and outfitted in athletic gear for his annual walk across his state, Murphy was emphatic that despite being an imperfect messenger, he felt compelled to lead. “What the government is supposed to do is create the rules of the economy and society, which makes it easier for us all to live happier, healthier, fuller lives,” he said. […]Lawmakers need to back up and figure out what’s going on, he said. A hint came when he published an op-ed on loneliness on the conservative news site The Bulwark last year and got more positive feedback in Connecticut than anything he’d ever written on foreign policy, guns or health care. It made him question his approach as a lawmaker. “It was a language they understood. Their kids are lonely. They’re feeling lonely,” he told a forum on building connected communities at Harvard in October. As Murphy sees it, Americans feel exhausted and overwhelmed. They’re working longer and can’t disconnect from their jobs. They have fewer friends and it’s harder to carve out time for those they do have. They’re exhausted by how fast technology is evolving and the unforeseen mental health impacts of social media, leaving them — and their kids — vulnerable. He sees an opportunity for bipartisan work in that shared reality. Murphy’s first attempt at loneliness policy, the “National Strategy for Social Connection Act,” was born out of those realizations. The bill calls for creating an office of social connection, with a director who would advise the president and create a national strategy combining public health, technology and social infrastructure to foster social connection. An advisory council with members from the departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Veterans Affairs, Education, Commerce and other agencies would help assess and implement the plan. […] “He and I can make a pretty good team on this,” Murphy said of Murthy, explaining that there’s also a limit to what the surgeon general can do. “He can’t go out and build a political coalition. He can’t do hand-to-hand combat inside the Congress.” There, Murphy sees a need for more social media regulation, economic policy to provide more free time and direct support for the types of social organizations people used to belong to in droves. While he expects difficulty in directing money to barber shops or bowling alleys, he sees growing consensus around regulating social media. On that, Murphy has proposed a bipartisan bill with Sens. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Katie Britt (R-Ala.) to regulate teenagers’ access to Facebook, TikTok and other sites, and ban kids younger than 13 from the platforms. “There’s no question that it’s not too late to properly regulate social media,” Murphy said. “We haven’t tried.” Click here to read the full story. This summer, Murphy introduced the National Strategy for Social Connection Act, legislation to combat America’s epidemic of loneliness and promote social connection in our communities. Earlier this year, Murphy co-wrote an op-ed in the Daily Beast with Ian Marcus Corbin, a philosopher at Harvard Medical School and a Senior Fellow at the think tank Capita, to call for a spiritual renaissance in American politics. In April, Murphy also authored an op-ed in TIME with Richard Weissbourd, a Senior Lecturer and the faculty director of the Making Caring Common Project at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, on how America’s obsession with individual success has come at the expense of our sense of community and the collective good. Murphy first outlined the politics of loneliness in a piece for the Bulwark last year. ### Read less WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and U.S. Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), along with U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and U.S. Representatives Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) on Thursday reintroduced legislation that would invest in safe and nurturing school climates that support all students and address over-policing in our nation’s K-12 schools. Research shows that the presence of mental and behavioral health personnel in schools, like counselors, social workers, and psychologists improves
...Read more educational outcomes for kids, specifically by improving attendance and graduation rates while lowering the rates of suspension, expulsion and other disciplinary incidents. Meanwhile, the presence of police in schools leads to an increase in arrests of students — particularly students of color and students with disabilities — often for common misbehavior that a school could address without the involvement of law enforcement. The Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act would prohibit the use of federal funds to maintain police presence in schools and instead provide $5 billion in new grant funding to help schools hire more counselors, social workers, and other mental and behavioral health personnel as well as implement services in schools that create positive and safe climates for all students. “There is nothing more important than making sure our kids feel safe and supported in the classroom. But right now, too many students, often kids of color or students with disabilities, are arrested by police in schools instead of receiving support that would actually get at the root causes of a child’s behavioral issues. While we’ve seen many school districts across the country make real progress in creating positive learning environments, often by removing police from their hallways, the unfortunate reality is that many schools are reverting back to old disciplinary practices that focus on punishing kids instead of helping them get back on track. We’re reintroducing this legislation because we know putting more counselors and social workers in schools leads to better educational outcomes across the board, and this bill would ensure school districts have the resources they need to make sure school is a safe, nurturing place for every student,” said Murphy. “For too long, the presence of police in schools has resulted in our students – particularly students of color, LGBTQ+ students, and students with disabilities – being criminalized for normal adolescent behavior. And rather than receiving the resources and support that are proven to help them grow and reach their full potential, these students are unjustly put on a pathway to confinement. The Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act would disrupt the school-to-confinement pathway by shifting federal resources away from school police and investing in culturally responsive nurses, mental health professionals, and other trauma-informed staff. I thank our colleagues for their partnership on this bill and urge Congress to swiftly pass this critical legislation,” said Pressley. “Counselors, social workers, and educators belong in schools – not police. Enough is enough. This bill ensures schools adopt policies and practices that bring students in, not push them out. All students – especially Black and Brown children – deserve a learning environment that meets their most fundamental needs and allows them to reach their full potential. I’ll continue to fight to make that a reality,” said Warren. “Schools should serve as a pipeline to advance educational and career opportunities—not prison. The Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act will provide the mental health resources and support necessary for young people, teachers, and communities who have led a nationwide effort for police-free schools. We must continue to fight for essential resources, including counselors and trauma-informed services, so that all students have a healthy and safe learning environments where they can thrive inside and outside the classroom,” said Markey. “Our youth deserve schools where they are supported, not surveilled and punished. For too long, our education system has relied on punitive disciplinary practices and police presence in schools, disproportionately impacting students of color and other marginalized youth. The research clearly shows that this approach has failed. The time has come for a radically different strategy centered on meeting students' needs and nurturing their growth. I’m proud to join my colleagues in reintroducing a piece of legislation meant to build a more just education system. It is time we change course and invest in mental health professionals to help students thrive,” said Omar. "As an organization that is actively fighting the robust school-to-prison pipeline in Waterbury, CT, a school district in the heart of Senator Murphy's district, we applaud his and Representative Pressley's efforts to reintroduce transformational legislation that is long overdue. As a member of a statewide coalition and a national coalition for police free schools we stand in solidarity and support of each other as we call for an end to the over-policing of school campuses and students all over this country and demand increased investments in school staff and programs that increase school safety and improve school climate in ways that police or policing can not," said Robert Goodrich, Executive Director of RACCE. “The presence of police in our K-12 schools is rooted in racism and prejudice. According to GLSEN’s National School Climate Survey, 82% of LGBTQ+ youth reported feeling unsafe in school – and criminalizing kids only causes more harm to Black and brown queer students, who are already some of the most marginalized youth in our nation. We must divest from the police and invest in school counselors, social workers, classroom materials, and other programs that show students that we value their well-being,” said Melanie Willingham-Jaggers, Executive Director of GLSEN. “Children’s Defense Fund applauds Senator