url,title,date,year,month,party,chamber,state,member_name,bioguide_id,domain,scraper,source,date_source,text,has_text,collected_at,updated_at https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/issue-in-focus?ContentRecord_id=720BD1CB-CD72-45A9-A8E4-1B8066C5A22B,Defending Religious Liberty from Progressive Extremists,2018-12-21,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Religious liberty is one of the defining principles of our founding and our history. We are incredibly fortunate that for nearly two and half centuries, our tradition of religious freedom guaranteed to us under the First Amendment has accommodated people of many different faiths and deeply held beliefs. So even though the Supreme Court ruled that the states must legally change the definition of marriage to include same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, Americans are still constitutionally allowed to disagree with this definition on the basis of their religion or personal beliefs. As Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his Obergefell v. Hodges opinion, The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths In turn, those who believe allowing same-sex marriage is proper or indeed essential, whether as a matter of religious conviction or secular belief, may engage those who disagree with their view in an open and searching debate. But this week, the Senate was close to confirming a nominee to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission who threatens to deny this principle. Chai Feldblum, who was first nominated to the EEOC by President Obama in 2009, was re-nominated to the commission's five-member board by President Trump last December. And unfortunately, Feldblum has had a history of pushing a political agenda on marriage at the expense of religious freedom. Feldblum has written that she sees the conflict between religious belief and LGBT liberty as a zero-sum game where a gain for one side necessarily entails a corresponding loss for the other side. And there is no mystery about which side she thinks should win. In a separate speech she said, There can be a conflict between religious liberty and sexual liberty, but in almost all cases the sexual liberty should win I'm having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win. These are not the words of an open-minded jurist. Rather, they are the words of an activist intent on stamping out all opposition to her cause. In fact, she has even gone so far as to say that granting liberty to gay people cannot be adequately advanced if pockets of resistance are permitted to flourish. As an EEOC commissioner, Feldblum would be in a prime position to stamp out those pockets of resistance. As she herself told the Washington Blade in 2015, The EEOC has jurisdiction only over employment. But other federal agencies that enforce sex discrimination provisions often look to our interpretation for guidance in interpreting the laws they enforce. And that is why I objected to and blocked her re-confirmation on the Senate floor this week: the federal government should never be used as a tool to stamp out religious liberty. While Obergefell v. Hodges changed the legal definition of marriage which Americans are free to agree with if they choose the First Amendment also unequivocally protects an individual's right to believe in traditional marriage. We are blessed enough to live in a country that has historically valued religious freedom and understood its importance to human happiness and social flourishing. It is of the utmost importance that we confirm nominees to our government who will continue to uphold and protect this freedom.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=731BEE6D-9FAE-40FA-99EC-32A4AE03620E,"December 21, 2018 Mobile Office Visit Box to Juab County",2018-12-21,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Nephi When: Friday, December 21, 2018 @ 8:30 am 10:00 am Where: Nephi City Hall, 21 E 100 N, Nephi, UT 84648",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=2219ABAA-9020-4DEF-B3CA-4E4094634307,Sen. Lee Applauds U.S.-Mexico Asylum Agreement,2018-12-21,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONSen. Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement today responding to Thursday's Department of Homeland Security announcement that the United States and Mexico had reached an agreement that will help solve the migrant crisis: I applaud Secretary Nielsen's announcement yesterday of the Migration Protection Protocol. For too long our asylum system has been overloaded and subject to serious abuse. The Administration's new policy is a strong first step toward solving these problems and putting the system on a more sustainable footing, Lee said. The new protocol also shows what close cooperation with Mexico on migrant issues - something I have been strongly encouraging on both sides of the border - can accomplish. Going forward, my hope is that Congress follows the Administration's example and enacts permanent changes to our asylum system, Lee continued. I firmly believe both in the rule of law and that America should provide sanctuary for legitimate asylum seekers who suffer persecution in their home countries. The MPP advances both of these objectives, and is a great first step toward much needed reform of our asylum system. Sen. Lee visited Mexico twice in the last two months. You can read more about his trips here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=453AED16-732B-49B2-B04F-CD715F228E30,Sen. Lee Comments on Public Lands Bill,2018-12-21,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON - Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement Friday regarding a public lands package that failed to pass the Senate Wednesday night: I understand people's frustration, and I share it. Governor Herbert, like 49 other governors, has been completely cut out of this broken, unfair process. He has no choice but to accept the process and simply hope to get what he can out of it. Chairman Bishop hates the process too, but he is up against the clock, with Democrats about to take over the House. If I were in their shoes, I might be saying exactly what they are saying. But I'm not. I'm not just in the Senate; I'm on the committee, which is driving this process. I understand people want me to let the bad process slide this once so we get it done. But that is exactly how the broken process the process that excludes Utah, that cuts Utah out, and leaves Utah behind perpetuates itself. I'm the one person in a position to stand up for my state and shine a light on this broken process. That's the only way it's ever going to get better. I understand this bill will probably pass now in a few weeks, but it will do so without my vote. Governor Herbert and Chairman Bishop are good friends, good men, and excellent public servants. I respect their position and empathize with it. But my job is different from their jobs. And as long as the Senate tries to foist these lands bills on western states at the last minute, hiding the bill as long as possible to avoid transparency and accountability, I will fight it in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and on the Senate floor. Utah and the country deserve better.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-chairman-s-note?ContentRecord_id=7A21EA2A-B278-4F85-9027-1BE909AA8213,Towards A Better Land Deal in Utah,2018-12-21,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"This Wednesday, a group of legislators tried to sneak legislation expanding the federal government's control of Utah past the United States Senate. The 680-page bill was not made public until 10 am Wednesday morning, and less than 12 hours later, these legislators were trying to force final passage through the Senate through unanimous consent, without any debate or amendment. I objected. This bill would have had a big impact on the state of Utah, creating 1.3 million acres of wilderness - about half of that in Utah - and permanently reauthorizing the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). That would have made any reform of that flawed program impossible. Coming from a state where two-thirds of the land is owned by the federal government, where we can't do anything without leave from the federal government, that would have hurt. When the federal government owns large amounts of land in your state it means your schools are underfunded; fire, search, and rescue are underfunded; local government is underfunded. That underfunding results from the fact that most of the land is owned by the federal government. You can't tax that land. You receive pennies on the dollar for a program called Payment in Lieu of Taxes. Most of the land cannot be developed privately. Most of the land cannot be taxed by the states and localities. Now make no mistake. I'm not talking about developing our National Parks. We don't want to set up an oil drilling rig under the Delicate Arch. Of the 33.3 million acres owned by the federal government in Utah, just 12 million of them are parks, forests, wilderness, or recreation areas. The vast majority of the rest of federal land could be developed, taxed, and used to create revenue. But right now that land that is excessively restricted and environmentally degraded as a result of poor federal land management policies. And many of these degrading policies are linked to the LWCF. I am not opposed to compromise. I am open to reforming the LWCF. If the program could be reformed so that the fund was used for states to buy land, and not the federal government, I could support that. That is how the program was originally designed. States were supposed to get 60 percent of LWCF money. Instead, states have only received 25 percent. That must change. Also, our National Park Service is already suffering from over $10 billion worth of maintenance backlogs. The federal government should not be buying more land when it can't properly manage the land it has now. LWCF money must first be spent on ending the existing maintenance backlog before more new land can be purchased. But my biggest issue with the bill was that it did nothing to address the imminent threat Utah faces from unilateral executive land grabs through the Antiquities Act. I offered to drop my objection to the entire bill in exchange for adding just two-words: or Utah. These two words would permanently give rural Utahns the peace of mind that the land they use for grazing, farming, hunting, shooting, and a variety of other activities couldn't be stolen from them with the stroke of a Presidential pen. It's the same peace of mind already enjoyed by people in Alaska and Wyoming. They already have an exemption from the Antiquities Act. All I asked for was equal treatment for my fellow Utahns. And that call for equality was rejected. I will continue to work with my colleagues on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to find an adequate compromise that best serves Utah interests, including reforms for the LWCF. As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Lands, securing such a deal will be my top priority. But what I won't do is sign off on a deal that is bad for Utah.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=582243A2-9D02-4030-A9A3-8E89BD5F339D,"December 20, 2018 Mobile Office Visit to Morgan County",2018-12-20,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Morgan When: Thursday, December 20, 2018 @ 8:30 am 9:45 am Where: Morgan City Hall, 90 W Young Street, Morgan, UT 84050",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=A426F4C5-5258-4AC3-AF56-5FB34BC5AF64,"December 20, 2018 Mobile Office Visit to Rich County",2018-12-20,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Randolph When: Thursday, December 20, 2018 @ 3:30 pm 4:30 pm Where: Rich County Courthouse, 20 S Main Street, Randolph, UT 84064",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=D02845D8-4E2F-4A88-8CE8-50924D92BCB4,"December 20, 2018 Mobile Office Visit to Daggett County",2018-12-20,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Manila When: Thursday, December 20, 2018 @ 12:15 pm 1:30 pm Where: Manila Town Hall, 145 E Highway 43, Manila, UT 84046",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=51EF7C0B-0338-438A-AA9A-AB1F0B9BA25B,Hatch Puts on the Boxing Gloves One Last Time in Senate Farewell Video,2018-12-19,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCIn a video produced by the Senate Republican Conference, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT),the President Pro Tempore and Senior Republican in the United States Senate,said farewell tohis Senate colleaguesand thanked Utahnsfor the opportunity to fight for them in the ring. Video on YouTube ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=B908A476-3C1B-40D9-BD52-507C3367F5DD,"Hatch, Schumer Introduce Bipartisan Sports Betting Integrity Legislation",2018-12-19,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DC Today, US Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced the Sports Wagering Market Integrity Act of 2018. The bipartisan legislation would put in place world-class safety measures to protect consumers, preserve the integrity of sporting events, and ensure the propriety of the sports wagering market. As I wrote in Sports Illustrated earlier this year, sports betting is inevitable so let's make sure it's done right, said Hatch. This bill is the first step toward ensuring that sports betting is done right in the states that choose to legalize it.Just as importantly, it provides protections for states that choose not to go down that path. For the better part of this year, I have engaged with and learned from stakeholders on all sides of this issue the gaming industry, professional and amateur sports leagues, consumer advocates, data providers, law enforcement, and many others. The result of those discussions is a comprehensive bill that tackles numerous, complex issues and includes provisions to protect the interests of each of those stakeholders. I am pleased that the Minority Leader has joined me in introducing this legislation, confirming that while this may not be an easy issue, it is a bipartisan one. There is much work to be done, but I hope this bill will serve as a placeholder for the next Congress, should they decide to continue working to address these issues. As a lifelong sports fan I treasure the purity of the game, and afterMurphy v. NCAA,I knew that Congress had an obligation to ensure that the integrity of the games we love was never compromised, said Schumer. That is why I believe the time is now to establish a strong national integrity standard for sports betting that will protect consumers and the games themselves from corruption. The bipartisan legislation that Senator Hatch and I have introduced, follows the principles laid out in the federal framework that I released in August and will serve as solid foundation upon which we build the appropriate guardrails around the burgeoning sports betting industry. I will strongly advocate for this bill to move forward and for Congress to vote to pass federal legislation very soon. Statements of Support Jocelyn Moore, National Football League Executive Vice President: (click here for full NFL letter) ""The Sports Wagering Market Integrity Act reaffirms the long-standing commitment of Congress to protecting the integrity of American athletics. We appreciate the bipartisan leadership demonstrated by Senators Hatch and Schumer in bringing forth this commonsense legislation, and we urge its swift enactment."" Keith Whyte, Executive Director of the National Council on Problem Gambling: The National Council on Problem Gambling thanks Senator Orrin Hatch and Senator Chuck Schumer for their leadership in addressing problem gambling. Using revenue from the existing sports wagering excise tax, this bill provides the first-ever Federal funding dedicated to gambling addiction prevention, research and treatment programs. NCPG believes these measures are a great first step to addressing problem gambling across the country. These essential programs will improve public health and wellness by reducing the personal, social and economic costs of gambling addiction. Gordon A. Smith, United States Tennis Association CEO and Executive Director(click here for full USTA letter): ""Based on our experience with and understanding of sports wagering abroad, the USTA supports a federal, holistic approach to regulating sports wagers, and uniform cooperation and regulation with state gaming regulators and betting operators, as well as robust education and regulations for athletes and others affiliated with these sporting events. The proposed federal sports wagering bill, if enacted, would significantly aid sports organizations in maintaining the integrity of sport. We applaud the introduction of this bill and stand ready to work with you to advance this important legislation."" Russell Moore, President of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission: The proliferation of sports gambling in this country in the wake ofMurphy v. NCAAshould trouble anyone who cares about families, those dealing with gambling addiction, and the vulnerable. Congress must take action to rein in this exploding industry. This bill is a good first step to protect families and the vulnerable from the deceit of sports gambling. Background Senator Hatch was one of four original authors of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992, created to protect the integrity of athletics from taint or corruption. He released a statement earlier this year when the Supreme Court ruled to change the legislation that has limited state-sanctioned sports betting for over two decades.Click herefor more information. In May, Senator Hatch wrote an op-ed in Sports Illustrated that outlined his goal of protecting the integrity of sports. Click here for the full article. In August, Senator Hatch spoke on the Senate floor about his efforts to develop sports betting legislation. Click here for video and speech text. In August, Senator Schumer proposed a federal framework to protect consumers and the integrity of sports. The Sports Wagering Market Integrity Act of 2018 On May 14, 2018, the Supreme Court in Murphy v. NCAA struck down the federal prohibition of state-authorized sports wagering schemes. Since the decision in Murphy, seven states have joined Nevada in accepting sports wagers, with more than two dozen other states considering legislation to legalize sports wagering. States historically have regulated other forms of gaming with little intervention by the federal government. But the interstate nature of most sports wagering and the thriving, transnational illegal market demand the attention of the federal government to establish consistent standards for sports wagering regulators and to provide law enforcement with additional authorities to target the illegal sports wagering market and bad actors in the growing legal market. The Sports Wagering Market Integrity Act of 2018 would: Prohibit the acceptance of sports wagers, with exceptions for social gambling and states that meet certain minimum standards; Permit states to authorize online sports wagering to provide a regulated alternative to the illegal, offshore market; Prohibit sports wagers on amateur sporting events except the Olympics and college sports; Establish to request restrict certain sports wagers when necessary to protect contest integrity; Prohibit sports wagering by individuals younger than 21; athletes, coaches, officials, and others associated with sports organizations; and individuals convicted of certain federal crimes related to sports wagering; Require that sports wagering operators use data provided or licensed by sports organizations to determine the outcome of sports wagers through 2024, and set requirements for data used thereafter; Establish a national self-exclusion list; Put in place a variety of consumer protections, including disclosure, advertising, and reserve requirements; Establish recordkeeping and suspicious transaction reporting requirements; Update existing casino anti-money laundering laws to include sports wagering operators; Provide a process whereby states may compact with each other to permits interstate sports wagering; Designate a non-profit National Sports Wagering Clearinghouse to, inter alia, receive and share anonymized sports wagering data and suspicious transaction reports among sports wagering operators, state regulators, sports organizations, and federal and state law enforcement; Dedicate revenue from the existing sports wagering excise tax to law enforcement and programs for the prevention and treatment of gambling disorder; Update the Wire Act to permit certain interstate sports wagers, while also providing additional enforcement authorities such as a state cause of action and a new mechanism for the Department of Justice to target unlicensed, offshore sports wagering websites; Expand the Sports Bribery Act to cover extortion and blackmail, prohibit sports wagers based on nonpublic information, and strengthen whistleblower protections; and Provide additional authorities to the Department of Health and Human Services to prevent, monitor, and treat gambling addiction. Click here for final bill text. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=6F30B944-7AF5-4EE0-AF4C-D29EDFA963D5,"December 19, 2018 - Mobile Office Visit to Piute County",2018-12-19,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Junction When: Wednesday, December 19th, 2018 @ 2:00 PM- 2:30 PM Where: County Courthouse, 550 North Main, Junction, UT 84740",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=BC273F8E-F7E3-4D00-8AF6-A8075FA50695,"December 19, 2018- Mobile Office Visit to Piute County",2018-12-19,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Joseph When: Wednesday, December 19th, 2018 @ 11:30 AM- 12:00 PM Where: Joseph, UT",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=C86E8B16-FDE7-4BBD-B8F0-E9BA7AF70EBB,"December 19, 2018 - Mobile Office Visit to Piute County",2018-12-19,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Marysvale When: Wednesday, December 19th, 2018 @ 12:30 PM- 1:00 PM Where: Marysvale Community Center, 100 North 215 East, Marysvale, UT 84750",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=CBF93437-7727-4AE4-A937-A53E75A05DB3,Sen. Lee Objects to the Unanimous Consent of Chai Feldblum's Confirmation to the EEOC,2018-12-19,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I first want to note that it has been suggested that there is only one objection to Chai Feldblum's nomination to the EEOC. That is not true. I am among those objectors; I am not the lone objector. My objection to this nominee relates to my belief and religious freedom. You see, religious freedom is very important to me. I am the descendant of people who were ordered exterminated by the Governor of Missouri on October 27, 1837. Religious intolerance cannot be tolerated in this country, and I see a growing wave of religious intolerance. I see a growing wave of sentiment of people suggesting that on the basis of people's religious beliefs, they can be subject to adverse government decision-making. Ms. Feldblum has written that she sees a conflict between religious belief and LGBT liberty as ``a zero-sum game'' where ``a gain for one side necessarily entails a corresponding loss for the other side.'' I see no reason why that should be the case, and I think that is fundamentally incompatible with our Nation's long tradition of pluralism and religious freedom. Make no mistake--there is no mystery about which side Ms. Feldblum thinks should win. In a separate speech, she said: ``There can be a conflict between religious liberty and sexual liberty, but in almost all cases, the sexual liberty should win I'm having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.'' I find these remarks stunning, especially because an entire amendment to the U.S. Constitution--the very first one, by the way--is devoted to religious liberty. These are not the words of an open-minded jurist. These are not the words of an open-minded lawyer. These are the words of an activist intent on stamping out all opposition to her cause. In fact, she has even said as much. She said: ``[G]ranting liberty to gay people . . . cannot be adequately advanced if `pockets of resistance' are permitted to flourish.'' Who is she to decide whether someone should be permitted to persist in their own religious belief simply because those beliefs happen to conflict with a particular political worldview? As an EEO Commissioner, Ms. Feldblum would be in a prime position to stamp out those pockets of resistance. She herself has noted: The EEOC has jurisdiction only over employment. But other Federal agencies that enforce sex discrimination provisions often look to our interpretation for guidance in interpreting the laws they enforce. The Federal Government should never be used as a tool to stamp out religious liberty--that principle which is so central to our Nation's founding and to human happiness itself. It is so important that we have to stand behind it. Ms. Feldblum, however, wants to deny exactly that. On that basis, I object to her confirmation.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=B56162DC-2694-452D-83ED-EFB4BEA44448,"Hatch, Wyden Push For Improvements to the Tariff Exclusion Process",2018-12-18,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DC US Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Ron Wyden (D-OR), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, have written a letter to US Department of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to improve the process that US businesses must go through to request exclusions from Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum. In the letter, Hatch and Wyden express concerns that delays and confusion under the current process extend uncertainty for American workers, businesses, and their suppliers and customers. We commend the Department of Commerce (DOC) for improving the exclusion processat the same time, as stakeholders have advanced through the product exclusion process, additional flaws have surfaced where we believe DOC needs to make improvements,the senators wrote. American businesses report lengthy delays in the processing of exclusion requests; contradictory, incomplete, or ambiguous guidance when the DOC denies requests on technical grounds; and slow and unresponsive replies to their inquiries to the DOC. Each of these flaws undermines the fairness and timeliness of the exclusion process for American stakeholders and we urge DOC to resolve these flaws promptly to reduce economic hardship and uncertainty that stakeholders are experiencing. In this letter, Hatch and Wyden urge the Department of Commerce to improve the product exclusion process in four specific ways: Adhere to the normal review timeline that the department established in the Federal Register (a maximum of 106 days). Clearly identify any technical defects in exclusion requests. Retain the original submittal and posting dates for calculating refunds when technical defects in exclusion requests are cured. Answer inquiries sent to the official Department of Commerce email address with prompt and responsive information. Background:In April, Hatch and Wyden sent aletterto Secretary Ross urging him to improve the exclusion process which was difficult and ineffective for American businesses. Read the fullletterto Secretary Ross below. Dear Secretary Ross: In a letter to you dated April 19, 2018, we requested certain improvements to the process that the Department of Commerce (""DOC"") instituted for product exclusions from the tariffs imposed on imported articles of steel and aluminum under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and Proclamations 9704 and 9705 of March 8, 2018, as amended. Since then, DOC has introduced a formal rebuttal and surrebuttal process and an opportunity for exclusions from quotas applicable to steel and aluminum products from certain countries. We commend DOC for improving the exclusion process with these and other reforms. At the same time, as stakeholders have advanced through the product exclusion process, additional flaws have surfaced where we believe DOC needs to make improvements. As discussed below, American businesses report lengthy delays in the processing of exclusion requests; contradictory, incomplete, or ambiguous guidance when DOC denies requests on technical grounds; and slow and unresponsive replies to their inquiries to DOC. Each of these flaws undermines the fairness and timeliness of the exclusion process for American stakeholders, and we urge DOC to resolve these flaws promptly to reduce the economic hardship and uncertainty that stakeholders are experiencing. According to the interim final rule that DOC published in the Federal Register on September 11, 2018, ""[t]he review period normally will not exceed 106 days for requests that receive objections, including adjudication of objections submitted on exclusion requests and any rebuttals to objections, andsurrebuttals."" However, exclusion requests that were filed and posted as long ago as early April remain pending, a period more than double the 106 days targeted by DOC. Our assessments suggest that, of more than 29,700 posted requests awaiting decision as of December 10, more than 11,700 have been pending for more than 106 days, and more than 4,900 requests have been pending for more than 150 days. Each passing day that an exclusion request sits undecided extends the uncertainty for American workers, businesses, and their suppliers and customers. American businesses also have advised us that their requests for product exclusions have been denied on the basis that DOC deemed their requests to be ""incomplete"" or ""not sufficient,'' but without any explanation of the technical deficiency. Upon soliciting an explanation, the stakeholders report that they have received contradictory, incomplete, or ambiguous guidance from DOC, thus hindering their ability to promptly correct and resubmit a request. When DOC identifies a technical defect in a request, clearly identifying the defect would be appropriate and consistent with due process and fairness. We also understand that, at present, DOC has not clearly indicated whether an exclusion request whose technical defect has been cured will retain the original submittal and posting dates for purposes of calculating a refund of Section 232 duty payments. When DOC denies a request on technical grounds, such as a formatting error or incorrect HTSUS classification, then determines that a product exclusion is justified on the merits, DOC should authorize a refund of all Section 232 duties paid during the review period, including during any interval to cure technical defects. Procedures relating to technical corrections also should be clearly disclosed to the public on the DOC website. Finally, our stakeholders have reported several frustrations with attempts to use the designated DOC email address for inquiries about the steel product exclusion process (Steel232@bis.doc.gov). Problems have included delays of several days, at times more than a week, to receive a response while their tariff expenses continue to accrue; ""form"" answers from DOC that fail to address specific questions posed; and DOC redirecting questions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which has then redirected questions back to DOC, sending our stakeholders into a bureaucratic loop. In light of the foregoing, we urge you to ensure that (i) DOC adheres to the time periods that DOC has indicated for normal review of exclusion requests, and that delays beyond such periods are limited to rare and extraordinary circumstances; (ii) DOC clearly identifies to stakeholders any technical defects that it perceives in product exclusion requests; (iii) in cases when technical defects are cured, DOC retains the original submittal and posting dates for purposes of calculating refunds of Section 232 duty payments; and (iv) DOC answers email inquiries with prompt and responsive information. We look forward to hearing from you regarding further improvements to the Section 232 product exclusion process. We are prepared to assist as appropriate and request your prompt response to our concerns, with a description of your plans and actions to resolve them. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=FFD46E50-CADE-455B-8670-7EB437814221,Hatchs Traumatic Brain Injury Bill Passes Senate Unanimously,2018-12-18,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the President Pro Tempore and Senior Republican in the United States Senate, released the following statement after his legislation, theTraumatic Brain Injury (TBI) ReauthorizationAct of 2018,passed the Senate by unanimous consent. I created this program in 1996 with Ted Kennedy, and I consider it a critical piece of my public health policy legacy,said Hatch.The federal TBI program assists Americans who have sustained a traumatic brain injury to connect with the vital services they need. It also provides for prevention research, including research that will help us determine the incidence and prevalence of TBI at a national scale. I wish to thank my colleagues in both the Senate and the House for working with me to get this done. TheTraumatic Brain Injury Program Reauthorization Act of 2018is supported by the Brain Injury Association of America (BIAA) and the National Association of State Head Injury Administrators (NASHIA).Click hereto read the intro release. Background In 1996, Senator Hatch worked with Senator Ted Kennedy on the original TBI Act to help limit the suffering, death, and long-term disability that results from TBI. The legislation marked the beginning of a multifaceted federal endeavor to address the needs of persons with TBI and their families. Today's TBI program maintains that original framework of prevention, education, access, and protection. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducts projects to reduce the incidence of traumatic brain injury. Through the Administration for Community Living (ACL), the TBI State Partnership Grant Program helps states and territories to build service infrastructure and improve access to services and supports. This bill: Reauthorizes Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) surveillance activities and projects to reduce incidence of TBI. It also extends grants to states for TBI systems, and grants to protection and advocacy (P&A) systems, through the Administration for Community Living (ACL). ACL's TBI State Partnership Grant Program helps states increase access to rehabilitation and other services for individuals with TBI, and its TBI Coordinating Center provides technical assistance to grantees. P&As work to ensure that all individuals with TBI and their families will have accessible, available, acceptable, and appropriate services and supports. Authorizes theNational Concussion Surveillance System (NCSS)at the CDCto better estimate the incidence of TBI across the lifespan at a national level. TheCDC has taken steps to develop the NCSS, which is an effort that aligns with the TBI law's intent, recommendations made by the National Academies, and proposals included in previous budget requests. The system would have the capacity to improve understanding of the full range of circumstances leading to TBI, and to track healthcare utilization and services received after a TBI. Designates authority to the Administration for Community Living (ACL) for the state partnership grants and P&A grants.The TBI Reauthorization Act of 2014 allowed the HHS Secretary to review oversight of the TBI program and found that the federal TBI Program's goals closely align with ACL's mission. As a result, the state partnership grants and P&A components of the federal TBI Program transitioned from HRSA to ACL on October 1, 2015. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=0FA5DB35-C4CD-4431-8024-D720C9B5E88F,Sen. Lee Applauds Passage of the First Step Act,2018-12-18,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONSen. Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement following the Senate's passage of The First Step Act: We did it. We passed real bipartisan criminal justice reform. Thanks to the hard work of my colleagues, American families will be stronger and our communities will be safer. This is a huge win for America and President Trump.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=20EDD896-7CA9-4043-ADCE-E564A97DB05F,Hatchs Human Trafficking Bill Heads to Presidents Desk,2018-12-17,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenatorOrrin Hatch (R-UT) andRepresentative John Curtis (R-UT)released the following statements after thePublic-Private Partnership Advisory Council to End Human Trafficking Actpassed in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. The historic legislation will create a Public-Private Advisory Council to provide a direct line to federal government agencies that will streamline unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles and empower nonprofits and nongovernmental organizations in the fight against human trafficking. The greatest way to really have an impact in ending trafficking around the world is to empower those who have already been engaged in the fight,said Hatch.We've seen up close in Utah how experts have seen real results, and this bill would ensure that the resources of the federal government are put to the best possible use to help vulnerable children around the world. Organizations like Utah's Operation Underground Railroad (OUR) have made a tremendous impact in fighting human trafficking across the world,said Curtis.We can help them do more, saidCurtis. With better coordination and partnership with federal government agencies, imagine what they can accomplish. This legislation is a historic step in our journey to end human trafficking and I thank Senator Hatch for leading the charge. Statement of Support Tim Ballard,Founder and CEO of Operation Underground Railroad Human trafficking is the scourge of our era. I'm thrilled Senator Hatch and Congressman Curtis had the clout to advance this important bill, which will help us make a bigger difference in saving kids from trafficking all over the world. Background The Public-Private Partnership Advisory Council: Is composed of eight to fourteen representatives from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and nonprofit groups that have significant knowledge and experience in anti-human trafficking or rehabilitation and aftercare of human trafficking victims and survivors. Serves as a point of contact for Federal agencies reaching out to anti-human trafficking nonprofits and NGOs for input on programming and policies related to anti-human trafficking efforts. Has members of the Advisory Council appointed by the President for a term of two years and can be reappointed to serve an additional two-year term. They are not considered employees of the Federal government and shall not receive compensation. Meets at its own discretion, but not at least once a year. Formulates assessments and recommendations to ensure that the policy and programming efforts of the Federal Government conform to the best practices in the field of anti-human trafficking and rehabilitation and aftercare of victims. Submits a report to Congressional Committees with any recommendations and action items, not later than one year after the date of enactment. Sunsets September 30, 2020 ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=9E58DFE6-8ECD-4F3A-8F42-8767011B78F8,Hatch Statement on Senator Alexanders Retirement,2018-12-17,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday, Senator Orrin Hatch, President Pro Tempore and Senior Republican in the Senate, released the following statement upon hearing that Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) would not be running for reelection in 2020. Lamar Alexander has been an incredible legislative partner and an even better friend throughout his three terms here in the Senate,said Hatch. He has stood for civility, for bipartisanship, and for pragmatism, and the country is a better place because of him. While he will still accomplish much between now and 2020, Elaine and I wish he and Leslee the very best as they prepare for their next chapter. It is my sincere hope that we might find another opportunity to sit down and play music together down the road. Most recently, Senator Hatch and Senator Alexander celebrated passage of their bipartisanMusic Modernization Actinto law in October. Click below for their mixtape. Video Via YouTube ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=BA17F368-6D63-42C0-9592-227B73D7850A,Hatchs Bipartisan Emergency Medical Services for Children Bill Passes Senate,2018-12-17,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT)released the following statement after his bipartisanEmergency Medical Services for Children(EMSC)Reauthorization Act of 2018(S. 3482) passed the Senate.From smaller-sized medical equipment to different dosage requirements for medicine, the EMSC program helps medical professionals meet the unique needs of pediatric patients and provide state of the art emergency medical care for sick and injured children and adolescents. Since the program was created in 1984, pediatric injury-related death rates have been reduced by more than 40 percent. When I look back at my legislative accomplishments,I am most proud of those that have helped save children's lives. Since I authored the EMSC in 1984, contributions by this federal program have resulted in remarkable advances that have improved the quality of life for sick or injured children,said Hatch.Thanks to the EMSC program, we have state-of-the-art equipment, treatment, medication dosing information, and medical guidelines that are uniquely specialized for caring for pediatric patients in emergency medical situations. EMSC covers the entire spectrum of care, from the 911-call to when the child is back home safe and sound post-treatment. The program's continuation is imperative, and I encourage my colleagues in the House to consider it swiftly. Pediatric patients have important physical, developmental, and mental differences from adults. Now in its 34thyear, the Emergency Medical Services for Children (EMSC) program has made great strides to make sure that the entire spectrum of emergency medical services (EMS) can be provided to children and adolescents no matter where they are. Background State Partnership Grantsprovide states with resources to conduct assessments of their EMSC capabilities; identify gaps; and establish appropriate standards, training and resources to meet the needs of pediatric patients. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories have received EMSC funding under this grant program. Targeted Issue Grantsare awarded to eligible applicants to help address issues of national significance that extend beyond State boundaries. Typically, these grants result in new products or resources, or show the feasibility of new methods, policies, or practices. State Partnership Regionalization of Care (SPROC)grants establish agreements and ultimately implement a regionalized healthcare delivery system to get the right resources to the right patient at the right time. ThePediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN)is a research infrastructure that facilitates the collaboration of pediatric researchers across the nation in order to perform statistically-valid pediatric emergency research. TheData Coordinating Center (DCC)serves as a central repository for data generated by the PECARN research nodes, and works with investigators to ensure data quality. TheNational EMS for Children Data Analysis Resource Center (NEDARC)assists grantees in data collection, analysis and dissemination. TheNational Resource Center (NRC)focuses on dissemination and transfer of best practices in pediatric emergency care. