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.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-local-advocates-announce-expansion-of_charitable-deductions-of-food-donations,"Leahy, Local Advocates Announce Expansion of Charitable Deductions of Food Donations",2015-12-30,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.30.15 Leahy, Local Advocates Announce Expansion of Charitable Deductions of Food Donations BURLINGTON, Vt. (WEDNESDAY, Dec. 30, 2015) Joined by local advocates to end hunger and food insecurity, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Wednesday announced at the Chittenden Emergency Food Shelf in Burlington that a provision incentivizing donations of surplus food to local food pantries was recently signed into law, helping efforts to cut back on food waste and supporting communities help those in need across the country. During this congress, Leahy successfully led a bipartisan effort to expand and make permanent tax deductions for businesses and farms for donated food to community food shelves this year. As much as 40 percent of food that is produced, grown and transported in the United States will never be used because some businesses find it too costly to donate. This amounts to an estimated 70 billion pounds of wasted food each year. Leahy said: The burden of hunger threatens the livelihood and wellbeing of communities across Vermont. Hunger leads to malnourishment, obesity, diabetes and academic and social difficulty among children, and we all know a hungry child cannot learn.Vermont is a leader in the fight against hunger, and I was proud support this common sense provision to cut down on food waste and redirect resources to those in need. The Chittenden Emergency Food Shelf serves over 12,000 Vermonters each year, and continues to see an increase in visitors seeking food assistance. Rob Meehan, Executive Director of the Chittenden Emergency Food Shelf said, Many of the people we serve face difficult choices including skipping meals so their children will have enough to eat, choosing between food and medicine, food and housing, food and healthcare simply because they do not have enough money. We need more help from our federal government to feed vulnerable Vermonters and this is a valuable step in that direction. The provision, the House companion of Leahy's Senate legislation the Good Samaritan Hunger Relief Tax Incentive Extension Act, was included within a broader tax extension package passed in the year-end spending bill. This provision builds on a proven tax incentive to encourage businesses and farms to donate surplus food to their local food banks. It also permanently extends the same tax incentives to donate food, now available to corporations, to small businesses, farmers, ranchers and restaurant owners many of whom have large amounts of fresh food to donate. According to the Vermont Foodbank, 153,000 Vermonters rely on meals provided through food shelters, meal sites, senior centers and after-school programs each year. Vermont Foodbank CEO John Sayles said, Many of our neighbors are working hard and still can't make ends meet. Federal assistance is the first line of defense against hunger, but it has been decreasing in the past several years. We appreciate Senator Leahy getting a win for hunger relief this year, and we'll work hard to leverage that win for hungry Vermonters and continue to push for more federal, state and private support to end hunger. Community members were also in attendance to lend support for this enhanced opportunity for public-private partnership. Former Co-Chair of the Chittenden County Hunger Council and City Market Director of Community Engagement Allison Weinhagen said, Vermont's food co-ops, farms and food retailers all value the partnership with our local food banks and pantries. This extension further supports the impactful work that is being done throughout the state. The statistics on food insecure families in our community have not significantly decreased over the past several years and leadership like Senator Leahy's at the federal level is an important step in making a positive difference in the lives of our neighbors. As the most senior member and former chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, Senator Leahy has helped to lead the fight in Congress against hunger and is a longtime supporter of federal nutrition programs. This year he successfully advocated for an increase in federal funding for The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), a federal program which provides states with commodity food products to fill food shelves. Earlier this year, he also introduced the Farm to School Act of 2015 to bolster nutrition education in schools, while increasing economic benefits for our local farmers. Also in attendance were Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Secretary Deb Markowitz, Hunger Free Vermont, the Vermont Farm Bureau and members of the Chittenden County Hunger Council. # # # # # Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-sharper-focus-on-americas-middle-class-needed-in-the-new-year,Leahy: Sharper Focus On Americas Middle Class Needed In The New Year,2015-12-18,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.18.15 Leahy: Sharper Focus On America's Middle Class Needed In The New Year . . . Congress Clears Budget Bill, Ending The Sequester Straightjacket And Lifting Caps To Fund Key Priorities [Late Friday morning, the U.S. Senate approved legislation to fund the federal government through fiscal year 2016 and extend tax credits for millions of low- and middle-income class families. The final budget bill, which Leahy voted for and is expected to be signed by the President TODAY, includes a wide variety of funding investments that reflect Senator Patrick Leahy's priorities for Vermont. Leahy holds the most seniority on the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, which handled the Senate's work in writing the bill.] Hardworking Americans deserve more than living paycheck to paycheck, worrying about having to choose between paying an electric bill or putting healthy food on the table. This appropriations law ends a year of continuing budget uncertainty and extends tax credits for millions of hardworking families. We have kept out harmful riders that would have undermined everything from Wall Street reform to clean air and water laws. There are many steps forward in this bill for Vermonters and all Americans, but we need stronger steps. We need to carry this into the new year and strengthen it, to help lift the middle class and to protect the most vulnerable among us. We need much more progress in creating well-paying jobs in rural areas like Vermont, not just in the nation's urban centers. We need to do more to protect Social Security and Medicare and other programs in the safety net. We need to do more to make college affordable for students and families. This bill will let Congress begin the new year with focusing on America's middle class, taking stronger steps to help working families. By standing together, Senate Democrats have made it possible to cancel the harmful sequester and to lift caps to make investments possible that will make a difference in communities across Vermont from cleanup efforts on Lake Champlain, to ramping up our fight against opioid addiction, to equipping our police officers with lifesaving bulletproof vests. # # # # # At-A-Glance Summary Of Several Key Vermont-Related Provisions In The Final Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Bill (Cleared By Congress On Friday, Dec. 18, 2015) Lake Champlain The Omnibus Appropriations Bill includes funding to continue efforts to address the water quality and phosphorous levels in Lake Champlain, a longstanding Vermont priority for Senator Leahy. It includes $4.4 million in funds for the EPA's Lake Champlain Geographic Program, which will be crucial as Vermont and the EPA take on ambitious new work to improve water quality in the region. The highly successful sea lamprey control program was also funded at Leahy's request, and the $3.45 million provided will also support other ecosystem restoration work. Anti-Heroin Task Force Senator Leahy was instrumental in establishing this program to combat the growing scourge of opioid addiction in communities across Vermont and the nation, holding several Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, including one in Rutland. The Vermont Drug Task Force received $1 million from the first round of grants for this program in September 2015, resulting in the addition of five troopers to focus on heroin trafficking. The program will receive $7 million in funding in FY16. Substance Abuse Treatment The final spending bill includes $25 million an increase of $13 million over FY15 levels -- for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration's grant program, to expand opioid and heroin abuse treatment programs. This fall, Vermont's Department of Health received $1 million from the first round of federal funding from this program. Crime Victims Fund The Crime Victims Fund will receive its highest level of funding for services since its creation in 1984, increasing the funding available to victims by roughly $300 million, bringing the total to $2.6 billion. These funds provide direct aid to crime victims, helping with emergency shelter, transportation and legal assistance, as well as compensation for expenses such as hospital bills, burial costs and other restitution. The fund is financed by criminal fines and penalties, not taxpayer dollars. Leahy, a former prosecutor, has long been an effective champion for victims and for the help offered through the Crime Victims Fund. Bulletproof Vests The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant program, a program originally authored by Leahy in 1997, is funded at $22.5 million. In Vermont more than $980,000 in grant money has helped in buying 4392 vests for local and state law enforcement officers since the program began. College Affordability The final spending bill includes additional resources to help students and families afford the cost of college. The bill includes $900 million for TRIO -- $60 million more than last year -- which helps low-income and first-generation college students prepare for and succeed in college. The bill also includes strong funding for Pell Grants, and the maximum award under the program is expected to rise to $5915. Research Funding The bill increases funding for the work of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) by more than $2 billion, which is the largest increase for NIH since 2003. These funds will enhance funding for Alzheimer's Disease research and for precision medicine, among others initiatives. The NIH supports vital breakthrough research at institutions in Vermont and across the country. Head Start and Early Childhood Education The bill offers a total of $9.2 billion for Head Start, increasing funding by $570 million from last year. This level will restore funding for more than 900,000 children nationwide and increase Early Head Start programming for children from birth to age three. The bill also includes $250 million for Preschool Development Grants, which will support high-quality early education for more than 100,000 at-risk children across the country. Northern Border Regional Commission The Northern Border Regional Commission, a program that provides development funding for economically distressed Northern Border counties in Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine and New York, received a $2.5 million increase, growing the program by 80 percent in three years to $7.5 million in funding. The program awarded $1.2 million in funding to support projects in Vermont in 2015 and was created through Leahy's efforts in the 2008 Farm Bill. Land And Water Conservation Fund For the past two years, Leahy has led the charge for the full reauthorization and funding of the nation's most successful conservation program. Allowed to expire in September for the first time in its 50-year, bipartisan history, this bill rescues the program and includes a three-year reauthorization of the Fund. In Vermont more than $123 million in LWCF grants have supported hundreds of local parks and conservation projects over the last five decades. Forest Legacy Projects Forest Legacy projects are funded at $55.9 million. In Vermont more than 80,000 acres are permanently conserved through more than $22.9 million in Forest Legacy funds used in Vermont over the 25 years of this program, which Leahy authored and enacted in an earlier Farm Bill, modeling the program on Vermont's needs and experience. This year's funding includes a significant conservation project in central Vermont. Affordable Housing Senator Leahy led efforts to restore funding for the HOME program (which had been cut by 90 percent in the earlier Senate committee mark) to $950 million in the final bill -- a $50 million increase over last year's levels. The HOME program is the only federal block grant program to state and local governments designed exclusively to produce affordable housing for low-income families. The omnibus bill includes continued funding for the Community Development Block Grant program, and for Public Housing programs. Rural Development The U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development programs will receive an increase of $300 million, including more resources for Community Facilities and Water and Waste Disposal grants assisting rural communities. The DARK Act The omnibus rejected efforts by the food industry to block Vermont's Act 120, set to go into effect in July, ensuring that states can continue efforts to support consumers' right to know what is in their food. School Nutrition The omnibus provides $30 million for school equipment grants to help schools update outdated equipment to improve school nutrition and food safety. Tax Credit Extensions The bill makes permanent several important tax provisions used by thousands of Vermonters, including the Child Tax Credit, the American Opportunity Tax Credit, the Earned Income Tax Credit, conservation easement, charitable food donations by businesses and farmers, charitable IRA rollover, and permanently extends the research and development credit and section 179 business development tax credit for small businesses. The New Markets Tax Credit, Low Income Housing Tax Credit, and the Work Opportunity Tax Credit were extended through 2019. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/a-look-back-at-the-first-year-of-the-us-cuba-relationship-december-17-2014_-present,"A Look Back at the First Year of the U.S.-Cuba Relationship December 17, 2014 - Present",2015-12-17,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.17.15 A Look Back at the First Year of the U.S.-Cuba Relationship December 17, 2014 - Present Key Actions and Accomplishments December 17, 2014: President Obama moves to normalize relations with Cuba. Decision follows 18 months of secret negotiations between U.S. and Cuba and the release of American aid contractor Alan Gross. Announcement of plans over the coming months to ease travel and financial restrictions on Cuba. Paves the way for U.S.-Cuba to restore diplomatic ties, reopen embassies, and potentially lift the embargo. January 16, 2015: Departments of Commerce and Treasury announce regulatory changes to Cuba sanctions. The amendments implement the changes President Obama announced on December 17, 2014. March 31, 2015: U.S. and Cuba hold first formal talks on human rights. April 8, 2015: A public opinion poll of Cubans on the island is released; shows that an overwhelming majority of Cubans support an end to the embargo. Nearly all Cubans (97 percent of those polled) believe normalization of the relationship between Cuba and the United States is good for Cuba. April 11, 2015: Presidents Obama and Castro meet at the Summit of the Americas in Panama. Marks the first time the two nations' top leaders have sat down for substantive talks in more than 50 years. Both presidents agree it is time to end the embargo. The inclusion of Cuba in the Summit of the Americas comes after Latin American countries pressured the United States to allow Cuba to participate. April 20, 2015: Governor Andrew Cuomo leads delegation to Cuba. Governor Andrew Cuomo leads a delegation of New York business owners and politicians to Havana. His visit marks the first time a U.S. governor has travelled to the island since the U.S. and Cuba normalized relations. The trip includes officials from JetBlue Airways, the Plattsburgh International Airport, Pfizer, MasterCard, and the founder of Chobani. The trip leads to an agreement between Cuba's Center for Molecular Immunology and Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York to import a lung cancer vaccine and begin clinical trials in the United States. May 4, 2015: New Cuba PAC launches. New Cuba PAC pledges to donate to political candidates who support favorable policy toward ending the Cuban embargo. May 29, 2015: United States removes Cuba from state terror sponsors list. President Obama informs Congress of his decision in mid-April; Congress has a 45-day review period. Some congressional Republicans oppose the move; however, they do not make any effort to block the decision. Cuba had been on the list since 1982. Being listed subjects a country to U.S. restrictions on such things as foreign aid and defense sales. June 18, 2015: Cuba expands Wi-Fi access across the island. 35 Wi-Fi hotspots are created. Previously, Wi-Fi was only available at tourist hotels at hourly prices that would amount to nearly a quarter of the average monthly salary for Cubans. July 2015: United States restores diplomatic ties with Cuba. On July 1, President Obama announces that the U.S. and Cuba would reopen their embassies nearly 55 years since they first closed. On July 20, diplomatic relations are officially re-established; Cuban embassy holds flag-raising ceremony in Washington. Engage Cuba hosts private dinner between Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodrguez-Parrilla and American business leaders. On July 22, Engage Cuba hosts a briefing at the White House for the Cuban-American community about U.S.-Cuba relations. July 23, 2015: Senate Appropriations Committee approves three amendments favorable to lifting sanctions on Cuba. The amendments would end restrictions on travel to Cuba, allow private financing for agricultural sales to Cuba, and lift restrictions on ships docking at Cuban ports. August 14, 2015: Secretary of State John Kerry presides over the flag-raising ceremony at American embassy in Havana. Sec. Kerry's visit marks the first time in 70 years that a U.S. Secretary of State has visited Cuba. August 2015 October 2015: American airline companies announce new flights to Cuba American Airlines and Cuba Travel Services announce a new charter service providing nonstop service from Los Angeles to Havana. American Airlines also begins offering a once-weekly flight from Miami to Havana in partnership with Cuban travel services. JetBlue announces the addition of a second charter flight from JFK to Havana Delta establishes charter flights from Atlanta to Havana, set to start April 2, 2016. September 8, 2015: Leading Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump comes out in support of diplomatic reengagement with Cuba. Trump's stance means that for the first time in over a half-century, the leading presidential candidates from both parties support normalization; Hillary Clinton had stated her support a year prior. September 18, 2015: Obama administration further eases travel and business restrictions against Cuba. The announcement expands telecommunication opportunities in Cuba and allows certain American businesses to establish offices and bank accounts on the island. Cuban businesses and residents are now able to set up offices and bank accounts in the United States. However, significant barriers to open trade and travel still exist with Congress' refusal to lift the embargo. September 19, 2015: Pope Francis arrives in Cuba. The Pope visits Cuba before coming to the United States. During his visit, he lauds the normalization process between the two countries. September 2015 November 2015: Telecommunications contracts begin to be signed on the island. Verizon begins to offer voice and data roaming in Cuba through a third party. Sprint signs an interconnection agreement with Cuba's state telecoms monopoly Etecsa. September 28, 2015: Governor Asa Hutchinson leads Arkansas delegation to Cuba. Governor Asa Hutchinson asks Congress to lift restrictions that prevent U.S. food companies from selling to Cuba on credit. The measure, led by Senator John Boozman (R-AR), was approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee in July but has yet to receive a floor vote in the Senate and House. In 2000, the U.S. authorized cash-only agricultural exports to Cuba, which brought $30 million in sales to Arkansas annually. Since Cuba prefers to buy on credit, sales have fallen. September 29, 2015: Presidents Obama and Castro meet on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly. For the first time in more than 60 years, a U.S. president meets with a Cuban president on U.S. soil. October 6, 2015: Secretary of Commerce Pritzker makes official trip to Cuba. Sec. Penny Pritzker becomes the second U.S. cabinet official to visit the island since Fidel Castro's 1959 revolution. Sec. Pritzker meets with the country's ministers of foreign affairs and foreign investment. Sec. Pritzker tours Mariel, the site of a $1 billion investment to create a major shipping hub in Cuba. October 14, 2015: Nine state governors sign onto bipartisan letter supporting end to Cuban embargo. The governors of Alabama, California, Idaho, Minnesota, Montana, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia and Washington write letter to Congressional leadership highlighting the harm that the embargo has done to American agriculture exports. October 25, 2015: North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring leads North Dakota agriculture delegation to Cuba. North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring leads a delegation of representatives from commodity, agricultural, and commerce organizations to the island. Full list of participants: North Dakota Department of Agriculture; Bank of North Dakota; Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.; Great Northern Ag; Northarvest Bean Growers Association; North Dakota Grain Growers Association; North Dakota Mill & Elevator; North Dakota Trade Office; North Dakota Wheat Commission; and Red River Farm Network. November 2, 2015: Cuba hosts annual international trade fair. It is estimated that 50 U.S. companies attend the fair, more than ever before. Cuba signs first-ever roaming agreement with U.S. telecom company Sprint Corp. November 17, 2015: Engage Cuba partners with the Atlantic Council to release a poll from America's Heartland voters profiling their opinions on Cuba. The poll's findings show bipartisan support in Heartland states Iowa, Ohio, Indiana, and Tennessee for restoring diplomatic relations with Cuba, lifting the travel ban and ending the embargo. November 18, 2015: U.S. and Cuba sign historic environmental pact. The agreement marks the first accord between the two countries since the announcement that they would be normalizing diplomatic relations. The accord will protect nearby fish and marine life living off the coasts of both countries and allow U.S. and Cuban scientists to collaborate on research. Cuba's marine ecosystem is considered one of the best preserved and most diverse in the world. November 19, 2015: Debit cards become available for use in Cuba. MasterCard and Stonegate Bank (based in Ft. Lauderdale) announce that their cards are now active for use in hotels, restaurants and other stores in Cuba. They become the first financial institutions to take advantage of new business openings with Cuba. Americans travelling to Cuba will be able to use these cards at 10,000 merchants that accept the cards. ATM transactions will be available in 2016. November 29, 2015: Governor Greg Abbott leads Texas delegation to Cuba. Governor Greg Abbott leads a delegation of Texas agriculture and port officials and local businesses to Cuba. While in Cuba, the delegation meets with the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Investment, the Port of Mariel, the Chamber of Commerce and two Cuban entities, Alimport and Cimex. Texas-Cuba trade relations have decreased over the years due to restrictions and regulations. If full trade were allowed, Texas could see an economic impact of $43 billion. December 7, 2015: Engage Cuba launches Tennessee State Council. The 16-person council includes representatives from a range of industries, including agriculture, academia, manufacturing, business, and the arts. December 8, 2015: U.S. and Cuba hold the first round of discussions on mutual property claims. The two governments begin negotiations over U.S. individuals' and companies' properties that were seized after the 1959 revolution; Cuba also presents counterclaims of economic damages stemming from the embargo. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-the-need-to-combat-straw-purchasing-and-illegal-gun-trafficking,"Comment of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Need To Combat Straw Purchasing & Illegal Gun Trafficking",2015-12-17,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.17.15 Comment of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Need To Combat Straw Purchasing & Illegal Gun Trafficking We must do everything we can to ensure that deadly weapons like the rifles used in the San Bernardino shootings do not fall into the hands of terrorists, violent criminals, and drug traffickers. Law enforcement officials have complained for years that they lack effective tools necessary to investigate and deter straw purchasers and gun traffickers. Today's arrest of the individual who provided the rifles for the San Bernardino shooters is a reminder that we need to strengthen our laws to give law enforcement agents and prosecutors the tools they need to fight terrorism and violent crime. I will soon reintroduce the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act, which had broad bipartisan support last Congress. My legislation will make it a Federal crime to serve as a straw purchaser' of firearms, and establish tough penalties for those who skirt existing laws and traffic firearms to terrorists and criminals. In light of reports that the rifles used in the San Bernardino shootings may have been acquired through a straw purchaser, it is all the more important for Congress to take action to fix this problem. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-expansion-of-charitable-deductions-of-food_included-in-legislation-poised-to-clear-congress-by-end-of-this-week,Leahy: Expansion Of Charitable Deductions Of Food Included In Legislation Poised To Clear Congress By End Of This Week,2015-12-17,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.17.15 Leahy: Expansion Of Charitable Deductions Of Food Included In Legislation Poised To Clear Congress By End Of This Week WASHINGTON (THURSDAY, Dec. 17, 2015) U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) praises the inclusion of a provision aimed at fighting hunger by incentivizing donations of surplus food to local food shelves in a legislative package set to pass the U.S. Senate this week. Leahy has long been the leading advocate for the bipartisan Good Samaritan Hunger Relief Tax Incentive Extension Act, dating back to his time working with former Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.). The soon-to-be enacted provision, which was the House companion of Leahy's Senate legislation, expands and makes permanent incentives for farmers and businesses to donate excess food to nonprofit organizations like local food banks and pantries. As much as 40 percent of food that is produced, grown and transported in the United States will never be used because some businesses find it too costly to donate the excess food. This amounts to 70 billion pounds of wasted food each year. Leahy said: In Vermont, far too many families struggle to make ends meet, and a major factor continues to be the rising cost of nutritious food. Our food pantries play a crucial role in bridging the gap for families, and this commonsense step helps empower communities to help meet the need for healthy, affordable food. No one in our country should go hungry, especially as we send billions of pounds of food to landfills. This is a responsible solution that helps farmers, businesses and those in need. The CEO of the Vermont Foodbank, John Sayles, said, ""The Vermont Foodbank is thrilled with Senator Leahy's leadership to secure a permanent enhanced tax deduction for food donations. Everything we can do to support our food donors puts food on Vermont tables, keeping our kids ready for school, parents ready for work and our seniors free from worry."" The tax deduction expands upon a proven and effective tax incentive to encourage businesses and farms to donate surplus food to their local food banks. It would also permanently extend the same tax incentives to donate food, now available to corporations, to small businesses, farmers, ranchers and restaurant owners many of whom have large amounts of fresh food to donate. More than 50 million Americans live in food insecure households, according to a 2011 study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The measure is part of a broader tax credit extension package that will be considered as part of the year-end spending bill, which the Senate will consider before the end of this year's congressional session. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-ju2diciary-committee-on-judicial-nominations,"Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations",2015-12-17,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.17.15 Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations As we close the book on the first session of the 114th Congress, our attention is on the thousands of pages in the omnibus spending bill. But as the Republican leadership rushes to spin the press about what the Senate has accomplished in their twelve months in the majority, there is one Senate responsibility that should not get lost in the noise. That is our responsibility to equip our coequal branches of government, the Federal judiciary and the Executive branch, with the confirmed public servants that both branches need to serve the American people. Senate Republicans began the year by filibustering the nomination of the first black woman to be nominated for the position of Attorney General of the United States. No other Attorney General nominee in our history has been met with a filibuster. That did not stop Republicans from holding up Loretta Lynch's nomination longer than the last seven Attorneys General combined. Our nation's top law enforcement official deserved better treatment, but the fight to get her a confirmation vote previewed how difficult it would be to get votes scheduled on other crucial nominees. Republicans have blocked confirmation votes for the people nominated to serve as ambassadors to some of our closest allies. They have blocked consideration of nominees who would help keep our country safe from terrorist threats, including a Treasury Department nominee who would lead an office that investigates terrorist financing. By the end of this week, Senate Republicans will have also earned the dubious distinction of matching the record for confirming the fewest annual number of judicial nominees in more than half a century. Too many Americans who have sought justice in our Federal courts this year have instead found delays and empty courtrooms because of Senate Republicans' obstruction on judicial nominees. I am concerned that Republicans' treatment of our Third Branch risks politicizing it and diminishing the role that it was designed to play in our system of government. For the first six years of President Obama's tenure in office, Senate Republicans pulled out every stop to obstruct confirmations on judicial nominees systematically filibustering nominees and abandoning the Senate's tradition of confirming consensus judicial nominees before long recesses. While I was hopeful they would change course once they assumed the majority, they have instead taken their obstruction to unprecedented heights by virtually shutting down judicial confirmations. Over the course of the entire year, Senate Republicans have allowed judicial confirmation votes for only 11 nominees. In stark contrast, when Senate Democrats were in the majority during the seventh year of the Bush presidency, we confirmed 40 judges that year more than triple the number of judges confirmed this year. The Senate has a constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on the President's nominees. It is part of the core duties we must fulfill as Senators, and a fully-functioning Federal judiciary is dependent on us meeting this obligation. I have urged the Republican leaders to allow confirmation votes on the uncontroversial judicial nominees before the end of the year. We have 19 judicial nominees still pending on the floor. Each of these nominees was voice voted out of the Judiciary Committee and each has the support of their home state Senators. Traditionally, the Senate has confirmed such consensus nominees at the end of a session, but Republicans have repeatedly refused to do so during the Obama presidency. This is the seventh year in a row that Senate Republicans are rejecting the Senate's practice of consenting to confirmation votes at the end of a session. At the end of 2009, Senate Republicans left 10 judicial nominees on the Senate floor without a vote. At the end of 2010 and again in 2011, Senate Republicans left 19 judicial nominees pending on the calendar as they left town. In 2012 it was 11 judicial nominees, and in 2013 it was 9 that Senate Republicans left pending on the floor. Last year, Senate Republicans attempted to block 12 nominees on the floor in December. Fortunately, because Leader Reid took seriously the Senate's duty to fill judicial vacancies and filed cloture on those nominees, we were able to get those nominees confirmed. In each of the last two years of the George W. Bush administration when Democrats were in the Senate majority, we confirmed all of President Bush's judicial nominees pending on the Executive Calendar in December before we left for the year. Contrast that with this year when Senate Republicans are leaving 19 judicial nominees pending on the floor as they head home. The Republicans' double standard for President Obama's nominees will force the Senate to spend time next year doing work that should have been completed by now. For example, for the 19 nominations Senate Republicans left in 2010 and again in 2011, it took nearly half the following year in each case for the Senate to confirm these nominees. Perhaps Senate Republicans' real intent is to just run out the clock on the Obama administration but these delays are not procedural abstractions without real world consequences. For the judicial nominees who have already made a commitment to public service in the Federal judiciary, the obstruction means they must continue to wait and keep their professional lives on hold wondering if the Senate will do its job. The consequences for the judges currently serving in the Federal judiciary, as well as the litigants seeking justice before them, are also very real. Senate Republicans' treatment of judicial nominations has resulted in a dramatic increase in judicial vacancies this year. Since Republicans took over the majority in January, judicial vacancies have increased by more than 50 percent from 42 to 66. These vacancies impact communities across America, and it is doing the most harm to states with at least one Republican Senator. Of the 66 current vacancies that exist, 47 of them or more than 70 percent are in states with at least one Republican Senator. Of critical concern is the fact that judicial vacancies deemed to be emergency vacancies by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts have more than doubled this year. These vacancies represent judicial districts where caseloads are unmanageably high, leading to lengthier delays for parties before those courts. And yet, as we leave for the year, 9 of the 19 nominees pending on the floor that Senate Republicans refuse to confirm are judicial emergency vacancies in Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Minnesota, New Jersey, Iowa, New York, and California. In addition to the Article III nominees, there are five nominees to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims who were nominated well over a year ago. Each of these nominees was unanimously voice voted out of Committee last year and again this year. The Court of Federal Claims has been referred to as the keeper of the nation's conscience and the People's Court because it allows citizens with claims against the government to promptly seek justice. It is critically important that we confirm the five pending nominees to this court. However, they continue to be blocked by a single Republican Senator the junior Senator of Arkansas. Senator Cotton claims to have concerns that the court's caseload is not high enough and that the court should simply depend on senior judges coming out of retirement to hear cases. A recent letter to the Committee from the Chief Judge of the Court of Federal Claims, however, indicates that only one of the nine senior judges is willing to be recalled for full-time duty, and the other three would only agree to be recalled on a limited basis. Furthermore, the court's overall caseload has increased by nine percent over the last year. No member of the Judiciary Committee raised caseload concerns when these nominees were unanimously approved by voice vote last year or again this year. There is no good reason for Senator Cotton to deprive Americans across the country of a fully-functioning Court of Federal Claims by blocking the five highly-qualified nominees from receiving an up-or-down vote. These nominees include Armando Bonilla, a Cuban American who has devoted his entire career to public service at the U.S. Department of Justice; Jeri Somers, an African American woman who spent over two decades serving as a Judge Advocate General and as a Military Judge, and several others who would contribute to our justice system. As these nominees approach the two year mark of waiting for the Senate to take up their confirmations, I urge Senator Cotton to consider these well-qualified nominees on their merits. I have heard some suggest that Republicans' glacial pace on judicial confirmations is political retribution for the change to Senate rules regarding nominations. This obstruction, however, does not hurt U.S. Senators it hurts the American people. Behind the statistics on Republican obstruction the number of nominees languishing without votes on the Senate floor, the rising number of judicial vacancies, and the dramatic increase in emergency vacancies are the experiences of real people in our justice system. Individuals and small businesses seeking justice in our Federal courts who end up waiting for years for overburdened courts to hear their claims. The national press, including the Wall Street Journal and the Associated Press, has highlighted the devastating effects of the high number of judicial vacancies. The Wall Street Journal interviewed one of the Federal judges in a California district where a judgeship went unfilled for almost three years. Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill said, Over the years I've received several letters from people indicating, Even if I win this case now, my business has failed because of the delay. How is this justice?' And the simple answer, which I cannot give them, is this: It is not justice. We know it. Senate Republicans' obstruction on judicial nominees has also had another effect; it has halted the enormous progress needed in making the Federal judiciary better reflect the citizenry it serves. This progress increases public confidence in our justice system. I am proud of the fact that there are more women and minorities than ever before serving on our Federal bench. Yet as we conclude this session, the Senate is leaving several nominees of color with outstanding qualifications on the floor without votes. This includes Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo, who was nominated to a judicial emergency vacancy in the Third Circuit well over a year ago. When he is eventually confirmed, he will be the first Hispanic judge from Pennsylvania on the Third Circuit. Judge Restrepo has the strong support of the Hispanic National Bar Association, and has bipartisan support from his home state Senators, Senator Toomey and Senator Casey. Senator Toomey has said not only that he strongly supports Judge Restrepo's confirmation, but that he also recommended him to the President. Despite this overwhelming support for his nomination and the emergency vacancy that needs to be filled urgently, Republican Leadership recently skipped over Judge Restrepo on the Executive Calendar to confirm a district court nominee from Tennessee for a non-emergency judgeship. In addition to Judge Restrepo, Senate Republicans are adjourning for the year with four exceptional African American district court nominees and an exceptional Hispanic district court nominee held up on the floor. Two of the African American nominees Waverly Crenshaw and Edward Stanton have been nominated to district court positions in Tennessee. Both have the support of their home state Republican Senators and were unanimously approved by the Judiciary Committee by voice vote. The three other nominees of color Justice Wilhelmina Wright to the District of Minnesota, and John Vazquez and Julien Neals to the District of New Jersey are all nominated to judicial emergency vacancies. All have the support of their home state Senators and all were voted out of the Judiciary Committee by voice vote. The only reason all of these nominees could not be confirmed this week is that Senate Republicans would not allow it. While there is no reason not to hold votes on these nominees today, I am glad that Republicans have consented to a bipartisan plan to confirm five well-qualified judicial nominees in the five-week period after we return in the New Year. Because of this agreement, the Senate will be on pace in the first two months of next year to confirm almost half the number of nominees it took us this entire year to confirm. Under the agreement, the Senate will hold confirmation votes for Judge Restrepo as well as four district court nominees: Justice Wilhelmina Wright to the District of Minnesota; John Vazquez to the District of New Jersey; Judge Rebecca Ebinger to the Southern District of Iowa; and Judge Leonard Strand to the Northern District of Iowa. Four of these nominees are nominated to fill emergency vacancies, and three are nominees of color. This agreement allows for good progress that the Senate must continue to build on, so that we reduce judicial vacancies to ensure that Americans can seek timely justice in our courts. Federal judges serve an essential role in communities across the Nation. In two weeks, the Chief Justice of the United States will issue his end of year report. His predecessor often noted in such reports the impact of unfilled judicial vacancies on the functioning of the Third Branch. I hope that such a core resource matter will again be addressed in the upcoming report because the Republican Majority's treatment of nominations this past year has been an historic disappointment. I hope that in the New Year the Senate will make progress on the judicial nominees pending in the Judiciary Committee as well as on additional nominees that we receive from the President. I was glad to hear the Majority Leader's remarks this week that he does not believe there should be a cut off point for confirming qualified judicial nominees in an election year. The Majority Leader has been consistent on this view, and I commend him for it. In July 2008, the Senate Republican caucus held a hearing solely dedicated to arguing that the Thurmond Rule does not exist. At that hearing, the senior Senator from Kentucky stated: I think it's clear that there is no Thurmond Rule. And I think the facts demonstrate that. Similarly, the Senator from Iowa, my friend who is now serving as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, stated at that hearing that the Thurmond Rule was in his view plain bunk. He said: The reality is that the Senate has never stopped confirming judicial nominees during the last few months of a president's term. That was certainly the case when Democrats were in the majority in the last two years of the George W. Bush administration. I served as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee then, and I can tell you that Senate Democrats confirmed 22 of President Bush's judicial nominees in the second half of 2008. The American people deserve to have judicial vacancies in their communities filled. Hardworking Americans across this country are counting on us to do our jobs as Senators. Our constituents call our offices and meet with us to let us know how they feel about the legislative issues before us. They should not also have to ask us to fulfill the bare minimum of our constitutional duties, such as the duty to consider nominees in a timely manner to keep the Third Branch of government fully functioning. I sincerely hope the New Year will bring a new approach from Senate Republicans and that we can move forward to confirm all of the pending judicial nominees without further delay. # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-the-one-year-anniversary-of-the-release-of-alan-gross,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On The One Year Anniversary of the Release of Alan Gross,2015-12-17,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.17.