Murphy’s ‘Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act’, which adds Credible Messengers to the list of school professionals that could be funded under the bill. We need more student supports, like Credible Messengers, who share similar lived experiences with the students they mentor. Such work has proven to be far more effective than over-policing campuses, which often makes Black and Brown students feel unsafe where they are supposed to learn. All children should be able to live with dignity, hope, and joy at school. CDF is excited to continue working with Senator Murphy to build support for this bill,” said Rev. Dr. Starsky Wilson, President and Chief Executive Officer of Children’s Defense Fund. “The Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates is pleased to support the Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act and stands with Hill champions, parents and advocates to call for bold action to dismantle the systemic and institutionalized racism deeply embedded in exclusionary discipline policies and policing in schools. We call for an end to the use of harsh discipline; criminalization of students; and the use of law enforcement in schools. Schools must be transformed to promote learning; allow students to form positive and trusting relationships with trained and knowledgeable adults that are supportive of their complex needs; and encourage the use of evidence-based strategies to promote positive behavior. Enacting this legislation would help us achieve these goals and build the capacity of schools in support of all students, including students with disabilities,” said Denise Marshall, CEO for the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPAA). "When we speak with young people about the dreams they have for their lives, they talk about wanting schools where they feel safe, loved, and supported, not punished and policed. The Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act will help to transform schools into the places we all envision for young people by investing in evidence-based practices and support personnel, and ending federal support for harmful school-based law enforcement," said Morgan Craven, National Director of Policy, Advocacy, and Community Engagement at the Intercultural Development Research Association. “All students deserve to learn and grow in safe, inclusive, and supportive school environments,” said Denise Forte, President and CEO of The Education Trust. “Unfortunately, Black and indigenous students, students with disabilities, and other underserved students not only experience harsher discipline practices in the classroom, but are also more likely to be referred to and arrested by law enforcement. These police interactions have long-term destabilizing consequences. Rather than investing in policies and practices that harden our classrooms and expand the school-to-prison pipeline, we must invest in evidence-based measures that support students’ social, emotional, and academic development. The Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act is critical legislation, and The Education Trust is proud to support it.” The Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act would: · Prohibit the use of federal funds for maintaining police in schools: Since 1999, the federal government has spent more than $1 billion to increase the number of police in schools. However, evidence does not show this investment has improved student outcomes and school safety. This legislation would prohibit federal funds from being used to hire or maintain police in K-12 schools, diverting that funding toward other uses related to school safety within applicable grant programs. · Invest billions to help schools hire counselors, social workers, and other trauma-informed support personnel necessary to create safe, supportive learning environments for all students: The legislation helps schools build safe and positive learning cultures by establishing a new $5 billion grant program to support the hiring of counselors, social workers, school psychologists, and other personnel. The grant would also help schools implement programs to improve school climate, such as school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports, and invest in trauma-informed services and professional development. As more schools move away from policies that criminalize students and push them out of school, this historic investment will ensure districts have the resources to provide students with the supports they need to feel safe in school and thrive. · Incentivize states and school districts to end the criminalization of young people, particularly Black, Native American and Latino students, immigrant students, students with disabilities, LGBTQ+ students and other historically marginalized students, and instead invest in safe and nurturing learning environments where all students thrive. The legislation is co-sponsored by U.S. Representatives Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.-01), Cori Bush (D-Mo.-01), Antonio Cárdenas (D-Calif.-06), Troy Carter (D-La.-02), Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.-20), Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.-09), Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.-03), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas-18), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.-07), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.-04), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.-37), Barbra Lee (D-Calif.-12), Summer Lee (D-Pa.-12), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.-14), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.-03), Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.-13), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12), Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.-07), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.-12), and Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.-33). This legislation is supported by the Activists With A Purpose Plus, Advancement Project, Advocating 4 Kids Inc, Alliance Against Seclusion and Restraint, Alliance for Quality Education, Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools (AROS), American Association of University Women (AAUW), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), American Humanist Association, AMORC, ARISE, Autistic Self Advocacy Network, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Black Organizing Project, Black Swan Academy, Blue Future, Brighton Park Neighborhood Council, Center for Learner Equity, Center for Popular Democracy, Charles H. Wright Museum of African American History, Children's Defense Fund, Citizen Action of New York, Citizens for Juvenile Justice, COFI/POWER-PAC IL, Committee for Children, Communities United, Community Asset Development Redefining Education (CADRE), Community Organizing And Family Issues, Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities Education Taskforce, Council for Exceptional Children, Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, CT Black & Brown Student Union, Dignity in Schools Campaign, Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, The Education Trust, EPIC- Ensuring Parole for Incarcerated Citizens, EveryBlackGirl, Inc, Families and Friends of Louisiana's Incarcerated Children, Florida Rising, Freedom, Inc., Georgia Coalition for Equity in Education, Girls Inc., Girls for Gender Equity, GLSEN, GSA Network, Hearing Youth Voices, Heros Advocacy Group, Human Rights Campaign, IDRA, Kickapoo Peace Circle, Latinos Unidos Siempre, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Leaders Igniting Transformation, Maine People's Alliance, Make the Road Nevada, Make the Road New York , Make the Road NJ, MS Coalition to End Corporal Punishment, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, National Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities, National Black Justice Coalition, National Black Lives Matter at School, National Black Women's Justice Institute, National Center for Learning Disabilities, National Center For Youth Law, National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), National Education Association, National Juvenile Justice Network, National Parents Union, National Urban League, National Women's Law Center, New Bedford Coalition to Save Our Schools, New Georgia Project, New York Civil Liberties Union, NJ21United, Nollie Jenkins Family Center, Inc., Parents Organized for Public Education, Partners for Dignity & Rights, Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC), Project KnuckleHead, Providence Alliance For Student Safety, Providence Student Union, Providence Youth Student Movement, Public Advocates, Public Justice Center, R.A.C.C.E., Rethink New Orleans, Southern Movement Committee, Stand UP Alaska, Strategies for Youth Inc., Street Democracy, Student Advocacy Center of Michigan, Student Rights Project, Students Deserve, Tennesseans for Non-Violent School Discipline, The Federal School Discipline and Climate Coalition (FedSDC), The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, United Women in Faith. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Thursday released the following statement: “As I have said consistently, Israel has a right and an obligation to defend its people from terror attacks like the horrific events of October 7. The Hamas terrorists who planned and executed those attacks must be held accountable, and the ability of Hamas to carry out similar attacks in the future must be eliminated. “It's time for Israel's friends to recognize that the current operational approach is causing an unacceptable level of civilian harm and does not appear likely to achieve the goal of permanently ending the threat from Hamas. As we have learned from