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://stewart.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/stewart-s-legislation-honoring-anwar-sadat-signed-by-president,Stewarts Legislation Honoring Anwar Sadat Signed by President,2018-12-14,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Chris Stewart,S001192,stewart.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. Yesterday, President Trump signed Rep. Chris Stewart's (R-Utah) bipartisan legislation, the Anwar Sadat Centennial Celebration Act, into law. This legislation honors the late president of Egypt, Anwar Sadat, with a Congressional Gold Medal. President Sadat made a historic visit to Israel in 1977, the first Arab leader to do so. This began the foundation of peace between Egypt and Israel. This visit was all the more courageous given the opposition and outrage he faced at the time. President Anwar Sadat truly embodied the statesmanship and fortitude necessary to bring peace to the Middle East. His shining example of putting aside our differences and working towards peace is just as important today as it was during his tenure as President of Egypt. His bravery and dedication to peace deserve much more than a Congressional Gold Medal, but I'm grateful that we can honor him and his everlasting legacy. Rep. Chris Stewart For a video of Congressman Stewart's remarks on the House Floor,click here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=5D5C96B3-0B4D-4988-97B6-D9EA99A8D640,Hatch on Comments He Made Earlier This Week about Accusations Against President Trump,2018-12-14,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington,D.C.Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) issued the following statement about comments he made earlier this week about accusations made against President Trump: Earlier this week in an unplanned hallway interview with CNN, I made comments about allegations against the President that were irresponsibleand a poor reflection on my lengthy record of dedication to the rule of law. While I don't believe Michael Cohen is any kind of reliable voice in this process, I have expressed confidence in Bob Mueller and his investigation countless times, including writing intheWall Street Journalthat he must be allowed to complete his investigation. Last October, when Paul Manafort and Rick Gates were indicted, I said, I believe that it's in the best interest for all parties involved to allow Bob Mueller to conduct a full and vigorous investigation. More recently, this August I acknowledged that the campaign finance allegations were some serious charges, and they can't be ignored. I continue to believe that, and when we see Mueller's full report and the complete filings from the New York U.S. Attorney's office, we can determine the path forward. While I believe the President has succeeded in a number of important policy areas, that success is separate from the validity of these investigations, which I believe should be allowed to run their course. I also said in the unplanned hallway interview that you can make anything a crime under the current laws. I've long believed our criminal code is simply too large. I've proposed legislation to reduce overcriminalization, simplify our criminal code, and reinvigorate criminal intent requirements.(Seehere,here,here,here, andhere.)But at a time when faith in so many of our institutions is at an all-time low, I regret speaking imprudently. I don't believe the President broke the law, but one of the core principles of our country is that no one is above the law. That means anyone who does break the law should face appropriate consequences.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-chairman-s-note?ContentRecord_id=AFE3ADE1-B02C-436F-AB9F-774B35511E8C,Utah Farmers Deserve Better Than This Farm Bill,2018-12-14,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Utah farmers and ranchers need a good farm bill. They need reforms to existing crop insurance and subsidy programs that unfairly favor large corporate farms over small family farms. They need reforms to the federal government's grazing permit process. And they need clarity from the Environmental Protection Agency on which wetlands and waters are or are not subject to costly Clean Water Act regulations. Unfortunately, not only did the farm bill passed by the House and Senate this week do none of those things, but it also made existing farm policy worse by making it easier for the largest farms, and even non-farmers, to get taxpayer money. For example, the bill removed a provision from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) that would have forbidden non-farmers from getting farm subsidies. Now distant relatives and their spouses, who don't farm, can each collect up to $125,000 a year in government subsidies paid by taxpayers. In 2014 Congress did end some direct payment programs to farmers, but it also created two new subsidy programs: the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) programs. At the time farmers could choose which of the two programs to participate in. Under ARC, farmers get a check from the government if their revenue per acre falls below a benchmark level set by the Department of Agriculture. If prices for a commodity, like corn, are low farmers in this program get a check based on their acreage devoted to that crop. Under PLC, farmers get a check from the government when the price of a specific crop falls below a benchmark level set by the Department of Agriculture. If the price of say corn falls below the benchmark price, farmers get a check from the government based on each unit of crop sold. At the time these programs were created farm lobbyists promised they would reduce government subsidies to farmers. The opposite has happened. The projected cost of the two programs was supposed to be $18 billion over five years. Instead it has cost taxpayers $31 billion. Our nations farm policies are not helping small farmers. More than 60% of farm subsidies go to the largest 10% of farms. With all these government subsidies going to the largest farms, how can the smaller farms compete? Not only did Congress not reform these bloated programs, the new farm bill now allows farmers switch between the two programs whenever they want! Americas farmers deserve better than the crony-capitalist farm bill Congress passed this week.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-chairman-s-note?ContentRecord_id=F14C7A28-481C-4F43-A6BE-016A01682511,Strengthening Sovereignty Through Safe Country Agreements,2018-12-14,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"We live in an interconnected world that is becoming more connected every day. It is far easier for people in poorer countries to communicate and coordinate with their friends and relatives in richer countries now than it ever has been. If you are a poor farmer in Guatemala or an urban laborer who can't find a job in Honduras, odds are you know a friend or a relative in the United States who is telling you by phone or text just how much better economic conditions are here in the United States. This is why wave after wave of migrants from Central American countries are trying to enter our country through the southern border: they believe their lives will be better if they can just get into our country and join their friends and family that are already thriving here. And they are probably right. Their lives would be better if they made it into the United States. Unfortunately, we cannot just let in every person in the world who believes their life would be better if they were in the United States. According to Gallup more than 150 million adults worldwide would leave their current country and move to the United States if they could. Not only does our country not have the infrastructure to accommodate 150 million more people overnight, our country is already more divided than it has been in recent memory and the vast majority of American people either want less immigration (29%) or about the same (44%). Only a small minority, just 24% of Americans, wants more immigration. Of course, the United States should continue to take in refugees and those seeking asylum. But wanting a job and better economic opportunities is not a legal basis for an asylum claim. To secure asylum, a migrant must prove that, if returned to their home country, they would be persecuted due to their race, religion, nationality, political affiliation, or social group. According to the Department of Homeland Security, less than 10% of the Central American migrants who come to the United States with caravans meet this standard and are eventually awarded asylum status. But over 80% of Central American migrants who reach our border with Mexico do meet the much lower credible fear standard administered by the Border Patrol, who then releases them into the country. The vast majority of migrants released into the United States in this manner either fail to ever officially apply for asylum, or stop showing up to court when it becomes evident they will ultimately lose their asylum claim. This is unacceptable. When a large group of people disregard the law of the country they are entering there's a well-founded fear they will disregard our other laws as well. What the United States needs to help address the problem is a safe third country agreement with Mexico similar to the existing safe third country agreement the United States already has with Canada. Under a safe third country agreement, migrants seeking asylum must make their claim in the first country of arrival, not whatever country they want to move to the most. Alternatively, President Trump has been working on an agreement with the Mexican government that would allow Central Americans to apply for asylum in the United States, but instead of being released into our country while their claim was adjudicated, they would stay in Mexico until a final judgement was rendered. If we can implement either of these policies and thus end the current catch and release status quo, fewer migrants will make the dangerous trip north to the United States and our national sovereignty will be much stronger.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=2A4A7077-CDF0-49BC-8D14-D18B3869A672,Sen. Lee Releases Statement on Passage of S.J.R. 54,2018-12-13,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) released the following statement today after the Senate passed S.J.R. 54, a resolution leveraging their War Powers authority to end U.S. involvement in Yemen. Today was a victory for the Constitution and the separation of powers, Sen. Lee said. With this vote, we are one step closer to reviving our constitutional framework - where the power to declare war lies with Congress, not the executive branch - and we have taken a step towards removing ourselves from the spread of human suffering in Yemen. The resolution, cosponsored by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Chris Murphy (D-CT) was originally tabled in March of this year. However, following the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the Senate resurrected the bill and brought it to the floor. Sen. Lee has spoken out numerous times on the importance of this resolution, including last evening on the Senate floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://stewart.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/stewart-secures-major-win-for-utah,Stewart Secures Major Win for Utah,2018-12-12,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Chris Stewart,S001192,stewart.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. Today, Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) released the following statement after his legislation, the Sage-Grouse and Mule Deer Conservation and Restoration Act, was included in the final text and passage of the Farm Bill. The passage of this legislation is something conservationists and sportsmen can both celebrate. In order to protect mule deer and sage-grouse populations in Utah and across the West, we must protect and enhance their habitat. The review process for vegetation management has become too cumbersome and time consuming. This legislation removes bureaucratic red tape and gives land managers the tools needed to protect and preserve this precious habitat. Rep. Chris Stewart Background According to the Fish and Wildlife Service, Pion and Juniper forests have been encroaching on key sagebrush habitat at a rapid rate. This invasion erodes and fragments sagebrush habitat and provides artificial roosting and nesting sites for sage-grouse predators. Tree removal also carries widespread ecological benefits, such as reduction of catastrophic wildfire risk. Wildlife managers in the West have long worked to convert Pion and Juniper stands to sagebrush because doing so increases forage and soil water availability, which improves wildlife carrying capacity and benefits big game populations, particularly mule deer. Although tree expansion is a natural process normally controlled by naturally-occurring wildfire, fire suppression efforts over the years have allowed expansion to go unchecked. As a result, trees have spread to areas they have not historically occupied, increasing the risk of large-scale, uncontrollable wildfires. Fortunately, federal restoration projects have been successful in removing these trees without threatening the natural habitat, and this legislation helps build on these successes. This legislationmakes it easier for land managers and wildlife organizations to work together onvegetation management projects that benefit the environment, and it gives the Bureau of Land Management the tools it needs to better preserve precious habitats for both sage-grouse and mule deer. For the original press release of the Sage-Grouse and Mule Deer Habitat Conservation and Restoration Act, click here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=83D85837-FE73-4374-B646-17C8B9C95C05,"In Farewell Floor Speech, Hatch Issues Call to Heed Our Better Angels",2018-12-12,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCThis morning, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate and the longest-serving Republican Senator in history, delivered his farewell address on the Senate floor. In his remarkswhich bring to a close more than four decades of public serviceSenator Hatch urged his colleagues and the American people to heed the better angels of our nature by recommitting to comity, restoring civility to the public discourse, embracing the principles of pluralism, and striving for unity by rejecting the politics of division. Video via YouTube ONCOMITY If I were to identify the root of our crisis, it would be this: the loss of comity and genuine good feeling among Senate colleagues. Comity is the cartilage of the Senatethe soft connective tissue that cushions impact between opposing joints. But in recent years, that cartilage has been ground to a nub. All movement has become bone on bone. Our ideas grate against each other with increasing frequencyand with nothing to absorb the friction. We hobble to get any bipartisan legislation to the Senate floor, much less to the President's desk. The pain is excruciating, and it is felt by the entire nation. ONHEEDING OUR BETTER ANGELS Our challenge is to rise above the din and divisiveness of today's politics. It is to tune out the noise and tune into reason. It is to choose patience over impulse, and fact over feeling. It is to reacquaint ourselves with wisdom by returning to core principles. Today, allow me to offer a prescription for what ails us politically. Allow me to share just a few ideas thatwhen put into practicecan help us not only fix the Senate but put our nation back on the right path. ONPETTINESS VS. PERSUASION We live in a media environment that favors outrage over reason, and hyperbole over truth. The loudest voicesnot the wisest onesnow dictate the terms of public debate. The media deserves some culpability in creating this environment by adopting outrage as a business model. But we are complicit when we use words to provoke rather than to persuade, to divide rather than to unite. We only make the problem worse when the object of our discourse becomes to belittle the other sideto own the libs, for example, or to disparage the deplorables. If you're looking to convert someone to your side, humiliating them is probably not the best place to start. We would do well to remember that pettiness is not a political strategy. Some fast facts: Senator Hatch's retirement follows a historic legislative career, having passed more than 800 bills into lawmore than any legislator alive today. Hatch was also named the most effective in the Senate in the last Congress by theCenter for Effective Lawmakinga non-partisan research organization. As a member of the Judiciary Committee for 42 years, Hatch has participated in the confirmations of more than half of all federal judges who have ever served. Hatch has also been involved in the last 15 Supreme Court confirmation debates, including the confirmations of every current member of the Supreme Court. Senator Hatch's most significant legislative accomplishments include the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Children's Health Insurance Program, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and the STOP School Violence Act. Thefullspeech, as prepared for delivery, is below: Mr. President, for more than four decades, I have had the distinct privilege of serving in the United States Senate, what some have calledthe world's greatest deliberative body. Speaking on the Senate floor; debating legislation in committee; corralling the support of my colleagues on compromise legislationthese are the moments I will miss. These are the memories I will cherish forever. To address this body is to experience a singular feelinga sense that you are a part of something bigger than yourself, a minor character in the grand narrative that is America. No matter how often I come to speak at this lectern, I experience that feelingagain and again. But today, if I'm being honest, I also feel sadness. Indeed, my heart is heavy. It aches for the times when we actually lived up to our reputation as the world's greatest deliberative body. It longs for the days in which Democrats and Republicans would meet on middle ground rather than retreat to partisan trenches. Now some may say I'm waxing nostalgic, yearningas old men often dofor some golden age that never existed. They would be wrong. The Senate I've described is not some fairytale but the reality we once knew. Having served as a Senator for nearly 42 years, I can tell you this: things weren't always as they are now. I was here when this body was at its best.I was here when regular order was the norm, when legislation was debated in committee, and when members worked constructively with one another for the good of the country. I was here when we could say, without any hint of irony, that we were members of the world's greatest deliberative body. Times have certainly changed. Over the last several years, I have witnessed the subversion of Senate rules, the abandonment of regular order, and the full-scale deterioration of the judicial confirmation process. Polarization has ossified. Gridlock is the new norm. And like the humidity here, partisanship permeates everything we do. On both the left and the right, the bar of decency has been set so low that jumping over it is no longer the objective. Limbo is the new name of the game.How low can you go? The answer, it seems, is always lower. All the evidence points to an unsettling truth: The Senate, as an institution, is in crisis. The committee process lies in shambles. Regular order is a relic of the past. And compromiseonce the guiding credo of this great institutionis now synonymous with surrender. Since I first came to the Senate in 1978, the culture of this place has shifted fundamentallyand not for the better. Here, there used to be a level of congeniality and kinship among colleagues that was hard to find anywhere else. In those days, I counted Democrats among my very best friends. One moment, we would be locking horns on the Senate floor; the next, we would be breaking bread together over family dinner. My unlikely friendship with the late Senator Ted Kennedy embodied the spirit of goodwill and collegiality that used to thrive here. Teddy and I were a case study in contradictions. He was a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat; I was a resolute Republican. But by choosing friendship over party loyalty, we were able to pass some of the most significant bipartisan achievements of modern times from the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to the Ryan White bill and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Nine years after Teddy's passing, it's worth asking: Could a relationship like this even exist in today's Senate? Could two people with polar-opposite beliefs and from vastly different walks of life come together as often as Teddy and I did for the good of the country? Or are we too busy attacking each other to even consider friendship with the other side? Mr. President, many factors contribute to the current dysfunction. But if I were to identify the root of our crisis, it would be this: the loss of comity and genuine good feeling among Senate colleagues. Comity is the cartilage of the Senatethe soft connective tissue that cushions impact between opposing joints. But in recent years, that cartilage has been ground to a nub. All movement has become bone on bone. Our ideas grate against each other with increasing frequencyand with nothing to absorb the friction. We hobble to get any bipartisan legislation to the Senate floor, much less to the President's desk. The pain is excruciating, and it is felt by the entire nation. We must remember that our dysfunction is not confined to the Capitol. It ripples far beyond these wallsto every state, to every town, and to every street corner in America. The Senate sets the tone of American civic life. We don't mirror the political culture as much as we make it. It's incumbent on us, then, to move the culture in a positive direction, keeping in mind that everything we do here has a trickle-down effect. If we are divided, then the nation is divided. If we abandon civility, then our constituents will follow. And so, to mend the nation, we must first mend the Senate. We must restore the culture of comity, compromise, and mutual respect that used to exist here. Both in our personal and public conduct, we mustbethe very change we want to see in the country. We must not be enemies but friends.Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memorywill yet swellwhen again touchedby the better angels of our nature. These are not my words but the words of President Abraham Lincoln. They come from a heartfelt plea he made to the American people long ago on the eve of the Civil War. Lincoln's admonition is just as timely today as it was then. If ever there were a time in our history to heed the better angels of our nature, it is now. How can we answer Lincoln's call to our better angels? In the last year, I have devoted significant time and energy to answering that question. Today, I wish to put flesh on the bones of Lincoln's appeal. Our challenge is to rise above the din and divisiveness of today's politics. It is to tune out the noise and tune into reason. It is to choose patience over impulse, and fact over feeling. It is to reacquaint ourselves with wisdom by returning to core principles. Today, allow me to offer a prescription for what ails us politically. Allow me to share just a few ideas thatwhen put into practicecan help us not only fix the Senate but put our nation back on the right path. Heeding our better angels begins with civility. While our politics have always been contentious, an underlying commitmenttocivility has heldtogether the tenuous marriage of right and left. But the steady disintegration of public discourse has weakened that marriage, calling intoquestion the very viability of the American experiment. As the partisan divide deepens, one thing becomes increasingly clearwe cannot continue on the current course. Unless we take meaningful stepsto restore civility, the culture wars will push us ever closertoward national divorce. We would do well to remember that without civility, there is no civilization. Civility is the indispensable political normthe protective wall between order and chaos. But more than once, that wall has been breached. Consider recent events: the pipe bomb plot in the midterm election, the terrorist attack in Charlottesville last year, and the shooting at the Congressional baseball practice before that. These are stark reminders that hateful rhetoric, if left to ferment, becomes violence. Restoring civility requires that each of us speak responsibly. That means the President. That means Congress. And that means everyone listening today. We live in a media environment that favors outrage over reason, and hyperbole over truth. The loudest voicesnot the wisest onesnow dictate the terms of public debate. For evidence, simply turn on the TV. But be sure to turn down the volume. The media deserves some culpability in creating this environment by adopting outrage as a business model. But we are complicit when we use words to provoke rather than to persuade, to divide rather than to unite. We only make the problem worse when the object of our discourse becomes to belittle the other sidetoown the libs, for example, or to disparagethe deplorables. If you're looking to convert someone to your side, humiliating them is probably not the best place to start. Who among us would make friends with the same person who would make him a fool? Put simply, pettiness is not a political strategy. It is the opposite of persuasion, which should be the ultimate aim of our dialogue. Our better angels call on us to persuade through gentle reason. They call on us to inspire and unite rather than to provoke and incite. In short, they call on us to embrace civility. In addition to embracing civility, we must rediscover a forgotten virtue, one that lies at the heart of our nation's founding: pluralism. Pluralism is the adhesive that holds together the great American mosaic. It is the idea that we can actually be unitedbyour differences, not in spite of them. In a pluralist society, we can be polar opposites in every respect yet still associate freely with one another. I can be white, conservative, and Christian, and my friend can be black, progressive, and Muslim. We can be different but united precisely because we are united by ourrightto be different. That, in a nutshell, is pluralism. Pluralism is the alchemy that makesout of many, onepossible. It is the means by which we have been able to weave together the disparate threads of a diverse society more successfully than any nation on earth. At the heart of pluralism is the understanding that our country was built not on a collection of common characteristics but on a common purpose. When we approach political problems from a pluralist perspective, we recognize that the majority of our disagreements are not matters of good vs. evil but good vs. good. Pluralism acknowledges that there is more than one way to achieve the good life. Accordingly, it seeks to accommodate different conceptions of the good rather than pit them against each other. The adversary of pluralism is zero-sum politics, which we embrace at our own peril. Zero-sum politics tempts us to view life through an absolutist prismone that filters all nuance and recasts everything as an either-or fallacy. This distorted way of thinking renders every policy squabble as a Manichean struggle for the soul of the country.If the Republican tax bill passes, it will be Armageddon.If a Democrat takes the White House, it will be the end of America as we know it.Funny how these prophecies never come to fruition. Answering the call to our better angels requires us to reject zero-sum politics in favor of pluralism. It requires us to make room for nuance and to see our differences not as competing but as complementary. Nowhere is the pluralist approach more needed than in the fraught relationship between religious liberty and LGBTQ rights.As my colleagues know, I've made religious liberty a priority of my public service. Of all the hundreds of pieces of legislation I've passed during my 42 years in the Senate, the one that I'm most pleased with, and the one that I hope will most define my legacy, is theReligious Freedom Restoration Act. Religious liberty is a fundamental freedom. It deserves the veryhighestprotection our country can provide. At the same time, it's also important to take account of other interests, especially those of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. We are in the process now of working out the relationship between religious liberty and the rights of LGBTQ individuals here in America. There are some who would treat this issue as a zero-sum game, who would make the religious community and LGBTQ advocates into adversaries. This is a mistake. Pluralism shows us a better way. It shows us that protecting religious liberty and preserving the rights of LGBTQ individuals are not mutually exclusive. I believe we can find substantial common ground on these issues that will enable us to both safeguard the ability of religious individuals to live their faithandprotect LGBTQ individuals from invidious discrimination. We must honor the rightsbothof believersandLGBTQ individuals. We must, in short, find a path forward that promotes fairness for all. In my home state, we were able to strike such a balance with the historic Utah Compromise, a bipartisan anti-discrimination lawthat both strengthened religious freedomsandoffered special protections to the LGBTQ community. No doubt we can replicate that same success on a federal level. That's why, as one of my final acts as a US Senator,I challenge my colleagues to find a compromise on this crucially important issuea compromise that is true to our founding principles and that is fair toallAmericans. Our better angels invite us to walk the path of civility and to embrace the principles of pluralism. But above all, they call on us to strive for unity. Before President Lincoln beckoned us to our better angels, he warned that a house divided against itself cannot stand. That warning is especially relevant in our time. Today our house is as divided as any time since the Civil War. Each year, red and blue America drift further apart. As progressives move to the coasts and conservatives retreat to the interior, we increasingly sort ourselves by geography. We also sort ourselves by ideology, with media diets catered to quiet our cognitive dissonance and confirm our pre-conceived notions. It's a sad consequence of the Information Age that Americans can now live in the same city but inhabit completely different worlds. Something has to give; the status quo cannot hold. These are, or should be, theUnitedStates of America. While that name has always been more aspirational than descriptive, it at least gives us an ideal to strive for. To achieve the unity that is our namesake we must reject the politics of division, starting with identity politics. Identity politics is nothing more than dressed-up tribalism.It is the deliberate and often unnatural segregation of people into categories for political gain. This practice conditions us to define ourselves and each other by the groups to which we belongin other words, the things that divide us rather than unite us. When institutionalized, identity politics causes us to lose sight of our shared values. In time, we come to see each other not as fellow Americans united by common purpose but as opposing members of increasingly narrow social subgroups. And thus begins the long descent into intersectional hell. Our better angels call on us to resist identity politics by recommitting ourselves to the American idea, the idea that our immutable characteristics do not define us. It's the idea that all of usregardless of color, class or creedare equal, and that we can work together to build a more perfect union. When we heed this call, we can achieve unity. And ideasnot identitycan resume their rightful place in our public discourse. Mr. President, this is the last request I will ever make from this lecternthat as a Senate and as a nation, welistento our better angels; that we recommit ourselves to comity; that we restore civility to the public discourse; that we embrace wholeheartedly the principles of pluralism; and that we strive for unity by rejecting the rhetoric of division. When we heed our better angelswhen we hearken to the voices of virtue native to our very naturewe can transcend our tribal instincts and preserve our democracy for future generations. That we may do so is my humble prayer. Now, Mr./Mme. President, before I close, let my parting words be words of gratitude. There are countless people I need to thank, but first and foremost, I wish to thank the good people of Utah. Without you, I could have accomplishednothing.The landmark reforms that I passed in Congress have always been a joint effortdrafted by me under constant guidance from people like you. In that sense, the legislativelegacyI leave behind isnotminebutours. Representing the Beehive State has been the privilege of a lifetime. Thank you for 42 years. I likewise wish to thank my familymy sweet wife Elaine and our six children, who have stood by me through thick and thin. And of course, I wish to thank my congressional colleagues, especially Leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan, and the countless other public servants I have had the privilege of working with over the years. These are friendships I will treasure forever. I also wish to thank my protective detailthe 20-plus men and women who have worked day and night to keep me safe over the years. These officers are like family to me. As all of you know, a Senator is only as good as his staff, which is why I need to recognize mine today. My Finance Committee Staff, led by Jeff Wrase, has helped me accomplish things I never could have accomplished on my own. In particular, I wish to thank my personal staffthe countless men and women who have served alongside me over the years. Because of you, I have been able to pass more bills into law than any legislator alive today. Thank you. Let me take just a moment to recognize them personally. Thanks to my Chief of Staff Matt Sandgren, I am ending this term on a crescendo of legislative activity, having introduced more bills this Congress than at any other time during my Senate service. In the last two years, we've also enacted a historic number of bills into law. My staff has not let up in the final stretchnot one bit. We've been a legislative powerhouse to the very end, and I've got Matt Sandgren to thank for that. I've had many chiefs of staff, but I think I saved the best for last. My Utah staff also played a critical role in my legislative success. A huge thank you to Melanie Bowen, Sharon Garn, Annette Riley, Heather Barney, Sean Firth, Cloe Nixon, Jessa Reed, Ron Dean, Matt Hurst, Nathan Jackson, Courtney Brinkerhoff, and Emily Wilson. And here in DC, a huge thank you to Matt Jensen, James Williams, Matt Whitlock, Corey Messervy, Ruthie Montoya, Celeste Gold, Sam Lyman, Chris Bates, Peter Carey, Brendan Chestnut, Kristin McClintock, Jacob Olidort, Ally Riding, Dianne Browning, Heather Campbell, Nick Clason, Jeff Finegan, Will Holloway, Rick James, Bailee Flitton, Abdul Kalumbi, Monique Laing, Karen LaMontagne, Keri Lyn Michalke, Romel Nicholas, Lauren Paulos, Jordan Roberts, Margo Robbins, and Samantha Ryals. This truly is the best staff on Capitol Hill. Last, and perhaps most importantly, I wish to thank my Father in Heaven, who has allowed me to serve for much longer than my detractors would have hoped. Each time I walk into this chamber, I am humbled by the significance of it all. And I am reminded of a passage of scripture, one of my favorites:For of him unto whom much is given much is required. Truly, God has given me so much. In return, I've tried to give back as much as I could. I hope He will accept my best efforts. Now before I get any more sentimental, I should note that this is a final floor speechnot a final goodbye. Three weeks from now, I will no longer hold office, but I will continue to hold a special place for all of you in my heart. I look forward to continuing these special friendships even long after I have left the Senate. Thank you, again, to everyone. May God bless all of you. May he bless the Senate, and may He bless the United States of America. With that Mr. President, I yield the floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=A50E3C33-14AD-4B2D-B4C8-5C5A4401F61C,Hatch Honored by Senate Colleagues,2018-12-12,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCThis morning, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate and the longest-serving Republican Senator in history, delivered his farewell address on the Senate floor.Click here for more. Afterwards, he was honored by many of his Senate colleagues as they paid tribute to his decades-long legacy. Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY) Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) Senator Dan Sullivan (R-AK)",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=4FCED571-8AA2-40F2-96F7-5B1780ED1A4A,"December 12th, 2018 Mobile Office Visit To Davis County",2018-12-12,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Farmington When: Wednesday December 12th, 2018 @ 11:00 am 12:30 am Where: Farmington City Hall -160 S Main,Farmington, Utah 84025",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=11C42223-0305-4FC0-9DBD-5F73AF6B130C,Remarks on Retiring Sen. Orrin Hatch,2018-12-12,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"It is with mixed emotions that I rise today to honor my friend and senior Senator, the gentleman from Utah, Orrin Hatch. This year marks the end of an astounding 42-year tenure serving the people of Utah in the Senate. In that time, Senator Hatch has made an indelible mark on our state and our nation. People who follow Washington politics closely know what he has meant to this institution, his party, and the republic. But for those of us from Utah, Orrin Hatch is more than a name in the newspaper. He is the towering political figure not only of his generation, but also of the generations that have come along in his wake. Many Utahns can't even remember a time before Orrin Hatch was serving, leading, and speaking for us in Washington. One of the great privileges of my young life was the opportunity to serve as his page when I was a teenager. He was, then as now, one of the leaders of the Senate. Not only a political role model, but a role model, period: outspoken but always thoughtful; honest, but always gentle; tough when he had to be, and kind even when he didn't have to be. One of my fondest memories of Senator Hatch was a few years after I had been his page, when I was 17 or 18 years old. I was at the General Conference, sitting a row behind the Hatches, when the Senator had to get up and catch a plane to go back to Washington. When he turned around and saw me there, he stopped recognizing me. He took the cufflinks off his shirt they had the seal of the Senate on them and handed them to me as a gift. I felt like the luckiest kid in the world, like a rock star had just handed me his guitar. But of course, the career of Orrin Hatch stretches back much further than that. In 1976, the political landscape of the United States was very different than it is today. We were plagued by double-digit inflation, high interest rates, growing unemployment, and a diminishing military. America was still reeling from the war in Vietnam and the Watergate scandal. At the same time, Congress was rapidly expanding the federal budget with no regard for the future debt it was racking up. Washington was governed by the belief that government was the answer to every problem, and that ordinary Americans could not be trusted to make decisions by themselves. It was in this environment that Orrin Hatch without any political experience or, according to experts, much chance of success stepped up. As he wrote in one of his memoirs: I could not escape the powerful and persistent belief that my state and country were in serious trouble, headed down a dangerous and destructive path, and that if given a chance, I could make a difference. I felt it was my duty, my responsibility, to run and at least give voice to my concerns and my ideas for remedying what was wrong. It was my obligation to give the voters another choice. So Orrin the son of a tradesman, who grew up during the Great Depression in a ramshackle house built from recycled lumber did just that. He defied the pundits and took the plunge. From that first campaign, Orrin understood that Utahns wanted the country to go in a different direction, and he was ready to offer his service. Against all odds, and with a lot of hard work from him and his family, Hatch beat the incumbent Democrat by a solid margin. Thus began his long career in the Senate, and his many years of striving to serve the interests of Utah and the nation. For four decades, Orrin has not only been engaging in the great debates of his time, but leading them. As I see it, the thread that runs through Senator Hatch's politics is trust: his trust in the American people, in the Constitution, and in the institution of the Senate. That trust of consumers, producers, workers, and families is why he's such an advocate for the free enterprise economy. It's why he has sponsored a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution seventeen times and whence came his nickname Mr. Balanced Budget from Ronald Reagan himself. In shepherding the historic tax reform law we passed last year, Senator Hatch adopted an inclusive, open-minded approach that succeeded specifically because he trusted his colleagues. His work in the 1980s, helping to create the modern generic drug industry, was based on the same principle trusting the American people to make good decisions for themselves and their health care. We all know the honors and accolades. President Pro Temp. Presidential Medal of Freedom. But Orrin would be the first to tell you, the real legislative legacy he leaves behind is the work of a Senator who has sponsored more bills that have become law than any other legislator alive today. Look at the stamp he leaves on the Judiciary Committee. Not just landmark legislation like the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which guarantees robust protections for all Americans to live, work, and worship according to their beliefs. Senator Hatch has been personally involved in the selection and confirmation of federal judges in Utah and across the country, and every current member of the Supreme Court a legacy that will outlast his time in the Senate still by many decades. And yet, despite all the history Orrin has made in Washington, his story is even more impressive. He has been a loving and devoted husband to his wife Elaine for 61 years. Together, they have six children, 23 grandchildren, and 24 great-grandchildren. They are his proudest achievements, and he credits their love as the key to his success. Despite decades at the pinnacle of American government, Orrin believes the most important years of his life were the two he spent serving as a missionary in the Great Lakes Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As Senator Hatch mentioned in recent remarks, an article of our faith is If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things. And this is indeed how he has lived his life, and the way in which he has faithfully served God, his family, his country, and his state. Utah and the United States as a whole are better off for his service since he decided to run for the Senate all those years ago. I am grateful for all the time that he has dedicated to Utah, and for the personal encouragement that he has given to me. And from the time that I was his page, to the past years that I have been his colleague in the Senate, it has been an honor to serve with him. I yield the floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=6186588A-D2EB-49C1-BCEC-EB240DA7EEC0,Civil war in Yemen and the importance of the separation of powers,2018-12-12,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"About Mike Services Issues Press Press Releases Speeches Op-Eds Videos Weekly Newsletter Contact",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=741B570A-37F3-4006-8F5E-25AC5DA24B01,Civil war in Yemen and the importance of the separation of powers,2018-12-12,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"About Mike Services Issues Press Press Releases Speeches Op-Eds Videos Weekly Newsletter Contact",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=749DEA60-9D88-4824-9FEC-E22172D83DB2,"Hatch, Tillis, Flores Introduce Bicameral Hatch-Waxman Integrity Act",2018-12-11,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenatorOrrin Hatch (R-UT),SenatorThom Tillis (R-NC), andRepresentative Bill Flores (R-TX)released the following statements after introducing theHatch-Waxman Integrity Act of 2018in the Senate and House of Representatives. The legislation would help ensure that alternative procedures for challenging drug patents do not tilt the playing field contrary toHatch-Waxman's design. It would also help make sure that drug manufacturers have the proper incentives to develop life-saving medications. As the coauthor and namesake ofHatch-Waxman, I have a keen interest in ensuring we have a well-functioning generic drug industry,said Hatch. This means making sure that generic companies are able to develop drugs while also ensuring that brand companies have sufficient protections in place to recoup their investments.Hatch-Waxmanstruck a careful balance that achieved these goals and in doing so helped to create the modern generic drug industry. TheHatch-Waxman Integrity Act,which I'm pleased to be introducing today with Senator Tillis and Representative Flores, will help preserve that careful balance going by ensuring that newer, alternative procedures for challenging drug patents do not give one side an unintended advantage. The biotechnology and life sciences industry undertakes tremendous risk and costs to develop new,life-savingdrugs, with the vast majority of products never making it to the market at great expense to the manufacturer.These drugs save millions of lives every year and are a critical component of our nation's healthcare system.While it is important to call out bad actors who price gouge, we must allow sufficient time and balance so companies can continue to develop life-saving drugs and help people with the countless illnesses and diseases that affect millions of Americans,said Tillis.The Hatch-Waxman Integrity Act of 2018 willrestorea proper balance in the marketso thatcompanieswill continue to spend billions of dollarsto develop life-savingand life-alteringtreatments. I want to thank Senator Hatch for his leadership on this issue and I look forward to building supportfor this billwithin the Senate. The Hatch-Waxman Integrity Act ensures that America remains a leader in developing life-saving and accessible therapies, cures and treatments for patients,said Flores.It restores an effective balance between the interests of brand-name and generic drug manufacturers so that innovation and competition will continue to flourish. It is fulfilling to work withSenators Hatch and Tillisto modernize the Hatch-Waxman Act so that hardworking American families continue to benefit from health care innovation. Background TheHatch-Waxman Integrity Act of 2018would require a generic manufacturer wishing to challenge a brand-name drug patent to choose between theHatch-Waxmanframework, which affords certain advantages such as being able to rely on the drug innovator's safety and efficacy studies for FDA approval, andinter partes review, or IPR, which is cheaper and faster thanHatch-Waxmanlitigation but does not provide the advantages of a streamlined generic approval process. The bill would apply similarly to patents on biologics. The bill would preserveHatch-Waxmanas the standard path for generic manufacturers to challenge brand patents, while keeping IPR as an option where other interests come into play. It would not have any impact on the use of IPR by the tech community. A copy of the bill text is available [here]. A detailed summary of the bill is available [here].",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=A9FA51D8-A07F-4087-BFDE-D39CF6EB7C0A,Hatch Secures Utah Priorities in Farm Bill Package,2018-12-11,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT),the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate,released the following statement afterseveral key Hatch priorities were included in the final text of the Farm Bill. The legislation included two bipartisan Hatch bills, theSage-Grouse and Mule Deer Habitat Conservation and Restoration Act(click here) and theFood Donation Act(click here). After much hard work and compromise, the Farm Bill is moving forward to the benefit of many diverse stakeholders in Utah and across the nation,said Hatch.From areas as different as feeding the hungry to habitat conservation, this Farm Bill is going to make a real difference.As a longtime champion of eliminating hunger, I was proud to see the inclusion of provisions to remove barriers that will increase donations of safe, nutritious, and quality food. Senator Blumenthal shares my goal of supporting hungry families in need, and I appreciate his bipartisan partnership.Also, with the bipartisan help of Senator Heinrich, we made great strides in reducingwildfire risk,strengtheningecosystems, and restoringcritical habitats, proving that conservation and active forest management can still meaningfully exist. Statements of Support Senator Hatch'sFood Donation Actwas supported by the Utah Food Bank, Feeding America and the Harvard Law School Food, Law and Policy Clinic. TheSage-Grouse Sage-Grouse and Mule Deer Habitat Conservation and Restoration Acthas been supported and aided by the efforts of the Mule Deer Foundation, National Shooting Sports Foundation, National Wildlife Federation, API, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Wild Sheep Foundation, Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, North American Grouse Partnership, and Boone & Crockett Club. Gina Cornia, Utahns Against Hunger Executive Director: Utahns Against Hunger thanks Senator Hatch for leading on getting key provisions of his Food Donation Act included in the 2018 Farm Bill. Because of his efforts we are reducing food waste and bringing more food options to families who are going hungry. Senator Hatch has always led on working toward eliminating food insecurity in the US andwe are proud that oneof his last legislative efforts was to support, children, parents and all to have greater access to food.We will miss his leadership and commitment to the programs that really matter to his constituents. Background Food Donation Act: Key provisions ofthe legislation were included to bolster food donations across the country,which will help eliminate food waste and increase food options for families who are going hungry. Sage-Grouse and Mule Deer Habitat Conservation and Restoration Act: The legislation allows for responsible, active forest management to improve ecosystems, reduce wildfire risk, and eliminate pinion and juniper encroachment on Sage-grouse and mule deer habitat.The billmakes it easier for land managers and wildlife organizations to work together onvegetation management projects that benefit the environment, and it gives the Bureau of Land Management the tools it needs to better preserve precious habitats for both Sage-grouse and mule deer. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=EFBF961F-C762-43A6-86E6-EBAC99A630F3,Senator Hatch Receives Air Force Distinguished Public Service Award,2018-12-11,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCThis afternoon, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate, was awarded the Department of the Air Force Commander's Public Service Award in a ceremony at the Pentagon. The award is the highest level award granted by the Secretary of the Air Force to a non-employee civilian. Senator Hatch shown with Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson.Click herefor video of the ceremony. According to Department guidelines, the Secretary of the Air Force Distinguished Public Service award is awarded to private citizens who have personally made a profound contribution on the national level, and which represent substantial progress to the Air Force mission. Prominent among those contributions are his efforts to preserve the viability of Utah's Hill Air Force Base, and to ensure it plays a continued role in our national defense. Statements of Support: General Herbert J. Hawk Carlisle, Retired Air Combat Command Commander and 4-Star General I simply love Senator Hatch and marvel at all he did for our men and women in uniform.Thanks to him, our fighting force is better prepared and trained, and our civilian workforce is stronger than ever. He is a true servant to this Country and the men and women in uniform.We are a safer and more secure Nation because of him. Deborah Lee James, Former USAF Secretary Senator Hatch has served this country with distinction and honor. Through his work, we have a stronger fighting force, better and more cost-effective weapon systems and better training resources. Our men and women in uniform are better off because of his service in the United States Senate. Lieutenant General Christopher Bogdan, Retired Head of the F-35 Program Office Senator Hatch is one of the finest gentlemen I've met in my entire life. He's a fantastic leader, he is an honor to this country, and we need more like him. He has done more in the Senate to dispel rumors about the F-35 and to bring the truth and the facts out more than any other statesman I know of. He does it in a way that is trustworthy and credible, he deals with the facts, he gets above the politics, and he is a fabulous supporter of the airplane. Senator Hatch's work with the Air Force: Negotiated on behalf of the new F-35 to lower the unit price, increase the buys and improve sustainment Secured funding for F-22 maintenance equipment at Hill Air Force Base in Utah Further cemented Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR) as the premier test range, allowing for future uses of 5thGeneration and hypersonic weapons Supported the civilian workforce a Hill Air Force Base Improved readiness capabilities across the Air Force Worked to protect defense budgets Developed DoD Software capabilities Ensured access to space through launch vehicles Tirelessly supported the nuclear triad ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=01066637-0819-4CBF-952F-FE77F60A3307,"December 11, 2018- Mobile Office Visit to Washington County",2018-12-11,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to New Harmony When: Tuesday, December 11th, 2018 @ 12:30 PM- 1:00 PM Where: New Harmony Library, 34 South 2900 East, New Harmony, UT 84757",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=0FEB2437-9473-4E98-9233-5CDF3BD1A279,"December 11, 2018- Mobile Office Visit to Washington County",2018-12-11,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Pine Valley When: Tuesday, December 11th, 2018 @ 9:50 AM- 10:20 AM Where: Pine Valley Chapel Parking Lot, 52 W. Main Street, Pine Valley, UT 84781",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=4301760D-383C-4A54-B505-C5AD172DC07E,"December 11th, 2018 Mobile Office Visit To Cache County",2018-12-11,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to River Heights When: Tuesday December 11th, 2018 @ 9:30 am 11:00 am Where: River Heights City Office- 520 South 500 East, River Heights, Utah 84321",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=AD9FDA45-CB2B-43DE-8F47-343D405CB21A,"December 11, 2018- Mobile Office Visit to Washington County",2018-12-11,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Gunlock When: Tuesday December 11th, 2018 @ 8:40 AM- 9:10 AM Where: Gunlock State Park, Gunlock Rd, Gunlock, UT 84733",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=C2C85438-CE3A-4EEC-804F-E321060DDA02,"December 11, 2018- Mobile Office Visit to Washington County",2018-12-11,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Central When: Tuesday, December 11th, 2018 @ 10:40 AM- 11:10 AM Where: SR 9 and Pine Valley Road, UT",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=3937D6FF-58C2-48E8-AA2B-EFB098B26D69,ADVISORY: Hatch to Deliver Farewell Speech on Senate Floor,2018-12-10,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCThis Wednesday, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate and the longest-serving Republican Senator in history, will deliver his farewell address on the Senate floor. His remarks will bring to a close more than four decades of Senate service. WHAT: Senator Hatch's final floor speech WHO: Senator Orrin G. Hatch WHERE: Senate floor, will be streamedhere WHEN: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 at 11:00 AM EST Some fast facts: Senator Hatch's retirement follows a historic legislative career, having passed more than 800 bills into lawmore than any legislator alive today. Hatch was also named the most effective in the Senate in the last Congress by theCenter for Effective Lawmakinga non-partisan research organization. As a member of the Judiciary Committee for 42 years, Hatch has participated in the confirmations of more than half of all federal judges who have ever served. Hatch has also been involved in the last 15 Supreme Court confirmation debates, including the confirmations of every current member of the Supreme Court. Senator Hatch's most significant legislative accomplishments include the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Children's Health Insurance Program, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and the STOP School Violence Act.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=C94093F0-2498-4EDC-8B0F-FAE560AD4EA5,Hatch Works with FCC on Final Stages of Suicide Hotline Designation,2018-12-10,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCThis afternoon, Senator Hatch (R-UT),theChairman of the Senate Republican High-Tech Task Force and President Pro Tempore of the Senate,submitted commentto the Federal Communications Commission urging them to consider designating 611 as the national suicide hotline. As the comment period ends, the FCC will make a recommendation for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline.Senator Hatch and RepresentativeChris Stewart, the House sponsor of the bill, insist that a more accessible and user-friendly national suicide hotline is a pressingnational issue. We believe 611 is a simple, easy-to-remember number and is the best option for the three-digit dialing code for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. This undertaking is of utmost national importance. This simple change can connect millions of Americans with life-saving resources, including veterans that find themselves in crisis. Background: Senator Hatch called improving the suicide hotline a first step in helping those contemplating suicide after meeting with Utah families who noted that the greatest stumbling block in suicide prevention isaccess to mental health services. The Senator likewise spoke during Suicide Prevention Week regarding his efforts to pass the legislation.Click herefor his remarks. When Senator Hatch introduced this legislation last May, he noted how dire Utah's suicide epidemic has become.Click herefor that release. The legislation passed in the House of Representatives in August (click herefor the release) and was signed into law by President Trump the following week.Click herefor that release. Click herefor PDF version, full text of the letter is below: December 10, 2018 Ms. Marlene H. Dortch Secretary of the Federal Communications Commission Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554 Dear Ms. Dortch, As sponsors of the National Suicide Hotline Improvement Act (Pub. L. No. 115-233), welcome the opportunity to provide comments with regard to WC Docket No. 18-336 and CC Docket No. 92-105. We believe that by making the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline more user-friendly and accessible, we can save thousands of lives by helping people find the help they need when they need it most. Every minute we wait, we leave helpless hundreds of Americans who are struggling with suicidal thoughts. As recently reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), there were over 47,000 deaths by suicide in America in 2017. These deaths contribute to shorter life expectancies for Americans. As the director of the CDC, Robert Redfield, recently said, These sobering statistics are a wake-up call that we are losing too many Americans, too early and too often, to conditions that are preventable. The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is one of nation's most important tools in reversing this troubling trend. We strongly encourage the FCC to consider designating 611 as the new National Suicide Prevention Lifeline telephone number. Of the existing eight N11 numbers, two of them have been designated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) at the request of Congress for a particular use (811, 911), four have been designated for a particular purpose by the FCC without congressional mandate (211, 311, 511, 711) and two of them have not been officially designated by the FCC for a particular use (411, 611). Currently, 411 is in widespread use for directory assistance. It is estimated that this number is used billions of time annually, making it impractical to use the number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. Thus 611 is the only undesignated, realistically available N11 number. This number is currently used on a limited basis for telephone repair and telecom customer service. In 1997, the FCC noted that the use of 611 appears to be far less ubiquitous than use of 411 for directory assistance and concluded that the code could continue to be used to facilitate repairs and customer service until [it] is needed for other national purposes. We firmly believe that making the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline more accessible and user-friendly is such a pressing, national purpose. Although it may be possible to designate an N11 number for dual purposes, we would oppose any such designation for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. An individual in crisis needs to speak with a crisis counselor as soon as possible. They should not be forced to navigate a phone tree, unnecessarily delaying the millions of calls received annually by the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. It would also be more difficult to market the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline if the number was used for dual purposes. It may also be possible to use a three digit number other than an N11 number. But the designation of another three digit dialing code, which otherwise would be used for a new area code, would unnecessarily eliminate millions of potential phone numbers and would not align with our intent of identifying a simple, easy-to-remember phone number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. We do not believe that a combination of digits and characters outside of the N11 schematic would be easy-to-remember or consistent with the intent of the National Suicide Hotline Improvement Act. Connecting with mental health services should be as easy as calling for police, fire, or emergency medical services. Since 1968, 911 has been used to access emergency services. In the absence of a widely known alternative, it is also used by many individuals experiencing a mental health crisis. Often people in crisis just need someone to speak with instead of having law enforcement or emergency services dispatched to their location. 911 dispatchers typically do not have the time or training needed to work with individuals experiencing a mental health crisis. This type of call is much better directed to the existing National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, which can work with emergency services if the acuity of the call requires an in-person response. Through designation of 611 for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline and a national marketing effort to educate the public that 611 would be available for mental health emergencies, we can simultaneously improve access to mental health services and relieve overburdened 911 dispatchers. In summary, we believe 611 is a simple, easy-to-remember number and is the best option for the three digit dialing code for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. This undertaking is of utmost national importance and has the ability to help connect millions of Americans, including veterans that find themselves in crisis, with life-saving resources. Thank you for your consideration of our comments and recommendations. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=9C34A062-434E-4DC0-8E8E-31DF10854BFB,Hatchs Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act Signed into Law,2018-12-07,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the senior Republican and President Pro Tempore of the US Senate, released the following statement after the President signed theAmy, Vicky, and Andy Child Pornography Victim Assistance Actinto law. Senator Hatch introduced the legislation alongside Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), John Cornyn (R-TX), and Pat Toomey (R-PA). This bill recognizes the unique kind of harm caused by child pornography and requires restitution in a manner that will support victims. I'm thrilled the President hassignedtheAmy, Vicky, and Andy Act into law. This is a momentous day and many years in the making.Hatch said.This bipartisan legislation will provide meaningful assistance for child pornography victims to support their recovery and allow them to reclaim their lives.I am proud of this legislation and look forward to seeing it change the world for good. The legislation establishes more relevant standards for child pornography victims who seek restitution from defendants and gives victims the alternative of a one-time fixed compensation payment from the existing Crime Victims Fund. The bill also allows victims access to the images depicting them, which can be important for victim identification, expert testimony, forensic review, and treatment. The bill passed in the Senate by unanimous consent in January. With the help of Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC), the House sponsor of the bill, and House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), the House of Representatives passed an amended version of the bill by unanimous consent. In November, the Senate passed the amended bill by unanimous consent, and today, it was signed by the President into law. Statements from Amy, Vicky, and Andy The bill is named after victims depicted in some of the most widely circulated child pornography series in the world. Amy, Vicky, and Andy all strongly support the bill. Amy wrote: Thank you, Senator Hatch, for not giving up. There are lots of important things going on in our country right now and I know that a bunch of abused kids aren't always at the top of the list. But you haven't given up and neither have we. Vicky and her husband wrote: This bill is an important and needed step in the process of healing and making those who have harmed so many accountable for the damage done. We are thankful for the efforts of all who have brought this to this point and urge Congress to go the last mile to make this happen. Andy, a Utah resident, wrote: I'm lucky, and so is Vicky and Amy and so many other mostly silent victims out there, to have you on our side and everyone else in the Senate. Just knowing that so many important people think that we matter, that the terrible things that happened to us as kids are being considered all the way up in the Congress of the United States.If we can all agree on something, it's that victims deserve justice. Thank you for helping us get it. Support for the Amy, Vicky, and Andy Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act Additionally, the Amy, Vicky, and Andy Act has been endorsed by the National Organization for Victim Assistance, National Association of Attorneys General, National Crime Victims Law Institute, National District Attorneys Association, National Center for Victims of Crime, National Association of VOCA Assistance Administrators, National Crime Victims Bar Association, CHILD USA, RAINN, APSAC in partnership with The New York Foundling, Enough is Enough, Thorn, Academy on Violence and Abuse, DV LEAP, Utah Crime Victims Legal Clinic, Utah Coalition against Sexual Assault, and the Children's Justice Fund. Senate Co-sponsors:Feinstein (D-CA), Grassley (R-IA), Klobuchar (D-MN), Cornyn (R-TX), Toomey (R-PA), Boozman (R-AR), Gillibrand (D-NY), Cotton (R-AR), Whitehouse (D-RI), McCain (R-AZ), Murkowski (R-AK), Capito (R-WV), Tillis (R-NC), Blunt (R-MO), Blumenthal (D-CT), Casey (D-PA), Warren (D-MA), McCaskill (D-MO), Hoeven (R- ND), Merkley (D-OR), Hirono (D-HI), Kennedy (R-LA), Cruz (R-TX),Harris (D-CA), Markey (D-MA), and Rubio (R-FL). Background The Amy, Vicky, and Andy Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act includes the following provisions: Findings that focus on the unique nature of child pornography crime and how it harms victims A more relevant and predictable definition of full amount of a victim's losses Restitution Child pornography production: victims receive full amount of their total losses Child pornography trafficking: victims receive from each defendant a minimum of $3,000 Compensation Victims of child pornography trafficking are entitled to receive a one-time payment of $35,000 in defined monetary assistance (which is indexed to inflation) from a Child Pornography Victims Reserve (CPVR) within the federal Crime Victims Fund (CVF) Caps fees for attorneys representing a victim seeking defined monetary assistance at 15% The court must assess defendants in child pornography cases to contribute to the CPVR: up to $17,000 for possession, up to $35,000 for distribution, and up to $50,000 for production crimes The CPVR will be capped at $10 million Victims of child pornography trafficking will enjoy the same priority in restitution payments as victims in other restitution statutes Child pornography victims have equal rights with criminal defendants to review the child pornography depicting them at a government facility or court for the purposes of furnishing expert testimony The Department of Justice must deliver a report to Congress withintwoyears after passage about the Act's implementation including an assessment of the funding levels for the Child Pornography Victims Reserve ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=FF5BE689-34C4-4130-ACDA-D401C363E690,"Hatch, Bicameral Congressmen Release Bipartisan Draft Legislation to Modernize FDA Regulation of Diagnostic Tests",2018-12-07,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Invitroclinicaltests,includingdiagnostic andgenetictests,requiregreateroversight toensuresafety andaccuracy Washington, DC Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Michael Bennet (D-CO)members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP)Committeetogether with US Representatives Larry Bucshon, MD (R-IN) and Diana DeGette (D-CO)members of the House Energy and CommerceCommitteereleasedbipartisandraft legislationyesterdayto establish a framework for overseeing in vitro clinical tests (IVCTs), such as test kits and laboratory developed tests (LDTs) at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This Congress, the lawmakers have worked with the stakeholder community and FDA to define parameters for IVCT oversight. While I am disappointedthis bill will not pass this year, I am hopefulthat my colleagues will prioritize this legislation in the 116thCongress,said Hatch.Americans deserve the assurance that the tests which are utilized in making vital, sometimes life-or-death decisions, are both accurate and reliable. This bill establishes a sensible, risk-based approach towards regulation of IVCTs that protects innovation in an ever-changing sector of healthcare. In the age of precision medicine, diagnostic and genetic tests are increasingly part of routine medical care,Bennet said. Without safety measures in place, these tests threaten patient safety and the potential of innovative diagnostics to transform health care. We'll continue working to develop a regulatory framework that results in better government and keeps pace with developing technologies. Advanced diagnostics are transforming the way we provide care for patients in the 21stcentury, giving rise to precision medicine and enabling physicians to provide more individualized treatments for patients,saidBucshon.Unfortunately, the regulatory framework for diagnostic testing has become outdated and is still stuck in the 20thcentury. Our goal with this draft legislation is to ensure patients can get the most appropriate treatment for their disease by creating a new regulatory framework that is risk based, creates a level-playing field, allows for leading edge development to thrive, and assures doctors and patients that their test results are valid and clinically meaningful. Safety and accuracy are rightly our top priorities when establishing a new regulatory framework for the approval and regulation of LDTs and IVCTs,said DeGette.I am grateful for the committed partnership of Rep. Bucshon, the Energy and Commerce Committee and our Senate colleagues by working together to forge this bipartisan and bicameral proposal. Background on In Vitro Clinical Tests: In vitro clinical tests (IVCTs) are used to analyze human samples, such as blood or tissue. The test results are often used to make diagnosis or treatment decisions. For example, at-home glucose tests can be used to monitor diabetes based on blood-sugar levels. One subset of IVCTs are Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs) that are administered and interpreted by physicians, pathologists, or other clinical professionals in a healthcare facility. Another subset of IVCTs are related to personalized and precision medicine, such as genetic tests. Healthcare professionals then use companion diagnostics to determine the optimal drug or treatment at the right dose and time for a specific patient. Under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is required to ensure quality laboratory operations for LDTs. However, CMS is not required to ensure analytical and clinical validityin other words, safety and effectivenessfor any IVCTs. Several IVCTs have voluntarily pursued FDA approval under the existing device regulation framework, but current device regulation is not practical for many of the clinical laboratories that develop IVCTs. In order to ensure patient safety and accurate and reliable testing, there is a need for a regulatory pathway for IVCTs. FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb hascalledfor comprehensive legislation for IVCT oversight. Summary of the Verifying Accurate, Leading-edge IVCT Development (VALID) Act: The draft legislation would establish: Authorizes theNational Concussion Surveillance System (NCSS)at the CDCto better estimate the incidence of TBI across the lifespan at a national level. TheCDC has taken steps to develop the NCSS, whicha risk-based approach to IVCT regulation, prioritizing FDA resources for the highest-risk tests that expose patients to serious or irreversible harm. Establishes a precertification program for lower-risk tests that are not otherwise required to go through premarket review. Precertification would allow FDA to establish standard validity requirements, while also lowering the burden on labs and developers and protecting continued innovation. High-risk tests, such as novel tests, would be required to undergo premarket review to verify analytical and clinical validity. FDA could require that any test undergo premarket review after providing the developer an opportunity to address issues identified by the agency. Discussion Draft Found Here ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/issue-in-focus?ContentRecord_id=C9CDDC2C-711F-4EC8-A8C0-C7EE41665AC4,Government Spectrum Valuation Act,2018-12-07,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"You can't see them, but all of us are surrounded by traffic jams every day. Even if you never set foot in a car, these traffic problems are almost definitely affecting your daily life. And they are getting worse. Do you have a mobile device like an iPhone? Do you use Wi-Fi in your home or at work? If so then you are part of the spectrum traffic jam. Just like cars travel down a highway, information travels on wavelengths in the electromagnetic spectrum. If there is too much information traveling on one particular wavelength then that information can't travel as fast or as accurately as possible. We do have traffic laws to govern these invisible traffic flows, but with the evergoing demand for wireless communication, our existing roads are clogging up. And if we want to be at the forefront of 5G wireless technology we are going to need all the spectrum we can find. In addition to the spectrum we all use for radio, television, and our mobile devices, the federal government also has set aside parts of the spectrum to key agencies like the Department of Defense and Interior Department. Of the spectrum dedicated to these federal agencies, most of it would be considered four lane express highways; obviously we'd like to reserve the best communications infrastructure for the defense of our country and its citizens. However, we're not entirely sure how much of that spectrum is actually being used by all of these agencies. While the unused spectrum bands were less of an issue at the beginning of the 1900s when there were fewer entitles like tech companies competing for them, that is no longer the case. With more and more people going wireless and demanding faster speeds, more spectrum is needed. This is why Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) and I introduced the Government Spectrum Valuation Act. The bill requires the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the FCC to determine the value of electromagnetic spectrum assigned or allocated to each federal agency and make that analysis available publicly annually. Once we know how much spectrum each agency has, and how much the spectrum is worth, we can better decide if agencies have the spectrum they need and if they have any unneeded spectrum that can be sold to the public. If the United States is going to maintain its status as a global technology leader we need to make sure we are allocating our finite spectrum resources efficiently. And this bill will help us reach that goal.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-chairman-s-note?ContentRecord_id=D4C98D24-3A16-4059-B078-C3BDC5A30B69,Dont Believe the Fake News about President Trumps First Step Act,2018-12-07,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Some in the media hate President Trump so much they will make up anything to stop his agenda. Take a recent Weekly Standard article, which claims that the President Trump-endorsed First Step Act contained a loophole which allows federal prison wardens to release dangerous criminals. Nothing could be further from the truth. Section 102(g)(1)(D)(ii) of The First Step Act clearly states that in order to be eligible for early release a warden must determine that a prisoner would not be a danger to society if transferred to prerelease custody or supervised release and that the prisoner is unlikely to recidivate. Asked to justify how it could claim The First Step Act allows dangerous criminals to be released from prison when the actual text of the bill forbids doing exactly that, The Weekly Standard did add a clarification to the story noting that the bill disallows exactly what the story claims it allows. But The Weekly Standard failed to correct the rest of the column which is every bit as much of a fiction as the first paragraph. According to the column, the House passed its conservative version of criminal justice reform weeks ago but someone just recently slipped [the loophole] quietly into the bill. Backers of the bill haven't commented on the loophole, the publication muses, and may not have learned of it. This narrative is complete and total fiction. Here are the facts. The House of Representatives passed The First Step Act this May by a vote of 360 to 59. Just two Republicans voted against the bill. It included the same provision to which The Weekly Standard now objects. This provision is not a loophole that was slipped into the bill. It is how the recidivism reduction program, a program that 226 House Republicans voted for, was designed to work. To the extent that backers of the bill haven't commented on a supposed loophole, that is because no such loophole exists!It is true that separate sentencing reform provisions were added to The First Step Act in the Senate. But those sentencing reform provisions did not touch or alter the recidivism reduction part of The First Step Act in any way. If opponents of criminal justice reform don't like the recidivism reduction that 226 House Republicans voted for, then they should make an honest and factual case against it. And if criminal justice reform opponents don't like the sentencing reforms added to The First Step Act, then they should make an honest and factual case against those reforms. But opponents shouldn't fabricate a narrative about some loophole being slipped into the Senate version of an otherwise conservative House-passed criminal justice reform bill. The reality is that The First Step Act is good conservative common-sense reform that is modeled after existing successful reforms in conservative states like Georgia and Texas. We have two more legislative weeks left in the year. Let's bring The First Step Act to the Senate floor and get President Trump's agenda done.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=807C529C-94A5-48F8-9532-94172F037042,Hatch Praised for Leadership in Passing CHRONIC Care Legislation,2018-12-06,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, was recognized for his leadership in creating and shepherding theCreating High-Quality Results and Outcomes Necessary to Improve Chronic (CHRONIC) Care Actinto law at the Bipartisan Policy Committee (BPC) event Bipartisan Leadership in Health Care: Chronic Care Implementation. BPC President Jason Grumet presented Chairman Hatch with an award for his bipartisan success. Hatch spoke on the years-long legislative effort in the Finance Committee to help seniors in Medicare suffering from stroke, diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, heart disease,and other chronic illnesses. This bill was the culmination of a bipartisan, committee-wide effort to streamline care coordination services and improve healthcare outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries living with chronic conditions,said Hatch.As more Americans with multiple chronic conditions age into the Medicare program, my colleagues and I wanted to ensure that Medicare would work for them. The full remarks, as prepared for delivery, are below: Thank you, Jason, for that kind introduction. And thank you to the Bipartisan Policy Center for arranging this event. Additionally, I want to express my sincere thanks to all of you for being here today to recognize a landmark piece of legislation that I was proud to co-author, the CHRONIC Care Act. With your steadfast support, we were able to include the CHRONIC Care Act in the Bipartisan Budget Act signed into law earlier this year. This bill was the culmination of a bipartisan, committee-wide effort to streamline care coordination services and improve healthcare outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries living with chronic conditions. As more Americans with multiple chronic conditions age into the Medicare program, my colleagues and I wanted to ensure that Medicare would work for them. I'd like to take a moment and say a special thank you to Ranking Member Wyden, who is here with me today. We have worked well together for a long time, addressing important issues. But, this bill was special. I was honored to work together with Senator Wyden to make a real difference in the lives of people living with chronic conditions. This bill is evidence that Congress can identify a problem and address it in a bipartisan manner. The Administration is now implementing policies of the bill. And, I know that Administrator Verma is doing her best to ensure that beneficiaries get the improved outcomes that Congress intended. I commend her also for the agency's work to build off the reforms initiated by the bill by taking additional steps to focus on those with chronic conditions. I would also like to thank Senators Isakson and Warner who dedicated so much of their own time and effort to bring this legislation to fruition. They will never know how much I appreciate it. It is likely that this will be one of the last times that I will be addressing you as Chairman of the Finance Committee, and I can't think of a better legislative accomplishment to be celebrating near the end of my service than this one. I'm so grateful to be here with you all. Please keep up the good work. Thank you, and God bless. For more information about the event,click here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=B1CB4EE7-41E3-4A11-99AB-5E0CFA942626,"Hatch, Udall Introduce Smoke Free Schools Act to Combat E-Cigs in Schools",2018-12-04,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DC Today, US Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Tom Udall (D-NM) introducedThe Smoke Free Schools Act of 2018to help school districts and local education agencies address problems associated with e-cigarette use in schools. The legislation also instructs the FDA to partner with the CDC and Department of Education to study best practices for schools to implement policies to address e-cigarette use among students and gaps in knowledge about the harms of e-cigarette use among youth and young adults. The bill also encourages further research on the dose-response association between e-cigarettes and combustible tobacco, and the current efforts by schools to use federal funding to combat e-cigarette use. I am grateful to join Senator Udall in introducing this much-needed legislation,said Hatch.This bill will help teachers and school districts address the problems of e-cigarette use in schools and target nicotine addiction among today's youth. Congress, the FDA, and the Department of Education have made great strides in the past 30 years to discourage teen smoking and nicotine use. Now, it's important to continue that work in the context of new devices and technologies that have been shown to lead to nicotine addiction among today's students. I am proud to join Senator Hatch in this important effort because e-cigarettes don't belong in schools, and harmful chemicals don't belong in our kids' lungs,said Udall.These products use enticing flavors and stealthy designs to appeal to middle and high school students, fueling nicotine addiction and increasing their risk of tobacco use. This has lured a generation of kids into vaping and driven an epidemic among young people that's reached truly alarming proportions. We've got to put a stop to this crisis and that starts in our schools. This legislation would ban vaping at schools and enable education agencies to better direct funding toward combatting e-cigarette use. Our kids deserve to be protected from a lifetime of nicotine addiction, and I'm committed to pushing for strong action to safeguard the public health of New Mexico students and their families. Statements of Support The legislation has received support from a wide range of groups, such as The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, The National School Boards Association, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, National PTA, and The Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE). JoAnn Bartoletti, Executive Director, National Association of Secondary School Principals: While the ENDS industry's profits skyrocket, we all suffer the loss of human potential that results from the damage caused by adolescent nicotine use. NASSP is proud to support this bill on behalf of the nation's principals, and we welcome the partnership of federal agencies that seek to forestall the growing use of ENDS among our nation's students. Thomas J. Gentzel, Executive Director and CEO, National School Boards Association NSBA thanks Senator Hatch for his efforts to assist school districts in ensuring that students are in safe and supportive learning environments. With the ability to utilize Title IV funding to eradicate the use of e-cigarettes in schools this legislation helps school boards continue implementing the Every Student Succeeds Act. Background The FDA, CDC, and NIH have all played an instrumental role in identifying the health risks associated with nicotine use and addiction among youth. Their continued research into the risks associated with e-cigarettes and their work to address measures to reduce e-cigarette usage among today's kids is vital. However, much remains to be done, especially in school settings, where e-cigarette use not only poses a health risk, but can be distracting for other students, difficult for teachers to detect, and result in a less healthy school environment. 