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On The One Year Anniversary of the Release of Alan Gross Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today marks the one-year anniversary of the release of Alan Gross from a Cuban prison where he spent five years. During that time he lost more than 100 pounds, lost five teeth, his mother died, his mother-in-law died, a brother-in-law died, and he missed his daughter's wedding. I worked for three years to help obtain Alan Gross' release and the return of the remaining members of the so-called Cuban Five who had served more than 15 years in U.S. prisons. Scott Gilbert, Alan Gross' lawyer, did an outstanding job, traveling countless times to Cuba and skillfully advocating on Alan's behalf with Cuban and U.S. officials. My larger purpose, like that of my good friend from Arizona, Senator Flake, who has been a real partner in this, was to finally put the Cold War behind us and to start looking forward to a new era. Like Senator Flake and many others, I was convinced that such a step would be widely embraced by the U.S. business community, by religious groups, by academia, by the scientific community, the media, and Americans across the political spectrum. I also knew that it would be welcomed around the world, including in countries whose people believe in democracy and human rights as strongly as we do. Alan Gross' release ushered in a new day in U.S.-Cuba relations, poignantly demonstrated on August 14th by the raising of our flag at the U.S. Embassy in Havana. It was a deeply moving experience to be there on that swelteringly hot day, to hear both national anthems played, and especially to hear the cheers of the Cubans who were inside and outside of the Embassy grounds. After 54 years of a failed, punitive policy that had achieved none of its objectives, President Obama and President Raul Castro wisely decided it was time to chart a new path. The reaction of the people of the United States and Cuba has been overwhelmingly positive. Even some of Cuba's most vocal critics of the Castro Government have welcomed the new opening. Alan Gross, who had every reason to be a bitter defender of sanctions, has instead strongly supported the new policy of engagement. He has never expressed anything but warmth and admiration for the Cuban people. Contrast that with the small handful of Members of Congress who continue to defend a discredited policy of isolation that has been repudiated by large majorities of their own constituents, denounced by every other government in this hemisphere, and that even they acknowledge has not succeeded. Yet their answer is to keep it in place, even opposing efforts by the State Department to improve security and staffing at the U.S. Embassy in Havana to which the Cuban Government has agreed. I am not so nave to think that reestablishing diplomatic relations with Cuba would result in the rapid transformation of Cuba into a democracy. Cuba's leaders are steadfast believers in a repressive political system that has enabled them to hold onto power unchallenged for more than half a century. Their economic policies have been a disaster, resulting in daily hardships for the Cuban people. While the Cuban Government blames its economic problems on the U.S. embargo, no one seriously believes that, although it is undeniable that the embargo has exacerbated those hardships. It is also undeniable that support for the embargo in the United States, from the business community to the human rights community, has evaporated. I wonder how many Members of Congress know that in the past five years the Government of Cuba, while blaming us for the embargo, has imported more than $1 billion in U.S. agricultural and medical products. American exports mean American jobs. The embargo punishes American workers. Why are we also punishing half a million Cuban entrepreneurs who already work in the private sector and are no longer dependent on the government? Why not support the private sector in Cuba as we do everywhere else in the world? Why not open the United States to an emerging Cuban market? It is past time to replace vindictiveness and personal or family grievances with what is best for the American people. I condemn the Cuban Government's arrests and imprisonment after trials that are devoid of due process of individuals who have done nothing more than peacefully protest against the government's repressive policies. At least two of them are among the 53 who were released as part of the agreement a year ago. Eleven others who were released at an earlier time are still being denied their right to travel freely. But Cuba's leaders cannot stop the tide of history any more than any of us can. The majority of Cubans were not even born at the time of the 1959 revolution, and they have very different priorities and aspirations from those who overthrew Batista's corrupt, abusive regime. Cuba is already changing in ways that will mean more freedom, more engagement with the world, and more economic opportunities. During the past twelve months, the Obama Administration has taken historic steps to implement the new policy. After so many decades when U.S. Cuban relations were frozen in time, the progress has been breathtaking. Talks are underway between both governments on a wide range of issues, from resuming direct mail and air service, to law enforcement cooperation and property claims. Senator Flake and I have introduced legislation, cosponsored by 45 other Democrats and Republicans, to end restrictions on travel by Americans to Cuba restrictions that do not exist for travel to any other country, including Iran and North Korea. If our bill were voted on I am confident it would pass easily. This year, the Senate Appropriations Committee passed, with bipartisan majorities, a similar travel amendment by Senator Moran and myself and two other amendments to facilitate U.S. agricultural exports and shipping to and from Cuba. In contrast, the House of Representatives adopted half a dozen provisions offered by a single Member that would turn back the clock. I have no doubt that the path begun by President Obama and President Raul Castro is the right one for the people of both countries and that the dwindling few who continue to try to stand in its way will fail. History is not on their side, and rather than continue to cling to a policy that was misguided from its inception and did nothing to help the Cuban people, they should respect the will of their constituents and the Cubans on whose behalf they erroneously claim to speak. Mr. President, only twelve months have passed since Alan Gross came home, but more has been accomplished in those twelve months for the betterment of the people of Cuba and the United States, and for our reputation and influence in this hemisphere, than in the past half century. I ask unanimous consent that a chronology of those accomplishments prepared by the coalition Engage Cuba be printed in the Record at the end of my remarks. I hope that before another year passes the Congress will have finally recognized that it, too, has a responsibility to respect the will of the people, to end the embargo, to stop interfering with the right of Americans to travel, and that exposing the Cuban people to our ideas, our principles, and our products is the best policy for the future. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-senate-republicans-must-prioritize_judicial-nominees-in-new-year-,Leahy: Senate Republicans Must Prioritize Judicial Nominees In New Year,2015-12-16,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.16.15 Leahy: Senate Republicans Must Prioritize Judicial Nominees In New Year WASHINGTON (Tuesday, December 15, 2015) The Republican-controlled Senate confirmed just 11 judicial nominees this year, matching the fewest number of nominees confirmed by any Senate in more than half a century. But under a bipartisan agreement negotiated by Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Republican Chairman Chuck Grassley (Iowa), the Senate next year will vote on five judicial nominees before the February recess. Four of these nominees are nominated to fill emergency vacancies, and three are nominees of color. Leahy said the bipartisan nominations agreement is a positive first step toward filling vacancies next year. After a year in which the Senate broke records for its inaction on judicial confirmations, I am glad that Republicans have consented to a bipartisan plan to confirm these well qualified judicial nominees, Leahy said. Because of this agreement, the Senate will be on pace in the first two months of next year to confirm almost half the number of nominees it took us this entire year to confirm. The Senate must continue to build on this progress so that we reduce judicial vacancies. The five nominees the Senate is poised to confirm early next year are: Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo of Pennsylvania to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals; Justice Wilhelmina Wright to the District of Minnesota; John Vazquez to the District of New Jersey; Judge Rebecca Ebinger to the Southern District of Iowa and Judge Leonard Strand to the Northern District of Iowa. In addition to the five nominees in the agreement, there are 14 more judicial nominees pending on the executive calendar, all of whom were approved by the Judiciary Committee by voice vote. These nominees will not be returned to the White House at the end of the session but rather will remain on the Senate calendar. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-lourdes-tiban,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On Lourdes Tiban,2015-12-14,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.14.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On Lourdes Tiban Mr. President, I want other Senators to be aware of information I received about Ecuadorian National Assembly member Lourdes Tiban, a prominent and respected leader of Ecuador's indigenous people. As an indigenous leader, Ms. Tiban has become one of the most outspoken advocates for freedom of expression, indigenous rights, and social rights in Ecuador. Not surprisingly, this has made her the target of verbal attacks by President Rafael Correa. Earlier this year, Ms. Tiban was beaten by unidentified assailants as she was walking to work. The assault was filmed and then shared online by government supporters who posted humiliating comments. This isn't the first time that Ms. Tiban has been physically assaulted. She is the victim of two other similar incidents which, I am told, have not been properly investigated. It is regrettable that, instead of vigorously investigating this latest attack against Ms. Tiban, a National Assembly member from President Correa's political party has brought a criminal case for libel against her. This is believed to be in retaliation for Ms. Tiban's claim that government supporters were responsible for targeting her, presumably in an attempt to silence her and remove her from the National Assembly. Ecuador is a country where judicial independence is seriously compromised. I have spoken about this several times, and it has been well documented by the Department of State, the United Nations, and human rights organizations. It is also illustrated by the fact that the Council of the Judiciary, with the power to appoint and remove judges, is comprised of five former officials of the Correa administration. It is likely that the criminal investigation against Ms. Tiban could result in an unjust conviction. We should condemn these attacks on freedom of expression, political rights, and the rights of indigenous people, and we should defend judicial independence which is fundamental to democracy in Ecuador and throughout the hemisphere. Lourdes Tiban has devoted her legislative efforts to protecting human rights for her people, and I am confident that she will continue to do so as she is not easily intimidated. She has my support and the support of others who believe in the principles of democracy. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/four-years-after-irene-renewal-in-waterbury,"Four Years After Irene, Renewal In Waterbury",2015-12-11,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.11.15 Four Years After Irene, Renewal In Waterbury By Patrick Leahy, Bernie Sanders and Peter Welch This past August, we marked the four year anniversary of Tropical Storm Irene. Memories of communities besieged by flood waters, houses knocked from their foundations and families forever changed are still fresh for each of us, and for so many other Vermonters. But just as Vermont rebuilt from the historic 1927 floods, Vermonters have pulled together to build back stronger, smarter and better after Irene. This has required new and creative thinking, and significant collaboration between communities, the State of Vermont and the federal government. Nowhere in Vermont is that story better told than in Waterbury. On August 29, 2011, the Winooski River jumped its banks and inundated the iconic Waterbury State Office Complex and state psychiatric hospital.When the floodwaters receded, it was clear the office complex and hospital were a total loss. Even before Irene hit, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) helped Vermonters prepare for the storm.The agency helped coordinate first responders across the state during and immediately after the floods. And in the end, it would provide individual assistance to more than 7300 Vermonters who lost property. But, as communities across Vermont would soon learn, FEMA generally only helps pay to rebuild infrastructure if it is rebuilt in the same place and restored to its pre-flood condition. Ideas like moving the state hospital and power plant out of the flood plain were nonstarters. This made no sense to us, to use taxpayer money to rebuild in a manner likely to fail again in the next flood, rather than building back stronger. So we crafted legislation and steered it through the Appropriations process and into law to ensure that FEMA could pay for smarter, more resilient projects. We met with FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate and his leadership team, and urged them to use this new authority in Vermont. And to their credit, they did. FEMA contributed more than $55 million to build a new state-of-the-art psychiatric hospital facility in Berlin, and to build a fantastic new state office complex that will reopen in Waterbury on Monday. In the end, the community of Waterbury, patients at the state hospital, and state workers in both locations are all better off. Another example of local, state and federal collaboration in Irene's aftermath is Waterbury's new municipal building. After Waterbury residents voted to expand the town library and historical society and to relocate the Town offices out of the flood plain, the project used more than $1 million in special Community Development Block Grant disaster funding that we fought hard to include in the federal budget.That federal assistance helped rebuild Waterbury stronger. Other examples of this collaboration include the Hunger Mountain Children's Center and the new South Main Apartments, each of which received $1 million in federal disaster assistance. And as a result, Waterbury has new affordable housing and expanded childcare opportunities for working families. All of these projects took vision from local leaders, Vermonters pulling together, lots of creative thinking, and an effective collaboration among town, state and federal governments to get where we are today.Residents of Waterbury and all Vermonters should be proud of what we have achieved, working together. There is more to do, but if we continue to work together we will always be stronger than before. # # # # # [Patrick Leahy (D) and Bernie Sanders (I) are Vermont's U.S. Senators, and Peter Welch (D) represents Vermont in the U.S. House of Representatives.] Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-welcomes-long-delayed-sec-draft-rule-on-oil-and-mining-transparency,Leahy Welcomes Long-Delayed SEC Draft Rule On Oil And Mining Transparency,2015-12-11,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.11.15 Leahy Welcomes Long-Delayed SEC Draft Rule On Oil And Mining Transparency WASHINGTON (FRIDAY, Dec. 11, 2015) -- U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Friday welcomed action by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to propose a rule on a long-delayed extractive industries transparency provision of the Wall Street reform law enacted in 2010. The transparency provision was authored by Leahy and became Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Leahy as a conferee worked closely with former Senator Dick Lugar (R-Ind.) and Senator Ben Cardin (D-Md.) when he successfully offered the amendment during the Dodd-Frank conference negotiations that created Section 1504. The transparency reforms require transparent reporting of payments made to governments for the extraction of oil, natural gas and minerals by companies that otherwise must file disclosures with the SEC. Once fully implemented, Section 1504 will help empower investors with a more complete view of the value of their holdings, encouraging capital formation. The reforms will bring more information to global commodities markets, contributing to price stability. Leahy notes that the reforms also will help citizens in holding governments accountable for the decisions made in managing valuable oil, gas, and minerals resources and revenues. A final rule on Section 1504 had been adopted by the agency on August 22, 2012, but it was subsequently vacated by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Since then, the European Union and Canada have both adopted transparency initiatives similar to the rule the SEC had initially adopted in 2012. Leahy said: I look forward to reviewing the proposed rule, but after the SEC's latest action it is clear that the commissioners have made an important step in the right direction and in following congressional intent by finally proposing this long-awaited rule for U.S. investors and citizens in resource-rich countries to hold their leaders accountable. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-introduces-bipartisan-authorization-military-force-against-isil,Welch Introduces Bipartisan Authorization Of Military Force Against ISIL,2015-12-10,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONAt a Capitol Hill press conference this afternoon, Rep. Peter Welch (VT-AL), joined by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-VA), announced the introduction in the House of bipartisan legislation that would authorize the use of American military force against ISIL. Joining Welch and Rigell at the press conference were Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ), the sponsors of identical legislation in the Senate. Under the U.S. Constitution, it is the responsibility of Congress to authorize the use of military force,"" said Congressman Welch. ""Since August 8, 2014 when military action against ISIL began, Congress has been absent. Since then, our military has delivered 8,573 airstrikes in Syria and Iraq at a cost to the American taxpayer of $5.2 billion. One American service member has been killed. It is time Congress did its job by debating and deciding on America's role in defeating ISIL. The failure of Congress to do its job is an abdication of its Constitutional responsibility and an indefensible transfer of power to the executive. The War Powers Resolution states that apart from an attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces, Congress must either declare war or authorize the proposed military action. The bipartisan, bicameral Authorization of the Use of Military Force (AUMF) introduced today would authorize the President to take specific, strategic military action and to provide support to our allies and regional partners in the battle to defeat ISIL. Key provisions include a sunset after three years unless reauthorized; a repeal of the 2002 Iraq AUMF; and a clause that defines this authorization as the sole statutory authority for the war on ISIL, as opposed to the 2001 AUMF. The text of the AUMF is available here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/new-england-senators-call-for-federal-funding-to-support-conte-refuge-and-connecticut-river-watershed-,NEW ENGLAND SENATORS CALL FOR FEDERAL FUNDING TO SUPPORT CONTE REFUGE & CONNECTICUT RIVER WATERSHED,2015-12-10,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.10.15 NEW ENGLAND SENATORS CALL FOR FEDERAL FUNDING TO SUPPORT CONTE REFUGE & CONNECTICUT RIVER WATERSHED WASHINGTON Today, U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) called on the U.S. Department of the Interior to provide federal funding to support the protection of the diverse plant, fish, and wildlife species in the Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge. In a letter to Secretary Sally Jewell of the Department of the Interior, the senators urged the Department to continue funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) and to prioritize the Conte Refuge which is of great environmental and recreational importance but is in need of more than $14 million for necessary upkeep and improvement projects. The Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge spans more than 36,000 acres throughout the Connecticut River watershed in Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts. As elected representatives of the four states encompassing the boundaries of the Connecticut River Watershed and the Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge, we write to urge you to provide sufficient funding in your FY17 budget to support the Refuge. The current need for the Refuge is acute: Fish and Wildlife Service staff and the non-governmental partner groups composing the Friends of Conte have identified over $14 million in projects as current and available priority opportunities within the Refuge, wrote the senators. These land trusts have added a combined total of more than 350,000 acres to the conservation estate basin-wide, providing recreational opportunities to the more than 2.3 million people who live in the basin and another 70 million who live within a day's drive of these properties. While we continue to work to reauthorize and for full funding for LWCF, we hope you will continue to put forward adequate funding for the Conte Refuge. The full text of the letter is below: The Honorable Sally Jewell Secretary Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington DC 20240 Dear Secretary Jewell: As elected representatives of the four states encompassing the boundaries of the Connecticut River Watershed and the Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge, we write to urge you to provide sufficient funding in your FY17 budget to support the Refuge. We thank you for including $2 million in the President's FY 16 budget in Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) last fiscal year. While we continue to advocate to our colleagues on the appropriations committee, Conte Refuge has not ranked high enough on the project list to receive funding for FY16. We hope you will consider moving the Refuge higher on the list of priority projects for LWCF funding. The current need for the Refuge is acute: Fish and Wildlife Service staff and the non-governmental partner groups composing the Friends of Conte have identified over $14 million in projects as current and available priority opportunities within the Refuge. Because of the many local, state, and federal partnerships in this watershed, the Conte Refuge presents a unique opportunity to leverage additional non-Federal funding. Additionally, members of the land trust community from throughout the basin routinely assist the Refuge in identifying properties and working with landowners towards federal ownership, lowering staff time and costs to the Service. These land trusts also have added a combined total of more than 350,000 acres to the conservation estate basin-wide, providing recreational opportunities to the more than 2.3 million people who live in the basin and another 70 million who live within a day's drive of these properties. While we continue to work to reauthorize and for full funding for LWCF, we hope you will continue to put forward adequate funding for the Conte Refuge. We look forward to working with you during the final steps of the FY16 and through the FY17 appropriations process. Sincerely, U.S. Senator Christopher S. Murphy U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal U.S. Senator Ed Markey U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders CC.: The Honorable Daniel Ashe Director Fish and Wildlife Service Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington, DC 20240 The Honorable Shaun Donovan Director The Office of Management and Budget 725 17th Street, NW Washington, DC 20503 ### Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/senate-judiciary-committee-adopts-leahy-amendment-confirming-that-the-us-must-not-bar-individualsbased-on-their-religion,Senate Judiciary Committee Adopts Leahy Amendment Confirming That The U.S. Must Not Bar IndividualsBased On Their Religion,2015-12-10,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.10.15 Senate Judiciary Committee Adopts Leahy Amendment Confirming That The U.S. Must Not Bar IndividualsBased On Their Religion WASHINGTON (THURSDAY, December 10, 2015) The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved an amendment authored by Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) confirming that the United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion. Leahy's amendment was adopted by a vote of 16-4. Consideration of his amendment came after some made demands earlier this week to shut the nation's borders to all Muslims. Leahy spoke out against this hateful rhetoric earlier this week. Many top Republicans and Democrats have condemned this reprehensible proposal. Many on this committee have rightfully expressed their outrage about the call earlier this week to shut our borders to Muslims. Now we need to formally go on the record to reject this reprehensible position, Leahy said. Leahy also asked FBI Director James Comey at an oversight hearing Wednesday whether such anti-Muslim rhetoric serves as a recruiting tool for ISIS. Director Comey confirmed: The notion that the U.S. is anti-Muslim is part of ISIL's narrative and al Qaeda's narrative and other terrorist groups. On Thursday, Leahy said the Senate should heed the call of our national security leaders and send a clear and direct message that America welcomes people from all countries and of all faiths. Our strength comes from our commitment to the principles of freedom, equality, and liberty. Results and a webcast of Thursday's executive business meeting can be found online. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-consideration-of-the-s1318-nuclear-terrorism-conventions-implementation-and-safety-of-maritime-navigation-act,"Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee On Consideration of the S.1318, Nuclear Terrorism Conventions Implementation and Safety of Maritime Navigation Act",2015-12-10,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.10.15 Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee On Consideration of the S.1318, Nuclear Terrorism Conventions Implementation and Safety of Maritime Navigation Act Given recent events, Americans are concerned about protecting the country against terrorism. I am glad that the Committee was able to hear from the FBI Director yesterday, and I hope that Congress will ensure that law enforcement has the tools and resources necessary to fight terrorism. Unfortunately, the bill that we will be marking up today is not the answer. I agree with Chairman Grassley that we must protect against nuclear terrorism. That is why Senator Lee and I worked in a bicameral way to pass legislation earlier this year that does just that. As the Chairman acknowledges,the vast majority of his bill was already enacted into law as part of the USA FREEDOM Act in June. This was language that we negotiated with the leaders of the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, to ensure that it could pass in the House. And the provisions that Senator Grassley is now trying to resurrect with his bill particularly the death penalty provision were deliberately excluded because the House told us that they could not pass it. So this appears to be an attempt to rehash a death penalty debate that is unnecessary. I have made clear that I would not oppose the other provisions in the bill related to material support and wiretap predicates. But I cannot and will not support expanding the scope of the Federal death penalty. I will not endorse the application of such an irreversible punishment when we still have an imperfect criminal justice system that is so susceptible to racial biases, procedural flaws, and simple human error. In fact, Senator Grassley and I are working togetherright nowon oversight of the FBI's flawed hair and fiber analysis which may have resulted in the conviction of innocent people sentenced to death.We know with certainty that our system makes mistakes. Unless the death penalty provisions are removed, the Chairman knows I will oppose this bill. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/opening-statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy_--sjc-oversight-hearing-with-fbi-director-comey,Opening Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy -- SJC Oversight Hearing With FBI Director Comey,2015-12-09,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.09.15 Opening Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy -- SJC Oversight Hearing With FBI Director Comey WASHINGTON (Wednesday, December 9, 2015) Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) is attending an oversight hearing this morning of the Federal Bureau of Investigation withDirector James Comey. Testimony, member statements, and a webcast of the hearing are available online. Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing On Oversight Of The Federal Bureau Of Investigation December 9, 2015 The Federal Bureau of Investigation is entrusted with the enormous responsibility of enforcing our laws and protecting the nation. No matter what the threat, and no matter what the motivation, the FBI is tasked with helping to keep us safe. On any given day, FBI agents around the country are investigating cases involving not only terrorism, but violent crime, gangs, cybercrime, identity theft, fraud, human trafficking, hate crimes, and child exploitation. The events of the past six months have underscored the varied nature of the threats the FBI faces, and the key role it plays in protecting against terrorist acts. This past June, nine African American churchgoers were murdered by a white supremacist during a bible study in Charleston. The day after Thanksgiving, three individuals including a police officer were shot to death inside a women's health clinic in Colorado Springs. Last week, 14 county workers in San Bernardino were murdered in a shooting rampage. Director Comey may not be able to share all of the details about these investigations today, but I believe we can all agree that there is one common motivating factor behind each of these heinous crimes: hateful extremism. These attacks remind us that we need to be vigilant against all forms of violent extremism. No one underestimates the incredibly difficult job of protecting the country from terrorist threats. So we have to support the law enforcement and intelligence officials who work to protect our nation by giving them the tools and resources they need to do their jobs effectively. And as we have heard from many law enforcement officials, we need to continue the hard work of building trust in our communities among neighbors, and with law enforcement, so that we can all share in the responsibility of keeping our communities safe. At the same time, we must categorically reject the divisive and corrosive rhetoric of fear that only serves to undermine us as a nation. We know what happens when leaders succumb to the politics of fear and lose sight of our fundamental American values. Fear is what drove the government to violate the Constitution and imprison thousands of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II. Fear is what fueled the justification for torture by the CIA, which the Director objected to when he was at the Bush Justice Department.And I know the Director reminds all of his new agents that the rhetoric of fear led J. Edgar Hoover to target Martin Luther King, Jr., and others during the 1960s. If we give in to this sort of fear, then the terrorists and extremists will have won. They want us to be afraid, and they want us to be a nation divided. Groups like ISIS, for example, actively promote the narrative that Muslims are not welcome in the United States. When there is talk about rounding up all Muslim Americans, or creating a registry based on religious beliefs, or shutting our borders to all Muslims, that is just the sort of xenophobic, hateful rhetoric that plays into our enemies' hands.It also demeans us as a democratic nation founded on the principles of freedom, equality, and liberty. We are better than that. We are a courageous and strong country. And our strength comes from our commitment to the morals and principles that continue to keep our country great and a beacon of democracy in the world. The Senate at its best can be the conscience of the Nation and recent events demand that we be at our very best. We are not afraid of terrorists, and we should not let our country be defined by irresponsible fear-mongering. While the focus of today's hearing will naturally be on the recent terrorist attacks, we should continue the Committee's bipartisan oversight of the FBI in other areas. Three years ago, the FBI learned that flawed microscopic hair comparison analysis was used in thousands of criminal prosecutions. I am not satisfied by the FBI's efforts to even notify those defendants who might be affected by the faulty evidence. The FBI should be sending agents out to gather the relevant information. The lives of potentially innocent Americans, including some on death row, depend on it. In addition, I will continue to work with Senator Grassley to ensure that whistleblowers at the FBI are afforded adequate protections. I thank Director Comey for coming before the Committee today. I know that he shares my respect for the Constitution, and my faith in the American people to rise above the divisive rhetoric of fear. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/vermont-delegation-calls-more-public-scrutiny-meetings-vermont,"Vermont Delegation Calls for More Public Scrutiny, Meetings in Vermont on Decommissioning Regulations",2015-12-08,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 The Vermont congressional delegation Sen. Patrick Leahy (D), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) and Rep. Peter Welch (D) announced Tuesday that they have called upon the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to improve public input on proposed changes to nuclear plant decommissioning regulations. Sen. Bernie Sanders, who serves on the Senate energy and environment committees, led the effort which urged the NRC to hold public meetings in each state where a nuclear power plant is currently being decommissioned and to extend the deadline for public comments. While we commend the NRC for proposing these long overdue regulations, we believe the short public comment period and the plan to have a single public meeting will not give local and state stakeholders sufficient opportunities to participate meaningfully in the rulemaking process, the Vermont congressional delegation wrote in a letter sent to NRC Chairman Stephen Burns on Monday. The letter was also signed by Sens. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Rep. William Keating (D-Mass.). To read the letter to the NRC, click here. Contacts: David Carle (Leahy): 202-224-3693 Michael Briggs (Sanders): 202-224-5141 Kirsten Hartman (Welch): 202-225-4115 ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/at-hearing-on-merger-of-two-largest-us-beer-companies_leahy-emphasizes-importance-of-level-playing-field--for-craft-brewers-to-compete,"At Hearing on Merger of Two Largest U.S. Beer Companies, Leahy Emphasizes Importance of Level Playing Field for Craft Brewers to Compete",2015-12-08,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.08.15 At Hearing on Merger of Two Largest U.S. Beer Companies, Leahy Emphasizes Importance of Level Playing Field for Craft Brewers to Compete WASHINGTON (Tuesday, December 8, 2015) During a hearing Tuesday of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights to consider the proposed merger of beer companies AB-InBev and SAB Miller, Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) emphasized the importance of a level playing field so that craft brewers can compete. Noting concern that the large brewing companies can use their power over distributors to squeeze out smaller craft brewers, Leahy called on the companies participating in the merger to commit that they would not increase their ownership of distributors or adopt further exclusionary practices at the expense of craft breweries. Vermont was one of the earliest incubators of craft brewing, Leahy said at the hearing. Our 40 breweries make some of the best, award-winning beers in the world. They contribute to our economy and have helped make Vermont a destination state. We want to ensure that these craft brewers and the brewers of tomorrow can continue to competeand that consumers continue to have choices. Addressing the CEOs of companies participating in the merger, he added: [G]iven the size of these companies, we need to look closely at this transaction. One way for large brewers to influence distribution is by buying up distributors. AB InBev has indicated that, following this merger, it will not increase its ownership of distributors above its current level of ten percent. Mr. Brito, at a minimum, I ask you to make a formal commitment to that today. For its part, Molson has indicated that, after it gains 100 percent ownership of MillerCoors, it will not increase its ownership of distributorsnor change its current practice of giving distributors leeway to showcase competitors' brands. Mr. Hunter, I ask you to make a formal commitment to that today. The pathway from brewer to buyer is critical if we want small companies to compete, Leahy said. I hope this issue will remain a subject of close review. Leahy is a lead cosponsor of the bipartisan Small Brewer Reinvestment and Expanding Workforce Act (Small BREW Act), which would recalibrate the federal beer excise tax that small brewers pay, cutting the tax nearly in half. Last month, he hosted a roundtable in Montpelier, Vt. with representatives and brewers from Harpoon, Lawson's Finest Liquids, Lost Nation, and Magic Hat to discuss issues facing the craft brew industry. Testimony, member statements, and a webcast of today's hearing are available online. # # # # # Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.),Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee,Subcommittee Hearing on Ensuring Competition Remains on Tap: The AB InBev/SABMiller merger and the State of Competition in the Beer IndustryDecember 8, 2015 Today's hearing on the proposed merger of AB InBev and SABMiller is important not only to American consumers, but to craft brewers and independent distributors across the country. Vermont was one of the earliest incubators of craft brewing. Our 40 breweries make some of the best, award-winning beers in the world. They contribute to our economy and have helped make Vermont a destination state. We want to ensure that these craft brewers and the brewers of tomorrow can continue to competeand that consumers continue to have choices. The proposed merger we consider today would join the two giants of the beer industry, which are together responsible for more than 70 percent of the U.S. market. The parties have announced that AB InBev will divest ownership of SAB's stake in MillerCoors, selling it to Molson. I welcome that effort to address some concerns about the proposed merger. But given the size of these companies, we need to look closely at this transaction. I want to hear more about how the divestment will operate in practice, and whether the merger will have other consequences for the beer marketincluding given the practice of big brewers buying up small craft breweries. It is important that we also consider competition in the markets for hops, barley, glass and aluminum. These are essential inputs for any brewer to compete. I also want to hear more about concerns in distribution: specifically, concerns that the large brewers' power over distribution is shutting out competitors and undermining consumer choice. A product can only be sold if customers can find it. If craft brewers are being squeezed off the shelf because of restrictive behavior by the dominant companies, that harms competition and limits consumers' options. One way for large brewers to influence distribution is by buying up distributors. AB InBev has indicated that, following this merger, it will not increase its ownership of distributors above its current level of ten percent. Mr. Brito, at a minimum, I ask you to make a formal commitment to that today. For its part, Molson has indicated that, after it gains 100 percent ownership of MillerCoors, it will not increase its ownership of distributorsnor change its current practice of giving distributors leeway to showcase competitors' brands. Mr. Hunter, I ask you to make a formal commitment to that today. The pathway from brewer to buyer is critical if we want small companies to compete. State laws regulating distribution vary dramatically, and many small brewers feel constrained by the current state of distribution. I hope this issue will remain a subject of close review. The growth of craft brewing is a success story in Vermont and other states across the country. I know these craft brewers personally, and met with them as recently as last month. Their creativity is shaping our economy, and we should make sure they have a level playing field. I thank Senators Lee and Klobuchar for holding this hearing today. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-the-conference-report-to-the-every-student-succeeds-act,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On the Conference Report to the Every Student Succeeds Act,2015-12-08,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.08.