...Read more America’s own counterterrorism campaigns, disproportionately large numbers of civilian casualties come with a moral cost, but also a strategic cost, as terrorist groups feed off of the grievances caused by civilian harm. “I share Israel's desire to destroy the threat from Hamas. And I know Israel cares about the impact of this war on innocent Palestinians, even as they track Hamas’s hideouts inside and below mosques, apartment buildings, and schools. But the way in which the current campaign is being waged – most recently evidenced by the terribly high human cost of the strikes on the Jabalya refugee camp – suggests that they have not struck the right balance between military necessity and proportionality. “The current rate of civilian death inside Gaza is unacceptable and unsustainable. I urge Israel to immediately reconsider its approach and shift to a more deliberate and proportionate counterterrorism campaign, surgically targeting Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders and terrorist infrastructure while more highly prioritizing the safety of civilians in accordance with the law of armed conflict. This does not mean that Israel should stop fighting Hamas, but it must take concrete steps to end the current widespread harm to innocent people and children inside Gaza.” Last month, Murphy spoke on the U.S. Senate floor on the importance of supporting Israel in its time of need and avoiding the mistakes the United States has made in our counterterrorism campaigns. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism and a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, on Tuesday spoke at an Appropriations hearing on the Biden Administration’s national security supplemental request with U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Murphy highlighted the importance of remembering the horrific details of Hamas’ terror attack against Israel on October 7th: “I think it's important that we be absolutely clear the nature of this brutal terrorist attack. I share with you the real worry that in this country and around the world, the memory of October 7th, just a few weeks in our rearview mirror, has
...Read more disappeared. It's incredibly important for us to remind the world about how our nation was changed after September 11th. And now Israel has been changed as well by this, and how we have an obligation to stand up for them.” On helping Israel avoid the mistakes the U.S. has made in our counterterrorism campaigns, Murphy said: “[O]ne of the lessons that we've learned in our counterterrorism operations is that not done well, you can end up creating more terrorists than you kill. In particular, when you are careless about civilian casualties, those civilian casualties become terrorist fuel. They become bulletin board recruiting material for terrorist groups. And so, there's a moral imperative to reduce civilian casualties, but there is also a strategic imperative. And so, I want to ask you whether you have a worry that the nature of the Israeli ground operation and the number of civilians that have been killed and will be killed could end up strengthening Hamas or other affiliated anti-Israel terrorist groups in the long run.” Murphy raised the urgency of Congress passing funding to support both Israel and Ukraine: “I think the reason why many of us are so worried about splitting Ukraine aid and Israel aid is because there is an urgency, a real urgency in Ukraine right now. And we know that this place has trouble doing one difficult thing, never mind splitting it into two or three. I know that we're careful about talking about the urgency because we don't want to cause panic or damage morale in Ukraine, but I do think we have to be honest with the American people and with this Senate about the consequences of not funding Ukraine.” In a question to Secretary Blinken, Murphy asked how the U.S. can ensure we can help get fuel into Gaza and prevent its diversion to Hamas, Blinken said: “We're working urgently on that. I'll say two things very quickly about it first, Hamas has its own supply stockpile of fuel. If it cared a whit about the people of Gaza, it would make sure itself that it used that fuel to have the hospitals be able to operate, have the incubators stay turned on, etc. But, of course it doesn't. And we have an obligation to do everything we can, if Hamas is not going to do it, to look out for people in Gaza. So, we are working on a mechanism that can get fuel to where it's needed, particularly hospitals, bakeries, desalination plants.” A full transcript of Murphy, Austin, and Blinken’s exchange can be found below: Murphy: “Look, Secretary Austin, we know you've been working around the clock to protect our friends in Israel and in Ukraine. Thank you for your work. Thanks for being here. Secretary Blinken, I want to thank you. At the outset, you described in really horrific detail what happened on October 7th. I think it's important that we be absolutely clear the nature of this brutal terrorist attack. And I share with you, the real worry that in this country and around the world the memory of October 7th, just a few weeks in our rearview mirror, has disappeared. It's incredibly important for us to remind the world about how our nation was changed after September 11th, and now Israel has been changed as well by this, and how we have an obligation to stand up for them.” “Secretary Austin, I wanted to talk to you, as Senator Schatz did, about the lessons that we've learned in our counterterrorism operations. I note, a story from this weekend in the Washington Post, entitled ‘U.S. Urges Israel Against Gaza Ground Invasion, Pushes Surgical Campaign.’ I don't want to ask you about the confidential communications you've had with your Israeli counterparts, but one of the lessons that we've learned in our counterterrorism operations is that not done well, you can end up creating more terrorists than you kill. In particular, when you are careless about civilian casualties, those civilian casualties become terrorist fuel. They become bulletin board recruiting material for terrorist groups. And so, there's a moral imperative to reduce civilian casualties, but there is also a strategic imperative. And so, I want to ask you whether you have a worry that the nature of the Israeli ground operation and the number of civilians that have been killed and will be killed could end up strengthening Hamas or other affiliated anti-Israel terrorist groups in the long run.” AUSTIN: “I agree with everything that you said, Senator, and that is a key lesson that we learned in the fights that we fought over the last 20 years or so. The things that you do on a battlefield, if you're not thoughtful about them, they could create a resistance to your effort that lasts for generations. And so there is an operational and strategic imperative to make sure that we're doing the right things as we outline our objectives and prescribe our techniques about how we're going to go about this. So, we've had those conversations for exactly the reasons that you mentioned.” MURPHY: “Secretary Austin, in turning to Ukraine, I think the reason why many of us are so worried about splitting Ukraine aid and Israel aid is because there is an urgency, a real urgency in Ukraine right now. And we know that this place has trouble doing one difficult thing, never mind splitting it into two or three. I know that we're careful about talking about the urgency because we don't want to cause panic or damage morale in Ukraine, but I do think we have to be honest with the American people and with this Senate about the consequences of not funding Ukraine. “Admiral Rob Bauer of the Netherlands, who you know well, said that the bottom of the barrel is now visible. And so I just want to ask you a pointed question about ammunition. We are really getting to a point very soon where there are not bullets in the guns, and we need to be serious with our colleagues about the consequences for the rank and file soldiers in Ukraine if we don't get this assistance soon. The need is dire, isn't it?” AUSTIN: “It absolutely is, Senator. And again, this funds artillery munitions, small arm munitions, you name it, and they desperately need a constant supply of warfighting capability in order to be successful. We would like to see them continue their operations through the winter. I think that’s an imperative. They can't do that if we've caused them to pause because there's a pause on the security assistance that we provide.” MURPHY: “30 seconds, Secretary Blinken, fuel into Gaza. Do we have a process to deliver fuel into Gaza that assures that it doesn't get diverted to Hamas?” BLINKEN: “We're working urgently on that. I'll say two things very quickly about it first, Hamas has its own supply stockpile of fuel. If it cared a whit about the people of Gaza, it would make sure itself that it used that fuel to have the hospitals be able to operate, have the incubators stay turned on, etc. But, of course it doesn't. And we have an obligation to do everything we can, if Hamas is not going to do it, to look out for people in Gaza. So, we are working on a mechanism that can get fuel to where it's needed, particularly hospitals, bakeries, desalination plants.” ### Read less Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) warned of potential harmful consequences to passengers, airline employees and small communities if a proposed merger between JetBlue and Spirit Airlines takes place.
“When these mergers happen, it seems to be that the haves — geographically — have more, and the cities that are smaller and needed the presence of these smaller airlines or smaller companies that get gobbled up by bigger companies lose out,” Murphy said during a roundtable discussion.