1) Findings The bill establishes finding supporting the assertion that e-cigarette use has become a public health risk in schools and among youth. The findings discuss the substantial increases in youth smoking in the past few years, as well as the dangers of nicotine addiction for people under the age of 18. Establishes Congress' policy-setting role in ensuring tobacco is discouraged to the maximum extent possible. States that local education agencies should be given the greatest flexibility to target specific funding to efforts aimed at eradicating the problem of e-cigarette use. 2) Prohibits e-cigarettes in schools The bill clarifies the Pro-Children Act of 2001 to state that ENDS, including e-cigarettes, should be included in smoking bans on smoking in educational and childcare facilities. 3) Clarifies that federal funding under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) can be used for e-cigarette prevention The bill amends Title IV of ESEA to clarify that e-cigarette prevention is an allowable use of funds to promote safe and healthy schools. 4) Authorizes studies Instructs the FDA to partner with the CDC and the Department of Education to conduct studies of best practices for schools to discourage e-cigarette use. It also instructs the FDA to study gaps in knowledge of the harms of e-cigarettes among adolescents and youth including injuries and poisoning. It seeks further information on the dose-response association between e-cigarettes and combustible tobacco, and the current efforts by schools to use federal funding to combat e-cigarette use. Finally, it instructs the FTC to consider including e-cigarettes in any studies they do relating to the marketing effects of traditional tobacco. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=C209C08C-4650-4714-9DFF-2AC0955C442A,"December 11th, 2018 Mobile Office Visit To Cache County",2018-12-04,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Clarkston When: Tuesday December 11th, 2018 @ 11:30 am 1:00 pm Where: Clarkston Town Hall - 50 South Main, Clarkston, UT 84305",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=261CBFDE-F42C-464B-8EAE-8C8D3DEB86DB,Hatch Statement on the Passing of President George H.W. Bush,2018-12-01,2018,2018-12,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C.--Senator Orrin Hatch, the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate, issued the following statement on the passing of former President George H.W. Bush President George H.W. Bush was among the greatest heroes of the American Century. The breadth and depth of his service are without parallel. Before rising to the highest office in the land, he was a decorated Navy Pilot, a Congressman from the State of Texas, an Ambassador to the United Nations, a CIA Director, and of course, the Vice President of the United States. He was the man who pulled back the Iron Curtain, shining the warm sunlight of freedom where freedom had grown cold. His influencein global affairs, in American domestic policy, and in our heartscannot be overstated. Today, we mourn the passing of one of the finest gentlemen I ever knew. May God bless the Bush family, and may our 41st President rest in peace with his beloved Barbara.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=2D1E9DF1-0633-4C07-BF96-4E6625BCE1AB,"Hatch, Duckworth Introduce Bipartisan Resolution to Support At-risk Youth & Help Eliminate Homelessness",2018-11-30,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCUS Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), along with Senators Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Patty Murray (D-WA), introduced a resolution to recognize November as National Runaway Prevention Month. The resolution, if passed, would help raise awareness of the runaway and homeless youth crisis and educate the public about how to help end youth homelessness. I am pleased to support the National Runaway Prevention Month Senate Resolution,said Hatch.Our resolution raises awareness of runaway behavior and ways to keep families together. We all must work together to create healthy homes to provide a promising future for our youth. It is a tragedy when any child does not have a safe roof over their head in the United States,said Duckworth.We must do everything we can to help children and families break the cycle of poverty, secure affordable housing and access to a safe and supportive home environment. This bipartisan effort to raise awareness around the issue of youth homelessness will bring us one step closer to achieving that goal. Background National Runaway Prevention Month would coincide with anti-homeless programs and activities sponsored by the National Runaway Safeline (NRS) headquartered in Chicago and National Network for Youth (NN4Y), which both work to eradicate and prevent youth homelessness across the country. Approximately 4.2 million youth run away or experience homelessness each year and many young people who experience homelessness will become victims of trafficking. Homeless youth are also more likely to be coerced into participating in criminal activity, joining a gang and using illegal drugs. A significant portion of runaway youth report physical or sexual abuse at home as a reason for leaving. The following organizations also support the resolution: The National Child Traumatic Stress Network, Youth Outreach Services and the Night Ministry.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/issue-in-focus?ContentRecord_id=F82AFBBC-5CDC-4D49-AD32-E38551936354,Whats in The First Step Act,2018-11-30,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Over incarceration is a very real threat facing our nation; it breaks down bonds with family and community and often times the prisoners are released with few skills and lacking the ability to truly reenter society, resulting in a higher likelihood to reoffend. This isn't to say that those who commit crimes should be given a slap on the wrist and sent on their way. We are, after all, a country of law and order. However, that same law and order requires we dole out justice fairly. When doled out unfairly, it causes a breakdown in trust of our law enforcement officials. This, too, leads to higher rates of recidivism and makes our country less safe. That is why a bipartisan group of legislators, law enforcement agents, and jurists have been working together to address these problems. Our solution is the First Step Act. The prison reform aspect of the bill deals primarily with expanding time credits that are earned for good behavior and participation in recidivism-reduction programs. Federal inmates use these credits to secure transfer from prison to pre-release custody meaning home confinement, supervised release, or a halfway house. Under this bill, not all inmates are eligible to earn those credit. The bill lists 50 offenses that automatically disqualify an inmate from earning these credits. The remaining inmates are eligible only if they their prison warden, using data-based standards developed by the attorney general and an independent commission, determines they're a low recidivism risk. For eligible inmates, the warden will individually tailor the type and amount of recidivism-reduction programming and activities. These recidivism-reduction programs are designed by federal prison wardens. Additionally, the bill mandates data analysis on the effectiveness of each recidivism-reduction program. If the program is not proven effective, wardens will not award time for participating in it. This bill does not allow dangerous criminals to earn early release. Beyond excluding those 50 specifically dangerous offenses, it directs experienced law-enforcement officers to determine whether an offender is dangerous. These officers are not government bureaucrats or elected officials who have outside agendas. These are professionals, doing a job they already do daily in order to run the nation's federal prisons. Similar risk assessments have already been implemented in Texas and Georgia, and these states are hardly criminal havens. There have been concerns about how fentanyl dealers would be affected under our bill, especially in light of the continued fight against opioids. According to the Sentencing Commission, the 56 people who were sentenced for fentanyl dealing in 2017 and who's sentences would have been affected by our bill would still be sentenced to an average of 211 months or 17 years and seven months in prison. Not exactly soft on crime. The bill also allows some judicial oversight of mandatory minimums. However, this safety valve cannot apply to offenders who threatened or perpetrated violence or bodily harm, or possessed a firearm or other dangerous weapon. In order for this to apply, offenders would also have to cooperate with law enforcement to go after higher-level offenders. Criminal-justice-reform in the 20th century has been led by conservatives who understood that law and order is built on the responsible use of government power, tight-knit communities, a vibrant civil society, strong families, and personal responsibility The FIRST STEP Act is a chance to continue that legacy.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=696BE35E-0E59-4954-9AFD-70FBFC801983,Senate Calls on State Department to Continue Search for Missing Utahn,2018-11-30,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) secured unanimous consent Thursday for passage of a Senate resolution calling on the State Department to continue its investigation into the likelihood that Utahn David Sneddon was abducted by the current totalitarian North Korean regime. At the time of his disappearance, David had his whole life ahead of him. He was eager to get back to BYU's beautiful campus and had recently signed up to take the LSAT. But he never had the chance to do any of these things, and the Sneddon family deserves to know why, Lee said. The first and most important responsibility of the United States government is to ensure the safety and freedom of the American people at home and abroad, Lee continued. The State Department's responsibilities in this matter include investigating all plausible explanations behind David's disappearance, and leaving no stone unturned in trying to return one of our brothers to his family.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-chairman-s-note?ContentRecord_id=4F4BC790-A71B-4B78-BAE9-7A83630BD808,End the War in Yemen,2018-11-30,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Eight months ago, the Senate voted to table a resolution that would have forced the president to either: a) end United States cooperation with Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen; or b) submit a formal declaration of war to Congress. That resolution was tabled by a vote of 55-44. This Wednesday that same resolution survived a vote to be added to the Senate calendar, 63 to 37. A final vote on the resolution is set for next week. The chance to end the war in Yemen is in sight. The inhumanity of the war is staggering: since 2015, more than 10,000 civilians have died and 40,000 have been wounded. In an attack just a few months ago, a bomb was dropped on a school bus that killed 40 young boys who were on a school trip and wounded another 56 children. But what few Americans knew until recently is that the U.S. military has actually been making the crisis worse by helping one side bomb these innocent civilians. So how did we get entangled in this crisis to begin with? In March of 2015, Saudi Arabia launched a war against Houthi rebels shortly after the Houthis ousted the Saudi-backed government in the capital city of Sanaa. The Obama administration, without consulting Congress, quickly authorized U.S. military forces to provide logistical and intelligence support, including midair refueling, surveillance, reconnaissance information, and target selection assistance. In other words, we have been supporting and actively participating in the activities of war. But Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power to declare war. Congress. Not the President, not the Pentagon, not someone else within the Executive branch, but Congress. The Founders could not have been clearer about this. And they did so with good reason: the Founders set up our system of government in such a way as to protect the people from excessive concentration of power in the hands of the few. We know from experience under British rule that bad things happen, especially at the national level, when too few people exercise too much power. And nowhere is this more evident than in the power to declare war. So the Founders placed the war power squarely in the legislative branch: the branch where honest, open, and public debate is supposed to happen; and the branch that is held most accountable to the people through elections at the most regular intervals. As Alexander Hamilton points out in Federalist Paper 69, this power would not be exercised by the executive branch so as to make it less likely to be abused, like it was when the King of England acted in and of himself to send his country and ours, for that matter to war. The situation in Yemen now poses a true humanitarian crisis. The country is on the brink of rampant disease and mass starvation: an estimated 15 million people don't have access to clean water and sanitation; and 17 million don't have access to food. More innocent lives are being lost by the day. My position on this has not changed for the past eight months. But with the taking of another innocent life, that of American resident Jamal Khashoggi, the circumstances have only further deteriorated. Intelligence suggests that, despite his repeated denials, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia himself ordered the murder. Saudi Arabia's moral depravity has only been made plainer. This is not an ally that deserves our support or military intervention, especially when our own security is not on the line. On the contrary, to continue supporting them in this war would be bad diplomacy and undermine our very credibility. U.S. intervention in Yemen is unauthorized, unconstitutional, and immoral. And we must not we cannot delay voting to end our involvement and our support of Saudi Arabia any further. We owe it to the American people who put their sons and daughters in harm's way to defend us; we owe it to their parents and families; and we owe it to ourselves, who have taken an oath to uphold, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=AAF75AD9-E3D6-448D-A1BB-57E998A0884C,"Hatch, Lee Introduce Resolution Renaming VA Outstation After Major Brent Taylor",2018-11-29,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Senior Republican and President Pro Tempore of the Senate released the following statement after he and Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced a Senate resolution to honor Utahn Brent Taylor. The legislation would rename the North Ogden Department of Veteran's Affairs outstation the Major Brent Taylor Vet Center Outstation'afterMajor Brent Taylor, wholost his lifeon November 3, 2018 while deployed to Afghanistan during an unprecedented year-long leave of absence from her service as the Mayor of North Ogden. Brent Taylor was a hero, a patriot, alovingfather, and a dear friend,Hatch said.News of his death in Afghanistan was devastating to all Utahns. Renaming this facility after Brent is a fitting tributeto his leadership, courage, and integrity. I hope it will also showJennie and the Taylor familyhow much we honortheir sacrifice. Senator Hatch shown with Major Brent Taylor",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=872B61B6-D109-4AAE-8437-153C2CE947DD,"Sens. Lee, Hatch Introduce Bill Renaming VA Outstation After Major Brent Taylor",2018-11-29,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON - Today, Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) introduced a Senate resolution renaming the North Ogden Department of Veteran's Affairs outstation the Major Brent Taylor Vet Center Outstation. A companion bill was introduced on Tuesday, November 20th, 2018 by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT) and was cosponsored by Reps. Chris Stewart (R-UT), John Curtis (R-UT) and Mia Love (R-UT). The bill would rename the outstation after Major Brent Taylor, who made the ultimate sacrifice on November 3rd, 2018 while deployed to Afghanistan. Prior to that deployment, he served as Mayor of North Ogden, where the outstation is located. Major Brent Taylor's life may be best defined by the word service.' Sen. Lee said. When he said service is what leadership is all about,' he knew that from personal experience, and he exemplified that motto in all aspects of his life. Bestowing his name on an outpost that aids his fellow servicemen and women in the town that he loved and served is a poignant way to honor his legacy of service, leadership, and Christ-like love. I am honored to join with my fellow Utah delegation members to bring this bill to the floor. Brent Taylor was a hero, a patriot, a loving father, and a dear friend, Sen. Hatch said. News of his death in Afghanistan was devastating to all Utahns. Renaming this facility after Brent is a fitting tribute to his leadership, courage, and integrity. I hope it will also show Jennie and the Taylor family how much we honor their sacrifice.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=BBDE36AE-1097-4749-B7C9-A270008802B8,Remarks on S.J. Res 54: The Yemen War Powers Act,2018-11-28,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Mr. President, I stood before this body in March of this year to protest our country's unconstitutional intervention in Saudi Arabia's bloody war in Yemen. I was proud to stand with my colleagues Senator Sanders and Senator Murphy to file a discharge motion of our resolution, S.J. Res 54, that would remove U.S. armed forces from Yemen. At that time, members of the Foreign Relations Committee requested additional time to study the issue and debate the resolution in committee. The chairman of the committee, my colleague Senator Corker, requested this with the commitment to [QUOTE] bring forth legislation to actually appropriately deal with many of the issues relative to Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and ourselves. So the Senate voted to table the motion. Since then, the committee has held a hearing on this issue, and introduced a separate bipartisan bill to address it. But no further action has been taken. And so today, eight months later, the bloodshed continues still abetted by the United States, even amidst further revelations of Saudi depravity. It is long past overdue that Congress remove U.S. forces from Yemen, as recent circumstances only confirm. Today we have a chance to remedy our course of action and do what the Constitution and justice demand. The situation in Yemen is dire. The war has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilianshuman beings, lest we forgeteach one of them possessing immeasurable dignity and worth. It has created refugees, orphans, widows, and displaced countless families. The numbers and the inhumanity are staggering: since 2015, more than 10,000 civilians have died, and 40,000 have been wounded. In an attack just a few months ago, a bomb was dropped on a school bus that killed 40 young boys who were on a school trip and wounded another 56 children. But what few Americans knew until recently is that the U.S. military has actually been making the crisis worse by helping one side bomb these innocent civilians. So how did we get entangled in this crisis to begin with? In March of 2015, Saudi Arabia launched a war against Houthi rebels shortly after the Houthis ousted the Saudi-backed government in the capital city of Sanaa. The Obama administration, without consulting Congress, quickly authorized U.S. military forces to provide logistical and intelligence support to the Saudi coalition. U.S. military support has continued since then, including midair refueling, surveillance, reconnaissance information, and target selection assistance. In other words, we have been supporting and actively participating in the activities of war. But Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power to declare warCongress, not the President, not the Pentagon, not someone else within the Executive branch, but Congress. The Founders could not have been clearer about this. And they did so with good reason: the Founders set up our system of government in such a way as to protect the people from excessive concentration of power in the hands of the few. We know from experience under British rule that bad things happen, especially at the national level, when too few people exercise too much power. And nowhere is this more evident than in the power to declare war. So the Founders placed the war power squarely in the legislative branch: the branch where honest, open, and public debate is supposed to happen; and the branch that is held most accountable to the people through elections at the most regular intervals. As Alexander Hamilton points out in Federalist Paper 69, this power would not be exercised by the executive branch so that it would be less likely to be abused, like it was when the King of England acted in and of himself to send his country and ours, for that matter into war. Now, some opponents of our resolution claim that our involvement in Yemen is constitutional under the War Powers Act of 1973. It is true that under the War Powers Act, the executive branch can use armed forces in cases of emergencies and under time constraints. But the conflict in Yemen by no means constitutes a threat to the safety of American citizens, and our involvement has far surpassed the allotted emergency time constraint. The Houthis, while no friends of ours, are a regional rebel group that does not itself threaten American national security. In fact, the longer we fight against them, the more reason we give them to hate America and embrace the opportunists who are our true enemy in the region Iran. The more we prolong the activities that destabilize the region, the longer we harm our own interests in terms of trade and broader regional security. The War Powers Act also states that the assignment of U.S. armed forces to coordinate or participate in hostilities of a foreign country constitutes a conflict of war. And so some have argued that we have not been engaging in hostilities, and therefore have not violated the War Powers Act. But this claim, too, falls flat on its face. We have specifically aided the Saudi coalition with midair refueling and target selection assistance; or as Defense Secretary Jim Mattis himself said in December of 2017, our military is helping the Saudis [QUOTE] make certain [they] hit the right thing. In other words, we are helping a foreign power bomb its adversaries. If that doesn't constitute hostilities, I don't know what does. And finally, some critics say that this resolution would hurt our efforts to combat terrorism in the region, specifically al-Qaeda and ISIS. However, the resolution explicitly states that it would not impede the military's ability to fight these terror groups. In fact, U.S. involvement in Yemen has arguably undermined the effort against al-Qaeda's affiliates. The State Department's Country Reports on terrorism for 2016 found that the conflict between the Saudi-led forces and Houthi insurgents has actually helped al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and ISIS's Yemen branch to deepen their inroads across much of the country. It appears that our involvement in Yemen accomplishes no good at all only harm, and serious harm at that. The situation in Yemen now poses a true humanitarian crisis. The country is on the brink of rampant disease and mass starvation: an estimated 15 million people don't have access to clean water and sanitation; and 17 million don't have access to food. More innocent lives are being lost by the day. My position on this has not changed for the past eight months. But with the taking of another innocent life that of Jamal Khashoggi the circumstances have only further deteriorated. Intelligence suggests that despite his repeated denials the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia himself ordered the murder. Saudi Arabia's moral depravity has only been made plainer. This is not an ally that deserves our support or military intervention, especially when our own security is not on the line. On the contrary, to continue supporting them in this war would be bad diplomacy and undermine our very credibility. No, U.S. intervention in Yemen is unauthorized, unconstitutional, and immoral. And we must not we cannot delay voting to end our involvement and our support of Saudi Arabia any further. If we do, we have ourselves to blame for our country's lost credibility on the world stage; and more importantly, our own consciences will bear the blame for the thousands of lives that will surely continue to be lost. The Founding Fathers had incredible wisdom in requiring these issues issues of American blood and treasure to be debated and discussed between two equal branches of government. They understood that matters of war and alliances must constantly be reconsidered and reevaluated; and in an open, honest, and public manner. That is one of our most solemn duties in this body, and it is the opportunity that lies before us today. We owe it to the sons and daughters of the American people who put their sons and daughters in harm's way to defend us; we owe it to their parents and families; and we owe it to ourselves, who have taken an oath to uphold, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the motion to discharge the resolution. I yield the floor. As prepared for delivery",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://robbishop.house.gov/media/press-releases/bishop-introduces-bill-honor-fallen-utah-soldier,Bishop Introduces Bill to Honor Fallen Utah Soldier,2018-11-27,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Rob Bishop,B001250,robbishop.house.gov,,,legacy,"Rep.Rob Bishop (UT-01) introduced HR 7163, a bill to designate the outstation of the Department of Veterans Affairs in North Ogden, UT, as the Major Brent Taylor Vet Center Outstation. Brent Russell Taylor served as Mayor of North Ogden City and as a Major in the Utah Army National Guard. OnSaturday, November 3rd, 2018, Major Taylor was killed in an attack in Afghanistan. From the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, Congressman Rob Bishop spoke about Major Taylor and the designation of the Major Brent Taylor Vet Center Outstation. BISHOP: Major Brent Russell Taylor is one of six brothers to each wear the uniform of the United States Army. While training Afghan security forces in support of Operation Freedom's Sentinel, Major Taylor was killed by an apparent insider attack on November 3rd in Kabul Province, while in the final months of deployment. He is survived by his wife, Jennie, and seven children; Megan, Lincoln, Alex, Jacob, Ellie, Jonathan, & Caroline. In Utah, we will forever mourn with the family of Major Taylor. We will grieve his loss and honor his sacrifice. As Major Taylor, and his brothers, passed through Basic Combat Training, they learned the Army Values in great detail. Those values are Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. Major Brent Taylor lived these values. First: Loyalty Major Taylor swore to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States. He swore to support and defend our nation's guiding document against all enemies. He demonstrated his loyalty to that oath time and time again. Duty Major Taylor earned a Bronze Star for, his outstanding dedication to duty during combat operations in Iraq. The Army says, doing your duty means more than carrying out your assigned tasks. Brent Taylor's military service record shows he employed this guidance to the fullest. So too does his life outside the military. Taylor was not only Major Taylor, he was also Mayor Taylor. His community and neighbors so entrusted him to lead and provide that they elected him mayor of North Ogden City, Utah. In that role, he did much more than carry out his assigned tasks.' He worked to beautify and improve the city. He aimed at creating a community that was welcoming to newcomers. In the pre-dawn morning of his last Christmas on earth, Mayor Taylor ventured out into the cold to oversee the snow plows and salt trucks as they cleared the roads and made his city safe. Respect Major Taylor not only enjoyed the respect of his family, community, and fellow service members. His praise came from across the globe. In a letter from Afghanistan to Mrs. Taylor following her husband's death, an Afghan aviator said, your husband taught me to treat my children as treasured gifts, to be a better father, to be a better [husband], and to be a better man. A man does not receive that level of praise without first showing forth their own grand measure of respect. Major Brent Taylor knew about respect. Selfless Service As a high school senior in Chandler, Arizona, Brent delivered the Honors Speech at graduation and his instruction to the audience was to, Go out. Be happy. Find peace and make a positive difference in the world. Major Taylor left his family and American soil on four deployments to serve and, make a positive difference in the world.' In that same Honors Speech, he gave the order to stick with it to the end. He, himself, did just that. Honor Major Taylor honored his faith, his family, his community, and his county throughout his short life. Brent's social media postings are replete with photos of his children and family. They show images of love, service, and patriotism. Qualities of a man, husband, and father who honors his family and country. In his last Facebook post, Brent implored that we all remember we have far more as Americans that unites us than divides us. He ended that post with the words, God Bless America. Integrity The army says that integrity is a quality you develop by adhering to moral principles and that the more choices you make based on integrity, the more this highly prized value will affect your relationships with family and friends. The days since the sad passing of Major Brent Taylor have been filled with an outpouring of love and grief expressed by those who knew Brent. His integrity left an impression and his integrity affected his relationships. Personal Courage In September of 2007, Major Taylor was commanding a convoy in Iraq when he was hit by an insurgent IED. His vehicle was struck by shrapnel, asphalt, and concrete debris. For the wounds received in action, Major Taylor was awarded the Purple Heart. He would go on to deploy twice more. Brent Taylor stood as an example of personal courage. He lived the Army Values. In April of this year, the Department of Veterans Affairs opened a facility in North Ogden City. It's a place where veterans and their families can go to receive counseling, support, and other help. It's a place located right in the heart of Brent Taylor's hometown and as a small gesture to his service and sacrifice, I have introduced a bill to name this VA facility, the Major Brent Taylor Vet Center Outstation. The naming of a building will never repay the debt our nation owes Mayor Taylor or his family, but it can stand as a humble reminder of the citizen soldier who lost his life in the service of others.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=298DA07B-7E22-4332-B4A5-7DB8642E7D1F,"At Hoover Institution, Hatch Reflects on 42 Years at Forefront of Foreign Policy",2018-11-27,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday,Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT),the senior member and President Pro Tempore of the US Senate, gave the following remarks at Stanford's Hoover Institution. The Senator reflected on his 42 years of service in the foreign policy arena, providing commentary on lessons learned and how to apply them going forward. Via YouTube We need to look back in order to move forward. Only by looking to the past can we bring clarity to the challenges of the present. One can and should ask sincere questions of why we pursue certain policies and what immediate and enduring outcomes they might produce. Often this line of reasoning brings us outside of our ideological comfort zones. But it is precisely in those zones of discomfort that honest conversations can take place. And it is those conversations that can produce the most breathtaking results. Thefullremarks, as prepared for delivery, are below: Thank you. It's an honor to be with you today. I wish to express my deep gratitude to the Hoover Institutionto its esteemed director Thomas Gilligan, Michael Franc, and to the distinguished members of the Institution's board of overseers and research community. In a little over a month, I will retire from the Senate after 42 years of service. Among the countless unforgettable experiences I've had as a Senator, few compare to the opportunities I had to shape our nation's foreign policy. As many of you know, I have been on the front lines of some of the biggest moments in international politics of the last half century. Today, I want to share with you some of the lessons I learned along the way. Just last month I visited Croatia a country whose independence I worked hard to realize and a region I worked to secure in the leadup to the Dayton Accords. It was also my third visit to Europe over the past year to advance our bilateral relations with our European allies. Indeed, even in the final year of my career, my commitment to America's standing in the world is no less intense than it was during my early years, when I helped transfer Stinger missiles to Afghans when the Soviets advanced in Central Asia or when I fought alongside President Reagan to establish the National Endowment for Democracy. These milestones took place during historic turns in world history: the height of the Cold War; our efforts to continue protecting the liberal international order, and our efforts to secure America and the free world during the War on Terror. It spanned seven presidential administrations, both Republican and Democrat, and the transformation of the media and information landscapes. I mention these highlights to underscore just how much our history impacts who we are and where I believe we're headed. Through our actions in the present, we create our history. So we must recognize opportunities for doing good when we see them and confidently pursue the correct course. We have a duty to learn about our past about the sacrifices made; the decisions taken; the costs and rewards at stake. The study of history is not a mere academic exercise; it is foundational to understanding who we are. Our history does not remain in the past; it lives in the present, offering endless lessons for the challenges we have before us. If we ignore history, we risk forgetting a fundamental truth: that freedom is fatefully fragile, and we must defend it at every turn. In my 42 years of service, I have gained an appreciation for the fact that our history is so much more than memorizing statistics such as names, dates, and places. Rather, it is about the stories told, the lives lived, and the sacrifices made to preserve the principles we stand for. The most important lesson of world history in the 20th century is that if America does not rise to the task, no one else will. After World War II, America's grace in the wake of victory was unprecedented. That America and its allies chose to embrace and even salvage the country we had recently fought was an ironic turn. It was not only a diplomatic challenge but a moral one. None captured the moral sentiment better than Chancellor Adenauer, who responded to President Kennedy's remarks concerning the bonds between the United States and Germany with the following words: I feel you should try to imagine what it means for a vanquished nation after such a murderous fight and war to see the victor extend the helpful hand to the vanquished. It was not only the material aid and assistance, but it was, above all, the human attitude, the human aspect, the human spirit in which this was done which established these inseparable bonds between our two countries. These words describe not only a particular history, but also the visceral sentiment within which that history was made. That America and Germany share such history comes from our understanding of lessons learned from what a generation experienced, their realization of the lowest depths that humanity can reach, and the collective commitment to protecting the world from ever repeating such horrors. Chancellor Adenauer's remarks point to the ways in which historical moments can define how we appreciate our principles. The principles that Americans hold dear, including the protection of basic human liberties, democratic institutions, open elections, and free-market competition, have endured the test of time not merely because they are noble in their own right, but rather because they are strong and resilient enough to survive. A key feature of international relations is the challenge of working with states and actors that do not always share the same principles. Indeed, the most trying of cases require finding a way forward with those who overtly oppose the principles you stand forin some cases, having nothing but hostility towards you. Statesmanship is tested precisely within these settings. It begins with a historical appreciation of the principles we stand for, and how best to apply these principles in overcoming today's challenges. Properly applying our past requires a deliberate focus on parsing out how our nation came to be. Without US leadership, post-war European reconstruction never would have taken place, Soviet communism never would have been defeated, and the economic growth and prosperity that our country has come to expect never would have occurred. The existing American-led global order certainly did not ensue from a reluctance to engage internationally or commercially. It also did not come from a single moment of engagement. Rather, the fact that we have had a stable and open global order for more than 70 years is largely because America has remained critically present and involved in advancing its leadership responsibilities abroad, which ultimately helps the nation flourish at home. I am concerned that US disengagement from the worldparticularly when it comes to security and tradecould result in a more unstable and less open world. On the homefront, protectionism and economic nationalism will lead to a less robust economy and fray international relationships especially with our allies that jeopardize American security. The risks of American retreat from global leadership must not be ignored. This requires moving away from excessively ideological, tribal, or partisan postures a task that is not always comfortable to accept. Two observations here become immediately clear: first, rarely has the road been a straight one in achieving a set objective. Local conditions and realities confront us, and we naturally cannot operate effectively without working through them. The second is that rarely are parallels precise between the challenges of the past and those of today. The past, in other words, cannot predict how we should behave in the face of new challenges, but it should prepare us with the knowledge of where the potential for results might lie. From these two observations there is a universal lesson that comes to all who build a relationship with history. In the end, even the best of historians cannot know every last detail of how a story unfolded, every turn of the dime, every exact cause and effect. But this is not cause for despair. Rather, it is an invitation to honesty and hard work. While we may not always know precisely how or when our actions might lead to particular results, we cannot shirk the responsibility of doing everything we can to achieve what is right. The first step in this honest approach is knowing when to leave ideology, tribalism, and partisanship at the door, inviting partners when they present themselves, and committing to a principled pragmatism. Standing by principles is necessary, but insufficient. Only an approach that is both collaborative and creative can yield the desired outcome. Much as with the episodes of the Berlin Airlift and the Marshall Plan, we win over more partners to our ideas when we convince them through what those ideas achieve. Unfortunately, the caliber of creativity and courage required to learn from our past is in rare supply today. Domestically, we have become far too comfortable in our political bubbles and media digests. In the process, we have forgotten that those of different political persuasions can be our intellectual sparring partners and collaborators, not our enemies. The root cause is our ahistorical view of our principles detached from the stories within which they were tested, trapped in hyperboles and ideological boxes. This prevents political leaders from doing meaningful work, just as it prevents the public from fully understanding the work their representatives do on their behalf. Sometimes, issues cannot and should not belong neatly into any one political category. Sometimes, getting it right simply means doing what's right. This lesson should be applied to our foreign policy as well. When the objective of doing the right thing is in plain sight, we as leaders need to be extra careful not to blind ourselves by ideological or partisan persuasions. I was able to get the right thing done recently when I helped secure the freedom of my constituent and his wife, Josh and Thamy Holt, from a jail in Venezuela where they had been held captive for nearly two years. The key was a clear focus on the objective, freeing one of our own, and being open to exploring opportunities that would lead us to that objective. My goal was to leave no stone unturned. This meant reaching out to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, corresponding with him, speaking with him, and meeting with his representatives in Washington when few of my colleagues were ready to do so. My objective was not to argue that one or another policy on Venezuela was right or wrong. Rather, it was to look squarely at where there might be possibilities. It was not the offer of a promise, but an acknowledgment of a potential. I believe it was this tone of principled but open outreach that encouraged an opportunity originally disguised as an intractable problem. Similarly, getting it right sometimes means disagreeing with one's own leadership. It is no secret that I staunchly support President Trump. I not only supported him as a candidate, but as Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I led the charge in passing tax reform, arguably the president's signature legislative accomplishment to date. America's tax system was in desperate need of repair and sensible reform, and I was grateful to work with the president to get the job done. But I also support free markets and free trade, and will passionately continue to do so. Whether it was leading the fight in Congress to enact bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority, which helps open markets for US exports, or authoring legislation to strengthen intellectual property rights in trade agreements, I have been at the forefront of advancing a pro-market strategy. History makes clear that protectionism corrodes our economy and global standing. Our nation has long maintained an open market to foreign imports and foreign capital while promoting freer trade and capital flows abroad. America did not become the world's leading economy by chance: much of the reason was the deliberate result of an economic agenda that embraced freer markets and freer trade, setting the stage for the expansion of individual freedom, shared prosperity, and global peace. Our nation must never lose sight of the values, policies, and institutions which have wrought our people such immense progress. America can ill afford a lurch back to protectionism, deglobalization, and economic decline. I am confident that our nation's leaders will ultimately do the right thing by resisting protectionism and promoting free markets and free trade. Even though I will be retiring from the Senate, I will not stop fighting for the issues and country I care about. I know well that the need for American leadership in the world has never been greater. In my regular meetings with world leaders, I am regularly moved by the sentiment that other nations want closer, deeper ties with the United States. Much, I believe, has to do with the fact that America offers a unique spark to cultivate a human spirit in engaging with the world. We need to look back in order to move forward. Only by looking to the past can we bring clarity to the challenges of the present. One can and should ask sincere questions of why we pursue certain policies and what immediate and enduring outcomes they might produce. Often this line of reasoning brings us outside of our ideological comfort zones. But it is precisely in those zones of discomfort that honest conversations can take place. And it is those conversations that can produce the most breathtaking results. My message to the American people, as well as to my colleagues in public service, is simple and comes from my own habits that have benefitted me: always learn from history not merely from the facts, but from the stories, lives, and emotions that produced them. Cultivate an understanding of the principles and values that have come to shape our course through those events. Use these lessons to guide the future. And in commiting to preserve the lessons of history, never fear stepping outside of your comfort zone when you have the opportunity to do the right thing. These steps do not guarantee success. Indeed all of us, just as our predecessors, face a brave new world with real and shifting challenges. But we can steer our general path towards the greater good if we accept the dual responsibility of protecting a shared history and working hard with whomever extends a helping hand to build a better world through it. Our nation's fate and our human spirit depend on it.