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On the Conference Report to the Every Student Succeeds Act Today the Senate will approve landmark legislation to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Since 2001, the failed policies of No Child Left Behind have unfairly burdened students, families, educators and administrators by holding students accountable for snap-shot academic progress. The overwhelming support in Congress for these reforms will reverse the one-size-fits-all approach to education that did not work for Vermont and so many schools across the nation. This bill gives States more flexibility to ensure that schools are supporting every student, while maintaining the Federal Government's responsibility to ensure that students everywhere have access to the resources they need for lasting academic success. Since 2001, I have heard from parents, teachers, students, policymakers, and administrators about the negative impacts of No Child Left Behind. I voted against the legislation, as I did not agree, and still do not agree, with a one-size-fits-all approach to education. I was also disappointed with the bill's rigid Federal accountability measures, as I truly believe States and local education agencies deserve flexibility when it comes to how schools operate. The conference report we will consider today reflects the positive changes to the law that the Senate overwhelmingly supported in July. The agreement restores educational flexibility to the states, while safeguarding student access to resources, regardless of race, gender, financial status, and learning level. I am pleased that the bill takes into account the greater needs of students in rural areas, increases funding for early childhood education programs, and improves school safety measures. I am especially pleased with the bill's innovative assessment and accountability demonstration authority provision, which will allow Vermont to adopt competency and performance-based assessments that prove far more than how well a student can perform on a test on one given day. And while States will design their own system to improve struggling schools, the conference agreement also includes Federal safeguards to protect civil rights and to provide resources for students at the greatest risk. We are eight years overdue for a rewrite of No Child Left Behind. I am pleased that we have come together, members on both sides of the aisle, to support the Every Student Succeeds Act. This bill truly reflects the needs of all students, educators, parents, and administrators, and I urge all Senators to support its passage. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/vermont-delegation-calls-for-more-public-scrutiny-meetings-in-vermont-on-decommissioning-regulations,"Vermont Delegation Calls for More Public Scrutiny, Meetings in Vermont on Decommissioning Regulations",2015-12-08,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.08.15 Vermont Delegation Calls for More Public Scrutiny, Meetings in Vermont on Decommissioning Regulations WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 The Vermont congressional delegation Sen. Patrick Leahy (D), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) and Rep. Peter Welch (D) announced Tuesday that they have called upon the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to improve public input on proposed changes to nuclear plant decommissioning regulations. Sen. Bernie Sanders, who serves on the Senate energy and environment committees, led the effort which urged the NRC to hold public meetings in each state where a nuclear power plant is currently being decommissioned and to extend the deadline for public comments. While we commend the NRC for proposing these long overdue regulations, we believe the short public comment period and the plan to have a single public meeting will not give local and state stakeholders sufficient opportunities to participate meaningfully in the rulemaking process, the Vermont congressional delegation wrote in a letter sent to NRC Chairman Stephen Burns on Monday. The letter was also signed by Sens. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Rep. William Keating (D-Mass.). To read the letter to the NRC, click here. Contacts:David Carle (Leahy): 202-224-3693 Michael Briggs (Sanders): 202-224-5141 Kirsten Hartman (Welch): 202-225-4115 ### Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-statement-on-americas-history-of-religious-tolerance-and-respect-for-personal-freedoms,Leahy Statement On America's History of Religious Tolerance and Respect for Personal Freedoms,2015-12-07,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.07.15 Leahy Statement On America's History of Religious Tolerance and Respect for Personal Freedoms Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Committee On The Judiciary, On Religious Tolerance and Respect for Personal Freedoms December 7, 2015 [NOTE: Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) will be joined by faith leaders Tuesday at 11:30am in the Capitol for a press conference on the need to support refugees fleeing persecution and violence throughout the world.] I am appalled that some are espousing the hate-filled view that a country as great as ours should have a religious litmus test. For more than 235 years, the United States has upheld the freedom of religion as one of its founding principles. We have been a confident nation unafraid to welcome newcomers. Our willingness to take in the outsider who yearns for freedom and opportunity in America is a source of tremendous strength, whether opening our doors to Jews fleeing persecution, Catholics including my ancestors seeking a new life, or countless other groups, including Muslims. I am stunned that some, appealing to fear and intolerance, want to end this legacy and are launching direct assaults on these American values. To reject those of a particular faith is unwise, and it is un-American. Leaders should appeal to the best in us by embracing the shared ideals of tolerance and diversity that bind Americans together. Jockeying for attention by spouting ignorant rhetoric that seeks to divide us for personal political gain is unworthy of anyone who truly deserves to lead this great nation. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-judicial-nominationssd,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations",2015-12-07,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.07.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations Today, we will vote on the nomination of Travis McDonough to be a Federal district judge in the Eastern District of Tennessee. He was nominated over a year ago, and his nomination was voted out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote nearly five months ago. Despite having the support of his home state Republican Senators, Mr. McDonough's nomination has nevertheless been held up by Republican leadership for no good reason. I will further note that while Mr. McDonough's vote is long overdue, Republican leadership has skipped over Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo who is ahead of Mr. McDonough on the Executive Calendar. I recall Republican leadership promising regular order when they took over the majority, so they should explain how skipping over a consensus and eminently qualified nominee with bipartisan support is following regular order. Judge Restrepo was nominated to a judicial emergency vacancy in the Third Circuit over a year ago. If confirmed, he would be the first ever Hispanic judge from Pennsylvania on the Third Circuit. Judge Restrepo has the strong support of the Hispanic National Bar Association, and has bipartisan support from his home state Senators, Senator Toomey and Senator Casey. Senator Toomey has said not only that he strongly supports Judge Restrepo's confirmation, but that he also recommended him to the President. I hope that the Republican leadership or Senator Toomey can explain to the people of Pennsylvania why Judge Restrepo is not being confirmed today. As we approach the end of the year, the Senate Republican majority is coming closer and closer to matching the record for confirming the fewest number of judicial nominees in more than half a century. While most Senators I have served with over the last 40 years would shudder at this fact, the current Republican leadership seems content to accomplish as little as possible when it comes to confirming nominees to our Third Branch of government. In the 11 months that Republicans have controlled the Senate, only 11 judges will have received a confirmation vote, including today. When Senate Democrats were in the majority during the seventh year of the Bush presidency, we had already confirmed 36 judges by this point. We should take action right now and hold confirmation votes on the 19 other judicial nominees pending on the floor. If we did confirm the remaining 19 nominees, thereby fulfilling a basic duty of the Senate, that would make a total of 30 judicial nominees confirmed this year. That number is still short of the 36 nominees that Senate Democrats confirmed at the same point of the George W. Bush administration, but it would mark a significant effort by this Senate to reduce vacancies. There is no reason not to do this. All 19 of the nominees were voted out of the Judiciary Committee by voice vote, yet as of today, Republicans refuse to bring them up for a vote. This obstruction has resulted in needless delays for hard working Americans who seek justice in our Federal courts. Currently pending on the Senate floor are nominees who would fill judicial emergency vacancies in Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Minnesota, New Jersey, Iowa, New York, and California. Senate Republicans have refused to respond to the urgent needs of those states to the detriment of their own constituents. Throughout his tenure in office, President Obama has worked with Senators to have the Federal judiciary better reflect the people they serve. Today there are more women and minorities than ever before on the Federal bench. This is an accomplishment that helps ensure the public's confidence in their court system. Unfortunately, that meaningful progress has slowed down under the Senate's Republican control. Today, several nominees of color with outstanding qualifications are being held up for no good reason, including Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo. Senate Republicans are also holding up four exceptional African American district court nominees and an exceptional Hispanic district court nominee. Two of the African American nominees Waverly Crenshaw and Edward Stanton have been nominated to district court positions in Tennessee. Both have the support of their home state Republican Senators and were unanimously approved by the Judiciary Committee by voice vote, and yet, continue to wait for the Majority Leader to schedule their votes. The three other nominees of color Wilhelmina Wright to the District of Minnesota, and John Vazquez and Julien Neals to the District of New Jersey are all nominated to judicial emergency vacancies. They all have the support of their home state Senators and were voted out of the Judiciary Committee by voice vote. And yet, they continue to wait for their confirmation votes to be scheduled. In addition to the Article III nominees, there are also five nominees to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims that were all nominated more than a year ago who all continue to be held up by a single Republican Senator the junior Senator of Arkansas. The Court of Federal Claims has been referred to as the People's Court because it allows citizens to seek prompt justice against our government. Of the five nominees, one is a Cuban American who has devoted his entire career to public service at the U.S. Department of Justice; another is an African American woman who spent over two decades serving as a Judge Advocate General and as a Military Judge. All five were voted out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote, but Senator Cotton continues to object to any of them receiving an up-or-down vote. He claims to have concerns with the caseload, but a recent letter from the Chief Judge of the Court of Federal Claims to the Judiciary Committee has indicated that only one of the nine senior judges is willing to be recalled for full time duty, and the other three would only agree to be recalled on a limited basis. Moreover, the court's overall caseload has increased nine percent over the last year. There are no good reasons for Senator Cotton to continue blocking these nominees. They deserve to have their confirmation votes scheduled. Senators can vote for or against them but they should not be denied a simple up-or-down vote. In a letter dated December 2, 2015 from the American Bar Association to Majority Leader McConnell, the President of the ABA states that our courts are unfortunately worse off today than they were at the start of this Congress. The letter urges that the Majority Leader schedule votes on the confirmation of all the Article III judicial nominees currently pending on the Executive Calendar. I ask unanimous consent to include a copy of this letter in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks. The process of confirming judges is about ensuring that the American people have a fully functioning judiciary. Because of Republican obstruction, judicial vacancies have increased by more than 50 percent since they took over the majority and caseloads are piling up in courts throughout the country. And judicial emergencies have more than doubled since the beginning of this year. I am concerned that the Republican leadership's refusal to confirm judicial nominations this year is undermining the Judicial Branch and harming the American people who seek justice. I urge Senate Republicans to conclude this year by showing some semblance of leadership by scheduling confirmation votes on the remaining judicial nominees pending on the Executive Calendar. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-leahy-sanders-challenge-fda-new-fda-cheese-standard,"Welch, Leahy, Sanders Challenge FDA on New FDA Cheese Standard",2015-12-04,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) are leading a bicameral, bipartisan coalition in Congress challenging a new U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standard that could ban many age-old recipes for raw milk cheese and severely harm artisan cheese producers in Vermont. In a December 3rd letter sent to FDA Deputy Commissioner Michael Taylor, the lawmakers express their concerns about FDA's non-toxigenic E. coli standard for raw milk cheeses, and insist that the agency listen to feedback from cheese producers who would be harmed by the more stringent standard. In addition, they question whether a new FDA standard calling for a thousand-fold decrease in the presence of non-toxigenic E. coli in raw milk cheeses would actually benefit public health, whether the standards are scientifically sound, and if they were adopted in an open and transparent way. The implementation of a more stringent non-toxigenic E. coli standard for raw milk cheeses is inconsistent with internationally-recognized standards. Non-toxigenic E. coli are typically not harmful to humans. The legislators believe that this new standard seriously threatens the artisan cheese industry in Vermont and across the country without evidence of risk to public health. Welch, Leahy, Sanders and their colleagues wrote: Cheese production is an important, and growing, component of our nation's value-added agricultural economy. It is an economic driver in rural areas across the country, producing good jobs, internationally-recognized brands, and award-winning cheeses. We are concerned that this standard could have a detrimental effect on cheese producers in our districts, and we ask that you carefully consider their feedback and that of the scientific community, and whether there is a commensurate risk and public safety benefit with a more stringent standard. The letter can be read in its entirety here. The FDA standard specifically seeks to limit the level of non-toxigenic E. coli found in raw milk cheeses from 10,000 most probable number (MPN)/gram in 2009 to 10 MPN/gram. The standard was contained in the latest edition of the FDA Compliance Program Guidance Manual and Compliance Policy Guide. Artisan cheese plays a powerful role in rural economies through job creation and conservation of working landscapes. Cheese has certainly been transformative for our community in Vermont's Northeast Kingdom. Every industry needs good regulation in order to thrive. As a cheesemaking community we are not asking for less' regulation, we are asking for good' regulation that is developed transparently and based on solid science. Getting the details right is of critical importance. The future of artisan cheesemaking in America depends on it, said Mateo Kehler, Co-Founder, Jasper Hill Farm. I am delighted that the Vermont congressional delegation and their colleagues in the House and Senate are challenging FDA's establishment of non-toxigenic E. coli standards for cheese. The American artisan cheese industry is witnessing extraordinary growth in the number of producers and products with corresponding improvements in quality and safety. Our American artisan cheeses rival the very best cheeses produced in Europe, and both domestic and imported cheeses are in high consumer demand and are creating economic opportunities for cheese makers and retailers both large and small. At a time when the Food Safety Modernization Act is requiring us to harmonize our microbiological standards with those of our international trading partners, this issue requires rigorous scientific analysis and international dialogue. These standards are negatively impacting both domestic and imported artisan cheeses. As someone who has conducted extensive research to improve the safety of artisan cheeses, I can conclusively state that there is no scientific basis for these standards, said Dr. Catherine W. Donnelly, Professor of Nutrition and Food Science, The University of Vermont. In addition to the Vermont delegation, the letter was signed by Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Angus S. King Jr. (I-ME), Christopher Murphy (D-CT), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Ron Wyden (D-OR), and by Representatives Tony Cardenas (D-CA), Joe Courtney (D-CT), Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Richard Hanna (R-NY), Jared Huffman (D-CA), Bill Huizenga (R-MI), Ron Kind (D-WI), Ann Kuster (D-NH), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Reid Ribble (R-WI), Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Randy Weber (R-TX). ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/days-before-program-expires-leahy-and-grassley-urge-support-for-legislation-to-reform_extend-job-creating-foreign-investment-program,"Days Before Program Expires, Leahy & Grassley Urge Support For Legislation To Reform & Extend Job-Creating Foreign Investment Program",2015-12-04,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.04.15 Days Before Program Expires, Leahy & Grassley Urge Support For Legislation To Reform & Extend Job-Creating Foreign Investment Program WASHINGTON (Friday, December 4, 2015) The job-creating immigrant investor visa program, known as the EB-5 Regional Center program, is set to expire in just one week if Congress does not move to reauthorize it. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) are urging Congressional leaders to support a bipartisan, bicameral proposal that would provide much-needed reforms to the program and reauthorize it for four years. The EB-5 program is not working how it was intended to by Congress. The EB-5 program has serious vulnerabilities, is loaded with fraud and abuse, and isn't nearly the job-creator it has been purported to be. We need to be sure that the EB-5 Regional Center program is not only creating economic stimulus and jobs in areas that need it the most, but also not jeopardizing the nation's security or harming U.S. investors, Grassley said. The program needs an overhaul with the common sense reforms that we've put together in a bipartisan, bicameral way. The status quo is unacceptable. The EB-5 Regional Center program has generated investment and created jobs in distressed communities, but the program is facing some pressing challenges. Reports of rampant fraud and abuse raise serious concerns and threaten the program's mission. The incentives Congress established to spur investment in high unemployment and rural communities are also routinely abused, undermining a core objective of the program, Leahy said. The Regional Center should be reauthorized, but only if reformed. There is now bipartisan consensus around these reforms, and we cannot squander this opportunity. Since launching in 1993, this program has generated capital investment and created jobs across the country. But the program has also experienced significant problems in recent years, underscoring the need for Congress to restore the program to one that transforms local economies in impoverished areas as well as rural states. To improve the program and ensure its reauthorization, Grassley and Leahy on Friday released the text of a carefully-crafted compromise with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.), Congressman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), and House Immigration Subcommittee Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.). The proposal modifies legislation the lawmakers unveiled earlier this year to bolster the Department of Homeland Security's authorities to administer the program, and provide investors with greater protections and more information about their investments. Additionally, the bipartisan proposal increases transparency and oversight and provides DHS the ability to proactively investigate fraud, both in the United States and abroad, using a dedicated fund paid for by certain program participants. It raises the amount of investment required and helps to restore the program to its original intent, by ensuring that much of the capital generated and jobs created occur in rural areas and areas with high unemployment. The bipartisan compromise has the support of Invest in the USA (IIUSA), by far the largest association of regional centers and EB-5 stakeholders, as well as the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (LCCR). An outline of the bipartisan proposal can be found here. Text of legislation can also be found online. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/in-late-night-vote-senate-passes-five-year-transportation-funding-package,"In Late-Night Vote, Senate Passes Five-Year Transportation Funding Package",2015-12-04,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.04.15 In Late-Night Vote, Senate Passes Five-Year Transportation Funding Package . . . Bill Will Bring More Than $1 Billion To Vermont For Critical Infrastructure Projects [WASHINGTON (FRIDAY, Dec. 4, 2015) On the eve of an expiration deadline, the Senate Thursday night passed legislation to fund America's transportation and highway programs, bringing stability to help Vermont plan critical infrastructure projects for the next five years. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) voted for The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act), which authorizes $305 billion in federal surface transportation funding over the next five years. The legislation is now on the President's desk, and he is expected to sign it into law today. The current authorization runs out tonight at Midnight. Following is Leahy's statement on the bill.] Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On Supporting The Highway Trust Fund Vermonters take great pride in our historic downtowns and small communities. In our cities and towns, we have a culture of getting things done and finding a way to accomplish our shared goals. That is why, like many Vermonters, I have been frustrated with the back-to-back short term patches to keep our highway trust fund afloat. I have consistently advocated for a long-term solution that will give States the ability to move forward with building and repairing roads, bridges, and byways; to promote rail safety and transit, and to invest in the critical infrastructure that supports our cities and towns; to enable interstate and intrastate commerce; and to create jobs for American workers. The time to pass a plan for long term transportation funding has finally come. The FAST Act will bring stability where for too long there has been uncertainty. This bill ensures that Vermont will receive the funding it needs, more than $1.1 billion over the next five years, to allow Vermonters to move forward on infrastructure projects that have been waiting in the wings. In Vermont, the construction season is short and the need is great, and a series of stopgap measures to kick the can down the road was never the right answer. I am pleased there will finally be the stability needed for Vermont, and all states, to move forward to bolster our country's infrastructure. This legislation also reverses changes made to the Federal Crop Insurance program, which was a careful balance first struck in the Farm Bill, sending a clear message that we should not thoughtlessly tamper with the Farm Bill until its next expiration in 2018. And while I'm glad that the harmful Freedom of Information Act exemptions that we eliminated in the Senate bill remain out of this conference report, I am concerned that a new exemption was added. Nowhere is the free flow of information more important than when the safety of every Vermonter, and every American, is at stake. We Vermonters know that in a democracy, demanding 100 percent of what you want and refusing to negotiate effective compromises is a formula for stalemate and paralysis. As a result, Vermonters know that to actually get something done, comprise is a must, and we have advanced the ball a long way down the field. This legislation provides stability to move our infrastructure forward to support our economy. It supports safety provisions to protect the wellbeing of those traveling America's highways and rails. Frankly, to facilitate the thriving communities, commerce, and economic growth that we want and need, we should be doing far more to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. This process should not be reduced to searching under sofa cushions as some have described it -- to scrape together the budget to pay for the vital roads and bridges that are so important to us in so many ways. But with this bill we finally are providing our states and communities with longer lead times to plan and accomplish this work on our infrastructure, and that signals at least a flicker of progress. We've had enough kicking the can down the road and generating year after year of uncertainty. It is time to bring stability and certainty back to our infrastructure and transportation. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/welch-leahy-sanders-challenge-fda-on-new-fda-cheese-standard,"Welch, Leahy, Sanders Challenge FDA on New FDA Cheese Standard",2015-12-04,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.04.15 Welch, Leahy, Sanders Challenge FDA on New FDA Cheese Standard Bipartisan, bicameral coalition warns of threat to Vermont's artisan cheese industry WASHINGTON Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) are leading a bicameral, bipartisan coalition in Congress challenging a new U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standard that could ban many age-old recipes for raw milk cheese and severely harm artisan cheese producers in Vermont. In a December 3rd letter sent to FDA Deputy Commissioner Michael Taylor, the lawmakers express their concerns about FDA's non-toxigenic E. coli standard for raw milk cheeses, and insist that the agency listen to feedback from cheese producers who would be harmed by the more stringent standard. In addition, they question whether a new FDA standard calling for a thousand-fold decrease in the presence of non-toxigenic E. coli in raw milk cheeses would actually benefit public health, whether the standards are scientifically sound, and if they were adopted in an open and transparent way. The implementation of a more stringent non-toxigenic E. coli standard for raw milk cheeses is inconsistent with internationally-recognized standards. Non-toxigenic E. coli are typically not harmful to humans. The legislators believe that this new standard seriously threatens the artisan cheese industry in Vermont and across the country without evidence of risk to public health. Welch, Leahy, Sanders and their colleagues wrote: Cheese production is an important, and growing, component of our nation's value-added agricultural economy. It is an economic driver in rural areas across the country, producing good jobs, internationally-recognized brands, and award-winning cheeses. We are concerned that this standard could have a detrimental effect on cheese producers in our districts, and we ask that you carefully consider their feedback and that of the scientific community, and whether there is a commensurate risk and public safety benefit with a more stringent standard. The letter can be read in its entirety here. The FDA standard specifically seeks to limit the level of non-toxigenic E. coli found in raw milk cheeses from 10,000 most probable number (MPN)/gram in 2009 to 10 MPN/gram. The standard was contained in the latest edition of the FDA Compliance Program Guidance Manual and Compliance Policy Guide. Artisan cheese plays a powerful role in rural economies through job creation and conservation of working landscapes. Cheese has certainly been transformative for our community in Vermont's Northeast Kingdom. Every industry needs good regulation in order to thrive. As a cheesemaking community we are not asking for less' regulation, we are asking for good' regulation that is developed transparently and based on solid science. Getting the details right is of critical importance. The future of artisan cheesemaking in America depends on it, said Mateo Kehler, Co-Founder, Jasper Hill Farm. I am delighted that the Vermont congressional delegation and their colleagues in the House and Senate are challenging FDA's establishment of non-toxigenic E. coli standards for cheese. The American artisan cheese industry is witnessing extraordinary growth in the number of producers and products with corresponding improvements in quality and safety. Our American artisan cheeses rival the very best cheeses produced in Europe, and both domestic and imported cheeses are in high consumer demand and are creating economic opportunities for cheese makers and retailers both large and small. At a time when the Food Safety Modernization Act is requiring us to harmonize our microbiological standards with those of our international trading partners, this issue requires rigorous scientific analysis and international dialogue. These standards are negatively impacting both domestic and imported artisan cheeses. As someone who has conducted extensive research to improve the safety of artisan cheeses, I can conclusively state that there is no scientific basis for these standards, said Dr. Catherine W. Donnelly, Professor of Nutrition and Food Science, The University of Vermont. In addition to the Vermont delegation, the letter was signed by Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Angus S. King Jr. (I-ME), Christopher Murphy (D-CT), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Ron Wyden (D-OR), and by Representatives Tony Cardenas (D-CA), Joe Courtney (D-CT), Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Richard Hanna (R-NY), Jared Huffman (D-CA), Bill Huizenga (R-MI), Ron Kind (D-WI), Ann Kuster (D-NH), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Reid Ribble (R-WI), Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Randy Weber (R-TX). ### Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-on-supporting-the-highway-trust-fund-,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On Supporting The Highway Trust Fund,2015-12-03,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.03.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On Supporting The Highway Trust Fund Vermonters take great pride in our historic downtowns and small communities. In our cities and towns, we have a culture of getting things done and finding a way to accomplish our shared goals. That is why, like many Vermonters, I have been frustrated with the back-to-back short term patches to keep our highway trust fund afloat. I have consistently advocated for a long-term solution that will give States the ability to move forward with building and repairing roads, bridges, and byways; to promote rail safety and transit, and to invest in the critical infrastructure that supports our cities and towns; to enable interstate and intrastate commerce; and to create jobs for American workers. The time to pass a plan for long term transportation funding has finally come. The FAST Act will bring stability where for too long there has been uncertainty. This bill ensures that Vermont will receive the funding it needs, more than $1.1 billion over the next five years, to allow Vermonters to move forward on infrastructure projects that have been waiting in the wings. In Vermont, the construction season is short and the need is great, and a series of stopgap measures to kick the can down the road was never the right answer. I am pleased there will finally be the stability needed for Vermont, and all states, to move forward to bolster our country's infrastructure. This legislation also reverses changes made to the Federal Crop Insurance program, which was a careful balance first struck in the Farm Bill, sending a clear message that we should not thoughtlessly tamper with the Farm Bill until its next expiration in 2018. And while I'm glad that the harmful Freedom of Information Act exemptions that we eliminated in the Senate bill remain out of this conference report, I am concerned that a new exemption was added. Nowhere is the free flow of information more important than when the safety of every Vermonter, and every American, is at stake. We Vermonters know that in a democracy, demanding 100 percent of what you want and refusing to negotiate effective compromises is a formula for stalemate and paralysis. As a result, Vermonters know that to actually get something done, comprise is a must, and we have advanced the ball a long way down the field. This legislation provides stability to move our infrastructure forward to support our economy. It supports safety provisions to protect the wellbeing of those traveling America's highways and rails. Frankly, to facilitate the thriving communities, commerce, and economic growth that we want and need, we should be doing far more to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. This process should not be reduced to searching under sofa cushions as some have described it -- to scrape together the budget to pay for the vital roads and bridges that are so important to us in so many ways. But with this bill we finally are providing our states and communities with longer lead times to plan and accomplish this work on our infrastructure, and that signals at least a flicker of progress. We've had enough kicking the can down the road and generating year after year of uncertainty. It is time to bring stability and certainty back to our infrastructure and transportation. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-urges-senate-to-protect-vermont-businesses-from-trade-secret-theft,Leahy Urges Senate To Protect Vermont Businesses From Trade Secret Theft,2015-12-02,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.02.15 Leahy Urges Senate To Protect Vermont Businesses From Trade Secret Theft WASHINGTON (WEDNESDAY, Dec. 2, 2015) The Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday held a hearing on the impact of trade secret theft on American businesses. At the hearing, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) noted that Vermont businesses rely on trade secrets to protect their intellectual property and emphasized the importance of those protections. In Vermont, trade secrets protect the specialized knowledge of woodworkers and artisans who have been crafting heirloom products for generations. They protect the secret recipes for Vermont craft brews and closely guarded customer lists for our top tourist services. They protect cutting-edge technologies that Vermont businesses are developing in plastics, complex manufacturing, software and green technology, Leahy said. He added: Trade secrets are especially important to small businesses, which often lack the resources to seek patent protection for their inventions. In the United States, trade secret law is the one form of intellectual property protection that currently lacks a federal civil remedy. Carefully written legislation will fill this gap in the law and provide businesses in Vermont and across the country with an improved tool to protect their intellectual property. Testimony, member statements, and a webcast of today's hearing are available online. # # # # Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Protecting Trade Secrets: the Impact of Trade Secret Theft on American Competitiveness and Potential Solutions to Remedy This HarmDecember 2, 2015 Today's hearing focuses on a topic that is essential to our Nation's economy and our status as the leading source of innovation around the world. In Vermont, trade secrets protect the specialized knowledge of woodworkers and artisans who have been crafting heirloom products for generations. They protect the secret recipes for Vermont craft brews and closely-guarded customer lists for our top tourist services. They protect cutting-edge technologies that Vermont businesses are developing in plastics, complex manufacturing, software, and green technology. Trade secrets are relied on by countless businesses to help keep their products and services unique. Today we will hear about the importance of trade secrets from two companies that have used proprietary information to build global brands and create tens of thousands of jobs across America and around the world. Yet trade secrets are especially important to small businesses, which often lack the resources to seek patent protection for their inventions. The features that make trade secret protections so useful also make them vulnerable, since disclosure by a rogue employee or by a cyber-attack can end their confidential status in an instant. In the United States, trade secret law is the one form of intellectual property protection that currently lacks a federal civil remedy. I have heard from businesses, practitioners, and law enforcement experts that creating such a remedy will improve the law by promoting uniformity and reducing the procedural hurdles that companies now face when stolen information is taken across state lines. Carefully written legislation will fill this gap in the law, and provide businesses in Vermont and across the country with an improved tool to protect their intellectual property. It will also ensure that our Federal law serves as a meaningful example internationally. During my travels to China and other countries I have emphasized the need for strong global protection of trade secrets. There is much more to be done to address the problem of trade secret theft internationally, but adopting a uniform Federal policy at home is one important step. Good, thoughtful work is being done in this Committee to craft such legislation. One priority for me has been ensuring that any seizure remedy to protect trade secrets is narrowly-tailored for example, so that actions to protect confidential information on a computer server do not unintentionally impact other content on the server that is unrelated to the theft. I thank Senators Coons and Hatch for working with me and with technology companies to address this concern. I look forward to the Committee's continued consideration of the bill. In 2012, we passed two pieces of legislation that helped improve our trade secret laws, including the Theft of Trade Secrets Clarification Act, which I introduced to close a troubling loophole in the law that allowed an employee who had stolen trade secrets to go free because the stolen secret was not part of a product sold in interstate commerce. I am glad that the Committee is continuing its bipartisan work in this vital area. I look forward to working with Chairman Grassley, Senators Hatch and Coons, and with all members of this Committee on this important issue for American businesses. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-urges-action-as-cola-deadline-approaches-for-seniors-veterans,"Leahy Urges Action As COLA Deadline Approaches For Seniors, Veterans",2015-12-01,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.01.15 Leahy Urges Action As COLA Deadline Approaches For Seniors, Veterans Legislation Would Boost Social Security By Closing Multi-Million Dollar Corporate Bonus Loophole WASHINGTON (TUESDAY, Dec. 01, 2015) -- With one month to go until seniors and veterans face a rare zero Cost-Of-Living Adjustment (COLA), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and other senators Tuesday urged action on the Senate Floor to pass the SAVE Benefits Act. Cosponsored by Leahy, the bill would boost Social Security and veterans benefits by ending tax subsidies for multi-million dollar corporate bonuses. If Congress does not act, seniors and veterans will face a zero COLA on January 1st. The Seniors and Veterans Emergency Benefits Act (SAVE Benefits Act) would provide about 70 million seniors, veterans, people with disabilities and others an emergency supplemental payment of about $581. This payment is equal to 3.9 percent of the average annual Social Security benefit -- the same percentage raise that CEOs at the top 350 firms received last year. The cost of the bill would be covered by closing a tax loophole allowing corporations to write off executive bonuses as a business expense for ""performance pay."" Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also supports the bill, whose chief sponsor is Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.),On the Senior and Veterans Emergency (SAVE) Benefits Act December 1, 2015 I want to thank Senator Warren for her leadership on a matter of great importance to millions of Americans. In October, Social Security beneficiaries received some upsetting news. For the third time in 40 years, the Social Security Administration announced that, in 2016, Social Security payments will not include a cost-of-living increase. Unless Congress Acts, seniors and others who receive Social Security benefits will not see an additional dime in payments in the new year. For the nearly two-thirds of beneficiaries who depend on Social Security for at least half of their income, and for the 24 percent of those where Social Security is the sole source of income, this news is not just distressing it is devastating. In order to address this issue, I am proud to stand with thousands of Vermonters and millions of Americans, and to support Senator Warren's bill to provide Social Security recipients, those who receive disability benefits, and veterans, among others, a one-time payment next year. This payment would be equivalent to an average increase of 3.9 percentthe same pay increase that the top CEOs in the United States saw last year. Many in Congress have turned a blind eye to the problems facing Social Security, arguing that we cannot as a country possibly afford to spend resources on our seniors. Yet each year, hardworking Americans subsidize billions of dollars in tax subsidies for the compensation packages of corporate CEOs. By no longer allowing corporations to receive tax deductions for performance pay packages for their executives, we could give a one-time, emergency payment to our nation's seniors and increase the solvency of the Social Security Trust Fund without adding a penny to the deficit. It is a matter of priorities. Are we as a country going to support the millions of Americans who depend upon Social Security to make ends meet? Or are we going to continue to allow the country's top CEOswhose average salary in 2014 topped $16 million eachto continue to rake in billions of dollars thanks to the performance pay tax loophole? The choice here should be clear. Social Security is an immensely important program, one that has helped millions of Americans stay out of poverty once entering retirement. This program has always represented a strong commitment to our nation's seniors. Ever since Ida May Fuller of Vermont received the first Social Security check issued, vulnerable seniors have had a safety-net to fall back on in retirement or to supplement individual retirement savings or pensions. Support for this bill represents a continued commitment to our nation's seniors and those with disabilities in this uncertain economy. I hope we can redouble our commitment to seniors, veterans, and those with disabilities in this country by passing this important legislation. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-recognizing-past-crimes-against-humanity-in-indonesia,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On Recognizing Past Crimes Against Humanity in Indonesia,2015-12-01,2015,2015-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.01.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On Recognizing Past Crimes Against Humanity in Indonesia Mr. President, the realignment toward Asia has focused our attention on partnerships with countries in the region. We share political, economic, security, and humanitarian interests, creating complex and multi-dimensional relationships. But our commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights must continue to be a foundation for our relations with these countries, as with others around the world. We must continue to advocate for open societies where dialogue and dissent are encouraged and where security forces are professional and accountable. At the same time, we cannot ignore history. Fifty years ago, under the guise of a state-sanctioned communist purge, hundreds of thousands of Indonesian men, women, and children were murdered. Many more were rounded up and led to concentration camps where they were imprisoned and many were tortured by the security forces of a dictatorial and brutal regime that had the backing of the United States. It has been widely recognized as one of the worst mass atrocities of the 20th Century, but efforts to establish a truth and reconciliation commission to come to terms with these crimes have stalled at every turn. The atrocities are still not recognized or discussed by the Indonesian government and the perpetrators were long celebrated as heroes for their actions. The United States should lead by example in acknowledging this tragic history and reaffirm that human rights are at the forefront of our strategic relationships, in Indonesia and beyond. As the most senior member of the Appropriations Committee, I have supported conditions on foreign assistance, including requiring recipient countries to protect freedoms of expression and association, respect the rule of law and due process, reform their judicial systems and security forces, and strengthen other key elements of a democratic society. Through the Leahy Law, I have sought to encourage reform of Indonesia's military and police forces, promote cooperation with civilian authorities, and hold human rights violators accountable. I have also supported efforts to demilitarize West Papua and stop the human rights violations associated with the militarization of that island. Unfortunately, while Indonesia has made important economic and political strides since the systemic repression of the Suharto years, impunity for the horrific crimes of the 1960s and during the final years of the independence struggle in East Timor remain glaring examples of unfinished business that are inconsistent with a democratic society based on the principle that no one is above the law. We need to recognize the role of our own government in this history, declassify relevant documents, and urge the Indonesian government to acknowledge the massacres and establish a credible truth and justice mechanism. I ask that a poignant opinion piece on this subject that was published in The New Yorker on September 29, 2015, be printed in the Record. # # # # The New Yorker Tuesday, September 29 Suharto's Purge, Indonesia's Silence By Joshua Oppenheimer This week marks the 50th anniversary of the beginning of a mass slaughter inIndonesia. With American support, more than 500,000 people were murdered by the Indonesian Army and its civilian death squads. At least 750,000 more were tortured and sent to concentration camps, many for decades. The victims were accused of being communists, an umbrella that included not only members of the legally registered Communist Party, but all likely opponents ofSuharto's new military regime from union members and women's rights activists to teachers and the ethnic Chinese. Unlike in Germany, Rwanda or Cambodia, there have been no trials, no truth-and-reconciliation commissions, no memorials to the victims. Instead, many perpetrators still hold power throughout the country. Indonesia is the world's fourth most populous nation, and if it is to become the democracy it claims to be, this impunity must end. The anniversary is a moment for the United States to support Indonesia's democratic transition by acknowledging the 1965 genocide, and encouraging a process of truth, reconciliation and justice. On Oct. 1, 1965, six army generals in Jakarta were killed by a group of disaffected junior officers. Maj. Gen. Suharto assumed command of the armed forces, blamed the killings on the leftists, and set in motion a killing machine. Millions of people associated with left-leaning organizations were targeted, and the nation dissolved into terror people even stopped eating fish for fear that fish were eating corpses. Suharto usurped President Sukarno's authority and established himself as de facto president by March 1966. From the very beginning, he enjoyed the full support of the United States. I've spent 12 years investigating the terrible legacy of the genocide, creating two documentary films, The Act of Killing in 2013 and The Look of Silence, released earlier this year. I began in 2003, working with a family of survivors. We wanted to show what it is like to live surrounded by still-powerful perpetrators who had murdered your loved ones. The family gathered other survivors to tell their stories, but the army warned them not to participate. Many survivors urged me not to give up and suggested that I film perpetrators in hopes that they would reveal details of the massacres. I did not know if it was safe to approach the killers, but when I did, I found them open. They offered boastful accounts of the killings, often with smiles on their faces and in front of their grandchildren. I felt I had wandered into Germany 40 years after the Holocaust, only to find the Nazis still in power. Today, former political prisoners from this era still face discrimination and threats. Gatherings of elderly survivors are regularly attacked by military-backed thugs. Schoolchildren are still taught that the extermination of the communists was heroic, and that victims' families should be monitored for disloyalty. This official history, in effect, legitimizes violence against a whole segment of society. The purpose of such intimidation is to create a climate of fear in which corruption and plunder go unchallenged. Inevitably in such an atmosphere, human rights violations have continued since 1965, including the 1975-1999 occupation of East Timor, where enforced starvation contributed to the killing of nearly a third of the population, as well as torture and extrajudicial killing that go on in West Papua today. Military rule in Indonesia formally ended in 1998, but the army remains above the law. If a general orders an entire village massacred, he cannot be tried in civilian courts. The only way he could face justice is if the army itself convenes a military tribunal, or if Parliament establishes a special human rights court something it has never done fairly and effectively. With the military not subject to law, a shadow state of paramilitaries and intelligence agencies has formed around it. This shadow state continues to intimidate the public into silence while, together with its business partners, it loots the national wealth. Indonesia can hold regular elections, but if the laws do not apply to the most powerful elements in society, then there is no rule of law, and no genuine democracy. The country will never become a true democracy until it takes serious steps to end impunity. An essential start is a process of truth, reconciliation and justice. This may still be possible. The Indonesian media, which used to shy from discussing the genocide, now refers to the killings as crimes against humanity, and grassroots activism has taken hold. The current president, Joko Widodo, indicated he would address the 1965 massacre, but he has not established a truth commission, issued a national apology, or taken any other steps to end the military's impunity. We need truth and accountability from the United States as well. U.S. involvement dates at least to an April 1962 meeting between American and British officials resulting in the decision to liquidate President Sukarno, the populist but not communist founding father of Indonesia. As a founder of the nonaligned movement, Sukarno favored socialist policies; Washington wanted to replace him with someone more deferential to Western strategic and commercial interests. The United States conducted covert operations to destabilize Sukarno and strengthen the military. Then, when genocide broke out, America provided equipment, weapons and money. The United States compiled lists containing thousands of names of public figures likely to oppose the new military regime, and handed them over to the Indonesian military, presumably with the expectation that they would be killed. Western aid to Suharto's dictatorship, ultimately amounting to tens of billions of dollars, began flowing while corpses still clogged Indonesia's rivers. The American media celebrated Suharto's rise and his campaign of death. Time magazine said it was the best news for years in Asia. But the extent of America's role remains hidden behind a wall of secrecy: C.I.A. documents and U.S. defense attach papers remain classified. Numerous Freedom of Information Act requests for these documents have been denied. Senator Tom Udall, Democrat of New Mexico, will soon reintroduce a resolution that, if passed, would acknowledge America's role in the atrocities, call for declassification of all relevant documents, and urge the Indonesian government to acknowledge the massacres and establish a truth commission. If the U.S. government recognizes the genocide publicly, acknowledges its role in the crimes, and releases all documents pertaining to the issue, it will encourage the Indonesian government to do the same. This anniversary should be a reminder that although we want to move on, although nothing will wake the dead or make whole what has been broken, we must stop, honor the lives destroyed, acknowledge our role in the destruction, and allow the healing process to begin. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/lawmakers-congress-must-act-ethanol-mandate,Lawmakers: Congress Must Act on Ethanol Mandate,2015-11-30,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Following the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) release of the final rules for the 2014-2016 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), Reps. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Steve Womack (R-Ar.), and Jim Costa (D-Calif.) released the following statement: The EPA's decision to funnel more ethanol into the fuel supply is terribly disappointing. The RFS requirements announced today will push ethanol volumes beyond the blendwall in 2016, leaving American consumers and our economy to feel the negative effects. While well-intentioned, it's now abundantly clear the RFS is a broken policy that is having drastic impacts on families, small businesses and retailers, the agriculture community, and the environment. Neglecting the concerns of 184 bipartisan Members of the House of Representatives over increasing ethanol requirements, the EPA proceeded anyway. And since the EPA refuses to keep RFS volumes below the blendwall, Congress must act to fix this broken ethanol mandate. A growing majority in Congress has recognized the real-world limitations' of this bungled policy, and a recent survey found 70 percent of Americans oppose it. The RFS Reform Act is a solution to the problems created by the ethanol mandate, and our bill would finally provide much-needed, long-term relief for those impacted by the failures of this policy. Recently, 184 bipartisan Members of the House of Representatives joined in sending a letter to EPA Administrator McCarthy expressing concerns regarding the proposed 2016 RFS requirements. In February 2015, Goodlatte, Welch, Womack, and Costa introduced the RFS Reform Act (H.R. 704), which eliminates corn-based ethanol requirements, caps the amount of ethanol that can be blended into conventional gasoline at 10 percent, and requires the EPA to set cellulosic biofuels levels at production levels. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/hoyer-welch-house-democrats-send-letter-speaker-ryan-need-robust-long,"Hoyer, Welch, House Democrats Send Letter to Speaker Ryan on Need for Robust, Long-Term Surface Transportation Funding",2015-11-27,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC - House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer (MD) joined Congressman Peter Welch (VT) and 60 Democrats in sending the following letter to Speaker Ryan on Wednesday about the need for robust, long-term funding for infrastructure repairs and improvements that will strengthen America's economic competitiveness. To read the letter, click here or see below. November 25, 2015 Hon. Paul D. Ryan Speaker U.S. House of Representatives H-232, The Capitol Washington, DC 20515 Dear Mr. Speaker: As the House and Senate work to finalize a long term surface transportation conference report, we urge you to support the higher funding levels needed to strengthen our surface transportation infrastructure and improve our competitiveness. There is bipartisan agreement that our transportation infrastructure is crumbling because the federal investment has failed to keep pace with our growing transportation needs. A quarter of our bridges are deficient; more than half our road are rated below good condition, and congestion increasingly burdens commerce. The American Society of Civil Engineers gives our infrastructure a nearly failing grade of D+. Prior to MAP-21, successive surface transportation bills consistently provided significant increases in funding. Unfortunately, while the Senate bill does contain small increases above the current inadequate baseline spending levels, neither the House nor the Senate version of H.R. 22 identifies or guarantees the funding sources sufficient to maintain our current transportation infrastructure, let alone the upgrades that are so urgently needed to expand and modernize that infrastructure. Given this shortfall in funding, we urge you to join us in supporting a conference report that packs the most punch by shortening the duration of the reauthorization perhaps to three or four years instead of six -- and increasing the transportation investment in each of those years. This is not a novel idea: the Chamber of Commerce recently wrote, The Chamber urges you to ensure that the conference report maximizes the benefits it would provide, rather than focusing on the number of years the transportation authorization would last. Providing increased funding for projects within less than the six year duration of this bill would help ensure long overdue needs are addressed in a more timely basis. We believe this approach will create jobs, improve our international competitiveness, make our roads safer, and provide American families and businesses with better transportation alternatives. Sincerely yours, Steny Hoyer Peter Welch James E. Clyburn Joseph Crowley Brad Ashford Ami Bera Donald Beyer Earl Blumenauer Madeleine Z. Bordallo Brendan Boyle Julia Brownley Tony Crdenas Kathy Castor Yvette Clarke Wm. Lacy Clay Jim Costa Elijah E. Cummings John K. Delaney Mark DeSaulnier Ted Deutch Michael F. Doyle Tammy Duckworth Elizabeth H. Esty Sam Farr Ruben Gallego John Garamendi Alan Grayson Gene Green Raul M. Grijalva Luis V. Gutirrez Alcee L. Hastings Brian Higgins Ruben Hinojosa Michael Honda William R. Keating Robin Kelly Daniel T. Kildee Derek Kilmer Ann Kirkpatrick Ann M. Kuster Brenda L. Lawrence Barbara Lee Ted Lieu Alan S. Lowenthal Michelle Lujan Grisham Jerry McNerney Gregory W. Meeks Grace Meng Gwen Moore Seth Moulton Donald Norcross Ed Perlmutter Scott Peters Pedro R. Pierluisi Mark Pocan Jared Polis Mike Quigley Kathleen M. Rice Linda Snchez Bobby Scott Terri Sewell Eric Swalwell",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/-with-gratitude-in-our-hearts-lets-resolve-to-end-hunger,"With Gratitude In Our Hearts, Lets Resolve To End Hunger",2015-11-23,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.23.15 With Gratitude In Our Hearts, Let's Resolve To End Hunger By Patrick Leahy This week we gather with family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving and rekindle some of the most important relationships in our lives. All of us in this great and good land have things to be thankful for. Some of us will give special thanks for good health or good fortune over the past year. We are always grateful when we can spend time with our loved ones. As we express thanks for the bounty that we enjoy, it can be easy to take for granted the comfortable shelter and the full tables that help make homecoming comfortable. For the 48 million Americans struggling with food insecurity, Thanksgiving can be a time of great stress and need as they grapple with the challenges of affording enough food for their families. Each and every day, millions of Americans face the uncertainty of not knowing when they and their families will have their next meals. Hunger and malnourishment are not confined to developing nations; they exist across the nation, and in our own communities. Nearly one in seven Vermonters receives 3SquaresVT help, and about 13 percent of all Vermont households face food hardship each year. One in five children faces hunger each day in Vermont, while more than 150,000 Vermonters each year rely on the safety net of food shelves, meal sites, senior centers and after-school programs for nutritional resources that they would not otherwise have without the support of the people of their communities. Across the nation, the costs of everyday essentials like food, heat, housing and medicine continue to rise, straining families' budgets. Americans should not have the impossible dilemma of having to choose between heat and food, but far too many must do that. Hunger can take its biggest toll on children. Kids who live in food-insecure homes are at greater risk of developmental setbacks, poor academic performance, nutrient deficiencies, obesity and depression. Food assistance programs have shown that these statistics can be turned around, or at least stabilized. Federal nutrition programs reduce the risk of children developing health problems, and they are associated with declines in the incidence of child abuse. Children from families who receive help from supplemental nutrition programs are also shown to have a higher achievement in math and reading, and improved behavior, social interactions and diet quality than children who go without. We all know that a hungry child cannot learn. Every child in America deserves a fair chance, which is why investments in nutrition programs are so important. As the senior member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry I am working to defend and continue the programs that counter childhood hunger, including the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children; the school lunch program; and the Child and Adult Care Food program. Years ago when I chaired the committee I was proud to restore Nutrition to the committee's title and to elevate its place on our portfolio of priorities. The Farm to School Act that I authored helps schools feed all children farm-fresh food while teaching them the importance of healthy eating lessons that will promote good health over a lifetime. This spring I had the chance to visit Milton Elementary School and saw students eager to fill their trays with nutritious, locally produced foods at the lunch counter. Milton also feeds hundreds of local families at monthly dinners aimed at bridging community relationships, as well as supplementing everyone's knowledge and skills for healthy eating habits. Since Milton began these programs, student participation in the school lunch program has risen from 38 percent to 65 percent. Milton's approach is proof that local and federal community investments in child nutrition and the farm to school program are making tangible strides in improving child and family health a model for communities everywhere. Vermont has made tremendous effort and achieved great progress in lifting Vermonters out of poverty with anti-hunger programs and with partners like the Vermont Foodbank and Hunger Free Vermont. We must also support these partnership efforts in Washington. Congress can help ensure that foodbanks are well-stocked by passing the Good Samaritan Act, a bill I authored to expand and make permanent tax deductions for donating food. Every year, 70 billion pounds of fit and wholesome food is sent into landfills. There's simply no excuse that in the wealthiest nation on Earth, people do not have enough to eat. We spend billions of dollars to dispose of wasted food. What if we instead invested this food in our own people? During Thanksgiving, and every week of the year, let's recommit ourselves to eradicating hunger. Together we can give a voice to our fellow Vermonters and fellow Americans who are often overlooked and marginalized. We have made meaningful progress in several ways in the fight against hunger and poverty. With gratitude in our hearts, let us resolve to do more. # # # # # [U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) serves on the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition And Forestry.] Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/our-enemy-is-isis-not-refugees-fleeing-isis,"Our Enemy Is ISIS, Not Refugees Fleeing ISIS",2015-11-20,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.20.15 Our Enemy Is ISIS, Not Refugees Fleeing ISIS Last Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to make it almost impossible for people from Syria and Iraq, fleeing the brutality of ISIS and Bashar al-Assad, to find refuge in the United States. It is worth reflecting on what this means for our country. Just a few weeks ago the world came together, stunned and heartbroken over the image of a three-year-old Syrian child's lifeless body washed up on a Turkish beach. His tragic death focused our attention on the desperate plight of so many Syrians who have fled the horror of ISIS and Assad's army. We called it the humanitarian issue of our day. We called forth images of the Statue of Liberty and our proud history as a safe haven for those fleeing persecution and war. Just days later, we hear calls to slam the door. To shut down our borders. To ignore that great symbol of refuge standing in New York Harbor. We should remember that the people we will shut out are those very children who touched our hearts just weeks ago. We watched in horror as desperate mothers and fathers loaded their infants into precarious rafts, awestruck that the risk of death was preferable to whatever terror they were fleeing. We are a country of immigrants. In the past year, about 70,000 refugees from almost 70 countries have resettled in the United States. Fewer than 2000 were Syrians mostly children, women, and the elderly who have been the victims of horrific violence and acts of terrorism, like ISIS's victims in Paris. By contrast, some nations have accepted hundreds of thousands of these desperate people. They have come here only after passing the most rigorous screening procedures for any population of travelers, which involve multiple federal law enforcement agencies and require anywhere from 18 months to two years to complete. Vermont has a proud and compassionate history of welcoming refugees, as Governor Shumlin has demonstrated in upholding our legacy, in the face of the knee-jerk retreats signaled by some states. These new Vermonters have enriched our communities culturally, socially and economically. Yet legislation reflexively introduced in Congress, like that approved in the House on Nov. 19, would collectively punish an entire population of people for one reason only: their country of origin. It does so based on the crimes of less than a dozen individuals, only one of whom may have been of Syrian nationality. We should reject this shortsighted, unnecessary, impulsive response. It will do nothing to make us safer. Instead it punishes thousands of innocent people who are fleeing atrocities by ISIS and others -- the very same barbaric terrorists we are trying to defeat -- as they struggle to escape being killed in Syria. At least one candidate for President has spoken of rounding up Syrians and sending them home. We must never forget the U.S. internment camps during World War II, when thousands of Japanese Americans were imprisoned for no other reason than their country of origin. It was a shameful period in our history, and one that should not be repeated. Others running for President suggest that we should admit only refugees who are Christians. Is that the kind of nation we want to become, when our Constitution guarantees religious liberty? As governors, presidential candidates, and many members of Congress call for slamming the door on Syrians fleeing death and destruction, France's President Hollande has shown leadership by reaffirming his government's intention to accept 30,000 refugees over the next two years. This is the example also shown by our neighbor to the north, Canada. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, once, herself, a refugee from Czechoslovakia, reminds us of the millions of refugees who have come to our shores in the 67 years since she arrived with her family. Like them, the Syrian people, whose country is being destroyed, have no choice but to leave. We are all horrified by what happened in Beirut and Paris. We need an effective, thoughtful strategy for countering ISIS and other terrorist organizations. This is what we should be debating, because what we have done so far is not working. ISIS is our enemy. The Syrian people fleeing ISIS are not. Intolerance has no place in this great and good country. Accepting refugees is a part of our history, our culture, of who we are, and it can be done safely with the proper screening procedures. This week, we give thanks for our freedom and for the American tradition of serving as a beacon of hope to those who are persecuted and in need of refuge. It would be a cruel irony if a terrorist attack in France caused us to abandon the American values embodied in France's gift to America, the Statue of Liberty. # # # # # [Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., is Vermont's senior United States Senator] Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-the-need-to-reform-the-eb-5-regional-center-program-,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Need To Reform the EB-5 Regional Center Program",2015-11-20,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.20.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Need To Reform the EB-5 Regional Center Program I have championed the EB-5 Regional Center program for many years. I have done so because I have seen its ability to generate investment and create jobs in distressed communities. But the program is facing some pressing challenges. Reports of rampant fraud and abuse raise serious concerns and threaten to cripple the program's integrity. The incentives Congress established to invest in high unemployment and rural communities are also routinely abused, undermining a core objective of the programto spur growth and create jobs in underserved areas. The Regional Center program is set to expire on December 11. It should be reauthorized, but we should not extend it blindly. There is bipartisan consensus that the program is in dire need of reform, and we cannot squander this opportunity. I have long sought reforms to the Regional Center program. Last Congress, my EB-5 amendment to Comprehensive Immigration Reform provided the Department of Homeland Security additional authority to revoke suspect regional center designations or immigrant petitions. It also provided for increased reporting, background checks, and securities oversight. My amendment was unanimously approved in the Judiciary Committee, but unfortunately the improvements it contained have all had to wait, as the House of Representatives failed to allow a vote on the bipartisan immigration reform bill that passed the Senate last Congress. In the past year, only more concerns have emerged. In January, I joined Senators Grassley, Corker, Johnson, and others in requesting that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit the EB-5 program. The GAO report, released in August, detailed fraud vulnerabilities within the program and questioned its economic impact. Separate reports from the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Intelligence and Analysis and Office of the Inspector General highlighted additional issues that need to be addressed. I am also troubled by the fact that the incentives Congress created to promote EB-5 investment in rural and high unemployment areas have been rendered meaningless. Investors are provided a discount if they choose to invest in rural or high unemployment areas, known as targeted employment areas or TEAs. At present, however, the most affluent neighborhoods in the country routinely qualify as TEAs by selectively stitching together otherwise unrelated census tracts. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Johnson rightly described this practice as gerrymandering. I do not suggest that affluent areas should not benefit from EB-5. They should. But they should not qualify for incentives intended to benefit high unemployment and rural areas. These areas typically do not have access to significant capital and often struggle to create jobs. Secretary Johnson himself called for significant reforms to strengthen the Regional Center program. In a letter to the Judiciary Committee last April, he asked for authority to quickly act on criminal and national security concerns, additional protections for investors, enhanced reporting and auditing, improved integrity of TEAs, increased minimum investment amounts, and more. I have now worked for over two years to develop legislation that would provide a necessary overhaul of the Regional Center program.In June, I was joined by Chairman Grassley in introducing this reform-oriented legislation, S.1501.Since then, Chairman Grassley and I have worked with House Judiciary Chairman Goodlatte on a bicameral bill based on S.1501. This bicameral bill would provide the Department with the authorities and investigative tools necessary to address national security concerns and fraud. The reforms include further expanding background checks, conducting a more thorough vetting of immigrant investors and proposed investments, and providing for the ability to proactively investigate fraud, both in the United States and abroad, using a dedicated fund paid for by certain program participants. The bill would provide greater protections for investors and clarity and shorter processing times for project developers. It would also raise minimum investment thresholds so more money goes to the communities that need it. And it would help to restore the program to its original intent, by ensuring that incentives to invest in distressed and undercapitalized areas are restored. Such reforms would answer the concerns raised by Secretary Johnson, the Department's Inspector General, the GAO, and others, instilling both confidence and transparency in the program. I believe these reforms would result in a secure EB-5 program that creates American jobs and promotes economic growth throughout our country. We cannot continue to leave the Department ill-equipped to administer this job creation program. We know what is needed to fix it. And we should fix it now. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-continues-leading-role-in-bipartisan-push-to-reauthorize-and-fund-the-nations-premier-conservation-fund,Leahy Continues Leading Role In Bipartisan Push To Reauthorize And Fund The Nations Premier Conservation Fund,2015-11-19,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.19.15 Leahy Continues Leading Role In Bipartisan Push To Reauthorize And Fund The Nation's Premier Conservation Fund . . . Land And Water Conservation Fund Is Under Attack In The House WASHINGTON (THURSDAY, Nov. 19, 2015) Ratcheting up a bipartisan effort to reauthorize a longstanding conservation program, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) this week joined a coalition of 14 senators calling on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Minority Leader Harry Reid to move to permanently reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), and provide full mandatory funding for the program. Leahy also led a separate bipartisan letter to the chair and ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies urging strong funding for the LWCF and the Forest Legacy Program in Fiscal Year 2016. The authorization for the LWCF expired in September after 50 years of funding conservation work in communities in Vermont and across the nation. Leahy and other senators wrote Leader McConnell and Minority Leader Reid: For the economy, sportsmen, veterans, wildlife and our kids and grandkids, we must permanently reauthorize LWCF it is America's most successful conservation program. We also strongly request that you include mandatory full funding in any must-pass year end legislation. The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1964 established one of America's most successful conservation programs. Using funds primarily derived from oil and gas receipts paid to the federal government by energy companies that extract publically owned resources not using tax dollars -- the program supports the nation's land, water, historic and recreational heritage. The program also supports America's outdoor recreation, conservation and preservation economies, which contribute more than $1 trillion to the nation's economy each year and support 9.4 million American jobs. Leahy, the senior-most member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, has long supported the LWCF and promoted its success in communities across Vermont and the country. The letter to Leader McConnell and Minority Leader Reid, led by Senators Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Richard Burr (R-N.C.), was also signed by Susan M. Collins (R-ME), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Kelly A. Ayotte (R-N.H.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and Steve Daines (R-Mont.). Leahy's letter to the chair and ranking member of the Senate Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, in which Leahy was joined by Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Susan M. Collins (R-ME), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Kelly A. Ayotte (R-N.H.). # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/senate-floor-remarks-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-as-he-and-senator-richard-durbin-d-ill-object-to-the-sudden-bid-by-senator-cruz-to-bring-his-anti-refugee-bill-to-an-immediate-senate-vote,Senate Floor Remarks Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) As He And Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) Object To The Sudden Bid By Senator Cruz To Bring His Anti-Refugee Bill To An Immediate Senate Vote,2015-11-19,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.19.15 Senate Floor Remarks Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) As He And Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) Object To The Sudden Bid By Senator Cruz To Bring His Anti-Refugee Bill To An Immediate Senate Vote [Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) on Thursday spoke on the Senate Floor to object to a bid by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to force an immediate vote on his anti-refugee bill, introduced an hour earlier. Leahy for decades has been a leader in honoring America's commitment to help refugees seeking safety from atrocities abroad and is the coauthor of the bipartisan legislation to respond to the refugee crisis the Middle East Refugee Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act which he introduced with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). Recalling the heartbreak felt the world over on seeing the image of a three-year old Syrian child's lifeless body washed up on a Turkish beach, Leahy said that ISIS is our enemy, NOT the Syrian refugees fleeing ISIS atrocities.] I thank the distinguished chair. I'm worried in this country that we hear rhetoric that is dangerous, and it's time to stop. It shames the very nature of what America is. We hear ideas that are wrong. I would say they are deeply anti-American. My Italian grandparents and my Irish great great-grandparents heard some of this rhetoric when some in this country said they shouldn't come here. Don't allow these papists into the United States. Don't allow these Irish that are opposed to the rule of Great Britain in their island that actually stood up and fought against Great Britain. And the words back then, like some of the words today, come from a place of fear and hatred. I don't want to stand by quietly and see the victims of terrorism and torture be demonized just so people will have a talking point for the local evening news. We are better than this. The bill that my colleague, the junior senator from Texas, introduced an hour ago would prevent virtually all nationals of Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen from refugee protection regardless of how they suffered at the hands of terrorists and despots. Women fleeing gang rapes, children fleeing horrors we cannot even imagine, they would be closed off. A few weeks ago the world came together stunned and heart-broken over the image of a three-year-old Syrian child's lifeless body washed up on a Turkish beach. His tragic death focused our attention on the plight of so many Syrians who have fled the horror of ISIS and Bashar Al-Assad. We called it the humanitarian issue of the day. We called forth images of our Statue of Liberty and our proud history as a land of refuge for those fleeing persecution. I heard so many on this floor as well as commentators in the news. But those who call now to slam our door on even properly vetted Syrian and other refugees should remember that the people we will shut out are the very children who touched our hearts just weeks ago. Of course we are horrified by what happened in Beirut and Paris. And we need an effective, thoughtful strategy for countering ISIS and other terrorist organizations. That is what we should be debating. We should be talking about how more countries should be involved in this fight. ISIS is our enemy. The people fleeing ISIS are not. In fact, we've had discussions about other things that could be done. Somebody who's on a terrorist watch list, but is in this country legally, can go to a gun show and buy all the weapons they want. They'd break no law. They can buy all the ammunition they want. They break no law. They can go to the store like the terrorist who did the Oklahoma City bombing -- and buy the components of a bomb. They break no law. These are the things we ought to be discussing. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-the-anniversary-of-executive-action-on-immigration,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On The Anniversary Of Executive Action On Immigration",2015-11-19,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.19.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On The Anniversary Of Executive Action On Immigration A year ago today, in a nationwide address, President Obama announced a series of measures to improve our broken immigration system. He outlined efforts to focus scarce resources on identifying and deporting those people who pose a danger to our communities, to modernize our legal immigration system, and to provide temporary relief from the threat of deportation forhardworking, law-abiding members of our communities. For many, the President's announcement offered, at last, a hope for stability. It acknowledged the longstanding presence and contributions of immigrants to our country. But the President's announcement also underscored the real human consequences of the House of Representatives failing to allow a vote to reform our immigration laws. Importantly, it highlighted the impracticality of deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants. Many of them have strong family ties in the United States and a deep desire to become fully integrated in our country. They are mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters. To suggest that we can simply remove them is unrealistic and it would conflict with fundamental American values. The President's executive action is no substitute for legislation. He reminded critics of that very fact during his address, pointing out that the commonsense, responsible solution to the problems in our immigration system is to pass a comprehensive reform bill. A year later, the Republican-led Senate has failed to debate, let alone pass meaningful immigration reform. Instead, it has repeatedly taken up divisive and partisan proposals that do not reflect a desire to fix what we all agree is a broken system. These political gimmicks are not serious attempts to address an issue as important as immigration and could not be more different from what the Democratic-led Senate accomplished in 2013 when we passed a bipartisan immigration bill supported by 68 Senators. During the Senate Judiciary Committee's consideration of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, I convened multiple hearings and we heard from 42 witnesses. Government officials and individuals representing a range of perspectives including law enforcement, civil rights, labor, faith, business, and state and local governments testified about the challenges confronting our current immigration system. We heard the powerful testimony of witnesses such as Jose Antonio Vargas and Gaby Pacheco, who pressed the urgent need for immigration reform. The compelling stories of DREAMers, young immigrants brought to this country as children, who have grown up as Americans and have every desire to make meaningful contributions to their communities, continue to inspire. Many of them have qualified for the temporary relief provided by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which has established a path for them to become our next generation of teachers, engineers, public servants, and doctors. Our Senate-passed, comprehensive bill included the DREAM Act, an important measure that would have provided a long-lasting solution to the problems these courageous young individuals face, acknowledging that they deserve to be part of our nation's future. The Senate-passed bill would have addressed many of the injustices in our current immigration system. It was a remarkable example of all that we can accomplish when we actually focus on the hard job of legislating. But the Republican-led House of Representatives blocked that effort. It stubbornly refused to even allow a vote on that bill. Given that lack of action, I understand the President's frustration and motivation. His executive action was a response to what we all acknowledge is a broken system, but it is no substitute for comprehensive immigration reform. Following the President's announcement, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the executive action program and heard the testimony of Astrid Silva. Hers is a fundamentally American story. It is similar in many ways to those of our parents and grandparents. It is a story of a family looking to find a better life. Astrid qualifies for the President's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. And her parents would be eligible for the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) program because her younger brother is a U.S. citizen. For more than 20 years, Astrid's family has been working hard and contributing to their local community. They are the kind of family we want to have as our neighbors and coworkers. Their stories remind us that their dreams, along with those of so many others affected by our dysfunctional immigration system, hang in the balance, and underscore the need for a permanent legislative solution. Some in Congress claim that the President's executive action undermined the prospect of achieving comprehensive immigration reform. But I remind them that the President's action prompted by Congressional inaction is not an excuse for continued Congressional inaction. We must keep working to find a permanent legislative solution that provides today's immigrants with an opportunity to prosper and contribute to our country. As families across the nation gather next week around the table to give thanks, we will all count our family members and their security among our greatest blessings. Our fight for comprehensive immigration reform is at its core a fight to help reunite families and provide the security that we all want for our loved ones. I urge Republicans to return to the cooperative and bipartisan approach of 2013 and work on comprehensive immigration reform legislation. The American people support immigration reform. It is the right thing to do, and it should not be delayed any longer. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/chamberlin-school-south-burlington-vt,"Chamberlin School, South Burlington, VT",2015-11-18,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.18.15 Chamberlin School, South Burlington, VT On November 18, 2015, Senator Leahy hosted an online chat with the Chamberlin School of South Burlington. The Senator was impressed with the engagement of the fifth grade classrooms, and enjoyed their rendition of their school song. The Senator also enjoyed answering their questions on his long term projects in the Senate, like his work on the USDA Farm to School grant program. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-on-the-need-to-support-refugees-fleeing-violence,Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On the Need to Support Refugees Fleeing Violence,2015-11-18,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.18.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On the Need to Support Refugees Fleeing Violence [Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) issued the following comment Wednesday on the need to support Syrian refugees. Leahy, who is also the Ranking Member of the State Department's budget committee the State Department and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee has long led efforts to support assistance for refugees. He is the coauthor of the bipartisan Graham-Leahy Middle East Refugee Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act to respond to the refugee crisis resulting from conflict in the Middle East.] Just a few weeks ago the world came together stunned and heartbroken over the image of a three year old Syrian child's lifeless body washed up on a Turkish beach. His tragic death focused our attention on the desperate plight of so many Syrians who have fled the horror of ISIS and Bashar al-Assad. We called it the humanitarian issue of our day. We called forth images of the Statue of Liberty and our proud history as a land of refuge for those fleeing persecution. Those who call now to slam our doors on even properly vetted Syrian refugees should remember that the people we will shut out are those very children who touched our hearts just weeks ago. We are all horrified by what happened in Beirut and Paris. We need an effective, thoughtful strategy for countering ISIS and other terrorist organizations. That is something we should be debating, because what we have done so far is not working. ISIS is our enemy. The Syrian people fleeing ISIS are not. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/senator-leahy-invites-vt-family-to-testify-at-hearing-on-international-adoption,Senator Leahy Invites VT Family To Testify At Hearing On International Adoption,2015-11-18,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.18.15 Senator Leahy Invites VT Family To Testify At Hearing On International Adoption WASHINGTON (Wednesday, Nov. 18, 2015) Christine Hutchins and her family from Cambridge, Vt., Wednesday came to the Senate Judiciary Committee to share their story of adopting their son James from Sierra Leone. Hutchins was invited to testify by the committee Ranking Member Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) at the hearing, just days before National Adoption Day. Leahy said: The Hutchins' journey to parenthood is one of courage and perseverance. They represent many other Vermont families who have similarly opened their hearts to a child in need through international adoption. I have been inspired by each Vermont family my office has helped through the adoption process. Hutchins testified during the hearing about her experience adopting her new son James in May, 2015. She and her husband Jonathan have been married for 11 years. Christine and Jonathan live in Cambridge, Vt., where Jonathan was raised. Christine was raised in Georgia, Vt. Hutchins' sister-in-law, Jennifer Smithers, and her husband Gregory Smithers, who adopted James' twin sister Grace were also at the hearing. Both families represent many other Vermont families who have similarly opened their hearts to children in need through international adoption. Leahy's full statement is available here, and Hutchins' statement is available here. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-hearing-on-national-adoption-month-stories-of-success-and-meeting-the-challenges-of-international-adoptions,"Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Hearing on National Adoption Month: Stories of Success and Meeting the Challenges of International Adoptions",2015-11-18,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.18.15 Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Hearing on National Adoption Month: Stories of Success and Meeting the Challenges of International Adoptions Next week, millions of families in this country will gather around a table to give thanks for the many blessings they have received. For proud parents and grandparents, this of course includes their children and grandchildren. It is fitting that this month we also recognize National Adoption Month, which honors the adoptive families who selflessly open their hearts and homes to children from the United States and around the world who are in need of a safe and loving family. Today we raise awareness about some of the barriers to international adoption and recommit ourselves to work together to improve the international adoption system. We must unite as families, communities, and policy makers, to find permanent, loving homes for all children. We will hear inspirational stories of international adoption. I am honored to welcome Christine Hutchins from Cambridge, Vermont. She and her husband, Jonathan Hutchins, welcomed their son James from Sierra Leone last year. I would also like to welcome Christine's sister-in-law, Jennifer Smithers, and her husband Gregory Smithers, who adopted James' twin sister Grace. Their journey to parenthood is one of courage and perseverance. They represent many other Vermont families who have similarly opened their hearts to a child in need through international adoption. I have been inspired by each family my office has helped through the adoption process. These families include Rabbi Joanie Chase and her husband Harley Parry from Rutland, Vermont, who adopted their son Ezra, from Ethiopia. My office helped to expedite the adoption process due to Ezra's health issues at the time. Ezra is now four years old. He is very healthy, active and much loved by his family, especially by his 10-year old sister, Arielle. Sarah and Paul Messenger of Townshend, Vermont, adopted their son Leyeyo from Tanzania, after having sponsored him to study in the United States. He came to Vermont when he was 9 years old, speaking no English and is now a successful high school student who plays soccer, ice hockey and lacrosse and is applying to colleges. Jen Violette and John Gerding from Wilmington, Vermont, have two adopted sons from South Korea. Niko is 6-and-a-half years old and his biological brother Bennett, who was adopted two years later, is now 5-and-a-half. My office became involved in assisting with Bennett's adoption. These boys are full of energy and deeply bonded with each other and their adoptive parents and bring joy to everyone around them. These Vermonters are just a few examples of the many Americans who have chosen to create a family through international adoption. I am happy that Vermont is not alone in reaching out to children across the globe. Just last year, American families adopted 6,441 children through international adoption. These families welcomed children from 99 different countries. We know that adoption of any kind international or domestic is unlikely for the vast majority of orphaned and abandoned children in many foreign countries. We can help those countries strengthen their child welfare systems and do a better job of caring for their children. But when international adoption is an option it provides children with a loving home and bright future filled with possibility. It can also be complicated, both legally and diplomatically. It can take an emotional, physical, and financial toll on a family. We also know that corruption is a serious problem in many countries of origin for adopted children, and there have been instances when governments have suspended international adoptions altogether as a result of reports of abuse. Many of the families we will hear from today have experienced delays during their adoption process, some for this very reason. As lawmakers, we must do our part to ensure that our laws not only provide protections for vulnerable children, but also to provide clarity to American families who want to be a forever family. That is why we are here today. I thank Chairman Grassley for convening this hearing on such an important humanitarian issue. I also look forward to hearing the compelling stories of the families with us today. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-statement-speaker-shap-smith,Welch Statement on Speaker Shap Smith,2015-11-17,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONRep. Peter Welch (D-VT) today issued the following statement on Speaker Shap Smith's decision to suspend his gubernatorial campaign. The challenges of life arrive on their own timetable, never convenient and always disruptive. Melissa has a thriving career as a much loved community physician. And Shap is a respected attorney, legislative leader, and strong gubernatorial candidate. For them, the timing could not have been worse. But that was beyond their control. What was within their control was how they responded. They are both fully engaged parents to Eli and Mia. They are both deeply committed to each other. And, together, they made a decision that reveals their strong character. We all support them and wish them well. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-speaker-shap-smith,Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy On Speaker Shap Smith,2015-11-17,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.17.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy On Speaker Shap Smith I spoke with Speaker Smith today and conveyed the heartfelt hopes, wishes and prayers that Marcelle and I have for him, Melissa and their family. Throughout his career in public service, Shap has worked to keep his priorities in order, striving to do the right things, for the right reasons. That has been a mark of his character, and a reason for the deep respect he has earned across our state. In this difficult decision, he has done that again. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-vermont-nets-125000-to-connect-schools-and-local-farms_,"Leahy: Vermont Nets $125,000 To Connect Schools And Local Farms",2015-11-17,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.17.15 Leahy: Vermont Nets $125,000 To Connect Schools And Local Farms WASHINGTON (Tuesday, Nov. 17, 2015) A program long championed by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) will invest $125,000 in bolstering efforts to bring local agriculture into the classrooms and cafeterias of schools across Vermont. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced the Farm to School grants Tuesday to connect child nutrition programs with local farmers. Leahy said: Tying local agriculture to our schools not only provides our children with healthy meals and improved nutrition, it encourages a long standing connection to the farms that are so iconic of our Green Mountain State. Every student deserves equal access to healthy meals, and I am proud that our school nutrition leaders will use these funds to help all children gain a better understand about where their food comes from. Today's announcement is another example of how Vermont continues to lead the nation in implementing this winning strategy. The Burlington School District received a $100,000 grant to expand hands-on food and garden-based education. The district has several gardens, which schools use to integrate nutrition education into the curriculum. Through the use of hands-on food science students are gaining heightened awareness of the importance of cultivation and nutrition. The funds will also be used to increase the availability of local beef in school meals. Farm to School is a valuable tool in creating food access for students and providing them with the ability to learn about their food, where it comes from, and the farmers growing it, said Doug Davis, Director of Food Service for the Burlington School Food Project. Knowing where your food comes from is one of the most important aspects of creating a sustainable food system. Burlington has been working in Farm to School for well over 10 years, and this grant will help us to move our program forward and allow us to create a model that can be replicated around our state. I am grateful to Senator Leahy and his team for making these grants available to schools around the country as part of the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act. The Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets also received a $25,000 grant for a statewide farm-to-school training to encourage Vermont supply chain partners to engage in agriculture development learning. This grant arrives on the heels of an Agency-led strategic mapping process to better inform farm to school practices in Vermont that identified this priority. Farm to School programs are a vital tool we can use to promote agricultural literacy in schools so that, from an early age, students understand the value of nutrition, develop healthy eating habits, and appreciate where their food comes from, said Vermont Secretary of Agriculture Chuck Ross.This USDA Farm to School Training Grant will provide a valuable opportunity to convene statewide FTS stakeholders and work collaboratively to develop and deepen partnerships between Vermont farmers, schools, nonprofits, community members, state government and other partners in order to increase the positive impact of Farm to School programming in Vermont. These awards were part of $4.9 million in grants for 74 projects across 39 states that were announced Tuesday as part of a program that Leahy championed in the creation of the child nutrition bill of 2010, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act. Since the program began awarding grants three years ago, Vermont has received over $425,000 in federal funding. Earlier this year, preliminary results from the 2015 USDA Farm to School Census announced that schools with robust farm to school programs are seeing reductions in plate waste, increases in school meal participation rates, and an increased willingness on the part of children to try new foods, notably fruits and vegetables. Students at Vermont schools with Farm to School programs were above the state and national averages for fruit and vegetable consumption The Leahy-authored USDA Farm to School program receives $5 million per year in annual appropriations. This year Leahy and Senator Thad Cochran (R Miss.) introduced bipartisan legislation to raise the program's funding level from $5 million to $15 million, and increase the maximum grant award to $200,000. The legislation also expands the scope of the program to include preschools, summer food service programs, and after-school programs, and it enhances access to tribal foods and other farming, such as aquaculture. The legislation also helps grantees improve procurement and distribution of local food. Leahy added: In Vermont we have long seen the benefits of farm to school programs in addressing child hunger. Since we started the USDA program, grant applications have far exceed the funds available. It is time we provide additional support to this commonsense strategy. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-in-support-of-the-administrations-clean-power-plan,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), In Support of the Administrations Clean Power Plan",2015-11-17,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.17.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), In Support of the Administration's Clean Power Plan [WASHINGTON (Tuesday, Nov. 17, 2015) The Senate Tuesday passed two resolutions disapproving the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan, an historic initiative led by the administration to combat the effects of climate change and benefit public health by reducing carbon emissions and encouraging a cleaner energy future. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) has long warned that the threat of climate change is now at our doorstep and called the resolutions an attempt to roll back one of the most meaningful environmental initiatives of our time.] Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.),In Support of the Administration's Clean Power Plan November 17, 2015 There is irrefutable evidence, with more accumulating all the time, that humans have altered not just the weather of a region, but the climate of our entire planet. From flooding felt across the country to extreme temperatures from north to south and east to west, these severe events are happening more and more frequently. Droughts are proliferating, wildfires are bigger and more expensive, tropical storms and hurricanes are more intense. You can look no further than the damage wrought in Vermont in the wake of Tropical Storm Irene a storm that had greatly weakened since first making landfall, but still so powerful as to deliver hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to our small state. It was enough to convince many Vermonters of the reality of climate change, as they watched roads washed away and iconic covered ridges yanked out of the footings that had supported them for generations. The science and the data by now are clear that human activities are a factor in the climate change that is unfolding all around us and in every corner of the globe. But common sense alone should tell us, as we look about us and see all of the carbon and pollution that is being pumped into our thin and fragile atmosphere, that all of these human activities are contributing factors. We must address the root causes of climate change, and that is what the administration's Clean Power Plan, bolstered by the rules for new and existing power plants, will do. Today, we won't vote about how to support our roads and bridges. We won't vote to further advance educational opportunities for young children. We won't vote on ways to keep our government of the people, for the people open. Rather, we are summoned to heed the call of pressure groups, wealthy corporations, and moneyed interests, and vote on a resolution of disapproval that denies the impact and the causes of climate change. These challenges under the Congressional Review Act fail to recognize the true cost of carbon pollution. The Clean Power Plan sets clear and flexible rules that signal to the marketplace that we cannot continue to spew harmful carbon pollution without limit. It finally puts an end to the free lunch for the fossil fuels industry. These rules offer commonsense solutions that will not only address climate change, but will protect Americans' health with cleaner air. They will also unleash the creativity and inventiveness of American entrepreneurship, and support investments in new technology. They will further set the stage for our vibrant and job-rich energy future. The flexibility in these rules means that states and companies will be able to decide the best ways to reduce their carbon emissions, whether through gains in efficiency and new technologies, or through an increased use of natural gas or renewable fuels. Vermonters are encouraged by these rules and about the Clean Power Plan -- not only because together, these proposals move the country forward to finally address climate change, but also because the plan and rules recognize the important work that Vermont and other Northeast States have been doing for the last decade through the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to cap carbon emissions and offer credits to cleaner producers. In Vermont, we can breathe easier knowing that under these rules, we will have less pollution blowing into the state from power plants in the Midwest. The majority in the Senate would rather roll back some of the most meaningful environmental initiatives of our time, rather than help to improve the health of Americans across the country. The science is clear: Failing to address climate change will lead to more dangerous and costly extreme weather events and threaten the health and wellbeing of our families and our communities. We must stop putting the interests of polluters above public health. It's time to stop putting the future of our planet and of generations to come in danger, and to act now to halt the devastating effects of climate change. Let us move beyond the energy policies of the last two centuries and move forward toward America's energy future. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-judicial-nominations321,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations",2015-11-16,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.16.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations Today, we will vote on the nomination of LaShann Hall to be a Federal district judge in the Eastern District of New York. She was nominated over a year ago, and her nomination was voted out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote more than five months ago. Ms. Hall is an outstanding African American attorney who will fill a judicial emergency vacancy. There is no reason Senate Republicans should have delayed her confirmation for this long. The Senate this week should also vote on the next nominee on the calendar, who was nominated on the same day over a year ago as Ms. Hall. Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo will be the first ever Hispanic judge from Pennsylvania on the Third Circuit. Judge Restrepo has strong bipartisan support from his home state Senators, Senator Toomey and Senator Casey, and there is an urgent need to fill the emergency vacancy on the Third Circuit to which he has been nominated. I have heard no objection to his nomination, and Senator Toomey has said he not only strongly supports Judge Restrepo's confirmation but he also recommended him to the President. I hope the Majority Leader will finally schedule his vote this week. In the eleven months that the Senate has been under Republican control this year, the Senate has only voted to confirm 9 judges. This obstruction has resulted in needless delays for hard-working Americans who seek justice in our Federal courts. Currently pending on the Senate floor are nominees who would fill judicial emergency vacancies in Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Minnesota, New Jersey, Iowa, New York, and California. Senate Republicans have refused to alleviate the urgent needs in those states. It does not have to be this way. When Senate Democrats were in the majority during the last two years of the Bush presidency, we had already confirmed 36 judges by this same time. We made sure that we fulfilled our constitutional duty to provide advice and consent to ensure that the American people had a fully functioning Federal judiciary. Senate Republicans' obstruction has caused judicial vacancies to pile up across the country. Since Senate Republicans took over the majority at the beginning of the year, judicial vacancies have increased by more than 50 percent. The number of judicial emergency vacancies since Senate Republicans took the majority has risen by a stunning 158 percent. The American people deserve better. We should follow well-established Senate precedent by confirming all consensus nominees before the end of the year. Each of the judicial nominees pending on the Executive Calendar was reported out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote. And each has the backing of their home state Senators, including Republican Senators. In fact, the next nominee after Ms. Hall and Judge Restrepo is Travis McDonough who has been nominated to fill a judicial vacancy on the Eastern District of Tennessee. Next week will mark the one year anniversary since Mr. McDonough was nominated, but it appears there is no relief in sight as his nomination continues to be held up by Senate Republicans, despite the strong support he has from his home state Senators, Senator Alexander and Senator Corker. I see no reason why he and the rest of the nominees pending should not be confirmed before we recess at the end of the year. As the New York Times put it in an editorial last Friday urging confirmation votes on all pending judicial nominees, With each day that passes without a vote on Judge Restrepo and other nominees, Republicans undermine the justice system, and the biggest victims are ordinary Americans who cannot count on fully functioning courts. I ask unanimous consent to include a copy of this editorial in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks. Shortly we will begin voting on LaShann Hall to fill a judicial emergency vacancy in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of New York. She is currently a partner at the law firm of Morrison & Foerster, LLP, in New York, where she has practiced since 2010. She was previously in private practice at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, and at Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP. She has the support of her two home state Senators, Senator Schumer and Senator Gillibrand. She was voted out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote on June 4, 2015. I urge my fellow Senators to support her confirmation. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-responds-ethanol-industry-attack-ad-airing-vermont-press,Welch Responds to Ethanol Industry Attack Ad Airing in Vermont; Press Availability Monday Morning in Barre,2015-11-14,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"BURLINGTON, Vt.Representative Peter Welch today released the following statement in response to a misleading television attack ad being aired in Vermont this weekend by the corn ethanol industry. The ad attacks Welch for his leadership of a broad, bipartisan House coalition fighting to reform the federal mandate to blend corn ethanol into the gasoline used to fuel cars, trucks, motorcycles, ATVs and snowmobiles, as well as the small engines that power boats, chainsaws and lawnmowers. The mandate is known as the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). Previously, Welch and his colleagues worked to successfully repeal two federal subsidies to the corn ethanol industry. Rep. Welch first learned of the harmful impact of corn ethanol policy on Vermonters several years ago when he visited Franklin County Field Days and was approached by a small group upset that corn ethanol in gasoline had ruined their chainsaw engines. Next he heard from Vermont dairy farmers who reported that the diversion of corn to produce ethanol was driving up feed and food prices. Soon after, Welch's own chainsaw stopped running. He was told by his local repair shop that the engine damage was caused by corn ethanol in the gasoline used to power the chainsaw. On Monday morning at the Vermont Food Shelf in Barre, Rep. Welch will be joined at a press conference by Vermonters affected by federal corn ethanol policy. The press conference will begin immediately following Welch's previously scheduled tour of the Vermont Foodbank where he will urge Vermonters to help those in need, especially during the holiday season. Welch's statement in response to corn ethanol industry attack ad: The corn ethanol industry is spreading a Washington-sized load of manure across Vermont. There is simply no place for this kind of corporate-funded deceptive attack ad in Vermont. These out-of-state subsidized corporations are entitled to their opinion but they cannot ignore the facts. The fact is that corn ethanol is ruining the small engines that power lawnmowers, chainsaws, boats, and snowmobiles across Vermont. The fact is that a federal mandate to blend corn ethanol into gasoline is driving up feed prices for farmers and food prices for consumers. And the fact is that the process of producing ethanol is harmful to the environment. I strongly support the development of renewable energy resources but the facts are clear that federal corn ethanol policy has been a well-intentioned flop. Working with Members of Congress from across the country, I am leading a broad bipartisan coalition to end subsidies of the corn ethanol industry. To date, we have succeeded in repealing two programs and we won't rest until we reform the Renewable Fuel Standard that Al Gore has labeled a mistake'. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-on-the-terrorist-attacks-in-paris,Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On The Terrorist Attacks In Paris,2015-11-14,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.14.15 Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On The Terrorist Attacks In Paris Vermonters and all Americans, and people of goodwill the world over, stand shoulder to shoulder and heart to heart with the people of France in sorrow and solidarity. The repugnant and perverse impulses that misguided movements use to degrade human beings to commit such acts of barbarity have no place in the civilized world. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/nyt-editorial_senate-republicans-are-undermining-the-justice-system,NYT Editorial: Senate Republicans Are Undermining The Justice System,2015-11-13,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.13.15 NYT Editorial: Senate Republicans Are Undermining The Justice System WASHINGTON (Friday, November 13, 2015) Senate Republicans are on pace to confirm the fewest number of judges in more than a half century. The Republicans' poor record has led to increased vacancies in courts throughout the country, and a backlog of judicial nominees pending on the floor. In an editorial Friday, the New York Times noted this obstruction undermine(s) the justice system, and the biggest victims are ordinary Americans who cannot count on fully functioning courts. Among the nominees pending on the executive calendar is Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo, who was nominated exactly one year ago to fill an emergency vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Pennsylvania.Restrepo was unanimously confirmed two years ago by the Senate to serve as a district court judge, and his nomination to the circuit court has the support of both Pennsylvania Senators. Yet despite that backing, Republicans have yet to schedule a vote on Restrepo and his confirmation before the end of the year may be in jeopardy. Earlier this week, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) urged Republicans to quickly schedule a confirmation vote on Restrepo and all pending judicial nominees before the end of the year. Although there is an urgent need to fill the emergency vacancy on the Third Circuit, the Republican leadership has refused to hold a confirmation vote, Leahy said. All Democrats support this nominee. I hope Senator Toomey will seek a firm commitment from his Republican leadership to schedule a vote this week for Judge Restrepo. The Senate will vote Monday on the confirmation of LaShann Hall, an African American woman who also was nominated exactly one year ago to fill an emergency vacancy on the Eastern District of New York. This will be the Senate's first vote on a judicial nominee in three weeks. Currently there are 21 judicial nominees pending, including 10 to fill emergency vacancies. Read the full New York Times editorial online and below. # # # # # Confirm President Obama's Judges By THE EDITORIAL BOARD NOV. 13, 2015 On Nov. 12, 2014, President Obama nominated Luis Felipe Restrepo to a judgeship on the federal Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Judge Restrepo, who already sits on the United States District Court in Philadelphia, seemed to secure the support of both Pennsylvania senators Bob Casey, a Democrat, and Pat Toomey, a Republican. But that does not mean that Judge Restrepo, whom Mr. Toomey called a very well-qualified candidate who would make a superb addition to the appeals court, will actually get through the confirmation roadblock led by Senate Republicans. Mr. Toomey, despite his professed support, is responsible for a big part of it, refusing for six months to sign off on the nomination by exploiting a pointless tradition that allows home-state senators to block a nomination with no explanation needed. He claimed that he was waiting for a background check, even though Judge Restrepo passed a check two years ago for his current job. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved Judge Restrepo for the appeals court seat in July. There has been no explanation for the holdup since then. As a Hispanic and a former public defender, Judge Restrepo would bring a needed measure of ethnic and professional diversity to the court. But he is just one of many judicial nominees awaiting action. Thirteen have not received a hearing by the Judiciary Committee, and 16 others, including Judge Restrepo, have been approved by the committee, all unanimously, but are still waiting for a full vote on the Senate floor. Since Republicans took over in January, the Senate has confirmed only nine of President Obama's nominees, the slowest pace in more than half a century. Meanwhile, the seat Judge Restrepo would fill is one of 30 long-vacant federal judgeships the court system deems judicial emergencies, meaning they have a backlog of hundreds of cases. Republicans say that Mr. Obama has seen more of his judicial nominees confirmed than President George W. Bush had by this time in his tenure in 2007. But that is mainly because Senate Democrats in 2013 stopped Republicans from repeatedly using the filibuster to block qualified nominees. After that, the Democratic-led Senate confirmed 96 of Mr. Obama's picks. The more relevant fact is there are 67 judicial vacancies today, far more than the number of vacancies Mr. Bush faced in 2007. The larger problem here, of course, is that Republicans are blocking votes on highly qualified and noncontroversial nominees to vent their anger with the president, who infuriated them with his now-stalled immigration action, among other things. Judges are not the only casualties of this interbranch crossfire. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, another unquestionably qualified candidate, waited almost six months before finally getting a vote. Senate Democrats should make these inexcusable delays a national issue. Mr. Obama, meanwhile, could start selecting judges himself in states like Texas, Alabama, Wisconsin and Indiana, where senators refuse to give him any names at all. With each day that passes without a vote on Judge Restrepo and other nominees, Republicans undermine the justice system, and the biggest victims are ordinary Americans who cannot count on fully functioning courts. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/sens-franken-leahy-urge-president-obama-to-take-action-against-forced-arbitration-clauses-that-strip-away-americans-rights,"Sens. Franken, Leahy Urge President Obama to Take Action Against Forced Arbitration Clauses That Strip Away Americans Rights",2015-11-12,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.12.15 Sens. Franken, Leahy Urge President Obama to Take Action Against Forced Arbitration Clauses That Strip Away Americans' Rights Both Senators Have Long Fought to Limit Forced Arbitration; This Month, New York Times Ran Investigative Series on This Unfair Practice WASHINGTON, D.C [11/12/15]Today, U.S. Sens. Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) pressed President Obama to take action against forced arbitration, which is when companiesfrom cell phone carriers to banksslip fine print into consumer and employment contracts that strip away rights from millions of Americans. Earlier this month, the New York Times ran a several-part series exposing the dangers of this practice. In a letter sent Thursday, Sens. Franken, Leahy, and 14 others asked the President to do everything he can to help ban the practice of forced arbitration. The Senators called for an Administration-wide effort to address this growing problem and asked the President to support steps that some federal agencies are already taking to limit forced arbitration. The [New York] Times' reporting revealed how forced arbitration deprives Americans of one of their most fundamental constitutional rights: the right to have their claims heard in a court of law, wrote the lawmakers. These clauses, which are often buried in the fine print of employment and consumer contracts, severely restrict Americans' access to justice. We strongly support legislative and regulatory efforts to eliminate forced arbitration clauses, and commend your own advances on this critical issue. But we believe that more must be done. Sens. Franken and Leahy, the leading Senate authors of the Arbitration Fairness Act, have long focused on the problem of forced arbitration clauses that waive individuals' rights to bring a claim in court or to join other litigants in a class action. The two have highlighted the issue in hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2007, 2008, 2011, and 2013, and in letters supporting administrative efforts to stop forced arbitration clauses in consumer financial services contracts and long-term care facilities such as nursing homes. Last week, immediately following the Times' stories, Sens. Franken and Leahy pressed the leading providers of arbitration services for answers on what they're doing to address problems in their industry. You can read a copy of one of those letters here. Today's letter to President Obama, which you can read below, was also signed by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Tom Udall (D-N. Mex), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Martin Heinrich (D-N. Mex.) Heidi Heitkamp (D-N. Dak.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.). November 12, 2015 President Barack Obama The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear President Obama: Last week, The New York Times unveiled a three-part investigative series, Beware the Fine Print, which details the pervasiveness and harmful effect of pre-dispute, mandatory arbitration clauses. The Times' reporting revealed how forced arbitration deprives Americans of one of their most fundamental constitutional rights: the right to have their claims heard in a court of law. These clauses, which are often buried in the fine print of employment and consumer contracts, severely restrict Americans' access to justice. We strongly support legislative and regulatory efforts to eliminate forced arbitration clauses, and commend your own advances on this critical issue. But we believe that more must be done. As awareness of forced arbitration grows, we urge you to identify and employ all of the Administration's existing legal authorities to ensure that Americans are able to enforce their rights and that corporations can be held accountable for wrongdoing. The ability of hardworking Americans to seek justice in our courts, even when up against the most powerful corporate interests, is a fundamental component of our civil justice system. However, as The Times' series highlighted, the ubiquitous nature of forced arbitration provisions in consumer and employment contracts has eroded this essential element by forcing individuals into a rigged, private system designed by corporations to favor corporations. Without the traditional legal rights and protections afforded by the courts, this shadow justice system operates largely in secret and without any meaningful appeals process. Reporting by The Times also illustrated that this system is inherently biased towards corporations because arbitrators have a financial incentive to rule in favor of repeat players so they will use their services again. From nursing home contracts and employment agreements to credit card and cell phone contracts, forced arbitration clauses stack the deck against Americans facing discrimination, neglect, sexual harassment, financial rip-off schemes, corporate fraud or deceit, and even wrongful death. The privatization of the American justice system also severely endangers our rule of law. The Constitution grants Congress the authority to enact laws and grants the judicial branch the authority to interpret those laws. Both the legislative and judicial branches' constitutional roles depend on the judiciary's ability to make public its decisions and interpretations of how the law applies to a given set of facts. Court decisions inform Congress's legislative drafting process and contribute to the future interpretation and development of the law. The secretive nature of forced arbitration, and the lack of public record or articulation of arbitration decisions, undermines Congress's ability to enact meaningful legislation and to ensure that such laws are being enforced fairly and judiciously by the courts. The executive branch can play a critical role in addressing this problem. For example, we welcome the Department of Justice's legislative proposal, which was announced in commemoration of Veterans Day, to make arbitration clauses unenforceable against servicemembers with claims arising under the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act. This proposal would ensure that the rights of our servicemembers are protected while they are away from home, and that our nation's heroes are able to devote their full attention to duty. Many agencies and regulatory bodies also have the authority and opportunity to ensure that federal dollars are not awarded to corporations that use abusive forced arbitration clauses. Some agencies are already exercising this authority, a step we welcome and support. For example, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has recognized the need to revise the requirements for long-term care facilities, including nursing homes, participating in Medicare and Medicaid programs to include limitations on the use of forced arbitration. Like restrictions that are placed on federal contractors, this use of federal authority is an important tool to ensure that taxpayer funds are not being used to subsidize corporate behavior that is not in the best interest of the American public. We urge other agencies that have the authority to impose conditions on the receipt of federal funds to use that power to prohibit the use of forced arbitration clauses. The Federal government should also use its relationship with federal contractors to ensure that the United States only contracts with responsible entities that do not force their customers into mandatory arbitration. We commend you for recently issuing Executive Order 13673, Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces, to limit federal contractors' use of forced arbitration for disputes arising from Title VII and tort claims related to sexual assault and sexual harassment. Going forward, we hope you will continue to use your authority under the Constitution, as well as the authority granted to you by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 and other statutes, to address the issue more broadly by requiring federal contractors to commit that they will use arbitration to resolve disputes only with the voluntary consent of all parties after such disputes arise. The executive branch should also work to address the injustice of forced arbitration clauses through its rulemaking authority. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 empowered the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to study and issue rules governing the use of forced arbitration in consumer financial services contracts. That effort is now underway, and is also a step we strongly support. Congress also granted authority to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under Section 921 of the Dodd-Frank Act to issue rules regulating the use of forced arbitration in retail securities markets, though it has not yet done so. We hope these and other Federal agencies with the authority to prohibit or impose conditions or limitations on the use of forced arbitration will take swift action to do so. Congress has vested broad authority in the President and federal agencies to oversee the efficient implementation of key federal laws. The elimination of forced arbitration is critical to secure the public's rights and remedies under those laws. In response to mounting evidence that demonstrates the devastating impact of forced arbitration clauses, we urge you to undertake an Administration-wide review to identify the areas in which the Executive Branch can assist in addressing this issue and protect Americans' access to justice. Sincerely, ### Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rep-welch-co-leads-bipartisan-coalition-demanding-house-vote-use,Rep. Welch Co-Leads Bipartisan Coalition Demanding House Vote on Use of Military Force Against ISIS,2015-11-10,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) is the co-leader of a new bipartisan coalition of 35 House lawmakers demanding the House of Representatives debate and vote on U.S. military involvement in the campaign to defeat ISIS. Following the recent announcement by President Obama of a deepening entanglement in Syria and Iraq, Rep. Welch and his colleagues sent a letter on Friday to House Speaker Paul Ryan demanding House action on an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). Joining Welch in leading the letter were Representatives Jim McGovern (D-MA), Tom Cole (R-OK), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Walter Jones (R-NC), and John Lewis (D-GA). Click here to view the letter. Last week, the president announced [that] the U.S. will deploy a U.S. Special Operations contingent into northern Syria to be embedded with and to advise opposition militant forces in that region; and U.S. military advisors and special operations forces already in Iraq will be embedded with Kurdish and Iraqi forces on the front lines of combat, the letter reads. A significant escalation in U.S. military operations in the region that places U.S. military personnel on the front lines of combat operations. We do not share the same policy prescriptions for U.S. military engagement in the region, but we do share the belief that it is past time for the Congress to fulfill its obligations under the Constitution and vote on an AUMF that clearly delineates the authority and limits, if any, on U.S. military engagement in Iraq, Syria and the surrounding region, the lawmakers added. Congress can no longer ask our brave service men and women to continue to serve in harm's way while we fail in carrying out our constitutional responsibility in the area of war and peace, the lawmakers concluded. As long as the House fails to assert its constitutional prerogatives and authority, the Administration may continue to expand the mission and level of engagement of U.S. Armed Forces throughout the region. We strongly urge you, Mr. Speaker, to bring an AUMF to the floor of the House as quickly as possible. Other Members signing the letter are Reps. Justin Amash (R-MI), Michael Burgess (R-TX), David Cicilline (D-RI), John Conyers (D-MI), Joe Crowley (D-NY), John Abney Culberson (R-TX), Peter A. DeFazio (D-OR), John J. Duncan, Jr. (R-TN), John Garamendi (D-CA), Paul A. Gosar (R-AZ), Janice Hahn (D-CA), Richard L. Hanna (R-NY), Joe Kennedy (D-MA), Daniel Kildee (D-MI), Ral R. Labrador (R-ID), Thomas Massie (R-KY), Mick Mulvaney (R-SC), Beto O'Rourke (D-TX), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Bill Posey (R-FL), Charles Rangel (D-NY), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Matt Salmon (R-AZ), Mark Sanford (R-SC), Janice D. Schakowsky (D-IL), Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Ed Whitfield (R-KY), Ted S. Yoho (R-FL), and Ryan K. Zinke (R-MT). The full letter can be found below: The Honorable Paul Ryan Speaker U.S. House of Representatives H-232 U.S. Capitol Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Speaker Ryan, Among the issues that require urgent attention by the U.S. House of Representatives is the question of the extent of involvement by the U.S. military in the war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Given the recent announcement by President Obama of a deepening entanglement in Syria and Iraq, it is critical that the House schedule and debate an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) as quickly as possible. Last week, the president announced initiatives that escalate U.S. engagement in combat operations in Syria and Iraq. Specifically, the U.S. will deploy a U.S. Special Operations contingent into northern Syria to be embedded with and to advise opposition militant forces in that region; and U.S. military advisors and special operations forces already in Iraq will be embedded with Kurdish and Iraqi forces on the front lines of combat. Secretary of Defense Carter also stated that U.S. air operations in both Syria and Iraq will increase their bombing campaigns. Taken all together, these represent a significant escalation in U.S. military operations in the region and place U.S. military personnel on the front lines of combat operations. We do not share the same policy prescriptions for U.S. military engagement in the region, but we do share the belief that it is past time for the Congress to fulfill its obligations under the Constitution and vote on an AUMF that clearly delineates the authority and limits, if any, on U.S. military engagement in Iraq, Syria and the surrounding region. U.S. bombing campaigns have been going on for more than a year, and U.S. troops on the ground have been increasingly close to or drawn into combat operations, including the recent death in combat of a special operations soldier in Iraq. Consistent with your pledge to return to regular order, we urge you to direct the committees of jurisdiction to draft and report out an AUMF as soon as possible. We do not believe in the illusion of a consensus authorization, something that only happens rarely. We do believe the Congress can no longer ask our brave service men and women to continue to serve in harm's way while we fail in carrying out our constitutional responsibility in the area of war and peace. As long as the House fails to assert its constitutional prerogatives and authority, the Administration may continue to expand the mission and level of engagement of U.S. Armed Forces throughout the region. We strongly urge you, Mr. Speaker, to bring an AUMF to the floor of the House as quickly as possible. Sincerely, ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-senate-republicans-should-confirm-all_consensus-judicial-nominees-before-end-of-year,Leahy: Senate Republicans Should Confirm All Consensus Judicial Nominees Before End Of Year,2015-11-10,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.10.15 Leahy: Senate Republicans Should Confirm All Consensus Judicial Nominees Before End Of Year WASHINGTON (Tuesday, November 10, 2015) Senate Republicans are on pace to confirm the fewest number of judges in more than a half century, and yet, the Republican majority will once again not hold a confirmation vote this week for any one of the 21 consensus nominees pending on the executive calendar. Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Tuesday urged Republicans to reverse course and quickly schedule confirmation votes on these nominees before the end of the year. The American people and the entire Federal justice system depend on the members of this body to fulfill our constitutional duty of providing advice and consent on judicial nominees, Leahy said. This Senatorial duty is one we cannot neglect. We should be supporting the judiciary by confirming qualified nominees to fill vacancies in courts throughout the country. All 21 judicial nominees pending in the Senate were reported unanimously by the Judiciary Committee. This includes 5 nominees from the U.S. Court of Federal Claims that were nominated a year and a half ago, as well as 10 judicial nominees to fill emergency vacancies. This week marks the one-year anniversary of the nomination of two outstanding nominees who continue to be held up without explanation. One of these nominees is LaShann Hall, an African American woman who was nominated last year to fill an emergency vacancy on the Eastern District of New York. The next nominee pending after her is Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo, who was nominated last year to fill an emergency vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Pennsylvania. While both nominees have the strong support of their home state Senators and were reported by the Judiciary Committee unanimously, they have waited for months on the Senate floor. Leahy warned that if the Republican majority does not pick up the pace, even nominees with Republican supportlike Restrepowill not be confirmed this year. If Republican obstruction continues, and if home state Senators cannot persuade the Majority Leader to schedule a vote for their nominees soon, then it is unlikely that even highly qualified nominees with Republican support will be confirmed by the end of the year, Leahy said. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-judicial-nominations321-,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations",2015-11-10,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.10.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations After finally scheduling a few confirmation votes on Federal judges last month, Senate Republicans have reverted back to holding up the confirmation process for no good reason. The American people and the entire Federal justice system depend on the members of this body to fulfill our constitutional duty of providing advice and consent on judicial nominees. This Senatorial duty is one we cannot neglect. However, that is exactly what has happened since Senate Republicans took over the majority this year. I had hoped that last month's judicial confirmation votes were an indication that Senate Republicans were finally ready to make progress on the backlog of well-qualified and uncontroversial nominees awaiting their confirmation vote. But again this week there is no sign of when the next judicial nominee will receive a vote. This is no way to lead the Senate. When Senate Democrats were in the majority during the last two years of the Bush presidency, we had already confirmed 34 judges by this same time. I have heard Republicans trying to justify their slowdown on judicial nominations by claiming they should somehow receive credit for 11 judges confirmed at the end of the last Congress. That excuse holds no water. It is well-established Senate precedent that all pending consensus nominees should be confirmed before the end of a year. And even if we added those 11 judges to the 9 confirmed this year, that would still bring us to only 20 which is a far cry from the 34 Democrats confirmed in the last two years of the Bush administration. The process of confirming judges is about ensuring that the American people have a fully functioning judiciary. Instead, because of Republican obstruction, judicial vacancies have increased by more than 50 percent since they took over the majority and caseloads are piling up in courts throughout the country. Equally alarming is the fact that the number of judicial emergency vacancies since Senate Republicans took the majority has risen by 158 percent. These vacancies impact communities across America, and it is doing the most harm to states represented by at least one Republican Senator. Of the 66 current vacancies that exist, 48 of them or more than 70 percent are in states with at least one Republican Senator. We should take action right now and hold confirmation votes on the 21 judicial nominees pending on the floor. The next pending district and circuit court nominees who will both fill judicial emergency vacancies were nominated one year ago and yet both are still awaiting the majority leader's action to simply schedule their confirmation votes. The next district court nominee on the Executive Calendar is LaShann Hall, an outstanding African American woman who has been nominated to serve in the Eastern District of New York. And directly following that nomination is Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo, who, when confirmed, will be the first ever Hispanic judge from Pennsylvania on the Third Circuit and only the second Hispanic judge to serve on the Third Circuit. Judge Restrepo has strong bipartisan support from his home state Senators, Senator Toomey and Senator Casey. At Judge Restrepo's hearing, Senator Toomey stated that there is no question [Judge Restrepo] is a very well qualified candidate to serve on the Third Circuit and underscored the fact that he recommended that the President nominate Judge Restrepo. Although there is an urgent need to fill the emergency vacancy on the Third Circuit, the Republican leadership has refused to hold a confirmation vote. All Democrats support this nominee. I hope Senator Toomey will seek a firm commitment from his Republican leadership to schedule a vote this week for Judge Restrepo. In addition to Judge Restrepo, a number of these pending nominees have the support of their Republican home state Senators. Just last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted out two Iowa nominees recommended to the President by the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee. However, if Republican obstruction continues, and if home state Senators cannot persuade the Majority Leader to schedule a vote for their nominees soon, then it is unlikely that even highly qualified nominees with Republican support will be confirmed by the end of the year. No Senator has raised a single objection to any of the 21 judicial nominees pending on the floor. Each one was reported out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote. And each has the backing of their home state Senators, including Republican Senators. Senate Republicans have no excuses left. I hope the Republican Senator from Pennsylvania and the other Republican Senators will implore their leadership to schedule votes on the judicial nominees pending on the floor without further delay. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-the-detention-of-hossam-bahgat,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On The Detention of Hossam Bahgat,2015-11-10,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.10.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On The Detention of Hossam Bahgat [On Monday, November 9, a statement by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on the detention of Egyptian journalist and human rights defender Hossam Bahgat, and on the continuing attacks on freedom of expression in Egypt, was published in the Congressional Record. Upon learning of Bahgat's release earlier today (Tuesday), Leahy said: I am pleased that the Egyptian government has decided not to proceed with its attempt to silence Hossam Bahgat. I hope this is a sign that the government recognizes it has a responsibility to protect the fundamental right of its citizens to access to a free press. Senator Leahy's Monday statement is below.] Mr. President, there is no right that is more fundamental to a democracy than freedom of expression. When this right, enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is threatened or curtailed, dictatorship is the predictable result. Regrettably, that is what we see happening in Egypt today. Like others here I received word this morning that Hossam Bahgat, an Egyptian journalist and one of that country's prominent human rights defenders, has been detained and may be charged in military court. He is apparently accused of publishing false news related to an article about an allegedly foiled military coup. According to information I have received, an October 13th article by Mr. Bahgat described the military prosecution of 26 officers and two Muslim Brotherhood members for allegedly planning to overthrow the government. The next day, the same publication printed the article in English under the title A coup busted? For this, Mr. Bahgat is being investigated by military prosecutors and could face one or more years behind bars. According to Mr. Bahgat's article which was based on the indictment in that case, authorities had summoned or arrested most of the defendants in April. Some of the detained officers alleged that they were tortured during interrogations inside military intelligence headquarters. Eight of the officers and the two Muslim Brotherhood leaders who were prosecuted in absentia were sentenced to life in prison, Mr. Bahgat reported. The rest were sentenced to between 10 and 15 years. Lawyers for Mr. Bahgat have reported that military prosecutors are investigating him for allegedly violating articles 102 and 188 of the penal code, both of which are minor, vaguely worded offenses that concern the publication of false news. Article 102 allows the prosecution of anyone who intentionally broadcasts false or tendentious news, data, or rumors, or propagates subversive propaganda, if this is liable to disturb the public security, spread terror among the people, or harm the public interest. It provides for an undefined period of detention and a fine of up to 200 Egyptian pounds (US$25). Article 188 allows prosecution of anyone who with ill intent publishes false news, data, or rumors, or forged or fabricated papers, or falsely attributed to others, if this is liable to disturb the general peace or provoke panic among the people or harm the public interest. It provides for detention of up to one year and a fine of up to 20,000 Egyptian pounds (US$2,490). According to Human Rights Watch, Mr. Bahgat was not the first journalist to report on the alleged military coup. In a statement, Mr. Bahgat's lawyers stated that he had no criminal intent and that other media outlets had previously reported the verdict. It is well established that civilians should not be prosecuted in military courts, yet that is what is happening to Mr. Bahgat. In October 2014, President al-Sisi greatly expanded military court jurisdiction for a period of two years, allowing the military prosecution of civilians for crimes that occur on public or vital property. Since then, Egyptian media outlets and human rights groups have reported that thousands of civilians have been charged in military courts, many of them for acts related to protesting and the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt's military courts operate under the authority of the Ministry of Defense, not civilian judicial authorities. According to human rights groups, they typically deny defendants the rights accorded by civilian courts, including to be informed of the charges against them, the right to a lawyer, and to be brought promptly before a judge following arrest. This is particularly concerning given the pattern of abuse of detainees in Egypt. Mr. President, as a former prosecutor who has served as both chairman and ranking member of our Judiciary Committee, I have spoken many times about the importance of an independent judiciary. Nowhere is this needed more today than in Egypt, where sham trials, some lasting only a few minutes, followed by sentences of death or life in prison, are common. I hope the Egyptian Government will see the wisdom of proceeding no further in its attempt to silence reputable journalists like Mr. Bahgat. Sometimes the news is favorable, sometimes it is unfavorable. That is the way life is, and it is not for government officials whether elected or unelected to decide what their citizens should read. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/veterans-day-message-from-senator-patrick-leahy,Veterans Day Message From Senator Patrick Leahy,2015-11-10,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.10.15 Veterans Day Message From Senator Patrick Leahy It is fitting that on the eve of Veterans Day, the Senate passed an annual VA funding bill that takes further steps toward fulfilling our commitment to those who have served and sacrificed for this nation, for each of us. There is much that is good in this bill. These budget gains are not enough, but they are an improvement, and they will make a difference. Budgets are a reflection of our priorities. Honoring our commitments to America's veterans must always be a top priority every year, and always. On Veterans Day, and on every other day, let us always pause to remember. Let us strive to honor and thank these brave men and women and their families for their sacrifices. And let us fulfill our own sacred obligation to care for them when they have returned home to us. # # # # # [Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., is co-chair of the Senate National Guard Caucus and the most senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.] Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/reaction-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-to-the-presidents-decision-on-the-keystone-xl-pipeline,Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) To The Presidents Decision On The Keystone XL Pipeline,2015-11-06,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.06.15 Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) To The President's Decision On The Keystone XL Pipeline This has been a long time coming, but the President has made the right decision. Taking either a long view or a short one, this misguided project is not in the national interest of the United States. Keystone XL represents the energy past. This inherently dirty tar sands project would be a wasteful diversion from the cleaner and more sustainable energy future and energy security that we want for ourselves and our children. It has no place in the energy future and the energy economy that we want. And it has no place in any strategy to avert the disastrous effects of climate change. This timely action also sets another strong example to other nations, ahead of the upcoming climate negotiations in Paris, that the United States is willing to walk the walk when it comes to tackling climate change. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-franken-press-arbitration-agencies-for-answers-following-nyt-report-highlighting-harmful-impact-of-forced-arbitration-on-consumers,"Leahy, Franken Press Arbitration Agencies For Answers Following NYT Report Highlighting Harmful Impact Of Forced Arbitration On Consumers",2015-11-04,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.04.15 Leahy, Franken Press Arbitration Agencies For Answers Following NYT Report Highlighting Harmful Impact Of Forced Arbitration On Consumers WASHINGTON (Wednesday, November 4, 2015) Following a three-part investigation series by the New York Times highlighting the impact on consumers and workers of forced arbitration clauses that prevent individuals from seeking justice in court, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.) are calling on the leading providers of arbitration services to address concerns about the use of such agreements. We have grave concerns that forced arbitration thrusts consumers into a shadow justice system that operates with little transparency or oversight, the Senators wrote in a letter to four leading arbitration service providers. The New York Times investigation showed alarming evidence that forced arbitration favors big corporations and repeat players over individuals seeking to vindicate their rights. Highlighting the broad scope of forced arbitration clauses that are frequently included in consumer contracts and employment agreements, the Senators expressed deep concern about a system that consumers are involuntarily forced into, that lacks transparency and is not subject to meaningful appeal. They also raised concerns that forced arbitration clauses undermine the ability of consumers to bring class action lawsuits to protect consumer rights, jeopardizing the rule of law and forcing consumers into a privatized justice system that operates without the predictability, transparency, or consistency of the court system. Leahy and Franken, the leading Senate author of the Arbitration Fairness Act, have long focused on the problem of forced arbitration clauses that waive individuals' rights to bring a claim in court or to join other litigants in a class action. The two have highlighted the issue in hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2007, 2008, 2011, and 2013, and in letters supporting administrative efforts to stop forced arbitration clauses in consumer financial services contracts and long-term care facilities such as nursing homes. A copy of the November 4 letter is below. The letter was sent to the American Arbitration Association, JAMS, the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, and the American Health Lawyers Association. ##### November 4, 2015 DearSir / Madam: A recent investigation by The New York Times revealed the scope of an injustice that affects millions of Americans: the inclusion of forced arbitration clauses in countless consumercontracts, employment agreements, and patient admission forms. These agreements, buried deep within contractual fine print, waive consumers' rights to bring a claim in court or to band together in a class action, even when consumers are seeking to enforce their rights under fundamental state and federal laws. We have grave concerns that forced arbitration thrusts consumers into a shadow justice system that operates with little transparency or oversight. The New York Times investigation showed alarming evidence that forced arbitration favors big corporations and repeat players over individuals seeking to vindicate their rights. Among other examples, the report highlighted: Several instances in which arbitrators socialized privately with corporate defendants during the course of an arbitration, including going to a basketball game, having lunch together during a break in proceedings, and meeting for coffee while proceedings were ongoing; Interviews in which more than three dozen arbitrators described feeling beholden to companies because of the threat of losing repeat business; Records of some 41 arbitrators who each handled 10 or more cases for one company between 2010 and 2014; Examples of an arbitrator who handled 40 cases for a single law firm over a 5-year period, and another arbitrator who handled 28 cases for a single company; and A story seen as a cautionary tale within the industry of an arbitrator who ruled in favor of an employee in an age discrimination suit and was never hired to hear another employment suit again. This evidence of bias towards repeat players warrants more than simple conflict-of-interest rules to prevent abuse. It raises real and troubling concerns about whether a privatized system of justice can ever operate fairly for individuals especially when that system is one that consumers are involuntarily forced into, that lacks transparency and is not subject to meaningful appeal. Beyond these deep concerns for individual consumers, privatization of the justice system also jeopardizes our rule of law. By preventing individuals from joining together in a class action, mandatory arbitration clauses force many Americans to abandon their claims entirely because their single case is not worth pursuing alone. State attorneys general have warned that arbitration clauses banning class action lawsuits undermine a crucial tool for protecting consumer rights. Others have said that such clauses give a get out of jail free card to corporations who can escape accountability. We agree. Forced arbitration also undermines key priorities for any justice system: predictability, fairness and consistency. Forced into private adjudication without a public record and with no precedential value between cases, plaintiffs' claims are reviewed on an ad hoc basis again, often against the plaintiff's wishes and without the possibility of meaningful appeal. How is the public able to gain insight into what a particular law means, how it is to be interpreted, and how it applies to a given set of facts if there is no public disclosure of a claim or articulation of the basis for its resolution? Even if that approach may be justified for private disputes between sophisticated companies who both choose to engage in arbitration, it has a devastating impact in cases where individuals are seeking to enforce their rights under state and federal laws. As one of the largest providers of arbitration services in the country, your organization plays a key role in perpetuating the arbitration system and determining which cases are heard and by what standards. Accordingly, we ask you to provide information to address the serious concerns that have been raised about inherent flaws and unfairness caused by forced arbitration clauses. 1. Transparency in decision-making. The New York Times investigation suggested that arbitration decisions can be made without publication or other mechanisms to promote transparency and inform the public about the proceedings. a.How is the public able to track arbitration filings within yourorganization? What specific information is made public about the parties, the arbitrator, any questions of law presented, the process followed in the arbitration, and the decision rendered in each case? b. How is the public able to gain information about an arbitrator's past judgments, experience, and relevant expertise? c. How is the public able to gain information about repeat adjudications against a particular party? 2.Rule of law. Article I of the U.S. Constitution grants to Congress legislative powers to enact laws; Article III of the U.S. Constitution grants to the judicial branch the power to interpret the law and apply those interpretations to specific cases. Foundational to the judiciary's constitutional role is its ability to publicly enunciate whether and how a law applies to a given set of facts. How do decisions of private arbitrators contribute to the interpretation and development of the law? Do you make arbitration decisions and opinions available to the public? What efforts, if any, are made to promote consistency across rulings of multiple arbitration providers? 3. Conflicts of interest. Which party designates the arbitration provider? Do you place limitations, including numerical limitations, on the cases an arbitrator can hear from a particular client or firm? Do you disclose to parties the prior cases an arbitrator has heard, and what information do you make available to parties about how those prior cases were decided? Is a party able to reject an arbitrator based on that information? 4. Arbitration resulting from forced arbitration clauses. In our view, there is an important distinction to be made between arbitration that both parties choose to enter into after a dispute arises, and forced arbitration that results from fine-print embedded in consumer contracts or employment agreements that individuals sign before a dispute arises, often unknowingly or without real choice. Do you agree with the finding of The New York Times investigation that there has been an increase in the latter form of arbitration? Do you agree with its finding that individuals are increasingly being diverted into arbitration instead of bringing their claims as a class action in court? Do you share our concern that forced arbitration raises important questions about fairness to parties who would not opt in to arbitration if they were given a choice after the dispute arose? Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-joins-effort-to-block-expansion-of-unwanted-robocalls,Leahy Joins Effort To Block Expansion Of Unwanted Robocalls,2015-11-04,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.04.15 Leahy Joins Effort To Block Expansion Of Unwanted Robocalls WASHINGTON (WEDNESDAY, Nov. 4, 2015) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Wednesday joined Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and others in introducing The HANGUP Act, which would repeal changes to the federal statute that limits automated telephone calls to consumers without their consent. Recent changes exempted robocalls made for federal debt collection from the consent requirements of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). In June, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) took steps to clarify consumers' rights under the TCPA to control the types of calls they receive. The FCC receives more complaints about unwanted phone calls than about any other issue, totaling more than 215,000 complaints in 2014. Vermonters are sick and tired of getting unwanted robocalls, Leahy said. At a time when the FCC has been working to limit these kinds of disruptive and harassing calls, the last thing Congress should be doing is adding more corporate loopholes to laws that are designed to protect consumers. We should quickly pass the HANGUP Act and say goodbye to allowing more unwanted calls. Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/sanders-merkley-leahy_introduce-bill-to-ban-new-drilling-on-public-land-,"Sanders, Merkley, Leahy Introduce Bill to Ban New Drilling on Public Land",2015-11-04,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.04.15 Sanders, Merkley, Leahy Introduce Bill to Ban New Drilling on Public Land WASHINGTON, Nov. 4 Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced legislation today to help accelerate the transition to clean energy by ending all new federal leases for oil, gas or coal extraction on public lands and waters. Worry less about your campaign contributions and worry more about your children and grandchildren,"" Sanders told Republicans who continue to deny the science on climate change. We are taking on the Koch brothers and some of the most powerful political forces in the world who are more concerned with short-term profits than the future of the planet. I've got four kids, and I've got seven beautiful grandchildren. We have a moral responsibility to leave our kids a planet that is healthy and inhabitable. Climate change is already impacting our world through greater forest fires and droughts, with serious effects on our farming, fishing and forest economies. The main cause is carbon pollution, and the impacts will only get worse in the coming decades if we keep burning fossil fuels unchecked, said Merkley. One key part of the solution is lying literally beneath our feet. A major contribution to this challenge would be stopping new fossil fuel leases on our public lands that lock in oil, gas and coal extraction for decades into the future. Our public lands should be managed for the public good, not for private profit. We have a moral responsibility to confront the reality of climate change, and the science is clear that the cost to our land, our communities and our climate of continued federal fossil fuel leasing is far too high, Leahy said. We cannot tackle our carbon emissions if we continue to violate our public lands and our climate with more drilling for fossil fuels. This is a commonsense step forward to addressing a global crisis that is at our doorstep. The Keep It in the Ground Act would stop corporations from starting new fossil fuels projects on all federal lands and waters. The bill prohibits offshore drilling in the Arctic and the Atlantic and stops new leases and ends nonproducing leases for offshore drilling in the Pacific and Gulf of Mexico. It also stops new leases and nonproducing leases for coal, oil, gas, oil shale and tar sands on all federal lands. The bill would keep over 90 percent of the potential carbon emissions from fossil fuels on our federal lands and federal waters underground forever. The bill is also cosponsored by Sens. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) Click here to read the legislation. Click here to read a summary of the bill. Click here to see the press conference on the bill. ### Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-leads-bipartisan-group-of-13-senators-in-introducing-resolution-on-political-oppression-by-government-of-the-maldives,Leahy Leads Bipartisan Group of 13 Senators In Introducing Resolution On Political Oppression By Government Of The Maldives,2015-11-03,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.03.15 Leahy Leads Bipartisan Group of 13 Senators In Introducing Resolution On Political Oppression By Government Of The Maldives WASHINGTON (TUESDAY, November 3, 2015) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Tuesday led a bipartisan coalition of 13 senators in calling on the Government of the Maldives to release former President Mohamed Nasheed and all other political prisoners in the country. The bipartisan bill expresses the sense of Congress that the Government of the Maldives should guarantee due process for all the people of the Maldives and respect their human rights. Leahy is the senior most member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and is the ranking member of its subcommittee on the Department of State and Foreign Operations. Leahy's statement on the legislation is available here, and the bill can be found here. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-senator-chuck-grassley-casting-his-12000th-vote,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy on Senator Chuck Grassley Casting His 12,000th Vote",2015-11-03,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.03.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy on Senator Chuck Grassley Casting His 12,000th Vote I've had the privilege of serving with several hundred Senators in this body over the years I have been here. And Senator Grassley has been a very special friend during that time. He has represented the voices of Iowans for nearly three and a half decades. I think we have been friends for that three and a half decades. When I think of Senator Grassley - 12,000 votes, hundreds of hearings, countless Tweets, and probably four dozen sweater vests later he's the same, down to earth Iowa farmer who visits every one of the state's 99 counties, every year. He is also the Iowa farmer who, when Vermont was hit with terrible flooding a few years back, was the first person to contact me to say, Vermont stood with Iowa when we were hit with a natural disaster. Iowa now stands with Vermont. He and I have worked together, and we have had a productive relationship that spans those decades. On the Judiciary Committee, we take our leadership responsibilities seriously. We have both made sure that both as Chairman and Ranking Members, that every Senator has a chance to be heard. We have found ways to come together on meaningful legislation. We enjoy each other's company. We are able to kid each other, as I did on his recent birthday. But more importantly, we do what I was told to do when I first came to the Senate, and I'm sure what Senator Grassley was told when he did - we keep our word. We've always keep out word to each other. It also helps that we both married above ourselves. His wonderful wife Barbara and my wife Marcelle are very close friends. They sometimes say that they belong to that special club that nobody wants to join, that of cancer survivors. Senator Grassley's willingness to listen and hard work was most recently on display in the Judiciary Committee, as we hammered out an important compromise on sentencing reform which brought the left and the right together both parties together. I think every single Senator complimented his leadership. And I must admit I was grateful for Senator Grassley's comments last week when I, too, crossed a voting milestone. He said we have been good friends, and hoped we could cast many more votes together. I share that hope, and congratulate my friend on this achievement. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-shumlin-announce-grant-help-businesses-hit-defense-cuts-diversify,"Welch, Shumlin Announce Grant to Help Businesses Hit by Defense Cuts Diversify",2015-11-02,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"ESSEX JUNCTION, Vt. Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) and Gov. Peter Shumlin today announced a federal grant to help Vermont businesses reliant on defense contracts diversify into new markets as defense spending declines.The $386,325 Department of Defense (DOD) grant was awarded to the Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development to work directly with Vermont businesses looking to adjust their business plans. Many Vermont businesses provide high-quality products and services to our military, Congressman Welch said.They also provide good jobs for Vermonters and represent a key component of our economy. As federal defense spending declines, it's important that these businesses diversify into new markets so that they and their employees continue to thrive. It is a good thing that defense spending is decreasing as America winds down its involvement in overseas conflicts, Gov. Peter Shumlin said. As that happens, there is an opportunity for us to work with companies like Revision to help them diversify and access new markets for continued growth right here in Vermont. This money will help us do that and I am thankful to Congressman Welch for helping us secure the funds to do this important work. The grant will be used to help businesses that directly contract or subcontract with the Department of Defense, or that exist anywhere along the supply chain. The Agency will work with eligible businesses on strategies to diversify and tap into new markets, as well as create workforce development plans to carry out new lines of business. In Vermont, impacted businesses are dispersed throughout the state with the majority in Chittenden, Franklin, Washington, and Orange Counties. We appreciate the Congressman and Governor working together on this grant opportunity, said Jonathan Blanshay, CEO of Revision Military. We know that other defense companies are challenged and may not have had the resources to diversify their market. Therefore, this grant will offer critical resources to these companies and assure they continue to exist and thrive in Vermont. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-the-passing-of-barbara-snelling,Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy On The Passing Of Barbara Snelling,2015-11-02,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.02.