JetBlue has proposed buying Spirit in a $3.8 billion deal.
While mired in the thick of a war in Israel, electing a speaker and the possibility of a second government shutdown this fall, Congress is facing a harrowing issue impacting America's youngest: A 69% increase in child labor law violations since 2018. Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., is the latest lawmaker looking to update the nation's antiquated child labor laws after a steep increase in violations over the last several years. Casey, who chairs the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee on Children and Families, on Thursday will introduce the Children Harmed in Life-Threatening or Dangerous Labor Act, or CHILD Labor Act. The bill focuses on setting hasher penalties for child labor law violations and increasing accountability for violators, including
...Read more contractors and subcontractors that employ children. The Fair Labor Standards Act prohibits children under age 18 from being employed in dangerous jobs and mandates child labor provisions. Casey is looking to enhance the 85-year-old legislation with his bill. "It is long past time we bring our child labor laws into the 21st century and fight back against the employers, contractors and subcontractors that violate them," Casey told USA TODAY. The Department of Labor has seen a 69% increase in children being employed illegally by companies since 2018 and the agency's Wage and Hour Division conducted investigations during fiscal year 2023 that found an 88% increase in the number of children employed in violation since 2019. Almost 5,800 kids were employed illegally during fiscal year 2023, according to the Department of Labor, which assessed more than $8 million in penalties for violations ? an 83% increase in penalties from the year prior. Violations range from physical injuries, or even death in some cases, to children working overnight shifts that violate the Federal Labor Standards Act. “Children do not belong in factories or working during hours when they should be studying, spending time with their families, or simply being children," Casey said. "Yet too many bad actors get away with forcing kids to work long hours and under dangerous conditions." Labor Department reports increase in children employed illegally. Casey's legislation follows recent data from the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division that conducted over 955 investigations in fiscal year 2023 and enforces the child labor provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The division held more employers accountable to child labor laws in the last year than in any one year during the last decade. Violations range in intensity. One from February resulted in a $1.5 million penalty against Packers Sanitation Services, a company that provides cleaning services at meat processing facilities. The division found the company employed more than 100 children who used strong chemicals to clean dangerous equipment. Another violation from last month found nine children illegally employed and operating hazardous machinery at Florence Hardwoods, a Wisconsin-based sawmill operator. One child died from work-related injuries. The maximum civil penalty under current law for a child labor violation is $11,000. But for many multi-billion dollar companies, that fee is not enough to deter them from violating federal law. What's in Casey's proposal? The CHILD Labor Act of 2023 would provide enhancements to modernize the Fair Labor Standards Act and federal contracting laws to ensure companies, contractors and subcontractors that hire children are held accountable. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., is co-leading the legislation with Casey. It has a companion bill in the House led by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. Several senators ? John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Ron Wyden of Oregon, Tina Smith of Minnesota, Alex Padilla of California, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Sherrod Brown of Ohio ? have signed on to co-sponsor Casey's bill. Separately, Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, and Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind. introduced a bipartisan bill last week that would also increase penalties for child labor law violations. Casey's bill includes the following provisions: Holding contractors and subcontractors accountable in the same manner as employers who violate child labor laws Authorize the Secretary of Labor to label goods that are produced with child labor and issue stop-work orders to any person in violation of child labor provisions Require the Secretary of Labor to report to Congress on an annual basis with data and recommendations concerning overall trends for work-related injuries, illnesses or deaths Increase the civil penalty amount for persons who violate child labor provisions from $11,000 to $151,380 for each child Amend the maximum fine from $10,000 to $750,000 for criminal penalties for any person convicted of child labor violations Require any person who violates child labor provisions to be liable to each employee affected with a minimum of $75,000 in compensatory damages Department of Labor seeks additional funding. As Congress looks to pass a slate of funding bills before the Nov. 17 government funding deadline, the Department of Labor is calling on Congress to meet a funding request of $50 million each for the Wage and Hour Division as well as the Office of the Solicitor of Labor to investigate child labor cases. According to the division, between 2010 and 2019, 15% of full-time employees were lost from the annual appropriation. The division has 740 investigators nationwide who protect more than 165 million workers at 11 million workplaces. The Department of Labor earlier this year launched an Interagency Taskforce to Combat Child Labor Exploitation and a National Strategic Enforcement Initiative on Child Labor to use data-driven strategies to initiate child-labor violations investigations. Casey sent a letter to the Department of Labor when the task force formed urging the groups to enhance data collection to better understand where violations are taking place and better target responses. "Recent cases of child labor violations demonstrate that we need more accountability and liability across supply chains," he wrote in the letter. Read less An effort by Senate Republicans to overturn U.S. Department of Agriculture rules it says protect LGBTQ+ people from discrimination in federally funded nutrition programs failed in a narrow vote on Thursday. Connecticut Democrat Sen. Chris Murphy railed against the Republican-led resolution that he said would allow schools to refuse students meals or reject them for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits if they identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or nonbinary. “If you're feeding poor kids, it shouldn't matter whether that kid is straight or gay or transgender, whether they're black or white, whether they're Catholic or Protestant," said Murphy in a speech on the Senate floor. "You can't choose not to feed a kid because of their ethnicity, their race, or
...Read more their sexual orientation. That's just common sense." The Senate Joint Resolution 4 was introduced by Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall and disapproves of Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) program rules regarding how to make complaints concerning allegations of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The rules were drafted in May 2022 following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bostock v Clayton County. In that ruling, Supreme Court justices said that Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the prohibition on sex discrimination in employment includes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The FNS determined that the court’s decision applies to its federally funded programs, including SNAP. The bill was co-sponsored by 19 Republican senators. Ahead of Thursday’s vote, Connecticut’s junior senator called Republicans who supported the resolution “bullies” and accused them of inventing a problem that doesn’t exist. He said their purported campaign targeting LGBTQ+ children could have lethal consequences, citing statistics showing 52% of transgender children contemplate suicide because of rejection. “Just think about that for a second. Half of the kids who are transgender come to the conclusion at some point in their young lives, that they would be better off dead, dead than to live in a world that believes that they are threats to be marginalized or expunged. How small, how tiny do you have to be to reach a position of political leadership and choose to use that position to bully or shame kids?” said Murphy. “This campaign of targeting and marginalizing gay and transgender kids trying to convince the country that they are threats to this country – it's just wrong on the facts. It's wrong morally, and it has lethal consequences. And it should stop.” Read less HARTFORD–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) announced that Intelligent Cutting Solutions (ICS), based in Newington, was named “Innovator of the Month.” Founded in July of 2020 by entrepreneurs Ibrahim Ibrahim and Darius Kania, ICS is a state-of-the-art waterjet cutting facility that provides water jet cutting services to Connecticut’s aerospace and defense sectors as well as the automotive, medical, and architecture industries. Their technology cuts through materials up to ten inches thick with superior edge quality and no distortion or damage due to heat. “It’s great to see one small business in Connecticut help countless others with their services. The team at Intelligent Cutting Solutions understood there was a gap in the market to meet the needs of our state’s aerospace and defense