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=FBC2AB93-5CD9-4BD3-BA8F-B14CDECF7FFE,"Hatch, Casey, Rooney, and Pascrell Introduce Bipartisan, Bicameral Traumatic Brain Injury Reauthorization",2018-11-27,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenatorsOrrin Hatch (R-UT) andBob Casey (D-PA), together with Representatives Tom Rooney (R-FL) andBill Pascrell (D-NJ), released the following statements after introducingtheTraumatic Brain Injury (TBI) ReauthorizationAct of 2018in the Senate and House of Representatives. The legislationextends the federal TBI program through 2024.Italso authorizes resourcesto boostthe CDC's recent efforts to launch a National Concussion Surveillance System as a means to fill longstanding data gaps and provide a better estimate of the TBI burden. The CDC has reported thatthis year alone,about 2.5 million children and adultswill experience a traumatic brain injury,Hatch said. We know TBI is a serious problem, but we fail to grasp its severity and scope. Our bill will change that.By reauthorizing theTBI program, our legislation willextend important research, education, and advocacy efforts to help us better understand the nature of brain trauma and reduce the prevalence of these injuries going forward. I am pleased to work with a bipartisan group of my colleagues on this reauthorization of the TBI Act,said Casey.This important legislation provides much-needed support for individuals and families living with TBI, and also builds on the CDC's work to more accurately determine the prevalence of concussion and TBI so that we can improve our prevention and treatment efforts. Traumatic Brain Injuries (TBIs) effect millions of people every year; from those in our veteran community to those in youth sports to their families,Rooney said. Throughout my ten years in Congress and as chair of the Congressional Brain Injury Task Force, I have been a staunch advocate in raising awareness for TBIs. The reauthorization and modernization of the TBIprogramwill ensure theresearch, education, and advocacy efforts for these injuries will continue. I want to thank my colleagues, Congressman Bill Pascrell and Senators Casey and Hatch, for their efforts in advancing this bill which will help us better understand TBIs and help mitigate and treat these injuries going forward. I am proud to introduce this critical bipartisan, bicameral reauthorization of the Traumatic Brain Injury Act,said Pascrell, Jr,the co-founder and co-chair of the Congressional Brain Injury Task Force.For the last 18 years, I have fought to advance research and treatment for TBI because our athletes on the ballfield and our brave soldiers on the battlefield deserve more. While we have a long way to go, the advances in technology since Congress first started having this conversation can bring us closer to a world where no one must endure the consequences of a brain injury. This goal will take the right investments and partnerships, and this legislation does just that. For the first time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will be able to implement a study to see how many people, both young and old, have sustained a brain injury, which will give us critical insight into this problem. This new TBI Act also modernizes how the government oversees TBI research, treatment, and prevention. And it provides an adjustment to account for the long overdue increase in funding for TBI that I fought to pass in the FY 2018 Omnibus last year. I look forward to working with my fellow Co-Chair of the TBI Task Force Congressman Tom Rooney, as well as Senators Casey and Hatch to ensure this legislation passes Congress and heads quickly to the President's desk. The Traumatic Brain Injury Program Reauthorization of 2018 is supported by the Brain Injury Association of America (BIAA) and the National Association of State Head Injury Administrators (NASHIA). Background In 1996, Senator Hatch worked with Senator Ted Kennedy on the original TBI Act to help limit the suffering, death, and long-term disability that results from TBI. The legislation marked the beginning of a multifaceted federal endeavor to address the needs of persons with TBI and their families. Today's TBI program maintains that original framework of prevention, education, access, and protection. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducts projects to reduce the incidence of traumatic brain injury. Through the Administration for Community Living (ACL), the TBI State Partnership Grant Program helps states and territories to build service infrastructure and improve access to services and supports.This bill: Reauthorizes Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) surveillance activities and projects to reduce incidence of TBI. It also extends grants to states for TBI systems, and grants to protection and advocacy (P&A) systems, through the Administration for Community Living (ACL). ACL's TBI State Partnership Grant Program helps states increase access to rehabilitation and other services for individuals with TBI, and its TBI Coordinating Center provides technical assistance to grantees. P&As work to ensure that all individuals with TBI and their families will have accessible, available, acceptable, and appropriate services and supports. Authorizes theNational Concussion Surveillance System (NCSS)at the CDCto better estimate the incidence of TBI across the lifespan at a national level. TheCDC has taken steps to develop the NCSS, which is an effort that aligns with the TBI law's intent, recommendations made by the National Academies, and proposals included in previous budget requests. The system would have the capacity to improve understanding of the full range of circumstances leading to TBI, and to track healthcare utilization and services received after a TBI. Designates authority to the Administration for Community Living (ACL) for the state partnership grants and P&A grants.The TBI Reauthorization Act of 2014 allowed the HHS Secretary to review oversight of the TBI program and found that the federal TBI Program's goals closely align with ACL's mission. As a result, the state partnership grants and P&A components of the federal TBI Program transitioned from HRSA to ACL on October 1, 2015.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ContentRecord_id=E6A4C3CA-0389-41A7-8309-B5B959713E8E,The Truth about the FIRST STEP Act,2018-11-27,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"As a former federal prosecutor, I am clear-eyed about crime. Unlike some reformers, I don't think our justice system is fundamentally broken, unjust, or corrupt. I have nothing but respect for law-enforcement officials, who put themselves in danger every single day in order to protect the public. I know from experience that dangerous criminals exist individuals who are incapable of or uninterested in rehabilitation and change. We should throw the book at those people. But my time as a prosecutor also tells me that not every criminal is dangerous or incapable of living a productive life. My faith as a Christian teaches me that many people are capable of redemption. And my instincts as a conservative make me believe that the government can be reformed to work better. For those reasons, I believe the FIRST STEP Act is legislation that deserves the support of all conservatives. It deals primarily with time credits that federal inmates can use to secure their transfer from prison to pre-release custody meaning home confinement, supervised release, or a halfway house. The bill clarifies that most prisoners can earn up to 54 days of credit per year if they display exemplary compliance with institutional disciplinary regulations. This is a modest change from existing law, which has been interpreted to allow 47 days of good-time credits per year. In addition, the bill creates a new credit for participating in recidivism-reduction programs or other productive activities that facilitate reentry into society. Because most of the criticism of the FIRST STEP Act has focused on this recidivism-reduction credit, it's worth outlining the specifics in more detail. Not all inmates are eligible to earn the credit. The bill lists 50 offenses, conviction for which disqualifies inmates from the credit. The remaining inmates are eligible only if they are determined to be a minimum or low recidivism risk by the warden of their facility, based on data-based standards developed by the attorney general and an independent commission. For eligible inmates, the warden will individually tailor the type and amount of recidivism-reduction programming and productive activities. Not all conservatives are on board with these reforms. Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) recently identified four objections to the legislation on these pages. None survive scrutiny. First, Senator Cotton argues that the term productive activity is defined so broadly that it would allow offenders to earn time credits by playing softball, watching movies, or doing activities that prisoners are already doing. That argument ignores the reality of the federal criminal-justice system and the plain text of the bill. The recidivism-reduction programs Cotton is so concerned about are designed by federal prison wardens, not prisoners. Federal prison wardens simply do not award time credits for watching TV. Furthermore, the bill mandates data analysis on the effectiveness of each recidivism-reduction program. If the program is not proven effective, wardens will not award time for participating in it. Second, Senator Cotton contends that the bill will allow dangerous criminals to win early release. As explained above, the bill categorically excludes offenders convicted of certain crimes and provides that all other offenders are eligible to earn credits only if they are deemed a minimum or low recidivism risk. Cotton dislikes this system because it reflects too much faith that government bureaucrats can judge the state of a felon's soul and is subject to manipulation by a future Democratic president. But the legislation doesn't ask government bureaucrats to judge the state of a felon's soul. Rather, it directs experienced law-enforcement officers to determine whether an offender is a danger a job they already do daily, in order to run the nation's federal prisons. Similar risk assessments have already been implemented in Texas and Georgia, and these states are hardly the post-apocalyptic criminal hellscapes that Cotton predicts such a system would cause. As to Cotton's point about tomfoolery by a future administration, if a president wanted to empty the nation's prisons, tinkering with the standards for earning recidivism-reduction credits would be an odd way to achieve that goal. As Cotton himself acknowledges, the president has broad authority to pardon or grant clemency. Third, Senator Cotton contends that the bill would allow serious fentanyl dealers to reduce their sentences by half. What he either doesn't know or fails to mention is that this applies only to the enhancement part of their sentence, not the underlying crime. Under current law, certain second-time drug dealers receive a 20-year mandatory minimum, while certain third-time drug dealers receive a mandatory life sentence. The FIRST STEP Act would reduce those mandatory minimums to 15 years and 25 years, respectively. The Sentencing Commission tells us that, in 2017, 56 people were sentenced pursuant to those mandatory minimums, and that the average sentence for those offenders under our bill would be 211 months or 17 years and seven months in prison. Not exactly soft on crime. Much of the reduced sentence in this estimate, according to Cotton, is attributable to the recidivism-reduction credit. Cotton apparently believes inmates will be able to participate in qualifying programs every single day of their sentence. But that is highly unlikely to actually happen, and there's a limit to how widely available these programs are. Fourth, Cotton argues against an expansion of the so-called safety valve, which allows trial judges to avoid harsh mandatory minimums in appropriate cases. This distorts the FIRST STEP Act, which maintains important limits on trial judges' use of the safety valve. Among other limits, offenders are not eligible for the safety valve if they used or threatened violence or possessed a firearm or other dangerous weapon, or if their offense resulted in serious bodily injury or death. They must also cooperate with law enforcement to go after higher-level offenders. The criminal-justice-reform debate is about first principles as well as policy specifics. Conservatives have a rich history as reformers. Indeed, the most successful criminal-justice reformers of the 20th century were conservatives who understood that law and order is built on the responsible use of government power, tight-knit communities, a vibrant civil society, strong families, and personal responsibility. They applied those values to develop policing methods that dramatically reduced crime and prison ministries that could change people's lives. The FIRST STEP Act is a chance to continue that legacy. Op-ed originally published by National Review",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=622C4BC8-41B7-417D-AAB7-94AF4E636CDD,Floor Speech Honoring Jim Hansen,2018-11-27,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Mr. President, earlier this month Utah lost one of our finest: former Congressman Jim Hansen a great leader, a great husband and father, and a great friend. And it is my privilege to honor his life today. To speak of Jim Hansen's life is to speak of public service. This phrase is often used to describe government employment, but in the case of Jim Hansen, it could not be more fitting. In whatever role he was in and in every aspect of his life Jim faithfully served. Jim's rule for getting involved in politics was get involved because you have a cause, not because you want a job. In fact, his motivation to first run for local office was to improve the water system in Farmington, Utah, where the water supply was sometimes dirty or even nonexistent. Though he'd only lived in Farmington a few years, Jim was elected to the Farmington City Council in 1961 and oversaw the installation of a new utility system no small feat in this small town which allowed the community to grow and flourish. Thus began his 42 years in public office. After serving on the city council for 12 years, Jim was elected to the Utah House of Representatives in 1973, rising to the position of House Speaker during his last term. It was then that Jim launched his congressional bid for Utah's 1st District, defeating the five-term incumbent Gunn McKay in 1980. He got right to work representing the citizens of Utah, this time at the federal level. Among his proudest accomplishments were serving on the Base Realignment and Closure Commission and on the House Natural Resources Committee. Jim took great pride in helping save Hill Air Force Base, in Northern Utah, from closure. Whenever he'd hear a jet roaring overhead at a decibel loud enough to break the windows, he would tell his children, That's the sound of freedom. You're lucky to hear and live under that every day. A great lover of the outdoors, so too was he proud of saving the environment from the environmentalists, as he would say. Jim often sparred with them about wilderness issues and championed multiple use policies for public lands, though he was also a sponsor of the 1984 Utah Wilderness Act that designated wilderness in U.S. Forest areas. Ever a staunch Republican and ever a man of humor he delighted in reciting his own version of Proverbs 22:6: Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will vote Republican. But Jim was always known for being able to work across the aisle, and was well-respected by his Democratic colleagues. He served as Chairman of the House Ethics Committee during a partisan crisis among its members over the investigation into former speaker Newt Gingrich; and both parties at the time trusted him to handle any investigations fairly and impartially. For 22 years he tirelessly served the 1st District of Utah in the House of Representatives, becoming Utah's longest-serving Congressman. After he announced his retirement in 2002, still at the top of his game, he said in an interview that he wanted to leave behind a legacy of hard work. And indeed Jim Hansen did. Not only was Jim hardworking, but he was also immensely generous; he did not keep his success for himself, but for years offered mentorship to anyone seeking to navigate the political waters. I myself was lucky enough to call Jim a mentor and a friend. When I first considered running for the Senate in 2010, he met with me at length and gave me helpful advice and encouragement. Even though I was a newcomer with very little chance of success, he couldn't have been more generous with his time and wisdom. When I announced my candidacy, he stood by me and offered his full endorsement. And so many others were also blessed by Jim's friendship and loyalty. A lesser-known story that illustrates the quality of his character involves his longtime friend Norm Bangerter, with whom he served in the state Legislature. In 1978, both men had their sights set on the House speaker post, but didn't want to run against each other. So they made a deal that Norm would step aside, so long as Jim agreed to step aside in the future if they were ever interested in the same position again. Now Jim hoped to become governor of Utah. In the 1980s, after Jim had been serving in the House for a few years, there was an opening for a Republican to take back the governorship, and everyone expected Jim to make a play for it. Except Norm wanted to run. So what did Jim do? He stepped aside, allowing his friend to run for and eventually win the position. That was the caliber of Jim Hansen's character. He was a man of humility and integrity, who always put others before himself. I would be remiss if I did not also mention Jim's piety, in the truest sense of the word. In addition to having a deep loyalty to his country and state, he had a deep loyalty to his family and his church. Jim married Ann Burgoyne in 1958, which he considered to be the smartest decision he ever made. Their family grew to include five children, and eventually 14 grandchildren and one great-grandchild. Grandpa Jim was the center of their family, and his love for them animated so much of his life. His grandchildren fondly remember his jokes, stories, and a zest for life. His granddaughter Anna recounted that on his 80th birthday, when he insisted on going water-skiing, he had waded into the lake wearing his slacks and socks, with his grandchildren sloshing behind him to fish out the Chapstick tubes and Tic-Tac packs that were floating out of his pockets. But that was Jim Hansen, full of life and spirit until the end. Before his involvement in politics, and after he served in the Navy during the Korean War, Jim went on a mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for two years. He also served as bishop of the Farmington 2nd Ward and president of the Davis Stake. One of his jobs as bishop was to supervise construction of the Farmington South Stake Center where loved ones and dignitaries gathered to honor his life this past week. It is only fitting that we pay tribute to this honorable man, who so faithfully served God, family, and country throughout his whole life. Jim Hansen will be sorely missed by his family, friends, Utahns, and all those whose lives were touched by him; but I have no doubt that his legacy will live on for years to come. I yield the floor. As prepared for delivery",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=1A43098B-F299-4E74-8B34-3D0B6A08B19D,"November 19, 2018 - Mobile Office Visit to Weber County",2018-11-19,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Huntsville When: Monday, November 19, 2018 1:00 pm 2:30 pm Where: Huntsville Town Hall: 7309 E 200 S, Huntsville, UT 84317",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=D6FF0190-164D-4663-A794-58796A372C9F,"November 19, 2018 - Mobile Office Visit to Box Elder County",2018-11-19,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Willard When: Monday, November 19, 2018 @ 9:30 am 11:00 am Where: Willard City Hall, 80 W 50 S, Willard, UT 84340",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=5A665CEE-36C8-4238-A2F3-19781C508684,"Hatch, Bipartisan Senators Introduce Legislation In Response To China's Human Rights Abuses Against Uyghurs",2018-11-16,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch(R-UT),thesenior Republican and President Pro Tempore of the Senate, released the following statementuponthe introduction of theUyghur Human Rights Policy Act.The bill isa response to the gross violations of human rights in China's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, including the mass internment of over one million Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities, as well as China's intimidation and threats against US citizens and legal permanent residents (LPRs) on American soil. The persecution of the Uyghur community is unconscionable,Hatch said.Religious liberty is a sacred right, which is why I have sought to defend it both at home and abroad. In line with that mission, I am honored to join Senators Rubio and Menendez today in advancing legislation that will hold the Chinese government accountable for its record of religious persecution, especially against the Uyghurs. Our bill sends a clear message that the United States will not abide such human rights abuses. It likewise provides the US government with the resources it needs to protect the basic liberties of the Uyghur community and other religious minorities. Additionalcosponsorsinclude Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Cory Gardner (R-CO), Angus King (I-ME), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), John Cornyn (R-TX), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Steve Daines (R-MT), Ed Markey (D-MA), Pat Toomey (R-PA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Background A copy of the legislation can be foundhere. Key elements of the legislation include: A report by the Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the State Department, regarding the regional security threat posed by the crackdown and the frequency with which Central Asian countries are forcibly returning Turkic Muslim refugees and asylum seekers. The report will also include a list of Chinese companies involved in the construction and operation of the camps. An FBI report on efforts to provide information to and protect U.S. citizens and LPRs (including Uyghurs) from Chinese government harassment and intimidation. A report by the CEO of the U.S. Agency for Global Media regarding efforts to intimidate Radio Free Asia (RFA) employees, the status and reach of U.S. broadcasting to Xinjiang, and analysis of disinformation propaganda by the PRC targeting Uyghur communities globally. A State Department report regarding the scale and scope of the crackdown. The bill urges high-level US engagement on this issue, the establishment of a new double-hatted position at the State Department (a Special Coordinator for Xinjiang) while the crisis persists, the application of Global Magnitsky and related sanctions, the full implementation of the Frank R. Wolf International Religious Freedom Act, a review of Commerce Department export controls and end user restrictions and the establishment of a voluntary database whereby U.S. citizens and LPRs can provide information regarding missing/detained family members with a view toward pressing for accountability.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=684AC6A4-5BE2-4931-858F-1E0ECCF15185,Hatch Champions Small Businesses and Women Business Owners,2018-11-16,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT),the President Pro Tempore of the US Senate,released the following statement after the Senate passed two respective resolutions to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the Women's Business Act of 1988 and to recognize November 24, 2018, as Small Business Saturday. This year marks the 30th anniversary of the passage of the Women's Business Ownership Act, signed into law by Ronald Reagan. During my time in the Senate,I have worked to remove barriers to small business success, and am proud that Utah has one of the highest ratesof growth and economic clout for women-owned businesses. I plan to join these trailblazers and Utah small business owners in celebrating Small Business Saturday. Women's Business Ownership Act Resolution On October 25, 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed the Women's Business Ownership Act of 1988 into law, empowering women entrepreneurs to independently pursue access to capital and providing unique federal assistance programs under the Small Business Administration. The resolution commemorates the 30th anniversary of the Women's Business Ownership Act of 1988 and recognizes the invaluable contributions female entrepreneurs make to our nation's economy. Over 10 million women-owned small businesses in the United States employ more than 8,400,000 people and generate nearly $1,500,000,000,000 in sales annually. Sponsors of the resolution are US Senators Jim Risch (R-ID),Ben Cardin (D-MD), John Boozman (R-AR), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Susan Collins (R-ME), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Steve Daines (R-MT), Ed Markey (D-MA), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Orrin Hatch (R-UT),Chris Coons (D-DE), John Hoeven (R-ND), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS),Mazie Hirono (D-HI), John Kennedy (R-LA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Mike Rounds (R-SD), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), and Tim Scott (R-SC). Clickhereto read the resolution. Small Business Saturday Resolution The bipartisan Small Business Saturday resolution recognizes the invaluable contributions small businesses make to our nation's economy. Small businesses create nearly two out of three new jobs in the United States, and employ nearly 48 percent of private sector employees in the United States. With over 30 million small businesses in the United States, they represent 99.9 percent of all businesses in the United States and constitute 97.6 percent of firms that export goods. The Small Business Saturday resolution joins the Small Business Administration in: Supporting the designation of November 24, 2018, as Small Business Saturday''; Celebrating the entrepreneurial spirit of small business owners in the United States; Recognizing the importance of creating policies that promote a business-friendly environment for small business owners that is free of unnecessary and burdensome regulations and red tape; Supporting and encouraging young entrepreneurs to pursue passions and create more startup businesses; and Celebrating the invaluable contribution that small businesses make to the United States as the backbone of the economy. Other sponsors of the resolution were US Senators Jim Risch (R-ID), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Christopher Coons (D-DE), John Barrasso (R-WY), Ed Markey (D-MA), John Boozman (R-AR), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Shelly Moore Capito (R-WV), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Steve Daines (R-MT), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), John Hoeven (R-ND), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), John Kennedy (R-LA), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Ron Wyden (D-OR), David Perdue (R-GA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Rob Portman (R-OH), Tom Udall (D-NM), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Jon Tester (D-MT), Mike Rounds (R-SD), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Angus King (I-ME), Tim Scott (R-SC), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), John Thune (R-SD), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), and Patty Murray (D-WA). Clickhereto read the resolution.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=B2AF1A23-6E0D-4690-9250-2CCE9AA2ACA3,Senator Hatch Receives Presidential Medal of Freedom,2018-11-16,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCThis afternoon, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate, was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in a special ceremony at the White House. The Presidential Medal of Freedom is the nation's highest civilian honor, which may be awarded by the President to individuals who have made especially meritorious contributions to the security or national interests of the United States, to world peace, or to cultural or other significant public or private endeavors. Photos via Twitter According to the White Housepress release, the President awarded Senator Hatch the Medal of Freedom in recognition of: his successful service as a legislator, having sponsored more bills that have become law than any living member of Congress; his efforts in the confirmation of qualified judges throughout the federal judiciary in order to protect our constitutional order; and his efforts to champion religious liberty, fight against communism, and stand on the side of freedom around the world. Via YouTube Justice Antonin Scalia, Babe Ruth, Elvis Presley, Roger Staubach, Alan Page, and Miriam Adelson were also recognized with medals.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/issue-in-focus?ContentRecord_id=364ED17A-83E9-4096-BF4D-C43368FA3215,Time to Vote on Yemen,2018-11-16,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Two weeks ago, following continued admonitions of innocence from Saudi Arabia, it was confirmed that American journalist Jamal Khashoggi was viciously murdered within the Saudi embassy in Istanbul. Khashoggi's death calls attention to the deaths of many perpetrated by Saudi Arabiaincluding in Yemen, where an innocent life cut short is not uncommon. Since 2015, more than 10,000 civilians have been killed, countless families displaced, and many more deprived of food, water, and shelter due to a Saudi-led blockade. Fifteen million people can't access clean water and sanitation. An estimated 17 million people 60 percent of the total population do not have reliable access to food and are at risk of starvation. These numbers and Khashoggi's murder beg us to reevaluate our involvement in Yemen, and further, the extent of our relationship with Saudi Arabia. It also serves as a reminder to Americans that Congress still has not held a vote on our continued military intervention in that country. Our intervention in that region started many years ago, escalating in 2015 when President Obama authorized ""logistical and intelligence support"" for Saudi Arabia following an uprising of Houthi insurgents against President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi. However, several years - and many lives later - we are no closer to a solution. Our involvement in Yemen is a clear violation of Article 1 of the Constitution which gives Congress, not the president, the power to declare war. In 1973, Congress did pass the War Powers Act which does give the executive branch the ability to use the U.S. armed forces in cases of emergencies and only for a limited time. But Yemen is not an emergency, and it has not been constrained by any time restrictions. That is why this past February Senator Sanders (VE-I), Senator Murphy (DE-D), and I introduced a resolution to remove U.S. Armed Forces from Yemen. However, the Senate tabled consideration of the resolution in a 55 to 44 vote. The resolution remains in the Foreign Relations Committee six months later with no additional vote on the forefront. For far too long congress has neglected our constitutional responsibility to oversee military intervention, and our continued involvement in Yemen is both unconstitutional and immoral. I hope to fix this by yet again calling on a vote, and this time passing, the Sanders, Lee, Murphy resolution which would remove U.S. forces from Yemen.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-chairman-s-note?ContentRecord_id=4153C907-DAC6-451A-B79F-D8A38BFD46A2,Time for Senate to Act on Criminal Justice Reform,2018-11-16,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"It is not every day that Democrats and Republicans are able to work together in Washington to produce legislation that makes Americans safer, strengthens American families, all while shrinking the federal government. But that is what happened this week when President Trump endorsed the First Step Act, a House passed prison reform bill that, thanks to a bipartisan group of senators, now contains much needed sentencing reforms too. Americans from across the political spectrum can unite around prison reform legislation that will reduce crime while giving our fellow citizens a chance at redemption, President Trump said Wednesday from the White House. Today's announcement shows that true bipartisanship is possible. The compromise legislation does not contain everything that many in the criminal justice reform movement want, but it is a huge improvement over the current system and includes the following provisions: - Incentivizes participation in evidence-based recidivism reduction programs by allowing prisoners to earn time credits for prerelease custody. - Excludes violent, high-risk, and sexual offenders from the prerelease custody program. - Mandates that inmates be incarcerated no more than 500 miles from their primary residence so their families can visit more often - Forbids the use of restraints on pregnant inmates. - Gives judges the power to reduce overly punitive mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenses. - Applies current law equally to all those convicted of cocaine and crack offenses regardless of when they were convicted. These are all commonsense reform measures that have won the support of key law enforcement organizations like the Fraternal Order of Police, the National District Attorneys Association, and the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Passing these reforms would be a huge win for the American people. But the American people haven't won yet. First, the legislation must be put on the Senate floor where it would easily get 60 votes to pass. Unfortunately, those in charge of the Senate schedule are refusing to give the bill a vote. Before this November's election, there was a promise to bring the bill to the floor if a whip check found there were 60 votes for the bill. But now we are told even if the votes are there, there is not time to vote on criminal justice reform. But nothing new has come up between the time these two statements were made. The Senate has the exact same to do list today that it did back in October. There is plenty of time to get criminal justice reform done. It just needs to be put on the Senate floor. If some senators oppose this legislation, if they disagree with President Trump about how best to keep Americans safe, then they should welcome the opportunity to make their case publicly on the Senate floor. They should welcome the opportunity to offer amendments or vote the bill down. But to deny this bill a vote, a bipartisan bill fully endorsed by President Trump, would be a huge loss for the president, for the Senate, and for the nation. Families and communities desperately need these reforms and have had their liberty restricted in the most severe way. Are we really going to look them in the eye and tell them we don't have time, when we know we do?",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=0E4C15BA-4462-4AD1-B0AC-06ABBCFF0B8F,Congress Unanimously Passes Hatchs Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act,2018-11-15,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the senior Republican and President Pro Tempore of the US Senate, released the following statement after Congress passed the Amy, Vicky, and Andy Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act. Senator Hatch introduced the legislation alongside Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), John Cornyn (R-TX), and Pat Toomey (R-PA). This bill recognizes the unique kind of harm caused by child pornography and requires restitution in a manner that will support victims. I'm thrilled the Senate and the House have passed this important bill. This is a momentous day and many years in the making.Hatch said.This bipartisan legislation will help provide meaningful assistance for child pornography victims to support their recovery and allow them to reclaim their lives. I am proud of this bill and look forward to seeing it signed into law. Sexual abuse and exploitation of children are indefensible and heinous crimes. Victims like Amy will be affected for the rest of their lives,said Toomey.I'm pleased that the House and Senate came together and passed this bill to improve access to restitution for victims from the sick individuals who produce, distribute, and possess this exploitative filth. The legislation establishes more relevant and useful standards for child pornography victims who seek restitution from defendants and gives child pornography trafficking victims the alternative of a one-time fixed compensation payment from the existing Crime Victims Fund. The bill also allows victims access to the images depicting them, which can be important for victim identification, expert testimony, forensic review, and treatment. The bill passed in the Senate by unanimous consent in January. With the help of Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC), the House sponsor of the bill, and House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), the House of Representatives passed an amended version of the bill by unanimous consentin September.Today, the Senate passed the amended bill by unanimous consent, and it will now be sent to the President to be signed into law. Support for the Amy, Vicky, and Andy Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act The bill is named after victims depicted in some of the most widely circulated child pornography series in the world. Amy, Vicky, and Andy all strongly support the bill. Additionally, the Amy, Vicky, and Andy Act has been endorsed by the National Organization for Victim Assistance, National Association of Attorneys General, National Crime Victims Law Institute, National District Attorneys Association, National Center for Victims of Crime, National Association of VOCA Assistance Administrators, National Crime Victims Bar Association, CHILD USA, RAINN, APSAC in partnership with The New York Foundling, Enough is Enough, Thorn, Academy on Violence and Abuse, DV LEAP, Utah Crime Victims Legal Clinic, Utah Coalition against Sexual Assault, and the Children's Justice Fund. Senate Co-sponsors:Feinstein (D-CA), Grassley (R-IA), Klobuchar (D-MN), Cornyn (R-TX), Toomey (R-PA), Gillibrand (D-NY), Boozman (R-AR), Whitehouse (D-RI), Cotton (R-AR), McCain (R-AZ), Murkowski (R-AK), Capito (R-WV), Blumenthal (D-CT), Tillis (R-NC), Casey (D-PA), Blunt (R-MO), Warren (D-MA), Hoeven (R- ND), McCaskill (D-MO), Merkley (D-OR), Hirono (D-HI), Kennedy (R-LA), Harris (D-CA), Cruz (R-TX), Markey (D-MA), and Rubio (R-FL). Background The Amy, Vicky, and Andy Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act includes the following provisions: Findings that focus on the unique nature of child pornography crime and how it harms victims A more relevant and predictable definition of full amount of a victim's losses Restitution Child pornography production: victims receive full amount of their total losses Child pornography trafficking: victims receive from each defendant a minimum of $3,000 Compensation Victims of child pornography trafficking are entitled to receive a one-time payment of $35,000 in defined monetary assistance (which is indexed to inflation) from a Child Pornography Victims Reserve (CPVR) within the federal Crime Victims Fund (CVF) Caps fees for attorneys representing a victim seeking defined monetary assistance at 15% The court must assess defendants in child pornography cases to contribute to the CPVR: up to $17,000 for possession, up to $35,000 for distribution, and up to $50,000 for production crimes The CPVR will be capped at $10 million Victims of child pornography trafficking will enjoy the same priority in restitution payments as victims in other restitution statutes Child pornography victims have equal rights with criminal defendants to review the child pornography depicting them at a government facility or court for the purposes of furnishing expert testimony The Department of Justice must deliver a report to Congress withintwoyears after passage about the Act's implementation including an assessment of the funding levels for the Child Pornography Victims Reserve",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=1DDAA4E0-9E18-481D-8A3B-8BC93919F004,"Hatch, Warner Celebrate National GIS Day with Comprehensive, Cutting-Edge Geospatial Data Policy",2018-11-15,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), thesenior Republicanand President Pro Tempore of the US Senate, released the following statement after passage of the Geospatial Data Act (GDA) and a Senate resolution recognizing November 15, 2018, as National GIS Day. For several years, Senator Hatch and Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) have worked together to lay a legislative foundation for federal geospatial data management. Their proposals seek to build awareness of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and the critical role that these technologies play in a growing multi-billion-dollar industry. 