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy On The Passing Of Barbara Snelling Like her late husband, Barbara loved Vermont. She brought that spirit to every office she held, working to make life better for families and communities in Chittenden County and across our state. Marcelle and I join all Vermonters in offering our appreciation and best wishes to her entire family and their friends and to all who knew or worked with her. # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-sen-ate-judiciary-committee-on-the-need-to-pass-the-arbitration-fairness-act,"Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Sen ate Judiciary Committee On the Need to Pass the Arbitration Fairness Act",2015-11-01,2015,2015-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.01.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Sen ate Judiciary Committee On the Need to Pass the Arbitration Fairness Act [The New York Times recently released a three-part investigative series highlighting the impact on consumers and workers of forced arbitration clauses. These agreements, often included in the fine print of employment contracts or consumer receipts, require individuals to waive their right to sue in court or their ability to pursue complaints against the corporation in a class action. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) has long raised concerns about the practice of forced arbitration, including in hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee he convened in 2007, 2008, 2011, and 2013. Leahy is also a long-time co-sponsor of the Arbitration Fairness Act, S. 1133.] We cannot allow consumers to be forced into a shadow justice system that consistently favors big corporations and repeat playersa system that operates without transparency or clear precedent. Hearings I convened when I chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee demonstrated that forced arbitration undermines the rights of hardworking Americans and guts key statutes, like our employment discrimination laws, by making them virtually impossible to enforce in court. Congress must act now to stop the injustice of forced arbitration. I call on the Senate to take up and pass the Arbitration Fairness Act. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/statement-rep-welch-response-white-house-announcement-syria,Statement of Rep. Welch in Response to White House Announcement on Syria,2015-10-30,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"Statement of Rep. Welch in Response to White House Announcement on Syria: ""This announcement raises serious questions about the Administration's strategy in the region. There may be credible answers but, without the engagement of Congress consistent with the requirements of the Constitution, the American people will not get the answers to which they are entitled. The biggest question raised by today's announcement is, When will Congress finally accept its responsibility?' The Constitution is clear that only Congress can authorize war. Make no mistake about it, this is a war. Yet, the legal framework justifying this war is loosely tied to the fumes of a Congressional authorization approved in response to the 9/11 attack on America over 14 years ago. A civil war in Syria did not exist 14 years ago. ISIS did not exist 14 years ago. Neither the United States nor Russia were conducting military operations in Syria 14 years ago. Every Member of Congress should debate and vote on the Administration's strategy. No more bobbing and weaving. We need to do our job.""",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-committee-on-the-judiciary-on-the-need-to-close-the-detention-facility-at-guantanamo-bay,"Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Committee On The Judiciary, On the Need to Close the Detention Facility at Guantanamo Bay",2015-10-30,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.30.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Committee On The Judiciary, On the Need to Close the Detention Facility at Guantanamo Bay The detention facility at Guantanamo is a stain on our national reputation and it should be closed. The Administration should continue expediting the transfer of the 52 cleared detainees, and accelerate the Periodic Review Board process to determine if additional detainees can be transferred. Members of Congress must also reject bumper-sticker politics and remove the onerous and unnecessary restrictions contained in this year's National Defense Authorization Act that stand in the way of finally bringing this terrible chapter to a close. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comments-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-on-the-bipartisan-budget-act-of-2015,"Comments Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015",2015-10-30,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.30.15 Comments Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 For months, Democrats have called on Republican leaders in both the Senate and the House to work with us to avert the economic crisis that default would have wrought on this country. With our backs against the wall, congressional leaders and the White House have reached an agreement to not only raise the debt ceiling ensuring that our government can pay its bills but to limit the devastating impacts of sequestration for the next two years. This agreement is far from perfect. This deal uses funding identified and supported by the Senate to extend the critical Highway Trust Fund. The Trust Fund has limped along, one short-term extension after another, for far too long. Despite the progress made on advancing a six-year authorization, we will now have to move back to square one to find a way to pay for it. I am as concerned now as I was in July that we are stealing from ourselves by selling off strategic oil preserves at a time of low prices, when we purchased at a time of high prices. And I am deeply concerned that this deal raids the Crime Victims Fund of $1.5 billion dollars. Democrats and Republicans alike have long supported the Crime Victims Fund unique in that it comes not from taxpayer dollars, but from penalties and fines paid by the criminals themselves. This fund was set up to be a dedicated resource to help victims of crime. Given the ongoing level of unmet need in that community, it is simply unacceptable that this Fund was raided to pay for unrelated things. This one-time rescission must not become a new precedent. We cannot turn our back on the victims of crime. Nonetheless, I support the Bipartisan Budget Act. It is the product of compromise that will offer a measure of stability and help pave the way for an omnibus appropriations bill to keep our government open past December 11. But this is only the first step. While we will avert a calamitous default next week, we now must undertake the difficult process of crafting an omnibus spending bill that will meet our financial obligations and properly invest our resources. We have come together across the aisle and across Congress to support this budget deal. Let's not squander those bipartisan efforts in the next phase by derailing the appropriations process with needless partisan policy riders intended to do nothing more than score political points. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-judicial-nominations43,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations",2015-10-30,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.30.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations Republicans continue to object to requests for unanimous consent on basic things we should be able to do in a bipartisan manner here in the Senate. In addition to my request about gender discrimination, Republicans have previously objected to unanimous consent requests to allow votes on noncontroversial judicial nominees with bipartisan support to fill vacancies in our Federal judiciary. These requests are not remotely controversial, and yet, the Republicans continue to obstruct for obstruction's sake. Since the Republicans took over in January, their leadership has allowed only 9 judges to be confirmed. A few district court judges have been confirmed in the last few weeks, but this recent increase in activity is in sharp contrast to their inaction all year. When Senate Democrats were in the majority during the last two years of the Bush presidency, we had already confirmed 34 judges by this point nearly four times more judges than Republicans have confirmed this year. Republicans have tried to justify their poor record by accusing Senate Democrats of scheduling votes for 11 judges during the lame duck session last December. They suggest that those 11 confirmations under last year's Democratic majority should somehow be counted towards this year's confirmation numbers. First, it is well-established Senate precedent to approve all pending consensus nominees before the end of a year. And second, even if we did ignore reality and count these 11 judges towards the Republicans majority's record, that would only bring their count up to 20 confirmations this year. That is still far behind the 34 nominees that Democrats confirmed in the last two years of the Bush administration. The glacial pace in which Republicans are currently confirming uncontroversial judicial nominees is a failure to carry out the Senate's constitutional duty of providing advice and consent. We should be responding to the needs of our Federal judiciary so that when hardworking Americans seek justice, they do not encounter the lengthy delays that they currently face today. Because of Republican obstruction, judicial vacancies have increased by more than 50 percent since they took over the majority this January and caseloads are piling up in courts throughout the country. We can and should take action right now to alleviate this problem by holding confirmation votes on the 16 judicial nominees pending on the floor. A number of these pending nominees have the support of their Republican Senators, and yet they continue to languish on the calendar without a vote. If Republican obstruction continues, and if home state Senators cannot persuade the Majority Leader to schedule a vote for their nominees soon, then it is unlikely that even highly qualified nominees with Republican support will be confirmed by the end of the year. These are nominees that members of the Majority Leader's own party want confirmed, including several from Tennessee and Pennsylvania. Last week, we had a hearing for two Iowa nominees. I expect they will be reported out of the Judiciary Committee soon. We also have nominees from Massachusetts, Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Hawaii, and Maryland, who are waiting for their confirmation hearings. None of these nominees are likely to be confirmed by the end of the year if Senate Republicans continue at this historically slow pace. I hope Republican Senators will implore their leadership to vote on the pending judicial nominees without delay for the sake of the American people who seek justice before those courts. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rep-welch-statement-rep-paul-ryan-s-election-speaker-house,Rep. Welch Statement on Rep. Paul Ryans Election as Speaker of the House,2015-10-29,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Congressman Peter Welch (D-VT) today issued the following statement following the election of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) as Speaker of the House. Upon his election, Welch congratulated Speaker Ryan with a gift of cheese from Cabot Creamery and maple syrup from Maverick Sugarbush. Today the House of Representatives elected a new Speaker of the House Paul Ryan from Wisconsin.I know Paul well.We worked closely together to help Vermont's artisan cheesemakers threated by a dumb FDA rule and then he helped me save VSAC jobs threatened by a provision in the budget.While we disagree on many policy issues, I can confirm that at least he loves Vermont cheese from Cabot and maple syrup from Maverick Sugarbush in Sharon! He is a good, decent, and honest man.Paul's election gives me hope -- hope that we can fix a broken House and hope that we will get back to work for the American people. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-and-grassley-press-treasury-irs-on-the-use-of-cell-phone-tracking-technology,"Leahy & Grassley Press Treasury, IRS on the Use of Cell Phone Tracking Technology",2015-10-29,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.29.15 Leahy & Grassley Press Treasury, IRS on the Use of Cell Phone Tracking Technology WASHINGTON (Thursday, October 29, 2015) Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) are once again pressing a top cabinet official about a government agency's use of cell-site simulator technology, which can sweep up the cell phone signals of innocent Americans. Following news reports that the Internal Revenue Service is using cell-site simulators, or Stingrays, the Senators sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Lew on Thursday seeking information about the Department's legal justification for using the technology and what privacy controls are in place. The Senators also asked about which other agencies within the Department use the technology. We were surprised to learn that IRS investigators may be using these devices, the Senators wrote. While the devices can be useful tools for identifying the location of a suspect's cell phone or identifying an unknown cell phone, we have previously expressed concerns about the privacy implications of these devices, as well as the inconsistent practices and policies across the federal, state and local agencies that employ them. The devices indiscriminately gather information about the cell phones of innocent people who are simply in the vicinity of the device. Senators Grassley and Leahy have long raised concerns regarding the use of cell-site simulators, and their oversight has led to the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security implementing new rules requiring agents to obtain a search warrant in many cases before employing the technology. A copy of the October 29 letter to Secretary Lew can be found online and below. ##### October 29, 2015 VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION The Honorable Jacob J. Lew Secretary U.S. Department of the Treasury Washington, D.C. 20220 Dear Secretary Lew, According to a report this week in The Guardian, in 2012 the Internal Revenue Service spent more than $70,000 on upgrading cell-site simulators (sometimes referred to as IMSI Catchers or Stingrays) and training related to the devices. We were surprised to learn that IRS investigators may be using these devices. Cell-site simulators mimic cell towers, forcing cell phones in the area to convey their approximate location and registration information. While the devices can be useful tools for identifying the location of a suspect's cell phone or identifying an unknown cell phone, we have previously expressed concerns about the privacy implications of these devices, as well as the inconsistent practices and policies across the federal, state and local agencies that employ them. The devices indiscriminately gather information about the cell phones of innocent people who are simply in the vicinity of the device. Recently, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security have both publicly issued guidelines governing the use of cell-site simulators. These policies are an important step forward, as they generally require law enforcement to obtain a warrant and provide greater information to courts that authorize their use, as well as mandate increased management controls over data collected by them. But they also provide for significant exceptions to the warrant requirement and are limited to use of cell-site simulators in criminal investigations. In light of the report that a component of the Department of Treasury also possesses this equipment, please provide responses to the following questions by November 30, 2015: Do any components of the Department currently use cell-site simulators and, if so, which components, in what capacity, and under what circumstances? If not, please explain any prior use of these devices. How many of these devices does the Department currently possess? Since when and how many times has the Department employed these devices? What policies does the Department have in place governing the use of cell-site simulators, including those related to the legal process necessary to deploy the devices and the retention and destruction of information collected by them? Are the Department's policies being reviewed in light of the guidelines recently issued by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security? Does the Department require its components to obtain a warrant prior to deployment of these devices? If so, what exceptions are permitted? If not, please explain why not. Does the Department loan cell-site simulators to state and local agencies, or provide federal grants that are used by state and local agencies to obtain cell-site simulators? If so, does the Department place any conditions on the use of those devices when purchased with federal money? If not, are there alternative methods by which the Department can incentivize state and local agencies to adopt the above-mentioned safeguards? Sincerely, Charles E. Grassley Patrick Leahy Chairman Ranking Member Senate Committee on the Judiciary Senate Committee on the Judiciary Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/senate-republicans-block-leahy-resolution-calling-for-equal-pay-for-female-soccer-athletes,Senate Republicans Block Leahy Resolution Calling For Equal Pay For Female Soccer Athletes,2015-10-29,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.29.15 Senate Republicans Block Leahy Resolution Calling For Equal Pay For Female Soccer Athletes WASHINGTON (Thursday, October 29, 2015) Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked a commonsense resolution authored by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) calling on the Fdration Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) to eliminate gender discrimination between male and female athletes. Leahy first introduced the resolution in July, after the United States women's soccer team was awarded just $2 million after beating Japan in the Women's World Cup championship. By comparison, the 2014 Men's World Cup winner, Germany, was awarded $35 million for its win over Argentina. Leahy's resolution calls for FIFA to end its discriminatory prize structure and provide equal awards for male and female athletes. The Republicans' move to block passage of the resolution came just days after the U.S. women's soccer team was recognized at the White House for their World Cup victory. It is a shame that in the Senate, we cannot even agree to pass a resolution that calls for the equal treatment of male and female athletes. If we cannot even pass a non-binding resolution, how can we ever achieve real pay equity for women? Leahy said. He added: The United States women's soccer team and all World Cup champions should be rewarded for their performance, for their grit, and for their teamwork, rather than devalued for their gender. We should stand together in support of these athletes and all female athletes. Leahy pointed out that FIFA's policy is not just discriminatory; it is far outdated compared to other sports championships. Wimbledon tennis's top prize finally implemented an equal prize payment structure for all athletes in 2007, and as a result, male and female players are awarded the same prize money for winning their respective championships. Leahy urged Republicans to reconsider their unfounded objection and to support legislation that promotes pay equity. Taking an overdue but important step toward pay equity will send a resounding message not just to women and girls, but also to men and boys across the world, he said. Equal pay for equal work should not just be an ideal we strive for, but a reality. The Leahy resolution is available online. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/breaking-leahy-comments-on-the-milestone-of-his-15000th-vote-in-the-us-senate_--,"[BREAKING] Leahy Comments On The Milestone Of His 15,000th Vote In The U.S. Senate --",2015-10-27,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.27.15 [BREAKING] Leahy Comments On The Milestone Of His 15,000th Vote In The U.S. Senate -- [As the dean of the Senate (its most senior member) Vermont's U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D) Tuesday morning passed a U.S. Senate milestone when he cast his 15,000th vote. Only five senators in history have cast more votes. The vote occurred during a series of votes late this morning during Senate debate on the cybersecurity bill. According to the nonpartisan website GovTrack, Leahy has sponsored more bipartisan bills than any other current member of this Senate: Sixty-one percent of his bills have had both Democratic and Republican cosponsors, reflecting his longtime MO of building coalitions and getting things done, helping to make him one of the Senate's most effective legislators. In the previous Congress he was one of the youngest senators in recent times to rise to the level of President Pro Tem. Following are some of Leahy's reflections about the milestone:] Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On Casting 15,000 Votes In The U.S. Senate October 27, 2015 What a great opportunity and responsibility the Senate affords this senator from Vermont, day after day, to make things better for Vermonters, and for all Americans. To strengthen our country and ensure its vitality on into the future. To forge solutions in the unending quest to make ours a More Perfect Union. Over the last 40 years, I have been blessed to be able to serve with some of the giants of the Senate: Mike Mansfield. Howard Baker. Walter Mondale. Hubert Humphrey. Bob Dole. Vermont's own Bob Stafford. And many, many others. Marcelle and I have made close friendships, on both sides of the aisle. Like Senator John Glenn and his wife Annie, Democrats, and Senator Cochran and Senator Lugar, both Republicans. More than 370 Senators in all, from different walks of life and every corner of this Nation. These different backgrounds, different stories, and different life experiences have helped make this institution the greatest deliberative body in the world. I cast my first vote in the Senate Chamber in 1975 on a resolution to establish the Church Committee. The critical issues of the post-Watergate era parallel issues we face today proof of the enduring fact that while the votes we cast today address the issues we face now, problems will persist, threats will continue, and improvements to the democracy we all revere can always be made. As a newly elected senator I also had a front-row seat and a bit part in an historic effort, initiated by a Democrat Senator Mondale of Minnesota and a Republican Senator Pearson of Kansas to change the Senate's earlier cloture rule, which had been abused for decades in thwarting the will of clear majorities of the American people on such crucial issues as civil rights reforms. That project might not sound difficult, but changing the way the Senate operates is something akin to trying to change the weather. Late very late one night -- during that lengthy and difficult debate on that bill, Senator Mondale and Majority Leader Mike Mansfield enlisted me, a young whippersnapper, to play a role. They asked me to stay on the floor one night around two in the morning to take the gavel as the presiding officer. They expected that a lot of tight rulings were coming up. But I felt the honor of the calling drain away as Leader Mansfield explained that they needed someone big, and who was still awake, to be in the chair for those rulings. Sometimes a senator is no more than a conscious body in the right place at the right time. But votes among the 15,000 that I have been proud to cast on behalf of Vermonters come quickly to mind today. Some specific to Vermont and some national and some global. Writing and enacting the Organic Farm Bill, the charter for what has become a thriving $30 billion industry. Stronger regulations on mercury pollution and combating the effects of global warming. Emergency relief for the devastation caused by Tropical Storm Irene. Adopting price support programs for small dairy farmers. Fighting for the privacy and civil liberties of all Americans. Supporting the Reagan-O'Neill deal to save Social Security. Nutrition bills to help Americans below the poverty line. Bipartisan strongly bipartisan campaign reform in McCain-Feingold. Patent reform. Reauthorizing and greatly expanding and strengthening the Violence Against Women Act. Opposing the war in Iraq, a venture that cost so many lives, and trillions of taxpayer dollars. And I was proud to be the first Vermonter to cast a vote, in the Armed Services Committee, to end the War in Vietnam. Every significant legislative success I have had has been achieved through the often slow process of methodically building bipartisan coalitions. Our breakthrough in the Senate Judiciary Committee just last week in beginning to come to grips with criminal justice reform is a fresh example of this. So was enactment this summer of the electronic surveillance reforms in our USA FREEDOM Act. Legislative work in a democracy in large part is the art of compromise. Compromise is essential in assimilating and digesting competing points of view and competing interests, which are all the more diverse in a large and heterogeneous nation like ours. We can keep faith with our core values as we listen to the perspectives of others. Insisting on our way, or no way at all, is a surefire recipe for stalemate, to the great detriment of the entire nation and the people we represent. As Winston Churchill once said: The maxim, 'nothing avails but perfection,' may be spelled shorter: PARALYSIS. Some measure of self-restraint is essential for a legislative body in a democratic republic like ours to function. Louis Brandeis once said, Democracy substitutes self-restraint for external restraint. It is more difficult to maintain than to achieve. He was right. Self-restraint in a democracy is not an easy virtue. In the previous Congress, as President Pro Tem I had the pleasure each day of accompanying Chaplain Barry Black to the podium, as he offered the morning invocation. I like to think maybe it's more that I like to hope that some of his inspiration rubs off on us, at least a little, each day. One morning years ago, for instance, he said: Give them (the senators) the stature to see above the wall of prideful opinion. Fifteen thousand votes. And you know what? There is so much more work to be done. We should restore the bipartisan campaign finance reform that so many in this body Republicans and Democrats supported. We should restore the historic and foundational Voting Rights Act. We should continue to fight to support our farmers, who give us food security and are the very fabric of this country. We should fight against government overreach in the wake of national security threats. We should do more to support our veterans and their families. We should expand education opportunity for all. We should act to rebuild the American middle class and to offer helping hands to lift all Americans out of poverty. We should fund our roads and bridges. We should pass appropriations bills each year, every year. These are not insurmountable goals. But it will take goodwill and bipartisan cooperation to achieve them. We 100 senators are but the public face of an institution that is supported by thousands of hard-working staff. Our office aides and policy experts -- my own, of course, among the best in the Senate. The Capitol Police, the folks who keep order and help to showcase this great building to millions of tourists. These bright and dutiful Senate pages in the well of this Chamber. All of them are part of the Senate family. The Senate at its best can be the conscience of the Nation. I have seen that when it happens, and I marvel in the fundamental soundness and wisdom of our system every time it does. But we cannot afford to put any part of the mechanism on automatic pilot. It takes constant work and vigilance to keep our system working as it should for the betterment of our society and the American people. And we can only do it if we start working together. It is easy for politicians to appeal to our worst instincts and to our selfishness. Political leaders serve best when they appeal to the best in us, to lift our sights, summon our will and raise us to a higher level. After all these years, I still get a lump in my throat as I arrive at this building, and walk out on this Floor, knowing its history, and taking part in its next chapters. Senators have come and gone, but I have had one partner through these 15,000 votes: Marcelle. She, and our three wonderful children and five beautiful grandchildren, are the bedrock, and the flywheel, of our family. I am so grateful to my fellow Vermonters for the confidence they have shown in me. It is a measure of trust that urges me on, and which I will never betray, or take for granted. Reflecting on the past 15,000 votes reminds me about the significance every time we vote, why I feel energized about what votes lie ahead and how we can keep making a difference. # # # # # Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-the-library-of-congresss-anti-circumvention-rulemaking,"Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee On the Library of Congresss Anti-Circumvention Rulemaking",2015-10-27,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.27.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee On the Library of Congress's Anti-Circumvention Rulemaking [The Library of Congress Tuesday released the results of its triennial review to establish exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's (DMCA) prohibition on circumventing technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. The exemptions announced today cover a range of activities, from repairing farm equipment to using motion pictures in film studies classes. Among the exemptions granted are those that allow unlocking of wireless telephones and other wireless devices to allow consumers to use their devices on the networks of their choice; a move urged by Congress in legislation authored by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and signed into law by President Obama in 2014. Leahy joined with Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) last week to request the Copyright Office undertake a comprehensive study of the role copyright law plays in defining how software-enabled products can be used.] Copyrighted software plays an ever-increasing role in our daily lives. Consumers rightly want to know how they can use software-enabled products without running afoul of the law, which is why Senator Grassley and I have asked the Copyright Office to study this critical issue. Today's announcement recognizes several important exemptions that will help users access technologies and content in a way that works for them. The rule also builds on the work we did last Congress and will enable consumers to connect not only their smartphones, but also their tablets and devices, to the network of their choice. ##### Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/save-the-bats,Save The Bats,2015-10-27,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.27.15 Save The Bats by U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Bats have not always had a good press.' They can seem scary, especially at Halloween time, and they have not been adequately understood, let alone appreciated. Today our bat populations are being decimated by the spread of a deadly fungus that causes white nose syndrome. An essential ingredient in saving America's bats is in better understanding them and the key roles they play in agriculture and in the ecosystem. Vermont's conservation ethic is deeply instilled in me, as it is in other Vermonters. I've long been fascinated by the vital roles that bats play on our farms and in our protected lands. When Vermont became one of the first states to face the decimation of white nose syndrome, I worked on the Senate Appropriations Committee, partnering with the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, to make white nose syndrome a budget priority. I've been a Batman fan since I was a boy. Folks sometimes are amused to learn that we live not far from a bat cave that is near our farm in Middlesex, in rural Central Vermont. As bat populations have declined in recent years, we see (and feel) an immediate correlation in the swarms of mosquitos we cope with on warm Vermont evenings. As bats disappear, mosquitos increase. My staff and I spent time with our State of Vermont bat scientists, including Scott Darling, a pre-eminent expert on bats, and saw the devastating impacts of white-nose syndrome on North American bat populations. More than even before, I've become an advocate for these amazing mammals. Bats are vital to the sustainability of natural ecosystems, national economies, and human health by controlling damaging insect pests, pollinating plants including fruits and vegetables, and dispersing seeds to ensure healthy functioning ecosystems. Research suggests that bats save U.S. farmers at least $3 billion a year in pestcontrol, and some years the value may be as high as $53 billion a year. Bats are found on nearly every continent, providing valuable benefits to farmers worldwide. Corn farmers alone benefit by more than $1 billion each year globally in crop damage prevention provided by hungry, insect-eating bats. Those are big savings for farmers, thanks to bats patrolling the skies at night and gobbling up insects that eat or damage our crops. North American bat populations are in crisis as the deadly fungus spreads throughout the Northeast, and now far beyond. Congress has appropriated more than $35 million to the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service to lead the effort to understand and combat this mystery disease. A coalition of scientists from state and federal agencies, universities and non-governmental organizations are working together to fight this disease. For additional information and to learn what you can do, visit https://www.whitenosesyndrome.org. While we've learned much about this deadly fungus, bats are still dying, and far more needs to be done. Raising awareness about the importance of bats to our national economy and human health is an important step in protecting and conserving bats. That's why I've partnered with a team of government, nonprofit, and private organizations to launch Bat Week celebrated this year on October 25-31. Now in its second year, Bat Week is intended to raise attention to the plight of bats, and their importance to us all. This year we are coordinating bat house building events around the country to break a world record for building the most bat houses in a day on Saturday, Oct. 31. Building bat houses provides places for bats to live and an easy and affordable way for everyone to get involved in helping bats. It is no coincidence that we chose Halloween to run these events a day when bat themes, costumes, stories and treats are found in every town and store in America. In fact, bats make possible all of the candies made with corn syrup including the favorite Halloween candy corn, and bats provide pest control for cocoa plants where chocolate comes from. So it is fitting to take time during the Halloween festivities to recognize the importance of bats species to this national holiday. While you are trick-or-treating with your children or grandchildren, handing out Halloween candy to the neighborhood kids, or attending a party, why not also take time on Halloween Day to build a bat house, or join a local bat house building activity. Visit www.batweek.org for an event near you and to learn more about bats. It is clear that we need bats, but they also need us. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-government-transparency-will-take-a-step-back-under-cyber-bill,Leahy: Government Transparency Will Take a Step Back Under Cyber Bill,2015-10-26,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.26.15 Leahy: Government Transparency Will Take a Step Back Under Cyber Bill Urges Senators to Defeat Bad FOIA Provisions Considered In Secret WASHINGTON (Monday, October 26, 2015) The cybersecurity legislation pending on the Senate floor includes an unnecessary provision that would weaken the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the government's premier transparency law. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), a champion of government transparency, is calling on all Senators to support his amendment to remove this provision and to support the overall mission of FOIA. For nearly half a century, FOIA has translated our great American values of openness and accountability into practice by guaranteeing access to government information. We should not be passing legislation that weakens this critical law. Instead, those Senators who talk about their pro-transparency records should support my amendment to strike the harmful FOIA provisions in the cybersecurity bill, and we should be working together to pass the bipartisan FOIA Improvement Act that the Judiciary Committee approved months ago, Leahy said. Leahy's amendment, which is supported by 27 groups that advocate for government transparency, would strike a completely unnecessary FOIA exemption for information that is already protected from disclosure under existing FOIA law. Leahy successfully led a similar effort earlier this year during Senate consideration of the surface transportation bill, which included several unnecessary FOIA carve outs that were ultimately removed. Not only is the carve out in the cyber bill unnecessary, it was not considered in the Judiciary Committee which has primary jurisdiction over FOIA. Instead, it was considered in a closed markup of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Leahy noted that changes to FOIA should not be enacted without full and careful consideration by the Judiciary Committee. The Senate must have an open and honest debate about the Senate Intelligence Committee's bill and its implications for Americans' privacy and government transparency, Leahy added. Legislation of this importance should not be hastily pushed through the Senate, without a full and fair opportunity for Senators to consider the ramifications of this bill. Unfortunately, by moving so quickly to end debate, it appears that the Majority Leader is trying to do just that. ##### Leahy Amendment Protecting the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) The Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) contains an overly broad new FOIA exemption that is both unnecessary and harmful. Everyone agrees that the vast majority of the sensitive information likely to be shared under CISA should not be disclosed, but this information is already protected from disclosure under existing FOIA exemptions and by other provisions in the bill. Creating new, unnecessarily broad, and completely useless exemptions only weakens the existing FOIA framework and threatens the twin goals of promoting government transparency and accountability. The Leahy Amendment strikes the so-called b(3) exemption from the bill. Cyber threat indicators and defensive measures are already protected from disclosure under a separate provision of the bill. The bill states that cyber threat indicators and defensive measures provided to the Federal Government shall be considered the commercial, financial, and proprietary information of the entity submitting the information. Additionally, commercial and financial information is already exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Existing FOIA exemptions provide additional strong protections for sensitive information shared pursuant to this bill. Most, if not all, of the sensitive information likely to be shared through CISA is already protected from disclosure under existing FOIA exemptions. This includes exemptions for trade secrets, confidential business and financial information, personal privacy, and law enforcement needs (including exemptions to protect ongoing investigations and information that could be used to circumvent the law). New ad hoc exemptions undermine the systematic protections in FOIA. Preemption of state and local law is overly broad and dangerous. As drafted, the new exemption applies not only to FOIA, but to all state, local, or tribal disclosure laws. Such broad preemption, which has not received careful consideration, could potentially impact hundreds of state and local regulations and lead to unintended consequences. FOIA is our nation's premier transparency law. Any amendments to this law should be considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has exclusive jurisdiction not in closed session by the Senate Intelligence Committee. New exemptions to FOIA should be enacted only after full, fair and public consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has exclusive jurisdiction over FOIA. This provision was debated behind closed doors by the Senate Intelligence Committee without the consultation of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Allowing this provision to be included in the underlying bill sets a dangerous precedent. ##### Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-sanders-welch-shumlin-announce-10-million-federal-grant,"Leahy, Sanders, Welch, Shumlin Announce $10 Million Federal Grant",2015-10-26,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.26.15 Leahy, Sanders, Welch, Shumlin Announce $10 Million Federal Grant Funds Clear Path for Restoring Passenger Rail Service to Burlington WASHINGTON (MONDAY, Oct. 26, 2015) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Representative Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Gov. Peter Shumlin Monday announced a $10 million federal grant from the Department of Transportation to improve rail service along the state's Western Corridor. The improvements will remove the final hurdle for restoring passenger service between Rutland and Burlington. In a joint statement, Leahy, Sanders, Welch and Shumlin -- who have vigorously supported this rail investment program -- said: Vermont's rail links were important to our past development, and rail service is an important ingredient in our transportation future. There is an overwhelming need here and across the country to improve our infrastructure for the 21st Century. We are glad that this grant will make those upgrades to the rail line along the Western Corridor to drive our economy forward. This investment is a win-win scenario for improving both freight and passenger service. The grant will be matched by state funds for the Western Vermont Freight-Passenger Rail Project. The project will improve service on the state-owned rail line between Rutland and Burlington by replacing track with new rail, ballast and ties; rehabilitating the Rutland Wye; adding new gates for public crossings, a new passing siding in Pitsford and a crossover in Leicester to allow for operational flexibility. The project will also include installation of new passenger platforms. The grant was awarded to the Vermont Agency of Transportation as part of $500 million in Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants released across the country for rail and transportation improvements. The project will completely upgrade the track to all for safer and faster movement of freight and passenger speeds that meet Amtrak's operating requirements. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-judicial-nomination56s,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations",2015-10-26,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.26.