...Read more industries. Their waterjet cutting systems are some of the best in business, and I’m proud to recognize ICS for their success and rapid growth since making the big leap to launch a business at the start of a pandemic,” said Murphy. “We saw a gap in Connecticut when searching for a reliable water jet cutting vendor, and we filled that gap with state-of-the art water jet cutting and inspection equipment. For years we struggled to find a water jet cutting vendor that can cut parts with aerospace accuracy and provide dimensional certification reports. So, we decided to start Intelligent Cutting Solutions. We just received our sixth water jet machine to keep our lead times low and to have machine redundancy. And our customers love the fact that we are inspecting the parts with laser inspection systems. Because the technology is so accurate nowadays we are able to produce near net shapes that require minimum subsequent processing by our customers,” said Ibrahim Ibrahim of ICS. Murphy believes entrepreneurship and innovation are the building blocks for a strong economy. In the U.S. Senate, he has introduced legislation to incentivize angel investors to put more money into startup companies—the Angel Tax Credit Act. Startup companies create an average of 2 million jobs each year. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Tuesday released the following statement after the U.S. Senate voted to confirm Jack Lew to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Israel: “Since October 7th, the Biden administration has been working around the clock to support our ally Israel, negotiate the rescue of hostages held by Hamas, and deliver humanitarian assistance to innocent civilians in Gaza. Having an ambassador on the ground is key to ensuring these efforts are as successful as possible, and I was proud to vote for Jack Lew’s confirmation today,” said Murphy. “It’s important we have every post that is related to resolving this crisis filled. I will continue to
...Read more push for the swift confirmation of nominees for U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon and Egypt, the State Department’s Coordinator for Counterterrorism, and the USAID Assistant Administrator for the Middle East. ” Last week, Murphy released a statement after the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to send the nominations for the U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Egypt to the U.S. Senate floor. Murphy spoke at a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the nominations hearings of Jack Lew to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Israel. Earlier this month, Murphy called for swift confirmation of key State Department officials in the Middle East, including Ambassador to Israel. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) led 21 of their Senate colleagues in releasing the following statement: “We condemn Hamas’ horrific terrorist attacks against Israel, for which Israel must hold Hamas accountable. In the course of that endeavor, every effort must be made to protect innocent civilians. Right now, hospitals in Gaza are hours away from running out of fuel that powers ventilators, incubators for babies, and other lifesaving equipment, and diseases are rapidly spreading without power to treat and pump clean drinking water. To prevent a
...Read more potential health crisis and help save countless lives, we believe it is possible to transport fuel directly to these hospitals, desalination plants, and water pumping stations with full transparency to prevent diversion to Hamas. There are extensive oversight mechanisms in place that will track the fuel deliveries directly to the intended sites where they can be used immediately to prevent the deaths of innocent civilians, including babies and children. We encourage the Biden administration to work with our Israeli, Egyptian, and UN partners to enable these lifesaving deliveries.” Murphy, Van Hollen, Schatz, Welch, Merkley are joined by U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Cory Booker (D-N.J), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Angus King (I-Maine), Chris Coons (D-Del.), and Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Friday wrote a Substack post explaining how the massive concentration of economic power in the technology, financial, and media industries over the last forty years has come with both an economic and a spiritual cost for the American people. Murphy lays out how monopolies and anti-competitive markets have not only increased costs and depressed wages for workers, but they have also contributed to “the unspooling of America.” Murphy highlighted the powerlessness many Americans feel living in a system where unelected mega-corporations make the rules that govern their daily lives: “Citizens may be frustrated with the quality of their government, but at least they have agency when it comes to who runs public institutions. They get to vote in
...Read more and out elected leaders, and with that ability comes a feeling of empowerment and control. But increasingly, elected government isn’t making the decisions most critical to the lives of ordinary Americans. Instead, those decisions are made by monopoly or near-monopoly companies, who have so much power as to be nearly immune from government touch, and so much concentrated market share that consumers have no choice but to abide by their rules.” On how government can fight back, Murphy wrote: “But there is good news – government possesses the tools necessary to unwind concentrated economic power. Some of these tools are old-fashioned regulatory power. For instance, why shouldn’t the rules of how our kids exist online be set by elected government instead of profit-obsessed private companies? Congress could, tomorrow, pass legislation to protect kids online and take back this rule-setting function from the wildly irresponsible hands of TikTok and Meta. Antitrust policy is another important, long dormant tool. Luckily, the Biden Administration has revived this capacity through a newly aggressive Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission. Suddenly, the big private governments are being held accountable by antitrust regulators, and that’s a great thing.” Murphy concluded: “I care about breaking up monopoly power because it’s good for consumers and workers. Costs are too high and wages are too low for the people I represent in Connecticut, and antitrust policy is an important means to give consumers more power to find lower prices and give workers more power to bargain for higher wages. But I care just as much about the crappy way that a lot of people I represent are feeling today. There are a lot of reasons for America’s spiritual malaise, but this feeling of powerlessness is a big element. And taking power away from private governments and restoring it to consumers and workers, through truly competitive markets, or to citizens, through active government intervention in the economic rule setting, is a way to help replenish the soul of our nation.” Earlier this week, Murphy hosted the first conversation in new series breaking down the Biden administration’s steps to shift the balance back in favor of the American people, focusing on FTC and DOJ’s recent actions to reshape major sectors like online commerce, internet search, health care, and airlines to the benefit of consumers. Murphy was joined by Bill McGee, Senior Fellow for Aviation and Travel at the American Economic Liberties Project, for a discussion on the DOJ’s lawsuit against the proposed JetBlue-Spirit merger and its potential consequences for consumers, airline workers, and local communities. Read the full post here. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) led 22 of their Senate colleagues in releasing the following statement: “We condemn Hamas’ horrific terrorist attacks against Israel, for which Israel must hold Hamas accountable. In the course of that endeavor, every effort must be made to protect innocent civilians. Right now, hospitals in Gaza are hours away from running out of fuel that powers ventilators, incubators for babies, and other lifesaving equipment, and diseases are rapidly spreading without power to treat and pump clean drinking water. To prevent a
...Read more potential health crisis and help save countless lives, we believe it is possible to transport fuel directly to these hospitals, desalination plants, and water pumping stations with full transparency to prevent diversion to Hamas. There are extensive oversight mechanisms in place that will track the fuel deliveries directly to the intended sites where they can be used immediately to prevent the deaths of innocent civilians, including babies and children. We encourage the Biden administration to work with our Israeli, Egyptian, and UN partners to enable these lifesaving deliveries.” Murphy, Van Hollen, Schatz, Welch, Merkley are joined by U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Cory Booker (D-N.J), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Angus King (I-Maine), Chris Coons (D-Del.), and Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.). ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) released the following statement on the Israel-Hamas War: “Israel has a right to defend its citizens after Hamas’s terrorist attacks, which have driven the region into turmoil and cost thousands of lives. The war in Gaza has become a humanitarian crisis and has claimed the lives of innocent Palestinians. As the United States put forward at the United Nations, we are calling for