2018 has been a banner year in the advancement of bipartisan geospatial policy, said Hatch.GIS technologies represent a rapidly growing industry that impacts everything from warfighting missions to emergency response efforts to infrastructure planning. National GIS Day is the perfect time to celebrate the passage of the Geospatial Data Act, which brings Congressional oversight to federal geospatial data acquisition, accounting, and utilizationfor the betterment of countless state, local, and national stakeholders. Our resolution designating today as National GIS Day honors the important work done by those in the geospatial community, and the critical role that geospatial data and mapping play in all aspects of our society, said Warner. Given the ubiquity of geospatial data and its importance to the federal government, it's vital that we employ smart, efficient data management policies. The recent passage of our Geospatial Data Act does just that, applying good-governance best practices to how we acquire and use this data, streamlining the processes for the benefit of the American taxpayers. Statements of Support The bipartisan Geospatial Data Act received widespread support from groups spanning the political spectrum. A coalition of 15 Republican, Democrat, and Independent Senatorsas well as over 65 universities, industry groups, trade associations, companies, and state and local stakeholdersendorsed the GDA. Jack Dangermond, President of Esri: ""I want to thank Senators Hatch and Warner for their leadership on GIS and geospatial data issues.The Geospatial Data Act will promote improved coordination as Federal agencies work with geospatial data and will ensure greater public access. Parallel to this legislation, emerging technologies such as web GIS and geospatial cloud services will enable the transformation of government, said Jack Dangermond, Esri president. Thanks to these important outcomes and others, the Act will save taxpayers millions of dollars and improve the management of our country's resources while fostering economic growth.Esri will fully support our users and Federal agencies in the work of maximizing the benefits from this legislation."" Brian Raber, President of Management Association of Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS): Senator Hatch has long been a champion for promoting good government solutions on a bipartisan basis, and theGeospatialData Act (GDA) is a prime example. The GDA will encourage domestic job growth within the growinggeospatial profession by bolstering public-private partnerships, inspire open and transparent government, and will establish a responsible and cost-effective geo' platform for data-sharing among federal agencies, states and the public. Molly Schar, Executive Director of the National States Geographic Information Council: ""This National GIS Day resolution punctuates Congress' strong support for efficient and effective GIS coordination across the country. Map-based digital information is critical to government work from transportation to natural resources to homeland security.For 25 years, the geospatial community has struggled with coordinating acquisition and access of geographic data. A truly national and shared spatial data infrastructure must be built and maintained by multiple levels of government, academia, nonprofits, and the private sector. No single entity has authority over all of those participants. The Geospatial Data Act authorizes the collaborative governance structure to convene all these partners to make decisions and develop direction together. The Geospatial Data Act is a law that will exponentially benefit taxpayers.On behalf of our state government representatives and larger membership, the National States Geographic Information Council offers our great appreciation to Senators Hatch, Warner, and bill co-signers in both Houses for their leadership on this critical issue."" Susan Gibbons, President of Association of Research Libraries and Deputy Provost at Yale: The Association of Research Libraries thanksSenatorsHatch, Warner, and all of those involved in the passage of this landmark legislation. Once implemented, the Geospatial Data Act will greatly enhance access by researchers, students, and members of the public to a vast array of geospatial data, advancing learning and knowledge creation and promoting open and transparent government Research libraries celebrate National GIS Day as geospatial data is an essential component of research, teaching, and learning in the research and education enterprise. Douglas Richardson, Executive Director of the American Association of Geographers (AAG): ""The American Association of Geographers thanks Senators Hatch and Warner for the opportunity to work together to shape and pass the Geospatial Data Act (GDA). This legislation will save US taxpayers millions of dollars as it allows government agencies to better coordinate with one another, to prevent duplication, and to procure geospatial expertise, technology, services, and data from across the full range of the dynamic and rapidly growing US geographic and geospatial community. Background A geographic information system (GIS) is a framework for gathering, managing, and analyzing data. Rooted in the science of geography,GIS integrates many types of data. It analyzes spatial location and organizes layers of information into visualizations using maps and 3D scenes. With this unique capability,GISreveals deeper insights into data, such as patterns, relationships, and situationshelping users make smarter decisions. Quality, up-to date geospatial data and tools are central to citizen access to governmental programs and, in addition, are an important means for federal agencies to interact and communicate with local communities and citizens. Geospatial data and tools also have the potential to save lives, limit damage, and reduce the costs of dealing with emergencies. Each year, people across the globe celebrateGISDayin November as part of Geography Awareness Week.GISDaystarted in 1999 as an educational event forGIS users to showcase their projects that have real-world applications. Opening their doors to schools, businesses, and the public,GISusers and vendors demonstrate the benefits ofGISand how it makes a difference in our society. Today,GISDayis recognized globally with events occurring in dozens of countries. GeospatialData Act, Public Law 115-254-- Bipartisan Hatch/Warner legislation, a good-governance bill that will bring structure and Congressional oversight to federalgeospatialdata spending, accounting, and usage.Text of the GDA can be found on page 583, Title VI, Subtitle FGeospatialData,FAAReauthorization Act of 2018. The GDA will: Dramaticallyreduce duplicative spending and, according to the Government Accountability Office, save the federal government billions of dollars Bolster federal emergency response capabilities by enabling smarter, more efficient disaster relief According to the U.S. Geological Survey, bolster strategies for advancing geographic information, infrastructure, and related geospatial data activities that will enhance national security, national defense, and emergency preparedness Improve infrastructure planning nationwide by providing state and local governments with access to higher-quality, more robust data The bill is supported by over 65 universities, industry groups, trade associations, companies, and state and local stakeholders ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=712C3522-137C-4389-A219-870A9277DB05,Federalism and Its Alternatives,2018-11-15,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"As you know, Congress has just returned to Washington this week after the pre-election recess. And of course the talk of the town is the split results of the mid-term elections last week. Everyone in the media, on Capitol Hill, and the administration is wondering what the new Democratic House of Representatives will mean for the future. Will there be compromise? Will there be gridlock? There is a lot of handwringing going on. So it warms my heart to be here today and see that there is at least one group of people who are really optimistic about the next two years Washington defense lawyers. I obviously had some disappointments on election night. Some good friends came up short in their races, and losing the House hurts. But I'm not going to lie: being able to call Mitt Romney Junior from now on does take some of the sting out of it. It is those elections, and the unambiguous message I think they sent, that I'd like to talk to you about today. To constitutional conservatives, the election results and the Congress it will produce have to be seen as an opportunity. To learn some lessons that both parties, but especially mine, have been ignoring for too long. Obviously, I was rooting for Republicans last Tuesday night. But from my perspective divided government is not a problem in and of itself. The House and Senate are going to be divided because the country is divided. In that sense, the election results once again affirmed the genius of the Founders' framework. Now in the media, division is lamented as a disease that needs curing ideally by conservatives just giving up and going along with whatever progressives want. But disagreement, especially in the United States, isn't a disease. It's a sign of health. Conflict even deep, bitter disagreement about first principles is innate to all human relationships. The Founders understood this. They had to, or they never would have gotten out of Philadelphia in one piece. From the day it was first conceived, the United States was among the most diverse nations in the history of the world. Our Constitution was written specifically for a people divided on political, regional, economic, cultural and religious questions. It serves as a roadmap for resolving disputes not only peaceably, but through mechanisms designed to best facilitate the happiness and freedom of all sides on all questions. When people ask today how Americans can overcome our differences and come together as one nation, the answer is in many respects the same as it is has been since 1787. The Constitution's system of separated powers and federalism not only made the United States vibrant and flexible but what the scholar Nassim Taleb calls anti-fragile. Ours is a system made stronger by tension and division. Thanks to the Constitution, our diversity really is a strength because of the common gratitude all Americans can take from the freedom to govern their unique communities according to their particular values. Under the alchemy of the Constitution, America's wild differences are transformed into a source of national unity. Today, though, it sometimes doesn't feel like it. Today, our disagreements seem to be pulling us apart, not together. Take, for example, the character assassination of Brett Kavanaugh excuse me, Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Six weeks after he was confirmed, I still can't quite get my head around what happened. My Democratic colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee deliberately withheld material evidence from Committee and FBI investigators for weeks, so as to maximize the cruelty visited both on Justice Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford. They used a nationally televised hearing to ask Justice Kavanaugh about flatulence and high school drinking games. They attempted to launder the vile accusations raised by Michael Avenatti, and they uncritically repeated other unsubstantiated and uncorroborated allegations. They justified their stunning abandonment of the presumption of innocence by saying the confirmation process was merely a job interview, as if that somehow disposed of the need for any semblance of fairness. The truth is that Democrats were acting irresponsibly even before Dr. Ford's letter was leaked to the press. My friend, the junior Senator from New Jersey, declared that Justice Kavanaugh's supporters were complicit in evil and urged protestors to get up in the face of some congresspeople. We are told this is payback for Judge Garland's nomination. At least Brett Kavanaugh had a hearing, the Left tells us as if that could somehow justify a deliberate effort to destroy a man's life. And, in any event, that excuse doesn't explain the smears against other highly qualified nominees of exemplary character over the past 30 years. So while the Democrats' treatment of Justice Kavanaugh is perhaps the worst and most recent manifestation of this phenomenonwhile it was shocking and disgustinglet's be honest: it was neither completely unprecedented nor entirely surprising. In any event, we need to find a way to prevent something like this from happening again. Ever. I applaud Chairman Grassley for investigating every lead and making criminal referrals where appropriate. That's one important way to deter people from making false accusations. But there's an even deeper problem. From the perspective of the raging extremists who control the Left's social agenda, what happened earlier this year was entirely rational. For decades, we have pulled powers constitutionally reserved for the states and the people into the federal government. And once they were here, we have transferred them from Congress to the judiciary and Administrative State. Today, more and more decisions are made by Washington, not state houses or city halls. And more and more of Washington's decisions are made by unelected judges and unaccountable bureaucrats, not Senators and Representatives. This anti-constitutional project has hacked away at the bonds of trust formed long ago between the American people and their government. By seizing power from more politically homogenous, local governments and communities, Washington denies the American people the ability to govern by consensus. A government designed to be by the people, of the people, and for the people all the people is too often instead run for 51 percent of the people and against 49 percent. This approach artificially raises the stakes of federal policymaking, and therefore, the temperature of our national political debate. As long as Supreme Court justices anoint themselves philosopher kings, issuing moral decrees in Nancy Pelosi's words almost as if God has spoken, the total political war we saw this fall will only continue. As long as the federal government blithely asserts the power to regulate, penalize, tax, or subsidize any behavior, our politics will incite the very impulses constitutions are written specifically to overcome. What we saw in a leftist mob driving Ted Cruz from a restaurant or violent criminals terrorizing Tucker Carlson's wife at her home is just the beginning. Increasingly, the Left treats politics like a religion, and conservatives not as loyal opponents, but heretics and infidels. On college campuses and other institutions where the Left holds unchallenged power, the Right is not questioned but anathematized. Conservative arguments are denounced as hate speech, illegitimate, undeserving of First Amendment protection. Many students today are being taught the foolish theory that some speech is violence and, by extension, the evil corollary that some violence is speech. The popularity on the Right of a more combative style is only further evidence that Americans have simply accepted the unhappy consequences of Washington's bipartisan consensus that all politics is now national. As we have seen in recent elections, very much including last week's mid-terms, our growing ideological divide mirrors a hardening geographic divide. Look at any electoral map today, and you see the same thing: America is split in two. Democrats are increasingly clustering in densely populated cities and near suburbs, mostly on the coasts. Republicans are winning in exurban and rural America. After last week's elections, for the first time in a century, only one state in the union will have a divided legislature. Red and Blue America see the country and the world very differently. So differently that our rhetoric today is less about option A versus option B, or even correct versus incorrect, and more in the realm of good versus evil. Such stridency makes national consensus rare, and federal compromise extremely difficult. Taken together, these three trends bitter philosophical disagreement, stark geographic division, and the bipartisan embrace of winner-take-all national politics comprise a constitutional dirty bomb that threatens the foundations of our republic. Bitter clingers. Deplorables. The Kavanaugh nomination. The religious inquisition of Amy Coney Barrett and Russ Vought. Even worse Charlottesville, and the congressional baseball practice. Even the institutions set up to shield Americans from the sort of mob behavior that has always threatened the stability of republics are coming under attack. The electoral college, the legislative filibuster, and even the Senate itself. Freedom of speech? Freedom of the press? Freedom of religion? The presumption of innocence? The right to bear arms? In today's all-or-nothing politics, especially on the Left but also sometimes on the Right, these bulwarks of liberty are too often casually dismissed as obstacles to progress. Meanwhile, the proponents of these principles are not just dismissed, but downright vilified. This toxicity of our politics and revolt against our institutions is the fruit of centralized power. Centralization has not made us stronger, or happier. It has not made our economy stronger, more dynamic, or more likely to promote economic mobility among the poor and middle class; centralization tends to do precisely the opposite. Meanwhile, and for many of the same reasons, it's making our politics weak, brittle, coarse, and resentful. Where do we think this is going to take us next? If and when the opportunity comes to replace one of the Supreme Court's liberals? In 2020, as Democrats jockey to see which one can be their successful Trump candidate? Bear in mind, we're at this fever pitch at a time of relative peace and historic prosperity. Thanks in large measure to President Trump's economic reforms and the sense of optimism they have created, our economy is at full employment and growing fast enough to temporarily distract us from our $21-trillion national debt and $800 billion annual deficit. What happens when the next bubble bursts? When the next recession hits? When the multi-trillion-dollar debts accrued by state and local pension funds come due? What happens when next we face a genuine international crisis? What happens when treasury yield rates return to their historical average, and we see service payments on our national debt skyrocketing from $300 billion per year to around $1 trillion per year, forcing us to find an additional $700 billion per yearmore than our entire budget for the Department of Defensewithin a surprisingly short period of time? You get the idea: according to any reasonable measuring stick, the dysfunctional status quo is unsustainable. It is driving our government toward insolvency and our politics toward violence. Realistically, Americans have two options. Either we are going to once again embrace the Constitution's vision of a diverse, tolerant, pluralistic union of states and communitieseach governed according the values and priorities of its citizens. Or this fundamentally un-American contestone recklessly designed to determine which half of our nation can unilaterally impose its will and its values on the other halfwill escalate violently out of control. Ultimately, this will come down to a binary choice: Federalism, or violence. Many on the Left don't seem too concerned about any of this. They believe demographic and historical trendscoupled with what many see as the inherent rightness of their leftist causemake their ultimate victory over Red America inevitable. They believe every lever of federal power will one day soon and permanently be in their hands. They are content with non-stop, political, total war because they're sure they're going to win itblind to the fact that such a victory would come at the expense of the American experiment itself. Unless or until that changes, it therefore falls to conservatives to chart a new course. Not simply to turn away from disaster, but to turn America toward a genuinely happy and sustainable future of tolerance and diversity. Beginning this project is going to be my focus for the upcoming Congress. Pundits expect the next two years to be legislatively thin. The Democratic House is expected to focus on investigating the Trump Administration, while the Senate spends its time confirming the president's nominees. Confirming judges and executive-branch nominees is critically important work, especially if we hope to restore localism and subsidiarity to the republic. But it's not enough. Conservatives also need a vision of America that transcends partisan total war, and an agenda to help get us there: a new, sustainable politics of subsidiarity and localism in the service of diversity and tolerance. Federalism is the answer. It's not just the best answer; it's the only answer. Setting aside for a moment that it is required by the Constitution itself, federalism offers several unique advantages for us today. First, if fully embraced, it would allow each state to govern itself according to its own values. Federal policies that have usurped local autonomy and imposed one controversial set of ideas on the entire country should be rethought and reformed, and power returned to the states. We have to devolve the federal programs necessary to once again let Vermont be Vermont and Utah be Utah. Second, we must allow the states to be more than laboratories of democracy. Too often, when Washington does speak of federalism, it does so in terms of temporary experimentation as if the only goal were to figure out which state's approach might be the one to be scaled up and then forced on the entire country. This is the absolute wrong approach. Instead, we should allow each unique community to develop unique solutions according to unique local preferences, and leave it at that. In every instance, some states are going to do better than others. The beauty of governing locally is that, if you really don't like one community, you don't have to run for office, or sue anyone, or protest, or write editorials. You can just move. Third, we should not think of federalism as merely a devolution of power, but the re-personalization of politics. How much of the toxicity of our national debate is due to its forced impersonal anonymity? Few people treat their neighbors the way activists treat each other on social media. Politics is an innately human activity it should be done eye-to-eye, not iPhone to iPhone. Getting decisions out of Washington won't just make Americans happier by giving them the power to run their own communities. It will make them nicer by forcing them to engage in politics as human beings again, instead of digital scolds and virtue signalers. Now, we should have no illusions about state and local governments always being more efficient or less wasteful than the federal government. They're often not. But sovereignty and civility are more important than efficiency. States have two other advantages over Washington. First, they're closer to their voters, and policymakers are more accountable more easily pressure-able and fireable than they are here. And second, of course, most states are required to balance their budgets, either by a constitutional amendment or otherwise. In any event, no state has the option of perpetual deficit spending on the scale seen in Washington. There is nothing wrong with a state's voters choosing to have a big government or a small government especially because they tend to bear the costs for their choices, and don't have the option of transferring those costs to another state or another generation. The low-hanging fruit is obvious. The Interstate Highway System. K-through-12 education. The federal higher education accreditation cartel. Early childhood education. The Department of Commerce. The huge glut of federally owned land and real estate. Housing policy. Workforce regulation. These and the knotty, interconnected problems of welfare dependence and health care would all be more easily untied if 50 diverse and motivated states were working on them. In Washington, because of America's deep red-blue divide, these are very controversial issues. They are less so within our increasingly dark red and dark blue states. When there is no national consensus or federal imperative, there should not be federal law; especially if there is a greater degree of consensus within each state. Just because New York, Massachusetts, and California agree on something doesn't mean the rest of the country has to go along. Insisting otherwise is not constitutional republicanism; it's cultural imperialism. By clearing Washington's decks of these smaller issues, we can finally begin to regain the trust necessary to deal with the bigger ones the ones we can't return to the states and localities. Senior entitlements and the debt. National security. Immigration. Trade. Globalization. The good news is that, thanks to President Donald Trump and the Republican Senate majority, we have a Supreme Court that should be ready to do its part on this project. Today the Court stands ready to allow indeed, to require the elected branches of the federal government to once again do their jobs instead of arrogating to itself authority to permanently settle important national issues. And for that, of course, no one deserves more credit or thanks than the men and women of the Federalist Society. Thank you. The United States must always be one nation. Today, we are a purple nation and that's okay. We need to stop trying to turn the red half blue and the blue half red - each against its own will. It doesn't work, and it's only making people on both sides of aisle in every state in the union really, really mad. Localism and subsidiarity they're not a deviation from the plan. They are the plan. They have been the plan all along. Returning to the plan won't just make our country happier and stronger. Respectful tolerance of diversity will make us better citizens and better people. The future we want is one in which all Americans are represented by their governments and respected by their neighbors where diversity is not only celebrated, but practiced by both parties at every level of government where local communities enjoy the freedom to be themselves where our differences make us one. Together, we can do this. But we've got to believe that the Founding Fathers knew what they were doing, and that their vision has never been more timely than it is at this very moment. Thank you very much. God bless",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://robbishop.house.gov/media/press-releases/bishop-statement-death-rep-jim-hansen,Bishop Statement on Death of Rep. Jim Hansen,2018-11-14,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Rob Bishop,B001250,robbishop.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONRep. Rob Bishop (UT-01) offered this statement following the death offormer Utah Congressman James Hansen: I will miss my friend Jim Hansen. My condolences go out to Ann and the rest of the Hansen family.As Utah's longest serving House member and the first to hold a full committee chairmanship, we owe Jim a great debt. He was a trailblazer. Not just for Utah, but for me personally. I followed him into the state legislature, to the Speakership, as Chairman of the Western States Caucus, into the U.S. House, and finally as Chairman of the Resources Committee. I will be forever grateful for the time he took to mentor me in each and every one of these roles. His impact on my life, and many others, cannot be overstated. ""Jim accomplished much without eversuccumbing to arrogance. He was a good man, a fine leader, and a cherished friend. He will be missed.""",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=37430BD9-6321-4B42-840A-080920D0828D,"Hatch, Kaine Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Protect Veterans & Low-Income Families from Housing Discrimination",2018-11-14,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCThis week, US Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Tim Kaine (D-VA) introduced theFairHousing Improvement Act of 2018to protect veterans and low-income families fromhousingdiscrimination.Their bipartisan proposalwould expand theFairHousingAct'sprotections to prohibithousingdiscrimination based on source of income orveteranstatus, giving more families access to affordablehousingand a shot at economic mobility. Helping veterans and families lead lives ofdignity and independencehas long been amongmy top priorities,said Hatch.This bill is part and parcel to that legacy. It will put an end to the immoral housing discrimination againstveterans andothers who rely on veterans'benefits, social security disability,or other non-wage legal income.This bill will address the fact thatSource of Income is not a protected class under the Federal Fair Housing Act,therebyhelping to remove an unnecessary barrier facingUtah families and veterans on the pathto self-reliance. As a fairhousinglawyer, I witnessed the pain experienced by families who were discriminated against as they searched for a home,Kaine said.Housingdecisions should be made on a potential tenant's merits, not harmful prejudices that hurt the nation's veterans and families in-need.TheFairHousingImprovement Actwill help us continue that long pursuit to protect all Americans from discrimination. Background Congress provides vouchers to help 2.2 million veterans and low-income householdstolive in decent, stable private-markethousing. TheFairHousingImprovement Act of 2018is supported by the American Bar Association,HousingOpportunities Made Equal Virginia, Inc., National FairHousingAlliance, NationalHousingLaw Project, National Association ofHousingand Redevelopment Officials, National Low IncomeHousingCoalition, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Veterans Association of Real Estate Professionals, and Virginia Poverty Law Center.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=9F36BADF-6266-4343-B301-5369A4E3D4C4,Hatch Statement on the Passing of Former Congressman Jim Hansen,2018-11-14,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT),thesenior Republicanand President Pro Tempore of the US Senate, released the followingstatement on the passing of Congressman Jim Hansen: With Congressman Jim Hansen's passing, Utah has lost a true statesman. Whether it was in the Navy, in the state legislature, or in the halls of Congress, Jim served with honor and distinction, always putting principle before party and others before self. Utah would not be what it is today without Congressman Jim Hansen. I'm grateful to have known such a remarkable man and even more grateful to have called him a friend. Senator Hatch shown with Jim Hansen at the ceremony renaming the Ogden federal building after Hansen on Feb. 21, 2006. Hatch spoke at the event and lauded Hansen for his years of service on behalf of the Beehive State.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=A535651A-7211-4956-91A4-3357D460487B,Hatch Introduces United States-Israel Cooperation Expansion Act,2018-11-14,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT),the President Pro Tempore of the US Senate, introduced the United States-Israel Cooperation Expansion Act. This legislation calls for greater support for security, law enforcement training, and cooperation between the United States and Israel. It also works to continue bilateral training between the United States and Israeli law enforcement personnel with a focus on best practices for anti-terrorism, community policing, managing mass casualties, and countering threats posed by illicit cross-border tunneling and unmanned aerial systems. Recent events in Israelremind us ofthe threatsthe countryand its citizens face every day.We mustremain steadfast in our supportofthe State of Israel and its right to defend itself, its existence,and its people.Hatch said.Moreover, we must recognize that in supporting Israel, we are not only fulfilling our promise to one of America's closest allieswe are alsostanding up for democracy and freedom in a part of the world that needs it most. I call on my colleagues in the Senate to join me in standing with Israel andthe principles it stands for. Statement of support Julie Rayman, American Jewish Committee Director of Political Outreach: Years of confronting common threats have demonstrated that the United Statesand Israel are stronger when we cooperate in matters of security, law enforcement, andtheprotection of civil society. Now, whenHamasrockets are raining down over Israel, this essential alliance and the urgency of expanded cooperationarebrought into even sharper focus. The U.S.-Israel Cooperation Expansion Act takes important and timely steps that members from both sides of the aisle have endorsed and AJC is proud to support. Background This legislation calls on the United Statesto support the inclusion of Israel in international law enforcement training programs and the promotion of those programs in Israel. Additionally, it calls on further training and education opportunities between the United States and Israeli law enforcement, with a particular focus on protection of both civilian and diplomatic facilities from threats emanating from illicit cross-border tunneling and unmanned aerial systems.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=CA16733E-7F43-491C-B570-AC94B7390E78,"Hatch Honored at US Patent and Trademark Office for Contributions to IP, Tech, and Innovation",2018-11-14,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT),the senior member and former Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee,gave the following remarks at the US Patent and Trademark Office this morning. Senator Hatch has long fought to strengthen intellectual property law, including with his most recent IP bill, the Music Modernization Act, which was signed into law last month. At this morning's event, several senior officials paid tribute to Senator Hatch's pioneering efforts on intellectual property reform. Among them wereWilbur Ross, the Secretary of the Department of Commerce, and former Hatch staffersMakan Delrahim, now Assistant Attorney General over Antitrust at the Department of Justice, andSharon Prost, the Chief Judge of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Senator Hatch has spent four decades championing intellectual property rights. I've worked hard these past four decades to strengthen our nation's IP laws. Patents, copyright, trade secretsI've had my hand in them all. I believe our economy is only as strong as our intellectual property laws. Promote research and innovation by protecting discoveries, and our country will continue to thrive. We'll stay at the forefront of science and technology. We'll remain the global leader in media and business development. Thefullremarks, as prepared for delivery, are below: Thank you for that warm welcome and for the opportunity to be here today. It's wonderful to be among so many friends. I'd like to offer special thanks to Director Iancu for organizing this event and for all he's doing to ensure we have a well-balanced, well-functioning patent system. I'd also like to thank Secretary Ross for taking time from his busy schedule to be here today. He's doing a great job at the Commerce Department, and I'm grateful to him for his service to our country. As you all know, I'm nearing the end of 42 years in the Senate. It's been a great privilege to serve the people of Utah and to be able to work with so many of my colleagues on so many important issues throughout the years. Intellectual property has been a particular focus of mine. IP protections are essential to our economy and to keep our country at the forefront of global innovation. I've been fortunate to have had the opportunity to lead enactment of a number of important IP bills during my time in the Senate. Early in my tenure, I worked with Representative Henry Waxman of California to pass the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act, better known as Hatch-Waxman. This bill created a process for generic drug manufacturers to enter the market while also granting brand manufacturers a period of exclusivity to enable them to recoup their investments. It led to an explosion in the availability of generic drugs, driving down drug prices and giving Americans greater access to affordable medication. Patent law isn't just about prescription drugs, of course. It extends to all aspects of our economy and is particularly important in the technology sector. All of those amazing gadgets and innovations our friends in tech come up withwell, patent law ensures they're able to reap the rewards for their ingenuity. Which in turn incentivizes further research and innovation. But patent law must be properly balanced. We must make it neither too easy nor too difficult to obtain a patent. And we must make it neither too easy nor too difficult to enforce a patent. We also need to ensure that the patents this office issues are high quality. Which brings me to the America Invents Act, or AIA. I introduced the first Senate version of the AIA back in 2006 with Pat Leahy. The AIA made a number of crucial updates to our nation's patent laws. But the one that seems to have generated the most controversy in the ensuing years has been inter partes review, or IPR. Who would have thought when we passed the AIA that IPR would be the issue that would most divide the patent community? Certainly not those of us who wrote the bill. IPR was an issue that most seemed to agree on at the time. I think most of us recognized that a beefed-up administrative review process was necessary. What we perhaps didn't foresee was how the process would play out. As many of you likely know, I've spoken at length in other venues about my concerns with how IPR is impacting Hatch-Waxman. I'm a strong supporter of IPR. Always have been, always will be. But I'm worried we didn't think through how the availability of expedited PTO review would impact the carefully balanced Hatch-Waxman framework, which sets forth specific timelines for litigation and FDA review and does not contemplate a collateral attack through IPR. I've offered a proposal that I believe would address these unintended consequences. My proposal, which I've dubbed the Hatch-Waxman Integrity Act, would put generic manufacturers wishing to challenge a brand patent to a choice: either go the traditional Hatch-Waxman route, or use IPR. But you can't do both. I look forward to continued discussion and consideration of this proposal in the coming months and beyond. Enough about patents. Let's talk a little about copyright. I know this is PTO, but we can still talk about copyright. Patent and copyright can be friends. One of the primary challenges with copyright law is ensuring it stays up to date with changing technology. When we think about copyright, we often think first about books and magazinesprinted material. But copyright is about much more than words on a page. It's about all sorts of media like movies and television shows, music and sound recordings. It's about physical media like CDs and DVDs. And it's about online media like Spotify and Netflix. As technology changes and we continue to find new ways to consume movies and books and music, our copyright laws must keep pace. That's why I led enactment of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the late 1990s, when advances in digital technology were making it easier than ever to pirate movies and music. The DMCA, as those in the business call the bill, placed strict restrictions on the ability to circumvent access controls on CDs, DVDs, and other digital media that are designed to prevent unauthorized reproduction. It also provided liability protection for internet service providers and other intermediaries. Recent years have seen a transition from CDs and DVDs to online streaming services such as Spotify and Netflix. This has posed a number of challenges, particularly in the music industry, which is governed by a morass of outdated and overlapping licensing laws. That brings me to my most recent IP bill, the Music Modernization Act, which President Trump signed into law last month. I won't put you through the pain of trying to explain the jumble of arcane music licensing laws that the bill updated. All you really need to know is that the bill creates a central clearinghouse to ensure songwriters get paid when Pandora, Spotify, and other digital music services play their songs and provides liability protection for those services in return. The bill vastly simplifies what had been a crazy system that wasn't working for anyone and also provides copyright protection for legacy sound recordings. Before I conclude, there's one other form of IP protection that I need to mentiontrade secrets. We all know how important trade secrets are. They're the sales strategy, the manufacturing breakthrough, or the secret sauce recipe that gives a company its edge. They're the reason companies require employees to sign non-competes, and they can be worth millions of dollars. Unlike patents and copyrights, trade secrets are not granted by the federal government. They're developed in-house. And they have value only so long as they remain confidential. When a company gets wind that a former employee, or someone else, is shopping around one of its trade secrets, the company's only real recourse is to go to court to try to stop the disclosure. Or if disclosure has already occurred, the company can seek damages. Prior to 2016, however, there was a significant hole in the law. A company couldn't actually go to court to defend its trade secrets. At least, it couldn't go to federal court. It either had to try to persuade the Department of Justice to block the disclosure, or it could go to state court if state law provided a remedy. The reason was that there was no federal private cause of action for trade secret theft. And so in 2016, I led enactment of the Defend Trade Secrets Act, or DTSA, which created a federal private cause of action. Under DTSA, a company that has reason to believe one of its trade secrets is about to be disclosed can obtain a federal injunction barring the disclosure and requiring the return of any misappropriated property or information. Damages remedies are also available. By giving teeth to federal trade secret protections, DTSA helps to ensure that companies are able to safeguard their valuable innovations. As you can see, I've worked hard these past four decades to strengthen our nation's IP laws. Patents, copyright, trade secretsI've had my hand in them all. I believe our economy is only as strong as our intellectual property laws. Promote research and innovation by protecting discoveries, and our country will continue to thrive. We'll stay at the forefront of science and technology. We'll remain the global leader in media and business development. I hope my Senate colleagues will continue my work on IP. There's still so much more to be done. I'm sure that Director Iancu and Secretary Ross and all of you have a number of IP-related ideas that you'd like Congress to take a look at. I encourage you to reach out to my colleagues. You all are the experts. And with your help, the sky's the limit. Thank you so much.