...Read more humanitarian pauses to allow full, rapid, safe and unhindered humanitarian assistance for civilians and the immediate, unconditional release of all remaining hostages.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee and Chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, released the following statement on President Biden’s request for supplemental funding to support domestic priorities and address urgent needs. “It is possible for Congress to both support Ukraine and Israel while also tackling the major, pressing challenges here at home. President Biden’s supplemental request would provide funding to address the urgent needs of families and local communities in Connecticut and across the country. “This request includes a new batch of federal dollars to help keep child care costs low for families, while ensuring childcare providers can keep their doors open. It would also
...Read more bolster our federal response to the fentanyl crisis that has devastated so many communities by providing life-saving overdose prevention and recovery services. Additionally, this request includes emergency disaster funding to help Connecticut farms that were hit hard by historic flooding this summer. “In the wake of the Hamas attacks on Israel, we have seen a disturbing rise in anti-Semitism and Islamophobia here at home. I have been calling for an immediate increase in funding for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program, and I’m glad this request includes $200 million to help ensure synagogues, mosques, and other religious institutions have the resource they need to feel secure. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I will fight to make sure this funding becomes a reality.” Earlier this month, Murphy led a bipartisan group of senators in calling for additional funding for FEMA’s Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP) to be included in any supplemental funding package Congress may consider. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) spoke on the U.S. Senate floor in opposition to U.S. Senator Roger Marshall’s (R-Kansas) and Senate Republicans’ effort to target LGBTQ children and adults by allowing schools to refuse to serve meals to students who identify as LGBTQ or state agencies to reject applicants for SNAP and other nutrition programs on the basis that they are LGBTQ. The resolution failed by a vote of 50-47. “If you're feeding poor kids, it shouldn't matter whether that kid is straight or gay or transgender, whether they're black or white, whether they're Catholic or Protestant. You can't choose not to feed a kid because of their ethnicity, their race, or their sexual orientation. That's just common sense. And I'll guarantee you 90% of Americans agree with
...Read more that sentiment. The reason we're debating this resolution, though, isn't because there's a problem that needs to be solved. We're debating this resolution because the right wing in this nation has launched a relentless and unceasing campaign to marginalize, demonize, and bully kids who are gay, transgender, or non-binary,” said Murphy. Murphy highlighted how out of touch these Republican efforts are with what people in America really care about: “A few weeks ago, I finished up my annual Walk across the state of Connecticut. Each year I spend a week walking about 20 miles a day talking to hundreds of people, most of them totally nonpolitical, about what they care about and what they want their leaders to be working on. You know what nobody talked to me about on that walk? Children's sexual orientation. Drag shows in schools. Bathroom labeling. You know what they did talk to me about? Wages not keeping up with costs. The safety of their neighborhoods. Israel. Opioids. Drug costs.” “It is no wonder the candidacy of Ron DeSantis – really founded on his relentless similar campaign of attacks against gay kids and adults in Florida – is floundering. Because even primary voting Republicans think that this obsession that Republicans have with children's sexual orientation or gender identity is just super creepy and super weird. And it has nothing to do with the actual set of problems that this nation is facing,” Murphy added. Murphy told the story of Seth Walsh, a 13-year-old who died by suicide after relentless bullying for his LGBTQ identity and stressed the fatal consequences of Republican anti-LGBTQ rhetoric: “A recent survey of transgender youth showed that half of them – 52% of them – have contemplated suicide over the last year. Just think about that for a second. Half of the kids who are transgender come to the conclusion at some point in their young lives, that they would be better off dead, than to live in a world that believes that they are threats to be marginalized or expunged.” Murphy concluded: “How small, how tiny do you have to be to reach a position of political leadership and choose to use that position to bully or shame kids like Seth? This campaign of targeting and marginalizing gay and transgender kids trying to convince the country that they are threats to this country – it's just wrong on the facts. It's wrong morally, and it has lethal consequences. And it should stop.” A full transcript of his remarks can be found below: “Mr. President, on the merits, this resolution is just absurd. The Department of Agriculture is not as Senator Cruz alleges punishing schools based upon how they label bathrooms or what they teach in health classes. The offenses that Senator Marshall, Senator Cruz are alleging here are just made up. “What the department is saying is simple. If you're feeding poor kids, it shouldn't matter whether that kid is straight or gay or transgender, whether they're black or white, whether they're Catholic or Protestant. You can't choose not to feed a kid because of their ethnicity, their race, or their sexual orientation. That's just common sense. And I'll guarantee you 90% of Americans agree with that sentiment. “The reason we're debating this resolution, though, isn't because there's a problem that needs to be solved. We're debating this resolution because the right wing in this nation has launched a relentless and unceasing campaign to marginalize, demonize, and bully kids who are gay, transgender, or non-binary. “All across the country where Republican state legislatures are introducing bills designed to demonize gay children, to make people believe that these kids are a threat to others. Hundreds and hundreds of bills all centered on the same lie as this resolution: that it's not okay to be gay, that it's abnormal to be transgender, and that society should rally around efforts to bully and shame these children and their families. “A few weeks ago, I finished up my annual Walk across the state of Connecticut. Each year I spend a week walking about 20 miles a day talking to hundreds of people, most of them totally nonpolitical, about what they care about and what they want their leaders to be working on. “You know what nobody talked to me about on that walk? Children's sexual orientation. Drag shows in schools. Bathroom labeling. You know what they did talk to me about? Wages not keeping up with costs. The safety of their neighborhoods. Israel. Opioids. Drug costs. “This obsession that Senator Marshall and Senator Cruz and their right wing allies have with the sexual orientation of our kids is so divorced from what people are actually talking about in this country. It is no wonder the candidacy of Ron DeSantis – really founded on his relentless similar campaign of attacks against gay kids and adults in Florida – is floundering. Because even primary voting Republicans think that this obsession that Republicans have with children's sexual orientation or gender identity is just super creepy and super weird. And it has nothing to do with the actual set of problems that this nation is facing. “But there is one problem attached to this resolution. There are consequences to what Senator Marshall and Senator Cruz are proposing. When leaders choose to make bullying and marginalizing gay kids a top priority, kids listen. Fuel gets given to their bullies. People like the senators that are sponsoring this resolution, legitimize attacks on gay kids and make those kids feel inferior and alone. “The students at Seth Walsh's school, they were systematic in the way that they targeted him because he was gay. They pushed him down the stairs. They kicked him until he was badly bruised. They screened at him. They called him names. No doubt these bullies took direction and inspiration from adults who paved the way who endorsed this kind of behavior. “And then one day after one of these incidents a frightened Seth called his mom and he said, Mom, you got to come get me right now. His mother could feel the fear in his voice. So she grabbed Seth's little brother, they rushed out the door, they went to the school, they brought him home. His mom was so supportive that afternoon. They just sat, and they talked Seth went upstairs. He took a shower to calm himself down. Afterwards, he came downstairs to ask his mom for a pen. told him he was going outside to play with the dogs. “10 minutes later, his mom went outside to continue this conversation with her son. But it was too late. Seth had hung himself from a tree. And the pen he had asked for was for his suicide note. Seth Walsh was 13 years old. “A recent survey of transgender youth showed that half of them – 52% of them – have contemplated suicide over the last year. Just think about that for a second. Half of the kids who are transgender come to the conclusion at some point in their young lives, that they would be better off dead, dead than to live in a world that believes that they are threats to be marginalized or expunged. “How small, how tiny do you have to be to reach a position of political leadership and choose to use that position to bully or shame kids like Seth? This campaign of targeting and marginalizing gay and transgender kids trying to convince the country that they are threats to this country – it's just wrong on the facts. It's wrong morally, and it has lethal consequences. And it should stop.” ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Thursday released the following statement after the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to send the nominations for the U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Egypt to the U.S. Senate floor for confirmation: “Jack Lew is eminently qualified to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Israel, and his confirmation is critical to our ability to most effectively support our ally, work to prevent a larger conflict in the region, and protect innocent civilians. I look forward to his swift confirmation by the full Senate, but there are several other vacant posts in the region and their confirmation is just as crucial. I’m glad to see the
...Read more nominee for U.S. Ambassador to Egypt also advance to the Senate floor, and I will continue working with Chairman Cardin and my colleagues on the committee to make sure we have a Senate-confirmed American diplomat in every capital in the region.” Last week, Murphy spoke at a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the nominations hearings of Jack Lew to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Herro Mustafa Garg to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Egypt. Earlier this month, Murphy called for swift confirmation of key State Department officials in the Middle East, including Ambassador to Israel and Egypt. Since then, the Senate has confirmed the ambassadors to Kuwait and Oman. ### Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism, on Thursday released the following statement after meeting with World Food Programme (WFP) Executive Director Cindy McCain: “The humanitarian situation in Gaza is dire, and it was important to get an update from WFP Executive Director Cindy McCain on what her organization is seeing on the ground. They have done incredible work to feed half a million Gazans since the start of this crisis and are working to expand operations, but emergency food supplies are dwindling and their entire aid distribution system needs fuel to operate. It is urgent for Israel to allow fuel to reach hospitals, desalination plants, and water pumping
...Read more stations – with all of the necessary protocols to prevent diversion – into Gaza to save the lives of innocent civilians. I will continue pushing for the United States to ensure our humanitarian partners at UNRWA, WFP, and other organizations receive the support necessary to help those fleeing violence.” Last week, Murphy led 33 of his Senate colleagues in urging the Biden administration to lead the international community in contributing to the United Nations’ emergency appeal of $294 million to address the immediate humanitarian needs in the West Bank and Gaza. ### Read less Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., is leading a call to boost federal funding for security at synagogues, mosques, and other places of worship as hate crimes increase and tensions rise over the war in Israel. Murphy, chairman of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, joined other senators Friday in seeking $500 million for a Federal Emergency Management Agency grant program. Organizations could use the funds for gates, motion lights, prevention planning exercises, contracts with security personnel, and other security hardening measures. "In the wake of the horrific Hamas terror attacks on Israel," Murphy said, "I am deeply concerned about the increased threats against synagogues, mosques, and other religious institutions here at home." In a letter to
...Read more House and Senate Appropriations Committee leaders, Murphy and three other Democratic senators wrote that "domestic terrorism and hate crimes targeted at vulnerable communities are at historic highs." "Hate and extremism continue to pose a threat to minority communities and we should ensure that we are able to provide robust support to our constituencies who are threatened by such violence," the senators wrote. Police in Connecticut have said they are on heightened alert and are sharing information on threats targeting synagogues and other places of worship. Rabbi Shaya Gopin of Chabad House of Greater Hartford said the state's Jewish population has to be practical "and conduct ourselves in a safe and secure way," while at the same time refusing to be intimidated and holding fast to its faith. Omar Abdelgader, president of the New Britain-based Islamic Association of Central Connecticut, said the federal funding would be "more than welcome." The mosque could use the money to add cameras and a gate and to pay security guards when congregants gather for worship, Abdelgader said. Mobashar Akram, general secretary of the Islamic Center of Connecticut based in Windsor, said he is concerned about safety at both mosques and synagogues as images of bloodshed in the ongoing war are flashed across screens. "It just takes one person to cause a lot of damage," Akram said. In its recently released annual crime report, the FBI listed three anti-Jewish hate crimes in Connecticut last year and three anti-Muslim hate crimes. Across the nation, the agency recorded more than 11,000 hate crime incidents, the most since it started collecting such data in 1991. The number included 1,124 incidents of anti-Jewish hate crime, an increase over 824 incidents reported in 2021. Anti-Muslim incidents increased to 158 last year from 153 incidents the year before, according to the FBI. In recent weeks, since Hamas attacked Israel, reports of antisemitic incidents have been increasing around the country. At the same time, a recent attack on a Palestinian family in Illinois left a 6-year-old boy dead and his mother hospitalized. Muslim Americans also are reporting more incidents of violence and bigotry against their communities since the war started. The Anti-Defamation League reported a 100 percent increase in antisemitic incidents in Connecticut last year - 34 incidents in 2021 and 68 in 2022 - compared with a 36 percent increase nationwide. The total in Connecticut included 55 incidents of harassment and 13 incidents of vandalism. No assaults were recorded in 2022, according to the report. Nationally, ADL recorded 3,697 antisemitic incidents in 2022, the highest total since the organization started tracking such data in 1979. The organization, according to its Audit of Antisemitic Incidents, draws its numbers from both criminal and non-criminal incidents of harassment, vandalism, and assault against individuals and groups as reported to the ADL by victims, law enforcement, the media and partner organizations. As the war in Israel and Gaza continues, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York, said, "we are likely to see threats to Jewish, Muslim, and Arab communities grow ... Every American has the right to worship freely and without fear." In their letter to Appropriations Committee leaders, Murphy and the other senators asked that the $500 million be split between eligible nonprofit organizations in high-risk urban areas and eligible organizations outside such areas. In the past fiscal year, the program distributed $305 million, but not all organizations that applied for funding received it, Murphy said. Read less Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn, led more than 30 fellow senators in urging the Biden Administration to send humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip and West Bank amid Israeli attacks, his office announced Wednesday. In the letter, addressed to Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, the senators expressed support for "Israel's right to defend its people" against the recent violence carried out by the militant group Hamas, who "bears the blame for initiating this conflict." However, they continued, "We also know there are many innocent Palestinians in Gaza who do not support Hamas and urgently need help as they seek to flee the fighting." "Displaced people around the world depend on lifesaving humanitarian assistance from the UN and its partners to feed their families, receive medical
...Read more treatment, and secure shelter," the senators wrote. "The United States should continue its steadfast support for Israel while also doing our part to help the UN assist innocent civilians as they flee the violence." Murphy and the other Democratic senators did not endorse a ceasefire in Gaza, as a small group of House Democrats and a growing number of advocacy groups have demanded. Instead, they pressed the U.S. to contribute to the United Nation's appeal for $294 million in aid "to address the immediate humanitarian needs in the West Bank and Gaza." President Joe Biden on Wednesday announced the U.S. will provide $100 million in aid to Gaza and the West Bank through partnerships with the United Nations and international NGOs. "Civilians are not to blame and should not suffer for Hamas's horrific terrorism," Biden said in a statement. "Civilian lives must be protected and assistance must urgently reach those in need." Additionally, Biden plans to ask Congress for $10 billion in assistance to Israel, according to the New York Times. The Murphy-led letter to Blinken was signed by 33 of the 51 senators who make up the Democratic caucus, including prominent names such as Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.; Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.; and Cory Booker, D-N.J. Other Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., did not sign, nor did any Senate Republicans. Connecticut's other senator, Democrat Richard Blumenthal, did not sign the letter but did tweet his support for "enabling lifesaving humanitarian assistance to reach all who need it in Israel and Gaza." On Thursday, Blumenthal signed onto a statement from Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., that urged "swift implementation of sustained access for humanitarian aid, including water and medical supplies, to save civilian lives in Gaza." Over nearly two weeks since Hamas's attacks killed more than 1,300 Israeli civilians, Israel has largely shut off supplies to Gaza, while repeatedly launching missiles into the territory. Last week, Israel ordered approximately 1 million residents to evacuate Gaza's northern half or risk being hit by Israeli strikes. The death toll in Gaza since Israel declared war has risen to 3,785 Palestinians killed, including 1,524 children, 1,000 women and 120 older people, the Gaza Health Ministry said Thursday. In recent days, the violence has spilled into the West Bank, where Israeli forces have killed at least 69 Palestinians and arrested hundreds more. A United Nations official on Wednesday called the situation in Gaza an "unprecedented catastrophe," pleading for aid to be allowed into the region. On the Senate floor Wednesday, Murphy advocated supporting Israel but also urged the United States to learn lessons from the nation's response to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, which includes long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In his view, the U.S. was "far too cavalier about civilian casualties and the humanitarian cost of our pursuit of the Taliban" and wound up "producing more terrorists and insurgents than they were eliminating." "If we're going to be honest with our friends in Israel, then we need to admit that we often failed to see beyond our fury and that we made mistakes by not understanding what came next after the invasion of Afghanistan and the decapitation of our enemy," Murphy said. "We had a Day One strategy, but we did not have a Day Two strategy, and we paid a horrible price." Read less WASHINGTON–Two weeks ahead of Election Day, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, on Tuesday requested an update from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on its implementation of President Biden’s Executive Order from March 2021 requiring federal agencies to expand opportunities to register to vote. In a letter to Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra, Murphy urged HHS to incorporate voter registration options into enrollment on Healthcare.gov. “Specifically, I write to seek an update on the status of whether voter registration options will be incorporated into Healthcare.gov during enrollment. Given the number of Americans who utilize Healthcare.gov, I strongly encourage HHS to
...Read more incorporate such an option as soon as possible, especially in light of upcoming national elections,” Murphy wrote. “On September 28, 2021, the White House released a “Fact Sheet” which detailed steps that agencies have taken, or plan to take, to address the requirements of the March 7th EO. Subsequently, on December 8, 2021, the White House released another “Fact Sheet” outlining additional specific actions, including a commitment to making it easier to register to vote by utilizing Healthcare.gov to connect voters to voter registration services and other voter services,” Murphy continued. “As of today’s date, it does not appear that a voter registration option has been incorporated in the Healthcare.gov enrollment process.” Murphy concluded: “The right to vote is the foundation of our democracy, but states around the country are increasingly making it more difficult for Americans to make their voices heard. Ensuring the American people are able to exercise this fundamental right must be a priority, and, in service of that goal, we must offer voters as many opportunities as possible to register.” Full text of the letter is available here and below. Dear Secretary Becerra, I write to request an update from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regarding the implementation of Executive Order 14019 which among other things, required federal agencies to consider ways to expand citizens’ opportunities to register to vote and obtain information about the electoral process. Specifically, I write to seek an update on the status of whether voter registration options will be incorporated into Healthcare.gov during enrollment. Given the number of Americans who utilize Healthcare.gov, I strongly encourage HHS to incorporate such an option as soon as possible, especially in light of upcoming national elections. As you know, on March 7th, 2021, President Biden signed EO 14019 (March 7th EO)[1] to promote access to voting, simultaneously acknowledging that there are many existing obstacles to exercising the right to vote for countless Americans which ultimately frustrate their right to participate in our democracy. The March 7th EO also required each agency to submit a strategic plan outlining the results of internal reviews examining ways the agency could facilitate additional voter registration and participation consistent with the law. On September 28, 2021, the White House released a “Fact Sheet” which detailed steps that agencies have taken, or plan to take, to address the requirements of the March 7th EO[2]. Subsequently, on December 8, 2021, the White House released another “Fact Sheet” outlining additional specific actions, including a commitment to making it easier to register to vote by utilizing Healthcare.gov to connect voters to voter registration services and other voter services[3]. As of today’s date, it does not appear that a voter registration option has been incorporated in the Healthcare.gov enrollment process. The right to vote is the foundation of our democracy, but states around the country are increasingly making it more difficult for Americans to make their voices heard. Ensuring the American people are able to exercise this fundamental right must be a priority, and, in service of that goal, we must offer voters as many opportunities as possible to register. As such, I write to inquire about the status of incorporating a voter registration option on Healthcare.gov. ### [1] Exec. Order No 14019, 86 C.F.R. 13623 (2021) Executive Order on Promoting Access to Voting | The White House [2] White House. (2021, September 28). FACT SHEET: Biden Administration Promotes Voter Participation with New Agency Steps. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/09/28/fact-sheet-biden-administration-promotes-voter-participation-with-new-agency-steps/ [3]White House. (2021, December 8). FACT SHEET: The Biden-Harris Administration is Taking Action to Restore and Strengthen American Democracy. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/12/08/fact-sheet-the-biden-harris-administration-is-taking-action-to-restore-and-strengthen-american-democracy/ Read less WASHINGTON–U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined a group of 32 colleagues in urging Congressional leaders to extend funding for the Affordable Connectivity Program, which provides financial assistance to access high-speed internet for 172,54 households in Connecticut and more than 21 million working families across the nation. “We write to urge you to extend funding for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), which provides over 21 million working families with financial assistance for broadband access, to help bridge the digital divide so they can continue to afford the broadband services they need for work, school, health care, and more,” wrote the senators. “Should ACP funding not be extended, millions of Americans could be at risk of losing
...Read more access to broadband.” “Failing to extend funding would be irresponsible,” they continued. “We urge you to extend funding for the ACP in a government appropriations package and include a long-term solution that ensures efficient spending of taxpayer dollars.” This letter is signed by U.S. Senators Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.)Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). The full letter can be found HERE. ### Read less 