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=1117398A-94D5-4BE6-A4B2-1372486B8BD2,Sen. Lee Mourns the Loss of Congressman Jim Hansen,2018-11-14,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement Wednesday on the passing of former-Rep. Jim Hansen (R-UT): Jim Hansen was a friend and mentor who I will deeply miss. For over 30 years he served his community honorably in the Navy, the Utah state legislature, and the United States Congress. The state of Utah will sorely miss this faithful public servant.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=37F5ACB0-A670-4B37-BF0B-BEB3E1F05E8A,"Sens. Lee, Markey Introduce Spectrum Valuation Act",2018-11-14,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) introduced the Government Spectrum Valuation Act. The bill would require the annual coordination of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to determine the value of electromagnetic spectrum assigned or allocated to each federal agency. It would also require each federal agency to report the value of their electromagnetic spectrum in the President's budget and each federal agency's financial statement. Congress has a clear responsibility to ensure that federal spectrum is being managed effectively and appropriately, Sen. Lee said. One of the first steps to conducting effective oversight is assessing the value of federal spectrum allocations. By simply calculating the value of federal spectrum allocations, Congress and the Administration will be better equipped to identify valuable federal spectrum bands and manage each federal spectrum allocation more efficiently. Spectrum is the oxygen of the wireless world, Sen. Markey said, ensuring American consumers and companies enjoy all of the benefits of this Internet of Things economy. It's a simple formula: more available spectrum equals more competition and innovation. But you cannot effectively manage what you have not measured, and this legislation will finally ensure the public knows the value of spectrum held by the federal government so we can ensure it is being put to the best use.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=51576DE4-D823-475E-BB19-F62B18AB0DBB,Sen. Lee Thanks President Trump for Supporting Criminal Justice Reform,2018-11-14,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement Wednesday after President Trump endorsed a bipartisan criminal justice reform bill in the Senate. President Trump has always been a strong voice for tough on crime policies and his endorsement of bipartisan criminal justice reform is a huge win for the American people. This legislation strengthens public safety by increasing faith in the criminal justice system, reducing recidivism, and protecting vulnerable families. Now it is time for the Senate to act by bringing this important bipartisan legislation to the Senate floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ContentRecord_id=3C776A92-279D-4385-89DD-97C3FF775527,Sen. Mike Lee: A conservative case for criminal justice reform,2018-11-13,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Government's first duty, President Reagan said in 1981 and President Trump recently tweeted, is to protect the people, not run their lives. The safety of law-abiding citizens has always been a core principle of conservatism. And it is why we need to take this opportunity to pass real criminal-justice reform now. Although violent crime rose during the final two years of President Obama's time in office, it decreased during the first year of Trump's presidency. We need to keep that momentum going. And criminal justice reform can help us do that in two ways. First, commonsense sentencing reform can increase trust in the criminal-justice system, thus making it easier for law enforcement personnel to police communities. Right now, federal mandatory-minimum sentences for many drug offenses can lead to outcomes that strike many people as unfair, and thus undermine the public's faith in our justice system. For example, when I served as an Assistant United States Attorney in Salt Lake City, Weldon Angelos -- a young father of two with no criminal record -- was convicted of selling three dime bags of marijuana to a paid informant over a short period of time. These were not violent crimes. No one was hurt. But because Angelos had been in possession of a gun at the time he sold the drugs (a gun which was neither brandished nor discharged in connection with the offense), the judge was forced by federal law to give him a 55-year prison sentence. The average federal sentence for assault is just two years. The average murderer only gets 15 years. While acknowledging the obvious excessiveness of the sentence, the judge explained that the applicable federal statutes gave him no authority to impose a less-severe prison term, noting that only Congress can fix this problem. When the public sees judges handing out unfair punishments, it undermines trust in the entire justice system. This makes it harder for police to do their job. As Ronald Reagan explained when he was Governor of California, [w]ithout respect for the law, the best laws cannot be effective. Without respect for law enforcement, laws cannot be carried out. We must have respect, not only for the law, but also for the many who dedicate their lives to the protection of society through enforcement of the law. Fairer sentencing laws will increase respect for police, especially in many communities where such respect is currently lacking. Second, excessive prison sentences break apart families and weaken communities -- the building blocks of American civil society. Incarceration is tough on any marriage. Few can survive the loss of marital love and financial strain that happens when a spouse is behind bars. And the longer the sentence, the more likely a marriage will end in divorce. One 2011 study found that each additional year behind bars increases the likelihood of divorce by 32 percent. This has real costs for the families -- and especially the children -- of offenders. Incarceration is an essential law enforcement tool that protects communities and keeps families safe. But it also inflicts costs on communities and families, and at some point the negative impact of incarceration on marriage and family can become too stark to ignore. And for non-violent offenders, especially those with no prior criminal history, excessive sentences often do far more harm than good. We now have a rare opportunity to pass criminal justice reform that will help restore trust in law enforcement and protect American families. In May of this year, the House of Representatives passed the First Step Act, which includes some much-needed prison reform measures that would reduce recidivism. Unfortunately, it did not include any reforms to address manifestly unjust sentences for non-violent offenders. The Senate now has a chance to add some of those much-needed prison reform measures into the bill. We won't get everything we want, but we have an incredible opportunity to reach a compromise that includes meaningful, commonsense reforms to our nation's mandatory-minimum drug sentencing laws. It is unlikely we will get another opportunity to enact meaningful reform anytime soon. President Obama failed to accomplish criminal-justice reform during his eight years in office. But President Trump and the Republican Congress can get the job done now. It would be another big step toward making America great again.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/mobile-office?ContentRecord_id=FBE9B5E7-E639-4E07-ADBE-8C42E3C46713,"November 9th, 2018 Mobile Office Visit to Utah County",2018-11-09,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"What: Mobile Office Visit to Cedar Fort When: Friday, November 9th 2018 @ 1:30 pm 3:00 pm Where: Cedar Fort Town Hall, 50 E Center Street, Cedar Valley, UT 84013",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=6E7AF769-09B0-4DDF-8F46-9A9082F05C16,"ABC4 Utah: A look back at the 42-Year Career of Senator Hatch, and his role in shaping the United States Supreme Court",2018-11-08,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Utah has been so good to me. All I can say is that I'm just so proud to represent Utah and my constituents. They are good people. SALT LAKE CITYThis week, ABC4 Utah is airing special coverage of Senator Hatch's final months in the United States Senate and his role in shaping the United States Supreme Court. On Tuesday, ABC aired a report highlighting Senator Hatch's landmark achievements and his legacy as one of the most effective legislators in modern history. Video and story via ABC4 Utah I never thought I'd be here 42 years, the longest tenure of any Republican Senator in history, said Hatch, (R-Utah). Utah voters sent the senator back to Washington for six more terms. He says walking the hallowed halls of Capitol Hill for all those years has been the honor of a lifetime. Utah has been so good to me. All I can say is that I'm just so proud to represent Utah and my constituents. They are good people. During his decades of service, the Senator has passed close to 800 bills, some of which are widely considered landmark legislation. Part of that success comes from his ability to cross party lines and form friendships on the other side of the aisle. More viaABC4Utah Senator Hatch's role in Shaping the United States Supreme Court The ABC 4 team was in Washington during the final days of Justice Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings, and on Wednesday night, aired a short special on Senator Hatch's role in shaping the United States Supreme Court over the last four decades. Video and story via YouTube The United States Supreme Court has the final say on issues that impact our lives in a profound way, and a Utah senator has had a profound impact on the court. Senator Orrin Hatch is finishing up his 42nd and final year in the U.S. Senate. That means he's been there for the confirmation process of every sitting Supreme Court Justice. As a member and former Chair of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch played a key role in forming the court as it sits today. As he reflects on his decades in DC, the court is part of his legacy he is pleased with. I feel like I have represented Utah. The court has not climbed all over Utah in many recent years. We've kept the federal government responsible when it comes to Utah, rather than the old Utah, where we were always picked on by the federal government. More viaABC4Utah",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=AC54BCAE-3043-4453-A6C5-6C46CAEFFA43,Sen. Lee Thanks AG Sessions for His Service,2018-11-07,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"SALT LAKE CITY Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement Wednesday after Attorney General Jeff Sessions resigned. Jeff Sessions is a dear friend who has served our nation admirably as U.S. Attorney, a senator, and as Attorney General. I wish him well in the next chapter of his long and successful career.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=9ABBCB39-734D-4661-9793-A4D7F14A7178,Sen. Lee Mourns the Loss of Utah Soldier Brent Taylor,2018-11-05,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"SALT LAKE CITY - Sen. Mike Lee issued the following statement after the Utah National Guard confirmed that Major Brent Taylor was tragically killed on Kabul, Afghanistan Saturday. Major Brent Taylor was the definition of the term public servant.' He dedicated his life to his family, his community, and his country. Every interaction that my staff and I had with Mayor Taylor left us better and provided living evidence of the best of Utah. In the coming days, Utahns who never had the privilege of meeting Brent will learn what kind of man North Ogden and the Taylor family have lost, and will join them in grieving his tragic loss. Our thoughts and prayers go out the Taylor family during this time.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://robbishop.house.gov/media/press-releases/bishop-statement-death-major-brent-taylor,Bishop Statement on the Death of Major Brent Taylor,2018-11-04,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Rob Bishop,B001250,robbishop.house.gov,,,legacy,"Brigham City, UT Following the death of North Ogden City Mayor Brent Taylor in Afghanistan while serving as a Major in the Utah Army National Guard, Rep. Rob Bishop (UT-1) issued the following statement: With the death of Major Brent Taylor, Utah has lost a hero. My heart breaks for his wife, seven children, and the rest of the Taylor family. Through his dedication to community as Mayor, and his love of country as an officer in the Utah Army National Guard, Brent Taylor set an example of service we all honor. His sacrifice will not be forgotten.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=7471463D-8241-46BF-B565-B4C9B1671B1E,Hatch's Statement on the Passing of Utah Political Icon Dan Jones,2018-11-02,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), thesenior Republicanand President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate, released the following statement on the passing of his dear friend, Utah political icon Dan Jones: Dan was a remarkable man who had a profound impact on Utah's political landscape. But most importantly, he was a great friend. Elaine and I will miss him dearly. My prayers are with Pat and the Jones family at this difficult time. Senator Hatch with Dan Jones in August ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/socialcapitalproject?ContentRecord_id=73E45604-2FE8-4D4C-B319-D8B4BEB884B4,The Numbers Behind the Opioid Crisis: Revised Utah Edition,2018-11-01,2018,2018-11,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The Social Capital Project is a multi-year research effort that will investigate the evolving nature, quality, and importance of our associational life. Associational life is our shorthand for the web of social relationships through which we pursue joint endeavorsnamely, our families, our communities, our workplaces, and our religious congregations. These institutions are critical to forming our character and capacities, providing us with meaning and purpose, and for addressing the many challenges we face.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://stewart.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/reps-stewart-and-delaney-introduce-bipartisan-legislation-to-modernize,Reps. Stewart and Delaney Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Modernize Suicide Prevention Analytics,2018-10-31,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Chris Stewart,S001192,stewart.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. Yesterday, Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) and Rep. John K. Delaney (D-Maryland) introduced H.R. 7103, the Suicide Prevention Analytics Act of 2018. This bipartisan legislation aims to address the gap in data reporting as it relates to self-harm and suicidal behavior. This pilot program will help improve the compilation and sharing of near real-time suicidal behavior information among care providers, prevention experts, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Emergency Room medical practitioners record suicidal and self-harm behaviors using standard medical data recording processes, including privacy regulations and safeguards. However, reports on suicidal behavior can take one to two years to compile. By enabling near real-time data sharing, community care providers can respond more quickly to changes in trends, deliver more timely prevention resources, and track the success of such resources. Too many of us have experienced the tragic loss of life and heartbreak that results from suicide. I'm proud to be the lead co-sponsor forthis legislation that focuses on a better way to track and monitor self-harm and suicidal behavior, said Rep. Stewart.Up-to-date reporting will allow federal and state resources to be made available in a more effective and timelier manner. There is still a lot to be done, and I am committed to continuing this critical work. Suicide rates in America are alarming and this is just one of the many necessary steps to improving mental health care, said Rep. Delaney. This legislation would enable the CDC to work in partnership with local communities, creating far more effective prevention efforts based on near real-time analysis. I applaud the efforts by mental health leaders especially the AFSP in pushing for this critical improvement in care. We will save lives with this bill. The program provides grants to state or local public health departments and is staggered to increase the number of grants over a five-year period, allowing CDC to build on its initial rollout to reach more communities each year. In 2016, 1.3 million Americans attempted suicide and in 2015, 505,507 people visited a hospital for injuries due to self-harm. Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the United States, reflecting the need for a more comprehensive review of suicidal behavior trends and effective prevention and reduction methods. This is the second collaborative mental health effort by Delaney and Stewart this year, after pushing for more program funding during the appropriations process. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://love.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=25&itemid=865,Rep. Love Statement on Birthright Citizenship Issue,2018-10-30,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Mia Love,L000584,love.house.gov,,,legacy,"""I have always opposed Presidential attempts to change immigration law unilaterally. The Constitution gives Congress, not the President, the power to 'establish a uniform rule of naturalization' and the 14thAmendment makes the conditions of citizenship clear: individuals born in this country are citizens. The Executive cannot unilaterally change those facts. I didn'tsupportit under the previous administration and I won't support it now.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=6A946E78-1D60-40A4-9B79-B94C971EE33D,"Hatch visits Croatia to Receive Order of Prince Branimir Award for Contributions to Croatian Independence, Meets with President and Prime Minister, Offers Tribute to Kreimir Cosic",2018-10-29,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Zagreb, Croatia Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the President Pro Tempore of the United States, traveled to Croatia this week for his last official overseas visit as a US Senator. The Senator's visit coincides with three milestones: the centennial of Armistice Day, the 23rd anniversary of the signing of the Dayton Accords, and the 70th anniversary of the birth ofKreimirCosic. Croatian President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic invited Senator Hatch to Croatia to receive the Order of Prince Branimir ribbon for his for his contributions to the independence of the Republic of Croatia and relations between the Croatian and American people, one of the highest honors the nation of Croatia can bestow. (See tweet from President@KolindaGKandUS Embassy in Zagreb). Via YouTube When the Berlin Wall fell, post-Cold War US foreign policy was first tested and formulated in South Eastern Europe. Senator Hatch is the only remaining US Senatorwho played a decisive role in the signing of the Dayton Accordsthe political resolution signed in November 1995 that paved the way for a strong and secure Croatia. Senator Hatch at the Berlin Wall during a tour of Eastern Europe on April 9, 1990. The Senator's involvement with Croatia over the years: S. Res. 246, which he introduced with Senators Dole and Lieberman in January 1992. The resolution called on the United States to recognize Croatia's independence. S. 21,The Bosnia and Herzegovina Self-Defense Act of 1995which was introduced in January 1995 and which called for an end to the arms embargo against Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Senate passed this legislation in August 1995. Afterwards, President Clinton initiated the Lift and Strike policy, and the Dayton Accords were signed several months later. In 1996, Senator Hatch visited Croatia, along with Senators Reid and Daschle, on a nine-day congressional delegation visit to survey the implementation of the Dayton Accords. Senator Hatch also held productive meetings with Prime Minister AndrejPlenkovic, President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic, and Speaker of the Parliament Gordan Jandrokovic, where they discussed ways of strengthening the US-Croatia bilateral relationship and advancing common political, military, commercial, and cultural priorities. KreimirCosic Fireside The Senator gave a tribute in honor of Kreimir Cosic at an event hosted by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In attendance were Church leaders, Croatian athletes, and Kreimir Cosic's family. In his tribute, the Senator reminisced about his relationship with ?osi?and about his work on behalf of Croatia and its neighbors in the 1990s. The event was held as part of a speaker series to commemorate what would have been Cosic's 70th birthday. The Senator gave a tribute in honor of Kreimir Cosic as a part of a speaker series to commemorate what would have been Cosic's 70th birthday. Via YouTube About Kreimir Cosic Kreimir Cosic was among Europe's most famous basketball players and was one of Brigham Young University's most celebrated athletes. Born in Zadar, he was recruited to play basketball for BYU, where he became a key fixture of the university's basketball program, earning All-American honors in 1972 and 1973. While a student at BYU, Cosic was baptized into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by Professor Hugh Nibley and, upon his return to Croatia, paved the way for the Church's establishment there, even translating the Book of Mormon into Croatian. Cosiclater became Croatia's Deputy Ambassador to the United States, in which capacity he worked side by side with Senator Hatch. The two shared a close friendship that began when Cosic played basketball at BYU.Cosic passed away in May 1995 of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, just months before the signing of the Dayton Accords, which brought lasting peace to his country. Senator Hatch shown with his dear friend KreimirCosic, former Brigham Young University basketball star and coach of the Yugoslav national basketball team in Zagreb, Yugoslavia.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://love.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=25&itemid=864,Statement on Tree of Life Synagogue Shooting,2018-10-27,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Mia Love,L000584,love.house.gov,,,legacy,"Americans stand together against this horrific shooting at Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh this morning. I am appalled at this anti-Semitic attack, and that anyone would carry out such violence -- especially at a place of worship. God bless the victims, their families and friends and those responding to and investigating this despicable act.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=6060EE9F-C050-46C8-B76D-A4845B751A48,Hatch's Statement After Pittsburghs Shooting,2018-10-27,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT),thesenior Republicanand President Pro Tempore of the US Senate, released the following statement after hearing about the attack on the Jewish synagogue in his hometown of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Today, my prayers are with the people of Pittsburgh. This horrific act of violenceperpetrated against a holy people on their holy dayreminds us of the reality of evil and the need to counter its influence with courage and love. The hatred in this man's heart has no place in a society founded on the ideal of religious freedom. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=42DA7305-3B5A-4528-A1CF-3D86444E3118,Hatch Introduces Federal Claims Court Nominee Richard Hertling,2018-10-24,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the senior member and former Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, delivered the following remarks at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing introducing Richard Hertling, the President's nominee to the Court of Federal Claims. Via YouTube Through the years I have known Richard, I have found him to be smart, honest, honorable, and with a fine temperament. He has always exhibited good judgment and insight. He has all the qualities we look for in a judge, and I have no doubt that he will make an excellent one. The Court currently has 11 vacancies among its 16 judgeships. I hope we can move Richard through the Committee expeditiously and get him confirmed promptly. I am confident he will be an outstanding addition to the Court. The fullremarks, as prepared for delivery,arebelow: Mr. Chairman and colleagues, it is a real pleasure for me to be here today to introduce Richard Hertling, the President's nominee to the Court of Federal Claims, to the Committee. Of course, as a longtime former staff member to four of our colleagues and a former counsel on this Committee, Richard needs little introduction. Richard was born and raised in New York City and attended Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School. After clerking for a judge on the Fifth Circuit, he was hired through the Attorney General's Honors Program as a trial lawyer in the Civil Division of the Justice Department, where he served for more than three years before coming to the Senate. I first got to know Richard when he joined the Judiciary Committee staff of our former colleague Arlen Specter at the beginning of 1990, almost 29 years ago. But before I met Richard, I knew and was friends with his father. Richard's father, Julius, was a member of the Greatest Generation. Himself the son of an immigrant who arrived in our country alone at 14, Julius enlisted in the Army at 17 and fought in Europe, where he was wounded twice and helped to relieve the besieged town of Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge. Julius died last year just before his 92nd birthday. Having known the father, I had high expectations for the son, and I was not disappointed. For many years my staff and I worked closely with Richard as he served Senator Specter, Senator Fred Thompson, Senator Peter Fitzgerald, and our current colleague, Senator Lamar Alexander. My staff continued to work with Richard when he was at the Justice Department and on the staff of the House Judiciary Committee. Most recently, in private practice, Richard worked with my staff to enact the Defend Trade Secrets Act, a bill on which I was the lead Senate sponsor. Through the years I have known Richard, I have found him to be smart, honest, honorable, and with a fine temperament. He has always exhibited good judgment and insight. He has all the qualities we look for in a judge, and I have no doubt that he will make an excellent one. I have had several former staff members appointed to the Court of Federal Claims. I appreciate how important the court is in holding our government accountable to the people for its actions. The Court currently has 11 vacancies among its 16 judgeships. I hope we can move Richard through the Committee expeditiously and get him confirmed promptly. I am confident he will be an outstanding addition to the Court.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=F5B25F47-AF0C-4EBA-8029-269CFE9E5F41,Hatch Speaks on 42 Years of Judicial Confirmations in Joseph Story Lecture,2018-10-24,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCThis evening, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the senior member and former Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, delivered the 2018 Joseph Story Distinguished Lecture at the Heritage Foundation.The subject of his speech was the politicization of the judicial confirmation process.In his 42 years on the Senate Judiciary Committee,Senator Hatch hasparticipated in the confirmation of over half of all federal judges who have ever served, including all sitting members of the United States Supreme Court. Via Heritage Foundation If things are going to improve, it's going to take some real effort at rebuilding trust, and perhaps a leap of faith or two. The last time we saw this was when the Senate minority decided to work with the White House to give the President's Supreme Court nominees a fair shake. I led that effort. I think it was good for the country. I'm hopeful something like that can happen again. I can't say I'm optimistic that it will, but things can change. As our good friend Harvey Dent likes to say, the night is darkest just before the dawn. Background Last year's Joseph Story Lecture was delivered by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, then a Judge on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals [LINK]. The 2016 Joseph Story lecture was delivered by Justice Clarence Thomas [LINK]. Theceremony is named afterJoseph Story, the eminent jurist whobecame the youngest Associate Justice ever to serve on the United States Supreme Court when he was appointed by President Madison in 1812. Story made a significant mark on American law in his33years on the bench. But Story'sgreatest contribution to jurisprudencewashis renownedCommentaries on the Constitution, in which he set forth a philosophy of judicial restraint. This lecture series celebratesthelegacyof Justice Story. The full text of the speech, as prepared for delivery, is below: Thank you for that kind introduction and for the opportunity to be with you tonight. It's a real honor to be here at the Heritage Foundation. This is one of the most important institutions in our nation's capitalindeed, in the entire country. For decades, the Heritage Foundation has led the way in promoting policies that advance freedom, prosperity, and individual liberty. It's been a stalwart in the fight to confirm textualist, originalist judges who will interpret the law as written, not make policy. I'm particularly honored to have been invited to deliver this year's Joseph Story Distinguished Lecture. As you all know, Justice Kavanaugh delivered last year's lecture. That is a title that I will never tire of saying:JusticeKavanaugh. As I've considered what I should speak about, I thought it would be appropriate, and timely, to share some thoughts about the confirmation process, particularly the judicial confirmation process. Some of you may not know this, but Justice Story was actually my very first Supreme Court confirmation when I arrived in the Senate back in 1811. His confirmation hearing was quite an event. They threw everything they had at him. Really tough questions about letters of marque, post roads, piracy, and felonies committed on the high seas. The XYZ Affair, the Louisiana Purchase, Justice Story's family apothecary shopnothing was off-limits. I even remember thatSpartacusmade an appearance, which was a real surprise, let me tell you. Travel between Italy and DC took a lot longer back then. In seriousness, reviewing judicial nominations is one of the Senate's most important duties, and it's been one of my primary focuses since I took office. I'm the former chairman and longest-serving member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I've seen a lot of judicial nominees in my time. In fact, I've participated in the confirmation of more thanhalfof all Article III judges who have ever served. A lot has changed during my time in office. I wish I could say the confirmation process has improved, or at least stayed about the same, but it hasn't. It's declinedprecipitously. The judicial confirmation process, simply put, is a mess. It hasn't always been this way. Both sides used to work together, or at the very least, used to try to treat each other's nominees fairly. The delay tactics that have become so commonplace used to be pretty rare. Here's an amazing factone that's almost impossible to believe given the current state of things. Before Justice Breyer was Justice Breyer, he was Judge Breyer, on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. He was nominated to that position by President Carter. And he was confirmed on December 9, 1980. Think about that date for a moment: December 9, 1980. That wasafterthe 1980 election, which you may recall ushered in the Reagan Revolution. Not only did Ronald Reagan defeat President Carter in the presidential race, but Republicans captured the Senate for the first time in 26 years. Notwithstanding all that, the Senate voted to confirm Judge Breyer in December 1980. And the vote wasn't even close. It was 80-10. Only 6 Republicans opposed Judge Breyer's confirmation. And that's not the whole of it. Judge Breyer wasn't evennominateduntil after the 1980 election. So he was both nominatedandconfirmedafterCarter lost the election andafterDemocrats lost the Senate. And Republicans didn't try to block him. They voted for him overwhelming. You wouldneversee that today, no matter which party was in the White House. I'm going to focus the majority of my remarks tonight on the Supreme Court. But the lower courts are important as well. And so I'm also going to talk about lower court nominations, and in particular the D.C. Circuit, which after the Supreme Court has probably been the site of our most pitched confirmation battles. As we'll see, the trend lines at the Supreme Court level repeat themselves in the lower courts as well. When I first joined the Senate back in 1977, the Breyer confirmation was largely par for the course. The timing was a bit unusual, but the vote count wasn't. I was sworn into office a few weeks before Jimmy Carter became President. President Carter didn't have any Supreme Court nominations during his termthankfully. But he did have four D.C. Circuit nominations. And those nominations were Patricia Wald, Abner Mikva, Harry Edwards, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. So we can thank Jimmy Carter forbothStephen BreyerandRuth Bader Ginsburg. Of course, I say that in jest. They're both terrific people and highly respected jurists, even though they do rule the wrong way sometimes. The time between nomination and confirmation for all four of President Carter's D.C. Circuit nominees was two to three months. A bit longer than Stephen Breyer had to wait, but not all that much longer in the grand scheme of things. And what about their confirmation votes? As best I can tell from my research, Judge Edwards and then-Judge Ginsburg were confirmed either by voice vote or unanimous consent. Judge Wald's confirmation vote was 77-21, with a majority of Republicans supporting her nomination. Judge Mikva had the closest vote at 58-31still a comfortable margin. After President Carter came President Reagan and, for a while, confirmations continued largely as before. There were some close votes here and there. But in the main, nominees were confirmed relatively quickly and with wide support. Let's start with Sandra Day O'Connor, nominated by President Reagan to the Supreme Court in 1981. Justice O'Connor received some criticism from pro-life groups when she was nominated. But her confirmation hearings went smoothly, and she was ultimately confirmed by a vote of 99-0. President Reagan's next Supreme Court nomination was a two-fer. When Chief Justice Warren Burger announced his retirement in 1986, President Reagan decided to elevate thenAssociate Justice William Rehnquist to Chief Justice and name a new Associate Justice, Antonin Scalia. Let's start with Justice Scalia. Scalia was a well-known conservative who had served in both the Nixon and Ford administrations before joining the D.C. Circuit in 1982. He had also served as the first faculty adviser for the Federalist Society's University of Chicago chapter. He was no stealth nominee. Both sides knew what they were getting. And what was his confirmation vote? 98-0. Unanimous. Just like Justice O'Connor's. Justice Rehnquist's confirmation process for Chief Justice was a bit more contentious. He had served on the Court for 15 years as an Associate Justice and had accumulated a string of dissents to liberal opinions. And so Democrats gave him a difficult time. They accused him of voter intimidation from his time in private practice back in Arizona. They dug up a restrictive covenant that he didn't know anything about on a piece of property he owned. And they fixated on a memo he'd written for Justice Robert Jackson back when he was a clerk for Jackson. None of these attacks stuck, and Rehnquist was confirmed by a vote of 65-33. A closer margin than O'Connor and Scalia, to be sure, but still comfortable. He won the votes of 16 Democratsroughly a third of the Democratic caucus. Notably, Rehnquist's nomination was the first time in history that opponents of a Supreme Court nomination attempted a partisan filibuster. Thirty-one Senate Democrats voted to filibuster his nomination. Not enough to block him. But a precedent was set, and the partisan terrain shifted. Most of us know what comes next after Rehnquist and Scalia, but before getting to that, I'd like to turn back to the D.C. Circuit for a moment. It's important not to forget about the lower courts. President Reagan nominated eight judges to the D.C. Circuit. We should all ask God's blessing for President Trump to get that many nominations. Here's the list: Robert Bork, Antonin Scalia, Ken Starr, Larry Silberman, Jim Buckley, Stephen Williams, Doug Ginsburg, David Sentelle. Conservative all-stars, every one. The longest time any of them had to wait between nomination and confirmation was four months. The majority, in fact, were confirmed in less than two months. And what about their confirmation votes? Well, this will surprise you. Seven of the eight were confirmed by either voice vote or unanimous consent: Only Judge Buckley had a roll call vote, and his vote was 84-11. That means that of President Reagan'seightD.C. Circuit nominees, onlyonereceived any no votes. Onlyone. Can you imagine that happening today? Never. Let's turn back now to the Supreme Court. As I discussed earlier, in 1986, Justice Scalia was confirmed 98-0 and Chief Justice Rehnquist was confirmed 65-33. Even Rehnquist, who had faced a fairly contentious confirmation process for the time, was confirmed by a two-to-one margin. Then came 1987. Then came Bork. For those who came of age in the lawor politicsafter 1987, it's difficult to understand what a sea change Bork's confirmation process was. Character assassination, shameless misrepresentations of the nominee's record, partisan warfareit all seems so commonplace now. But it wasn't always this way. Justice Scalia sailed through 98 tonothing. Ninety-eight tonothing. Go back and watch Justice Scalia's confirmation hearings. He smoked his pipe and had pleasant conversations with Judiciary Committee members. I'm not joking.He literally smoked a pipe. It was expected at the time that Senators would treat nominees with courtesy. That they would give Presidents deference on their judicial selections. That they would ask nominees pointed questions, but wouldn't try to destroy them. So imagine everyone's surpriseshock, reallywhen Ted Kennedy took to the Senate floor within 45 minutes of Bork's nomination and said the following: Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens. Now, you may be thinking to yourself, that sounds like what pretty much every Democrat said about Justice Kavanaugh. Well, it was unprecedented at the time. It had been less than a year since the Senate had confirmed Justice Scalia unanimouslyunanimously. Even what Rehnquist went through was nothing compared to what Democrats did to Bork. They smeared him as an extremist, an activist, and a bigot. Five years earlier, he had been confirmed to the second-highest court in the land by unanimous consent. Now, he was the greatest threat to individual liberty since Attila the Hun. Judiciary Committee Democrats prepared a 70-page report that grossly misrepresented Judge Bork's distinguished record and painted him as some sort of retrograde. Bork's video rental history was even leaked to the press in a desperate attempt to find something salacious to embarrass him with. Regrettably, Democrats succeeded in their slanderous tactics. They took one of the greatest legal minds of a generation, a former Yale Law Professor and Solicitor General of the United States, and defeated him. The final vote was 58-42 against confirmation. It was a dark day for our country. President Reagan ultimately nominated Ninth Circuit Judge Anthony Kennedy to the seat. After a fairly smooth confirmation process, Justice Kennedy was confirmed 97-0. The next nominee to the Supreme Court was David Souter, the stealth nominee. Having been confirmed to the First Circuit only two months before President George H.W. Bush nominated him to the Supreme Court, Souter had a minimal paper trail. It was virtually impossible for opponents to misrepresent his record the way they'd distorted Judge Bork's, mainly because he didn't have one. And the stealth strategy was a success, at least vote-wise. Souter was confirmed easily by a vote of 90-9. Jurisprudentially, of course, some would say the stealth strategy was somewhat less than a success. In any event, Souter was the calm between two storms. Next came my dear friend Clarence Thomas. I had thought, perhaps naively, that the Bork nomination was as bad as it could get. Senate Democrats had taken a universally admired and respected jurist and managed to paint him as a threat to freedom and prosperity. They had twisted his record, and his words, until they were completely unrecognizable. But it turns out that grossly misrepresenting a nominee's record is only part of the playbook. There's also character assassination. Justice Thomas is a dear friend of mine. We're honored to have him here tonight. I'd like to make just a few points about his confirmation experience. Not many people remember this, but there were actually two sets of hearings on Justice Thomas's nomination. The first was the standard set of hearings on his record and qualificationsthe sort of hearings all Supreme Court nominees go through. The second set was the hearings with Professor Hill. By the time Hill came forward, Justice Thomas's nomination had already been voted out of committee. Indeed, she went public onlytwo daysbefore Justice Thomas's nomination was scheduled for a final floor vote. And so the Senate delayed the vote to hear from Professor Hill. You may notice some parallels here to recent events. The hearings were ugly, but I believe they vindicated Justice Thomas. And the American people agreed. Opinion polls taken shortly after the hearings showed that the public believed Justice Thomas's accountoverwhelmingly. And at the end of the day, Justice Thomas was confirmed,as he should have been. One of the proudest moments of my life was defending Justice Thomas from the scurrilous, unfounded attacks on his character. Justice Thomas is a blessing to this country, and I thank God every day that he is on the Supreme Court. At the time of Justice Thomas's confirmation, I had been in the Senate for 14 years. We had gone from a unanimous confirmation process for Justice O'Connor to a more contentious process for Chief Justice Rehnquist to the all-out warfare of the Bork and Thomas nominations. The attacks had become increasingly heated, increasingly personal. By all appearances, we were on the road to the abyss. Then something interesting happened. We took a step back. Consider the next two Supreme Court nominations: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, our friends from the Carter days. Both were well-known liberals. Before joining the bench, Ginsburg had been the ACLU's general counsel. Breyer had been Ted Kennedy's chief counsel. But they were both well respected and had solid reputations on the court of appeals. So when President Clinton called me in 1993 to ask my views on whom he should nominate to the Supreme Court, I suggested Ginsburg and Breyer. They were certainly not the nominees I would have chosen had I been President. But as the Ranking Member on the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, I thought it was important to try to work with the White House to dial back the rancor that had been escalating for so long. And to his credit, President Clinton nominated Justices Ginsburg and Breyer. Both had smooth confirmation processes and were confirmed overwhelmingly. Justice Ginsburg's confirmation vote was 96-3. Justice Breyer's was 87-9. And so, after the all-out partisan attacks on Bork and Thomas, Republicans took a step back from the brink. I have been criticized by some for my role in suggesting Justices Ginsburg and Breyer to President Clinton, but I believe it was the right thing to do. Republicans were in the minority at the time. We could not block President Clinton's nominees. But we could work with the other side to stop the slide into the abyss. And that's what we did. The confirmation wars hit a pause. Things were relatively calm at the lower-court level as well through much of Clinton's presidency. There was some sniping at the fact that nominations were taking longer to process, a practice the Democrats had begun under George H.W. Bush. But confirmation votes were generally bipartisanif there even was a roll call vote rather than a voice vote or unanimous consent agreement. Let's take a quick look at the D.C. Circuit. President Clinton appointed three judges to the D.C. Circuit: Judith Rogers, David Tatel, and Merrick Garland. He also nominated Elena Kagan and Allen Snyder during the latter part of his second term, but the Senate did not act on their nominations, following the precedent Senate Democrats set under George H.W. Bush. Judges Rogers and Tatel were both confirmed by voice vote within four months of nomination. Judge Garland's confirmation process was a bit different. There was a dispute at the time over whether there was a need for another judge on the D.C. Circuit. Compared to other courts of appeals, the D.C. Circuit had a smaller caseload per judge. After an extended back and forth, the Senate voted to confirm Judge Garland eighteen months after he was nominated. The vote was 76-23, with a majority of Republicans supporting his nomination. After President Clinton came President George W. Bush. President Bush appointed four judges to the D.C. Circuit: John Roberts, Janice Rogers Brown, Tom Griffith, and Brett Kavanaugh. Their confirmation experiences were, shall we say, rather different from President Clinton's nominees. Recall how long President Clinton's nominees had to wait between nomination and confirmation. Judge Rogers waited four months. Judge Tatel also waited four months. Judge Garland had a lengthier 18-month wait while the argument over the D.C. Circuit's caseload played out. Well, here's how long George W. Bush's D.C. Circuit nominees had to wait between nomination and confirmation. Judge Roberts: 2 years. Judge Brown: nearly 2 years. Judge Griffith: a comparatively breakneck 13 months. And the winner of the Democratic obstruction crown? Judge Kavanaugh: 2 years, 10 months. Judge Kavanaugh waited longer between nomination and confirmation than all twelve Carter and Reagan D.C. Circuit nomineescombined. This recitation of President Bush's D.C. Circuit nominees leaves out an important name: Miguel Estrada. That's because Estrada was never confirmed. He withdrew his nomination after 2 years and 4 months in limbo after Senate Democrats filibustered his nominationseventimes. You'll notice I just used the F word: filibuster. When we talk about the extraordinary delays that arose during the George W. Bush years, the root cause was Senate Democrats' unprecedented use of the filibuster. This was a new front in the confirmation wars. It may sound strange to say today, but until the early 2000s, judicial filibusters simply didn't happen, at least not for lower court nominees. Prior to the George W. Bush administration, there hadneverbeen a successful filibuster of a lower court nominee. And there hadneverbeen a successful filibuster ofanyjudicial nominee who had clear majority support. That changed during the Bush years, and it really precipitated the decline of the judicial confirmation process. All of the work my Republican colleagues and I had done during the Clinton administration to restore a semblance of bipartisanship was blown up in an instant. It became all-out warfare once again. No good deed goes unpunished. Just look at the confirmation votes on President Bush's D.C. Circuit nominees. John Roberts had a voice vote. Good for him. Janice Rogers Brown: 56-43. Only one Democrat in support. Tom Griffith: 73-24. The Democrats split roughly even. Brett Kavanaugh: 57-36. Only four Democrats in support. For the first time in history, we had near-party-line votes for the D.C. Circuit. Contrast that with the eight Reagan appointees, all but one of whom were confirmed by voice vote or unanimous consent. The confirmation wars were back in full swing. Let's turn back now to the Supreme Court. President Bush appointed two Justices to the Court. The first was John Roberts. Roberts's confirmation had fewer fireworks than some previous nominations. Because he was replacing Chief Justice Rehnquist, he was not expected to change the ideological balance of the court. Moreover, Democrats knew there was another nomination coming thatwouldchange the balance of the Court. At the time Chief Justice Roberts had his confirmation hearing, there were actuallytwoSupreme Court openingsRehnquist's and Justice O'Connor's. Rehnquist's opening would be filled first, O'Connor's second. Replacing Rehnquist with another conservative would not alter the Court's ideological makeup. But replacing O'Connor with a more conservative Justice would. I believe that Democrats held their fire on Roberts because they knew a second, more consequential nomination was coming. They wanted to be able to say, look, we voted for Roberts. We're not partisan. Roberts was reasonable. But this new nominee, he or she is different. He or she is unacceptable. And so Roberts was confirmed relatively easily, by a vote of 78-22. I would note, however, that his confirmation votedidrepresent a decline from Justice Ginsburg's 96-3 vote and Justice Breyer's 87-9 vote. As you'll recall, President Bush made two nominations to fill Justice O'Connor's seat. The first was White House Counsel Harriet Miers, who withdrew following opposition from conservative groups. The second was Third Circuit Judge Samuel Alito, who was confirmed. Alito's confirmation experience was different from Roberts's. Because Alito would be replacing Justice O'Connor, the Court's longtime swing vote, Democrats were much more pointed in their attacks. In particular, they dug up a 25-year-old job application in which Alito had listed membership in a group called Concerned Alumni of Princeton. Even when it became clear that Alito knew nothing of the group's more controversial positions, Democrats kept up the attack. The criticisms of Justice Alito were so personal and so intense that his wife briefly left the confirmation hearing in tears. Democrats' efforts ultimately failed, however, and Justice Alito was confirmed. But not before Democrats tried to filibuster his nomination. Note that no Republicans had tried to filibuster Justices Ginsburg or Breyer. Even those who opposed their nominations didn't try to prevent an up-or-down vote. But as we've already seen with the D.C. Circuit, Republican efforts during the Clinton years to dial back the partisan warfare were met with the back of the hand once a Republican was back in the White House. The filibuster failed and Alito was confirmed 58-42. Only four Democrats supported his confirmation, the lowest number of opposing party votes for a Supreme Court nomination in all my years in the Senate up to that point. Even Justice Thomas received 11 Democratic votes for confirmation, and that was after the most contentious confirmation process in American history. President Bush was followed in office by President Obama. Given the deterioration of the confirmation process during Bush's time, one might have expected Republicans to give President Obama's Supreme Court nominees a nasty reception. But that didn't happen. Republicans found much to object to in Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan's records, including Sotomayor's suggestion in numerous speeches that a wise Latina woman would more often than not make better judicial decisions than a white male. Republicans also expressed deep concerns about Kagan's decision as Dean of Harvard Law School to ban military recruiters from campus. But they didn't launch the withering personal assaults that Democrats had leveled against previous Republican nominees. They didn't try to filibuster their nominations. Republicans asked Sotomayor and Kagan pointed questions, to be sure, but they didn't try to destroy them. The confirmation votes were 68-31 for Sotomayor, with 9 Republicans in support, and 63-37 for Kagan, with 5 Republicans in support. Sotomayor and Kaganbothreceived more votes from Republicans than Alito received from Democrats. Keep that in mind next time Democrats try to pin the blame for the confirmation wars on the GOP. I'll say just a few words about President Obama's D.C. Circuit nominees. President Obama appointed four judges to the D.C. Circuit: Sri Srinivasan, Patricia Millett, Cornelia Pillard, and Robert Wilkins. A fifth nominee, Caitlin Halligan, withdrew her nomination. Compared to the way Senate Democrats treated President Bush's D.C. Circuit nominees, the confirmation process for President Obama's first nominee, Judge Srinivasan, was a walk in the park. He was confirmed 11 months after nomination by a vote of 97-0. Not a single Republican opposed his nomination. Compare that to the votes on President Bush's D.C. Circuit nominees: Forty-three no votes for Judge Brown. Twenty-four no votes for Judge Griffith. Thirty-six no votes for Judge Kavanaugh. You'd have thought it was the 1990s again. President Obama's other D.C. Circuit nominees were confirmed only after Senate Democrats changed the rules to eliminate the filibuster for lower court nominees. The hubris of this move was quite something. It was Democrats, recall, who first deployed the judicial filibuster ten years earlier to block President Bush's nominees. Now that the shoe was on the other foot and a Democrat was in the White House, Senate Democrats had no compunctions about changing the rules to suit their needs. As you can imagine, Senate Republicans were furious. The result was near-party-line votes on President Obama's other D.C. Circuit appointees. I mentioned that one of President Obama's D.C. Circuit nominees, Caitlin Halligan, withdrew her nomination. She did so after a wait of 2 years and 6 months. If you wanted, I suppose you could criticize Republicans for holding up her nomination for such a lengthy period of time. But it wasn't anything different from what Senate Democrats did to John Roberts or Miguel Estrada or Janice Rogers Brown or Brett Kavanaugh. And I haven't even mentioned Peter Keisler, whom President Bush nominated to the D.C. Circuit in 2006 but who never received a floor vote. President Obama had one other judicial nominee who bears mention: Merrick Garland. Garland's name has become a rallying cry for our friends on the left. President Obama nominated Garland to the Supreme Court in March 2016, eight months before the 2016 presidential election and one monthafterthe primaries had already begun. It had been a hundred years since a Supreme Court nominee had been confirmed in a presidential election year after voting in the election had started. So Republicans made the entirely justifiable decision not to process Garland's nomination, following a policy Joe Biden himself had laid out 25 years earlier. In so doing, they didn't seek to destroy or tear down Judge Garland. They didn't attack his character or try to sully his good name. They simply didn't process his nomination. Compare that to what Democrats did to Alito and Thomas and Bork and Rehnquist. As we all know, Donald Trump won the 2016 election and nominated Neil Gorsuch. Gorsuch's hearings followed a path similar to the hearings for Chief Justice Roberts. Gorsuch, a conservative, had been nominated to fill the seat of Justice Scalia, also a conservative, meaning his nomination was unlikely to change the balance of the Court. Democrats made some efforts to distort Gorsuch's record. We heard endlessly about a frozen trucker, for example. But we didn't see the sort of personal attacks we saw with Alito and Thomas. We did, however, see a filibuster. Now that the shoe was back on the other foot, Democrats were more than happy to use the filibuster to try to block a Republican nominee. And so, following the precedent set by Democrats during the Obama years, Republicans lowered the threshold for cloture to prevent the minority party from blocking a nominee with clear majority support. Gorsuch was confirmed 54-45, with only three Democratic votes. The number of Democrats willing to support a Republican Supreme Court nominee continued to fall. That brings us to Brett Kavanaugh. The less said about recent events, the better. But I'd like to highlight two points about the Kavanaugh confirmation. First, it represented a sort of culmination of everything the confirmation wars had been building to over the past thirty years. The Bork hearings gave us vilification and defamation coupled with gross distortions of the nominee's record. The Thomas hearings gave us character assassination and the politics of personal destruction. We saw elements of both of these approaches in subsequent confirmations, particularly the Alito confirmation. But the Kavanaugh confirmation is when everything finally came together: the outlandish misrepresentations of pretty much everything the nominee had ever said, coupled with the most vile personal attacks imaginable. It's no coincidence, I believe, that this confluence of events occurred during the battle to replace Justice Kennedy, the man who for many years had held the key to critically important 5-4 decisions. When the stakes are high, the wolves come out. The second point to highlight about the Kavanaugh confirmation is how eerily it parallels the experience of Justice Thomas. The nominee endures a tough hearing but comes through mostly unscathed. He appears on the path to confirmation. He has been nominated to replace a Justice well to his left, sending the other side into apoplexy. Then, on the eve of a crucial vote, allegations are leaked to the press. And not just any allegations, but salacious allegations that just so happen to play into stereotypes about the nominee that many on the left have been pushing. It turns out also that Democrats have known about these allegations for some time, but did not raise them in the earlier hearing or in private conversations with the nominee. They also failed to disclose the allegations to Republicans for a period of several weeks. And then, at a late hour, when confirmation appears assured, the allegations are leaked to the press, throwing the nomination into doubt and dragging the nominee and his family through the mud. Call it the Democratic playbook. It's dishonest. It's malicious. And it's enormously damaging to the country. It's also something that Republicans haveneverdone to a Democratic Supreme Court nominee, at least not during my time in office. Thankfully, Justice Kavanaugh made it through the ordeal and was confirmed by a vote of 50-48. Only one Democrat supported his confirmation, the lowest number for a Republican Supreme Court nominee yet. We're very nearly to the point of party-line Supreme Court confirmations. From the unanimous vote for Justice O'Connor to the two-thirds vote for Chief Justice Rehnquist to the near-party-line vote for Justice Kavanaugh. If you want to talk about the decline of the judicial confirmation process, that's it in a nutshell. And lest we forget about the lower courts, the decline is accelerating there as well. President Trump's one D.C. Circuit nominee so far, Greg Katsas, was confirmed by a vote of 51-49. Again, nearly party line. We're seeing roll call votes on every single court of appeals nominee. Cloture votes on every single court of appeals nominee. Roll call and cloture votes on nearly every district court nominee as well. We've gone from the world of voice votes and unanimous consent agreements onsevenof President Reagan's eight D.C. Circuit nominees to straight partisan warfare up and down the entire federal judiciary. It's all scorched earth all the time. And it's terrible. I hope you've found tonight's history lesson interesting. My goal has been to share with you my perspective on how the judicial confirmation process has changed, for worse, during my time in the Senate. There's blame on both sides, I admit. Though I think a fair assessment of the facts shows that the vast majority of the blame lays with one side in particular. And it's not my side. But that's an argument for another day. I worry that those entering politics today, and my many Senate colleagues who haven't had the long tenure I have, think that it's always been this way, that it's always been a pitched battle over every nomination. That it's been nuclear war forever. But it hasn't. It really hasn't. Not until thirty years ago did the partisan fires engulf the Supreme Court confirmation process. And with the lower courts, it's an even more recent inferno. I remember the days before the fire. The days of unanimous confirmation votes. The days of voice votes and unanimous consent even for D.C. Circuit nominees. I wish we could get back to those days. Things are just so nasty right now. And unfortunately, I don't see a way out of it, not as long as both sides are engaged in all-out warfare. The only hope I have is that perhaps someone someday will take a step back and say, enough. Let's hit a pause. Let's try to work together again. That's what I did with President Clinton, and I think it helped. Did I vote for some nominees I wouldn't have chosen if I'd been President? Yes. But I did it under the expectation that when the shoe was back on the other foot, the other side would reciprocate. Regrettably, that didn't happen. We went from the dtente of the Clinton years straight into the partisan warfare of the Bush years. There's not much trust left, on either side. Certainly there's very little trust on the Republican side. Not after the complete, almost mindless obstruction we've seen from Senate Democrats these last two years. If things are going to improve, it's going to take some real effort at rebuilding trust, and perhaps a leap of faith or two. The last time we saw this was when the Senate minority decided to work with the White House to give the President's Supreme Court nominees a fair shake. I led that effort. I think it was good for the country. I'm hopeful something like that can happen again. I can't say I'm optimistic that it will, but things can change. As our good friend Harvey Dent likes to say, the night is darkest just before the dawn. Thank you again for the honor of being here tonight. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=4F3DB491-901E-484E-A303-13DAB3E8BAFD,"ICYMI: As Caravan Nears, Grassley, Lee Call on State, DHS to Explore Asylum Agreement with Mexico",2018-10-24,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) called on the Trump Administration to seek an agreement with Mexico to assist in accommodating a steady stream of migrants traveling through Mexico seeking asylum. The senators noted acknowledgements by Obama Administration officials that potential security threats are exploiting immigration vulnerabilities to enter the United States. In a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the senators urged the Trump Administration to adopt a safe third country agreement with Mexico similar to an existing agreement between the United States and Canada. Safe third country agreements require migrants seeking asylum to make their claim in the first country of arrival rather than passing through to another country. Such an agreement would serve American interests by helping to prevent expanded asylum claim backlogs and promoting national security by further disrupting migration of Special Interest Aliens, whom the Obama Administration noted are seeking entry into the United States. We know now that this caravan, as it stands currently, is not entirely comprised of Central American asylum seekers. As then-President Obama's own Homeland Security Secretary, Jeh Johnson, noted in an agency memorandum, titled Cross-Border Movement of Special Interest Aliens: we must continually evaluate our border and port of entry security posture to ensure our resources are appropriately aligned to address trends in the migration of SIAs,' the senators wrote. For over a decade now, United States sovereignty has been tested and too often disregarded. Under President Trump's Administration, and due in large part to both of your efforts, the United States is finally in a position to secure our border and reinstitute law and order. We strongly urge you on the eve of a new Mexican presidential administration to set the tone for American sovereignty in the twenty-first century. Entering into a safe third country agreement with Mexico would send a message to our partners across Central America that they too must share the burden of unsanctioned mass migration. Grassley has previously raised concern about reports that migrants with ties to terrorism or from countries known to be a high risk for anti-American terrorism are joining smuggling rings in Central America in order to enter the United States via the Southern border. Grassley's and Lee's letter to Nielsen and Pompeo follows: October 23, 2018 The Honorable Kirstjen Nielsen Secretary U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, D.C. 20528 The Honorable Mike Pompeo Secretary U.S. Department of State Washington, D.C. 20520 Dear Secretary Nielsen and Secretary Pompeo: As over 7,000 Hondurans travel through Mexico toward the United States border, we urge you to execute a safe third country agreement with the Mexican government that requires asylum seekers to make their claims in their first country of arrival. We believe this would be an appropriate next step because such an agreement is rooted in precedent, addresses our national security concerns, and serves the best interests of American citizens. A safe third country agreement is not unprecedented. In 2002, the United States entered into an agreement with Canada for cooperation in the examination of refugee status claims from nationals of third countries. The 2002 Safe Third Country Agreement with Canada required those seeking refugee status to make their claim in the first country of arrival. Given our shared land borders with both Canada and Mexico, and the decade-long surge of illegal immigration across our southern border, such an agreement is both appropriate and just. Further, there is international precedent. The Dublin Regulation[1] required asylum seekers arriving in the European Union to register their claims in the first country of arrival, and the EU-Turkey 2016 Agreement required Syrian migrants to file their claims in Turkey if they arrived in Greece via the Mediterranean Sea.[2] The United States, which is by far the most generous nation in the world, should also take appropriate steps to legally defend our own sovereignty. A safe third country agreement with Mexico would also address national security concerns inherent in a large group of unidentified individuals moving unabated toward the United States. We know now that this caravan, as it stands currently, is not entirely comprised of Central American asylum seekers. As then-President Obama's own Homeland Security Secretary, Jeh Johnson, noted in an agency memorandum, titled Cross-Border Movement of Special Interest Aliens: we must continually evaluate our border and port of entry security posture to ensure our resources are appropriately aligned to address trends in the migration of SIAs.[3] As you know, Special Interest Aliens or SIAs are individuals who are considered national security threats to our homeland, who attempt often successfully to enter the interior of the United States illegally. We need only look back to a 2017 investigative report from POLITICO that showed Hezbollah and their affiliated networks have trafficked narcotics, weapons and persons from Venezuela and other parts of Latin America, to the United States.[4] Of particular concern is Guatemala's recent announcement that it apprehended 100 ISIS terrorists in country, raising new security concerns about whether similar high risk individuals may have joined the caravan.[5] Due to the likelihood that such national security threats could mask themselves within this large caravan population, at a minimum, our federal government must prioritize the security of American citizens over anything else. A safe third country agreement also permits the federal government to address overdue fixes we need here at home, within our immigration laws and border security apparatus. Our border and immigration enforcement authorities are long overdue for aggressive increases in resources, technology, and infrastructure support. Further, our country's legal system that would be tasked with processing the thousands of migrants' claims for asylum is already in a dire state, and likely cannot withstand the incoming pressure. According to the FY 2019 Proposed Refugee Admissions Report, the number of pending affirmative asylum cases stands at about 320,000 (approximately 492,000 individuals).[6] This is in addition to the immigration asylum backlog, which stands at about 348,000 individuals.[7] Accepting this current caravan would add thousands of cases to our existing backlog, and send a message to future populations that the United States has open borders, all funded off the backs of American taxpayers and legal immigrants. For over a decade now, United States sovereignty has been tested and too often disregarded. Under President Trump's Administration, and due in large part to both of your efforts, the United States is finally in a position to secure our border and reinstitute law and order. We strongly urge you on the eve of a new Mexican presidential administration to set the tone for American sovereignty in the twenty-first century. Entering into a safe third country agreement with Mexico would send a message to our partners across Central America that they too must share the burden of unsanctioned mass migration. Sincerely, Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) Chairman U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Mike S. Lee (R-Utah) U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=2C1B4431-2689-4EEA-8229-132645B41ABF,Hatch Highlights Legislative Victories for Kids and Families,2018-10-23,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Utah Leaders, National Health Advocates gather tocelebrateHistoricCHIP,Family First, MIECHV Victories WASHINGTON, DCSenate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) today hosted several Utah and national leaders to celebrate thelongest extensionof Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) in program history,the passageof the Family First Prevention Services Act and the reauthorization of the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting program (MIECHV), all legislation focused on helping children and families. Click Here to See More Photos: Hatch Hosts Leaders to Celebrate Efforts to Benefit Children and Families During my service, I've worked hard to find bipartisan solutions to problems facing children and families. Throughout the difficult political and policy conversations we had on CHIP, I pushed hard for a 10 year extension of the program. I am so pleased that we made that a reality. Providing certainty to kids and families through CHIP is one of areas I am most proud to have worked on over the past 42 years, and it remains a bipartisan model of policy success. You've done so much to show us that there are leaders who care for us. -Natalie Clark, 20-year-old Utahn, beneficiary of the Family First Prevention Services Act We appreciate your heart for this nation's children, and we just want to say thank you. -William C. Bell, President and CEO of Casey Family Programs Senator Hatch has always been an advocate for children. -Katy Welkie, CEO of Primary Children's Hospital Background Hatchcreatedthe Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) with former Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) more than two decades ago. The program, which bridges the gap for families who don't qualify for programs like Medicaid but still cannot afford private insurance, issuccessfuland financially responsible, and continues to receive bipartisan support. Earlier this year, Congress enacted a six-yearCHIP extension the longest in the program's history based in large part on a bipartisan agreement Hatch struck with Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). The Bipartisan BudgetAct (BBA)added four more years of CHIP funding, ensuring that the program is funded through FY2027. Hatch also successfully negotiated the inclusion of two other Finance Committee products in the BBA, theFamily First Prevention Services Actand theStrong Families Act of 2017. TheFamily First Prevention Services Actwill help keep more children safely with their families instead of placing them in foster care. This legislation supports states in providing evidence-based services to prevent children from entering foster care, encourages states to place children with foster families instead of in group homes, and reduces bureaucracy for and provides help to relatives so more children can live with family if they must be removed from their homes. Hatch introduced theFamily First Prevention Services Actin June 2016, along with Wyden and committee members Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.). TheStrong Families Act of 2017wasintroducedby Finance Committee Member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and cosponsored by many members of the Committee. This bill funds the Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program through FY2022 and provides states with grants to support evidence-based home visiting programs for at-risk families, particularly women and children. This proposal received strong bipartisan support. Senator Hatch's full remarks, as prepared for delivery, are below: I want to thank all of you for being here today to recognize some of the important things we've achieved this year. You have all worked together with me to pass major legislation helping kids and families. I may get a lot of the credit, but you all did a lot of the work. During my service, I've worked hard to find bipartisan solutions to problems facing children and families. Throughout the difficult political and policy conversations we had on CHIP, I pushed hard for a 10 year extension of the program. I am so pleased that we made that a reality. Providing certainty to kids and families through CHIP is one of areas I am most proud to have worked on over the past 42 years, and it remains a bipartisan model of policy success. I'm also proud that the Family First Prevention Services Act became law this year, a bill I introduced with Senator Wyden. Too many kids end up in foster care because their families don't have the help they need, and now states will have more tools to help families in crisis so they can safely stay together. We also renewed a key home visiting program that helps parents with young children. And instead of telling states and local governments what to do, they get to choose the program that works for themas long as there's evidence it works. I'm so glad we have this opportunity to reflect on these achievements, and I'm grateful to be with you so we can celebrate these achievements together.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ContentRecord_id=3CCB59A2-6954-435A-B2C1-13C77506AF2B,Sen. Lee Calls for End to U.S.-Saudi War in Yemen,2018-10-22,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Mike Lee,L000577,www.lee.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON In light of Saudi Arabia's admission that they killed Jamal Khashoggi, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement Monday calling for an end to United States involvement in Saudi Arabia's war on Yemen. Killing a United States resident is never acceptable behavior, and the repeated failure to be honest about the incident should call into question the extent of our relationship with Saudi Arabia, Sen. Lee said. But setting aside the extent of our alliance generally, why should we continue to support Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen when the kingdom is killing our residents and lying about it? It is far past time that the United States Senate had a serious debate regarding our military involvement in Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen. This February, Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT), Bernie Sanders (D-VT), and Chris Murphy (D-CT) introduced a resolution to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities between Saudi Arabia and Houthi forces in Yemen. This March, before the Senate voted to table that resolution, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-TN) asked fellow senators to respect the members of the foreign relations committee that deal with this issue and let the resolution go back to committee with the commitment that we plan to bring forth legislation to actually deal appropriately with many of the issues relative to Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and ourselves. ""The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has had six months to study the resolution to end U.S. aid to Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen, Lee said. It is time for a vote.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=7199DBE1-C702-4EAD-B538-E50DB37643C8,Hatch Honors Utah Veterans in Washington,2018-10-19,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCToday Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the senior Republican in the United States Senate, welcomed a group of Utah veterans to Washington. The trip, arranged byUtah Honor Flight, a program that brings veterans to Washington to visit the memorials dedicated to honor their service and sacrifices, consisted of veterans from World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. Via YouTube ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=E9714BBD-1097-4DCC-BF8E-3F04D006E7A4,"Hatch, Smith Introduce Bipartisan Resolution Honoring October as National Principals Month",2018-10-17,2018,2018-10,Republican,House,UT,Orrin Hatch,H000338,www.hatch.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DCSenator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Senator Tina Smith(D-MN) introduced a resolution that recognizes the month of October 2018 as National Principals Month. I'mgratefulto join Senator Smith in introducing the resolution declaring October as National Principals Month,said Hatch. Not enough can be said about the invaluable role of principalswhether it'smanaging school operations and logistics, supporting teachers, setting curriculum,orinteracting with students and parents, principals truly serve as the backbone of our educational system. I am constantly inspired by principals I meet in Utah as I travel the state and see firsthand the effectof strong leaders in helping students succeed. I am hopeful this resolution will remind my colleagues in Congress and others to take time this month to show appreciation for principals. I have so much respect for the work principals do each dayprincipals wear many hats with making sure the buses run on time, ensuring school buildings function as they should, and playing a critical role in helping teachers deliver high-quality education for our students,said Smith.I get to meet with many principals thanks to my jobincluding Minnesota's Principal of the Yearand I'm proud to help support principals in Minnesota and across the nation with this bipartisan resolution to recognize October as Principals Month. Statements of Support Dr. L. Earl Franks, Executive Director,CAE - National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) National Principals Month honors principals for their dedication to our schools, students, and families. Principals work tirelessly to create learning environments that support great teaching and boost student learning so that all students have the opportunity to receive a well-rounded education. Thank you to Senators Hatch and Smith for introducing this resolution recognizing the critical role that principals play in our nation's schools. National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) Our nation's prosperity relies on schools' helping each student fulfill their greatest human potential. The principal creates those conditions in schools that allow each student to lead their own learning and become their best selves. We thank Senators Hatch and Smith for leading the US Senate's acknowledgement of the crucial role principals play in building the future our students will soon lead. Ernest Logan, President - American Federation of School Administrators The Senate's recognition of school principalsis a real honorto the genuine leaders of public education. We work hard every day and ourdedication, commitment, and passion for the children we serve is a common goal we can all understand. And while we take time this month to celebrate, the real commitment is seen in the investment made by Congress recently to enhance principal training programs. The more money invested in developingeducation leadership that fosters a culture of learning, by guiding instruction, engaging teachers and staff, and connecting with students, the better the outcomes for our children. Background Continuing on their support of school leaders and administrators, Senators Hatch and Smith introduced the following resolution declaring October as National Principals Month. The bipartisan resolution recognizes the contributions principals make through their many roles in schools, including collaborating with teachers to establish school curriculum, working to create safer school environments, and providing students with a high-quality education, among other things. The resolution follows Senator Hatch's work on legislation introduced earlier this year to improve the school administrator preparation pipeline. In August, Senator Hatch and a group of bipartisan senators introduceda bill to improve professional development opportunities for teachers and school leaders in high-needs school districts called theTeacher and School Leaders need Education and Development to be Empowered Resources in Schools(LEADER) Act.Click here to read more. Full resolution text below: Whereas the National Association of Secondary School Principals, the National Association of Elementary School Principals, and the American Federation of School Administrators have declared the month of October 2018 to be National Principals Month''; Whereas principals are educational visionaries, instructional and assessment leaders, disciplinarians, community builders, budget analysts, facilities managers, and administrators of legal and contractual obligations; Whereas principals work collaboratively with teachers and parents to develop and implement clear missions, high curriculum standards, and performance goals; Whereas principals create school environments that facilitate great teaching and learning and continuous school improvement; Whereas the vision, actions, and dedication of principals pro- vide the mobilizing force behind any school improvement effort; and Whereas the celebration of National Principals Month would honor elementary school, middle school, and high school principals and recognize the importance of principals in ensuring that every child has access to a high-quality education: Now, therefore, be itResolved, That the Senate (1) recognizes the month of October 2018 as National Principals Month''; (2) honors the contributions of principals in elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools in the United States; and (3) supports the goals and ideals of National Principals Month.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z