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Judicial Nominations Today, we will vote on the nomination of Lawrence Vilardo to be a Federal district judge in the Western District of New York in Buffalo. He was first nominated in February and his nomination was voted out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote over five months ago on May 6. There is no reason why this highly-qualified nominee should have waited so long for a vote. Despite having one of the busiest caseloads in the country, with more criminal cases than Washington, D.C., Boston, or Cleveland, there is not a single active Federal judge in that district. The court has been staying afloat only through the voluntary efforts of two judges on senior status who are hearing cases in their retirement. It is about time that we confirmed Mr. Vilardo to this vacancy. Next week marks the eleventh month that Republicans have been in the majority in the Senate. During that time, only nine judicial nominees have been confirmed. When Senate Democrats were in the majority during the last two years of the Bush presidency, we had already confirmed 34 judges by this same time. The glacial pace at which Republicans are currently confirming judicial nominees is an inexcusable failure to carry out the Senate's constitutional duty of providing advice and consent. It also has real and dire consequences for hardworking Americans who seek justice, but instead, encounter lengthy delays in the federal court system due to empty courthouses and overburdened courts. We can and should take action right now to alleviate this problem by holding confirmation votes on the rest of the 13 judicial nominees pending on the floor. A number of these pending nominees have the support of their Republican home state Senators, and yet they continue to languish on the calendar without a vote. If Republican obstruction continues, and if home state Senators cannot persuade the Majority Leader to schedule a vote for their nominees soon, then it is unlikely that even highly qualified nominees with Republican support will be confirmed by the end of the year. These are nominees that members of the Majority Leader's own party want confirmed, including those from Tennessee and Pennsylvania. And last week, we had a hearing for two Iowa nominees, who I expect to be reported out of the Judiciary Committee soon as well. None of these nominees are likely to be confirmed by the end of the year if Senate Republicans continue at this historically slow pace. No Senator has raised any objections to the judicial nominees pending on the floor. Every single one was reported out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote. Each has the backing of their home state Senators, including Republican Senators. These nominees are outstanding, accomplished legal professionals who are ready to serve in our justice system. They have devoted time away from work and their families to go through the rigorous nominations process. More than half of the pending Federal district and circuit court nominees would fill vacancies deemed to be judicial emergencies by the non-partisan Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Instead of working to ensure that all Americans have access to our Federal courts, Senate Republicans continue to obstruct President Obama's judicial nominees in a misguided effort to score political points against the president. The number of empty judgeships has increased by more than 50 percent since Republicans took over the majority. Their obstruction is reversing the hard-earned progress Senate Democrats made last Congress to drastically reduce the number of judicial vacancies. Making matters worse, the number of judicial emergency vacancies since Senate Republicans took the majority has risen by 158 percent. These vacancies impact communities across America, and it is doing the most harm to states with at least one Republican Senator. Of the 66 current vacancies that exist, 49 of them or more than 70 percent are in states with at least one Republican Senator. One of those vacancies is an emergency vacancy on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Pennsylvania. Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo is nominated to fill the vacancy and he has strong bipartisan support from his home state Senators, Senator Toomey and Senator Casey. At Judge Restrepo's hearing, Senator Toomey stated that there is no question [Judge Restrepo] is a very well qualified candidate to serve on the Third Circuit and underscored the fact that he recommended that the President nominate Judge Restrepo. Once confirmed, Judge Restrepo will be the first Hispanic judge from Pennsylvania to ever serve on this court and only the second Hispanic judge to serve on the Third Circuit. There is absolutely no reason to delay a vote on Judge Restrepo's confirmation, and yet his nomination has been pending on the floor for over three months. Since he was first nominated, Judge Restrepo's nomination has been pending for a staggering 348 days. The National President for the Hispanic National Bar Association, which strongly supports Judge Restrepo's nomination, wrote last week in the HuffingtonPost about the inexcusable delay in his confirmation. I ask unanimous consent to include a copy of this article in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks. Contrast Senate Republican's treatment of Judge Restrepo with President Bush's nominee to the Third Circuit, Judge Thomas Hardiman, who was nominated in the last two years of the Bush presidency. Judge Hardiman was confirmed in nearly half the time Judge Restrepo has been waiting, taking only 183 days from nomination to his confirmation. Furthermore, it took only 7 days for Judge Hardiman to receive a confirmation vote once he was reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Judge Restrepo has been pending on the floor for 109 days 15 times longer than Judge Hardiman. I hope the Republican Senator from Pennsylvania will implore his leadership to bring this highly qualified nominee up for a vote without further delay. Let us then turn to votes on the rest of the 12 pending judicial nominees without further delay. Shortly we will begin voting on Lawrence Vilardo to fill a judicial vacancy in the Federal District Court for the Western District of New York. Since 1986, he has practiced as a named partner at the law firm of Connors & Vilardo, L.L.P. in Buffalo, New York. He previously practiced at Damon & Morey, in Buffalo, New York from 1981 to 1986. The ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary unanimously rated Mr. Vilardo well qualified to serve on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, its highest rating. He has the support of his two home state Senators, Senator Schumer and Senator Gillibrand. He was voted out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote on May 6, 2015. I will vote to support his nomination. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-leads-190-house-democrats-demand-clean-debt-ceiling-extension,Welch Leads 190 House Democrats in Demand for Clean Debt Ceiling Extension,2015-10-23,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON With just eleven days remaining before a November 3 deadline for Congress to raise the debt ceiling to avoid a government default, Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), joined by Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer and Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn, announced today the support of the House Democratic Caucus for a clean extension of the debt ceiling. 190 Democrats signed Welch's letter to House Speaker John Boehner which demands a vote on a clean extension of the debt ceiling so that America continues to pay its bills. The letter reiterates that doing so will not authorize any new federal spending. Since 2011, Welch has been the House leader of the effort to ensure that America pays its bills and that the debt ceiling be raised without conditions or unrelated demands. He led a similar effort in 2103. The text of the letter follows: October 23, 2015 The Honorable John Boehner Speaker of the House United States House of Representatives H-232, The Capitol Washington, DC 20515 Dear Mr. Speaker, Congress will soon be faced with the question of raising the debt ceiling. The solvency of the federal government requires Congress to act in a timely fashion. Failing to do so will plunge the nation into default for the first time in American history, risking economic catastrophe. Raising the debt ceiling will ensure that America pays its bills for expenses already incurred, and does not authorize any new spending. When the House takes up this issue, we will support a clean extension of the debt ceiling which will allow America to continue to pay its bills as they come due. We categorically reject the view that it would be acceptable for America to default if unrelated demands are not met. As you will recall, when this irresponsible tactic was employed in 2011, it cost the American taxpayer $19 billion in higher interest costs. Sincerely, ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-sanders-welch-17-million-to-be-released-to-vermont-for-families-seeking-home-heating-assistance,"Leahy, Sanders, Welch: $17 Million To Be Released To Vermont For Families Seeking Home Heating Assistance",2015-10-23,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.23.15 Leahy, Sanders, Welch: $17 Million To Be Released To Vermont For Families Seeking Home Heating Assistance Delegation continues to fight for additional funding to be included in Fiscal Year 2016 spending bill (FRIDAY, Oct. 23, 2015) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vt.) -- who have long championed the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) -- Friday announced $17 million in funds to assist Vermonters seeking help to meet their home heating needs this winter, only days after the first snowfall of the season. In a joint statement, Leahy, Sanders and Welch said: LIHEAP is a lifeline to more than 25,000 Vermonters who need energy assistance to stay warm in the winter. Seniors on fixed incomes, people with disabilities, and low-income families spend a growing portion of their income heating their homes. Without this bridge of assistance, many Vermonters must choose between heating and other vital necessities, including food and costly prescription drugs.LIHEAP is a program that proves, year after year, to be one of the most effective expenditures of taxpayer dollars, and successfully leverages investments from all stakeholders in keeping Vermont families safe and healthy. This federal funding, granted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is part of a nationwide release of $3 billion in LIHEAP funds to help low income households pay for heating and/or cooling their homes. The funds represent about 90 percent of the funding approved for LIHEAP under the Continuing Appropriations Act signed into law last month. HHS will release the remaining funds for the program following the completion of Fiscal Year 2016 appropriations bills. LIHEAP is administered by the State of Vermont Office of Economic Opportunity, with support from Vermont's five community action agencies. Earlier this month, Senators Leahy and Sanders sent a letter to HHS requesting the release of as much federal funding as possible to Vermont despite the recently passed Continuing Resolution, which forestalls allocations prior to the passage of a federal spending bill. Congressman Welch led a bipartisan group of members of the House in sending a similar letter to the Department. Vermonters seeking home heating assistance may visit the website of the Department of Children and Families at http://dcf.vermont.gov/esd/fuel_assistance. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-and-grassley-call-for-copyright-study,Leahy & Grassley Call For Copyright Study,2015-10-22,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.22.15 Leahy & Grassley Call For Copyright Study Senators Seek Copyright Review to Provide Clarity for Consumers WASHINGTON (Thursday, October 22, 2015) In order to help the public navigate a world in which software makes virtually everything function, from refrigerators to tractors, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) joined together Thursday to request the Copyright Office undertake a comprehensive study of the role copyright law plays in defining how software-enabled products can be used. This is a complex field, and how we interact with software in our products touches on numerous important policy arenas, including intellectual property, privacy, consumer protection, public safety, cybersecurity, competition, and the evolution of the digital marketplace. Our laws should work together to promote the public interest in each of these areas, including the interests of consumers, creators, and technology companies wishing to engage in lawful behavior, Grassley and Leahy wrote in a letter to Maria Pallante, the Register of Copyrights. Grassley and Leahy have long been interested in these issues, introducing legislation last year to ensure that our copyright law would not stand in the way of consumers wishing to transfer their cell phones to other wireless carriers. Their bipartisan bill was signed into law last year. Now, the Senators are requesting the study in an effort to better understand and evaluate how our copyright laws enable creative expression, foster innovative business models, and allow legitimate uses in this software-enabled environment. They added: To help us make informed policymaking choices in this area, we request that the Copyright Office undertake a comprehensive review of the role of copyright in the complex set of relationships at the heart of these issues. The Office's longstanding interest and expertise in the intersection of copyright law and technology is essential to understanding how copyright shapes our interactions with software in the things we own. A copy of the October 22 letter can be found online and below. ##### October 22, 2015 The Honorable Maria A. Pallante Register of Copyrights U.S. Copyright Office 101 Independence Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20540 Dear Ms. Pallante: Over the past few decades, digital technologies have revolutionized our world. Our intellectual property laws have helped to enable these developments, promoting creativity and innovation, as well as dissemination of, and consumer access to, creative works. One result of recent technological developments is that copyrighted software is ubiquitous in our daily lives. Copyrighted software is now essential to the operation of our refrigerators, our cars, our farm equipment, our wireless phones, and virtually any other device you can think of. As software plays an ever-increasing role in defining consumer interactions with devices and products, many questions are being asked about how consumers can lawfully use products that rely on software to function. The public is rightly seeking clarity. This is a complex field, and how we interact with software in our products touches on numerous important policy arenas, including intellectual property, privacy, consumer protection, public safety, cybersecurity, competition, and the evolution of the digital marketplace. Our laws should work together to promote the public interest in each of these areas, including the interests of consumers, creators, and technology companies wishing to engage in lawful behavior. We write to you in an effort to better understand and evaluate how our copyright laws enable creative expression, foster innovative business models, and allow legitimate uses in this software-enabled environment. Some of the issues raised relating to restrictions on use of software-enabled devices may not be driven primarily by copyright issues and, to the extent action is called for we may need to look outside of copyright law. But there is undoubtedly a need to understand how copyright is implicated. To help us make informed policymaking choices in this area, we request that the Copyright Office undertake a comprehensive review of the role of copyright in the complex set of relationships at the heart of these issues. The Office's longstanding interest and expertise in the intersection of copyright law and technology is essential to understanding how copyright shapes our interactions with software in the things we own. Specifically, we would like you to study and report on the following topics: the provisions of the copyright law that are implicated by the ubiquity of copyrighted software in everyday products; whether, and to what extent, the design, distribution, and legitimate uses of products are being enabled and/or frustrated by the application of existing copyright law to software in everyday products; whether, and to what extent, innovative services are being enabled and/or frustrated by the application of existing copyright law to software in everyday products; whether, and to what extent, legitimate interests or business models for copyright owners and users could be undermined or improved by changes to the copyright law in this area; and identify key issues in how the copyright law intersects with other areas of law in establishing how products that rely on software to function can be lawfully used. This list of topics is not exhaustive. Please examine a ny other topic that the Office determines is relevant to our inquiry. To the extent that the Office believes legislative, or other, changes are necessary, please make appropriate recommendations. In performing this review, we request that the Office seek public input, including from interested industry stakeholders, consumer advocacy groups, and relevant federal agencies. We also ask that you complete the report no later than December 15, 2016 and that you keep our staff updated on your progress during its completion. This is a serious matter, deserving of the careful assessment and expert assistance that the Copyright Office can provide. We look forward to receiving your analysis. Sincerely, ___________________________ ___________________________ CHARLES E. GRASSLEY PATRICK LEAHY Chairman Ranking Member Committee on the Judiciary Committee on the Judiciary Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-senate-judiciary-committee-approves-historic-bipartisan-legislation-to-reform-criminal-justice-system,Leahy: Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Historic Bipartisan Legislation To Reform Criminal Justice System,2015-10-22,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.22.15 Leahy: Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Historic Bipartisan Legislation To Reform Criminal Justice System WASHINGTON (THURSDAY, Oct. 22, 2015) In a long-awaited breakthrough for federal sentencing reform, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday approved bipartisan legislation to reduce some mandatory sentences and apply those changes retroactively to inmates currently serving unfair sentences. Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), a former prosecutor who has long advocated for reform, praised the committee's work. I would like to see an end to all mandatory minimums, but the reforms in this bill represent real progress that I can support, Leahy said. A critical component is the opportunity for judges to apply our reforms retroactively on a case-by-case basis. Our concerns with proportionality and racial disparity require that these reforms apply to old sentences as well as to new ones. The Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act, which was approved on a bipartisan 15-5 vote, expands an existing safety valve that allows judges to impose a sentence below the mandatory minimum sentence. This approach is also part of the Justice Safety Valve Act, bipartisan legislation which Leahy coauthored to restore judicial discretion and end the use of mandatory minimum sentences. Leahy also held a hearing on that legislation and front-end sentencing reform last Congress. Many of the provisions in the bill approved by the Judiciary Committee today will apply retroactively for those currently serving long sentences, something Leahy has long called for. In a September Washington Times op-ed with Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Leahy noted that Applying these reforms retroactively will ensure that those currently serving unfair sentences can be reunited with their families. Leahy also outlined his goals for criminal justice reform in a major speech before the Coalition for Public Safety in July. The package also includes expanded provisions for the compassionate release of older and very ill federal prisoners. This is a priority that was also included in Leahy's bipartisan Second Chance Act reauthorization bill that was introduced in June. For more information on the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act, see the following documents: # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-bipartisan-group-urge-hhs-release-home-heating-assistance-funding,"Welch, Bipartisan Group Urge HHS to Release Home Heating Assistance Funding",2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON--Representatives Peter Welch (D-VT), Alma S. Adams (D-NC), Lou Barletta (R-PA), James P. McGovern (D-MA) along with 71 other Members of Congress sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Sylvia Burwell to urge for the swift release of Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) funding. Releasing the funding will allow families in need to access critical resources to heat their homes during cold winter months. As another Vermont winter grows near, federal officials should release LIHEAP funding now so that Vermonters who depend on it to stay warm are assured it will be there when they need it, said Rep. Welch. In addition, we should redouble our efforts to fully fund this vital safety net program in the federal budget. More than 120,000 North Carolinians rely on critical home heating assistance to keep warm during the winter, saidRep.Adams. This funding is particularly important for many low-income households, children, seniors and veterans who are struggling to pay their bills. With winter fast approaching and temperatures quickly dropping, I urge HHS to release this funding so that our families are not left out in the cold. As the winter months approach us, too many people in my district will have to make the impossible choice between paying for food or keeping warm, saidRep.Barletta. That just isn't acceptable in America. Time is already running short, as the cold weather has already begun in many places, so these funds should be released as soon as possible to protect people among us, particularly seniors and veterans, who depend on it for their very safety. Hundreds of thousands of Massachusetts families, including many seniors who are on a fixed income, rely on LIHEAP funding to help pay for their home heating costs, saidRep. McGovern. With these heating costs becoming a larger and larger share of many families' budgets, this is a critical lifeline that we must protect. Temperatures are already dropping in many parts of the country and after last year's record-setting winter in Massachusetts, we must do everything we can to prepare for this winter. Our most vulnerable families and seniors need access to LIHEAP funds and we urge you to release them as soon as possible. The HHS Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program is a federal program that helps low-income individuals including many seniors, veterans and the disabled pay their energy bills. The program is available during winter and summer months. $3.35 billion in LIHEAP funding was released for fiscal year 2015. LIHEAP provided heating assistance to more than 6.6 million households and cooling assistance to more than 1 million households during fiscal year 2014. In addition to Reps. Alma Adams (D-NC), Peter Welch (D-VT), Lou Barletta (R-PA) and James P. McGovern (D-MA), the letter was signed by Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Richard Hanna (R-NY), Joseph P. Kennedy (D-MA), Chris Gibson (R-NY), Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), Katherine Clark (D-MA), Elizabeth H. Esty (D-CT), Glenn Thompson (R-PA) Dan Benishek (R-MI), Luis Gutirrez (D-IL), Terri Sewell (D-AL), John Yarmuth (D-KY), Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY), Michael Capuano (D-MA), Joe Courtney (D-CT), Joyce Beatty (D-OH), Danny K. Davis (D-IL), Niki Tsongas (D-MA), Mike Kelly (R-PA), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Rick Larsen (D-WA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), John Lewis (D-GA), Joe Crowley (D-NY), Brian Higgins (D-NY), Kathleen Rice (D-NY), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), David N. Cicilline (D-RI), Judy Chu (D-CA), John Larson (D-CT), Donna F. Edwards (D-MD), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Mike Thompson (D-CA), Seth Moulton (D-MA), Richard E. Neal (D-MA), William R. Keating (D-MA), John Carney (D-DE), Tim Walz (D-MN), Dan Lipinski (D-IL), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Andr Carson (D-IN), Bobby L. Rush (D-IL), Betty McCollum (D-MN), Ann McLane Kuster (D-NH), Debbie Dingell (D-MI), Gwen Moore (D-WI), Dave Loebsack (D-IA), Cedric L. Richmond (D-LA), Gregory W. Meeks (D-NY), Stephen F. Lynch (D-MA), Jim Langevin (D-RI), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Sandy Levin (D-MI), Paul D. Tonko (D-NY), Nydia M. Velzquez (D-NY), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Brendan F. Boyle (D-PA), Dan Kildee (D-MI), Albio Sires (D-NJ), Ron Kind (D-WI), Yvette D. Clarke (D-NY), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Robert C. Bobby Scott (D-VA), Tony Crdenas (D-CA), Brenda L. Lawrence (D-MI), Donald Norcross (D-NJ), and Ted Lieu (D-CA). Click here for the full letter. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-continues-lead-debt-ceiling-demands-return-fiscal-responsibility,"Welch Continues to Lead on Debt Ceiling, Demands Return to Fiscal Responsibility",2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONRep. Peter Welch (D-VT), the leader of House efforts to prevent a default on America's obligations, today spoke on the House floor in advance of a looming November 3rd deadline to raise the debt ceiling. Mr. Speaker, let's be clear. Raising the debt ceiling has nothing to do with increasing government spending, it only has to do with whether America will pay its bills for expenses already incurred, Congressman Welch said. A confident nation keeps its word. A confident nation pays its billsnot some of them, it pays all of them. Running from our creditors and picking and choosing who to pay among them is as fiscally reckless as it is dishonorable. This new theory that America can actually consider it feasible as an option to default is extremely dangerous and very costly.We cannot now and we cannot ever default on our obligations and our commitment to the American taxpayer to be fiscally responsible by paying our bills. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-on-president-obamas-steps-to-address-opiate-and-heroin-abuse,Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On President Obamas Steps To Address Opiate and Heroin Abuse,2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.21.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On President Obama's Steps To Address Opiate and Heroin Abuse I applaud President Obama and Director Botticelli for taking important steps to curb addiction to powerful prescription opioids and heroin. The plan unveiled today, with commitments from such a wide array of public and private partners, represents a thoughtful, comprehensive approach to break the cycle of addiction. It also reflects how devastating opioid addiction has become. Communities across the country have seen the over-prescription of opioids result in a wave of debilitating addiction, too often leading to drugs once-thought unimaginable, like heroin, seeping into and crippling our families. The President's plan appropriately treats addiction as an illness a public health challenge and marshals significant resources to prevent and confront the problem. In particular, I believe that the massive prescriber education initiative, along with a commitment to expand access to evidence-based treatment and the overdose-reversing drug Naloxone, will help to stop addiction in its tracks and save lives. In Vermont we have confronted this problem head-on. We learned that it takes an all-hands-on-deck approach, such as the plan unveiled today, involving prevention, treatment, and smart criminal justice policies, to begin to get ahead of addiction. While there are no easy answers, today our nation is making real progress. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt_ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-the-department-of-homeland-securitys-policy-regarding-the-use-of-cell-site-simulators,"Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Department of Homeland Securitys Policy Regarding the Use Of Cell-Site Simulators",2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.21.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Department of Homeland Security's Policy Regarding the Use Of Cell-Site Simulators [The Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday issued new guidelines governing the use of cell-site simulators. The announcement comes weeks after Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), joined by Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), pressed DHS to safeguard Americans' privacy when it comes to the use of these devices, which can sweep up the cell phone signals of unknowing and innocent Americans.] The Department of Homeland Security's new policy on cell-site simulators is a positive first step in responding to the very serious privacy implications posed by cell phone tracking technology, but it raises additional questions that must be answered. Chairman Grassley and I called on DHS to establish a default warrant requirement, and to apply that rule to all agencies within the Department. I am disappointed that DHS has included the same problematic exception to the warrant requirement that is in the Justice Department's policy. Additionally, this policy is limited to criminal investigations, and it is not clear what rules will apply to any use of cell-site simulators for other DHS missions. We must ensure stronger protections for the privacy rights ofinnocent Americans who are not the targets of an investigation. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/news-backgrounder-even-after-benghazi-attack-house-leaders-continued-to-block-embassy-security-funds,"NEWS BACKGROUNDER: Even After Benghazi Attack, House Leaders Continued To Block Embassy Security Funds",2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.21.15 NEWS BACKGROUNDER: Even After Benghazi Attack, House Leaders Continued To Block Embassy Security Funds Leahy: . . . pure, distilled hypocrisy Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt., and then-chairman of the State Department's budget committee the State Department and Foreign Operations Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee), pushed for more embassy security funding than House Republicans were willing to provide both before and after the Benghazi attack. Leahy said: House Republicans have wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on a partisan exercise. For that, and for blaming the Administration for failing to protect our diplomats, without acknowledging their own efforts to slash resources for embassy security, is pure, distilled hypocrisy. BEFORE BENGHAZI: After Republicans took over the House in January 2011 -- before the Benghazi attack -- they proposed deep cuts for U.S. embassy operations and State Department programs across the board, including for diplomatic and embassy facility security. The House Republican Appropriations Committee cut $1 billion from the embassy security budget proposed by the Obama Administration in the two years prior to the Benghazi attack. For FY12, the House State Department and Foreign Operations (SFOPS) Bill was $596 million below the Administration's request of $3.83 billion for diplomatic and embassy facility security (including Diplomatic Security, Worldwide Security Protection and Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance). The counterpart Senate SFOPS bill was $319 million below the request. For FY13, the House was $434 million below the Administration's request of $4.04 billion for these security programs. The Senate SFOPS bill was $70 million below the request. Thus, over these two years immediately before Benghazi, the House SFOPS bills included cuts totaling more than $1 billion for these security programs. Both the Senate and House SFOPS overall budget allocations (the total funds given to the Appropriations Committee with which to craft their overall priorities in the SFOPS bills) for these years were below the President's request. In FY12 and FY13, the House chose to slash these security programs instead of other programs. AFTER BENGHAZI: In the aftermath of the Benghazi attack in 2012, House Republicans repeatedly blocked Senator Patrick Leahy's legislation to bolster funding for security for U.S. embassies abroad. Senator Leahy's efforts included a stand-alone embassy security bill, in the aftermath of the Benghazi attack, which he wrote and introduced, and which the Senate unanimously approved in February 2013. It was based on the Leahy Amendment that the Senate approved in December 2012 during debate on the emergency supplemental appropriations bill [LINK: http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-embassy-security-bill-passes-senate ] House Republican leaders dropped this Leahy embassy security legislation in the House version of the emergency supplemental bill [LINK: http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-leahy-embassy-security-amendment ] Leahy continued to push for enactment of embassy security funding. After months of foot-dragging by House leaders, they eventually consented to additional security funding, in the year-long FY13 Continuing Resolution (CR) that passed the Senate and the House (signed into law on March 26, 2013). That legislation included Leahy's additional funding and transfer authority for embassy security. The CR included $4.2 billion for diplomatic and facilities security, which was $1.4 billion above the Administration's initial request of $2.8 billion. The additional $1.4 billion was for increased diplomatic security requirements worldwide, and was based on the initial security assessment that the Department conducted after the Benghazi attacks. The CR also included transfer authority between the Diplomatic and Consular Programs and the Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance Overseas Contingency Operations accounts. DEFINITIONS: There are two accounts within the State Department-Foreign Operations bill which fund the main programs for the security of Department of State personnel and facilities: 1. Diplomatic and Consular Programs funds worldwide operating requirements for the State Department, and includes two security-related programs: Diplomatic Security is the law enforcement and security arm of the State Department, protecting people, property, and information worldwide, conducting international investigations, threat analysis, cyber security, and counterterrorism. Worldwide Security Protection includes the worldwide guard force protecting overseas diplomatic missions and residences. 2. Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance (ESCM) funds all costs related to the construction and maintenance of the State Department's overseas diplomatic facilities, including: construction and maintenance of security-related diplomatic facility projects; improved security at mission-related offices, schools and other off-post facilities; maintenance and repair of buildings owned or leased by the Department with an emphasis on security and life safety; and major rehabilitation of the Department's overseas residential and other facilities, including to meet security standards. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/remarks-of-senator-patrick-leahy-cato-surveillance-conference,REMARKS OF SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY CATO SURVEILLANCE CONFERENCE,2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.21.15 REMARKS OF SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY CATO SURVEILLANCE CONFERENCE Good afternoon. Two years ago at a Cato conference on NSA surveillance Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner announced our introduction of the original USA FREEDOM Act. It is great to be with you, two years later, to celebrate the enactment of the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015, and the end of the NSA's bulk collection of American's phone records. The USA FREEDOM Act marks the first major reform of surveillance laws in decades. This sort of reform does not come quickly, or easily. But Republicans and Democrats finally came together and passed this bill because it was the right thing to do. And because the American people demanded it. When the public learned that the government had secretly relied on a deeply flawed interpretation of Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act to engage in the indiscriminate, bulk collection of our telephone records, the response from the American people was clear. They were shocked that the phone records of innocent Americans were being swept up, regardless of any connection to terrorist activity. They lost trust in the intelligence community, and became skeptical of existing legal protections. They demanded meaningful limits on executive authority. They demanded more transparency, more accountability, more checks and balances. And they rallied behind an end to the NSA's dragnet collection of their phone records. Despite these powerful calls for reform, some leaders in the Senate defended the program and resisted even modest reforms. They claimed that the phone records program was necessary to keep our country safe, and resorted to the same fear-mongering tactics we have seen all too often. But they did not work this time. Through multiple hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee and the tireless advocacy of many in this room, we were able to demonstrate that the effectiveness of the program had been grossly overstated. And there was another factor at play, one that turned out to be critical. The sunset. When the USA PATRIOT Act was originally enacted in 2001, I worked with Congressman Dick Armey to ensure that it included a sunset of the most controversial surveillance provisions, including Section 215. We wanted to force Congress to revisit these provisions, and that is exactly what happened this year. With Section 215 scheduled to expire on June 1, the Senate still had not enacted legislation to reauthorize it. The Senate Majority Leader did not like our bill, but our coalition in the House and the Senate made it crystal clear that we would not let a clean reauthorization pass. So in the end, backed up against the sunset deadline, Leader McConnell was forced to bring up the USA FREEDOM Act, which ultimately passed the Senate with overwhelming support. The USA FREEDOM Act that was enacted into law did not go as far as the original bill that I introduced with Congressman Sensenbrenner. I wanted more reforms, but the bill that passed was an important step in a long journey that has not ended yet. First, and most importantly, the USA FREEDOM Act ends the NSA's bulk collection of Americans' phone records. The Act also prohibits the government from using other surveillance authorities to engage in bulk collection. Second, the law increasestransparency of the government's surveillance activities. The USA FREEDOM Act will lead to the declassification of more FISA Court opinions, and has already allowed companies like Yahoo! to report more information to the public about government surveillance requests. The mandatory government reporting requirements will soon provide even more information. Third, the reforms to the FISA Court in the USA FREEDOM Act allow the court to hear additional perspectives from expert third parties. The FISA Court has already authorized amicus curiae to appear before the court pursuant to provisions in the new law. In a few weeks, the FISA Court will take another significant step by designating a panel of cleared experts available to assist the court in any matter going forward. Lastly, the USA FREEDOM Act enacted major reforms to National Security Letters. The law ensures that NSLs cannot be used for bulk collection. It also strengthens judicial review of gag orders that are issued to recipients of NSLs bringing these gag orders into compliance with the Constitution. I believe that history will view the USA FREEDOM Act as a crucial step toward recalibrating our surveillance laws. I want to thank my partners on the bill: Senator Lee, Congressman Sensenbrenner, Chairman Goodlatte, and Ranking Member Conyers. Also Senator Wyden, who supported this effort to the end. Our bill could not have passed without the broad coalition of privacy advocates, U.S. companies, and others that worked for years to end bulk collection and enact meaningful reform. And thank you to the Cato Institute for including me today, and for your work on surveillance reform. This new law is the result of our collective efforts, but I am here to make clear to you that our work is not done. There are many in Congress who still prefer to give our national security agencies a blank check. They believe that any attempt to protect our privacy somehow makes us less safe. We must forcefully reject this premise. Too often, I hear members accept the framework of balancing' privacy rights and national security. This is the wrong approach. It suggests that any effort to protect Americans' privacy somehow makes us less secure. Protecting our most basic rights and protecting this country are not part of a zero-sum equation. They need not be in conflict. We can and should do both. We can give our intelligence and law enforcement agencies the tools they need to keep us safe, while at the same time placing responsible limits to protect Americans' privacy and constitutional liberties. The USA FREEDOM Act is proof of that. Our task now is to keep building momentum for further reform. The bipartisan coalition that was so critical to ending bulk collection must keep fighting. We still need to protect Americans' email and other content stored in the cloud. Reform of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which I originally wrote in 1986, is long overdue. Technology has outpaced this law and it must be updated. Senator Lee and I have introduced the ECPA Amendments Act, which enshrines in statute a warrant requirement for emails, texts, and other electronic content held by service providers. This bill has overwhelming, bipartisan support with 300 cosponsors in the House and more than 20 cosponsors in the Senate. It is time to finally get this bill across the finish line. We also need to reform the FISA Amendments Act, which sunsets in 2017. This law, also known as Section 702, has significant privacy implications for innocent Americans. And with the European Court of Justice's decision, it continues to have significant implications for American businesses in the global economy. I look forward to working with you to reform Section 702 and other surveillance authorities. Finally, we need to grapple with a whole range of new technologies that have the potential to threaten Americans' privacy. Technologies such as Stingrays, license plate readers, facial recognition technology, and even domestic drones are transforming the government's ability to monitor and collect information on innocent Americans. I will continue to work to ensure that these types of technologies are used responsibly, with clear guidelines and appropriate safeguards to protect our constitutional rights. This has been an historic, landmark year for surveillance reform, and we should celebrate our victory. But there is important work ahead. I have fought to protect the privacy and constitutional rights of Vermonters and all Americans from the day I was first elected to the Senate in 1974. I will not stop now. Thank you. ##### Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-regarding-the-cybersecurity-information-sharing-act-of-2015-october-21-2015,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Regarding the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 October 21, 2015",2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.21.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Regarding the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 October 21, 2015 It seems as though every week, the American people learn of yet another data breach in which Americans' sensitive, private information has been stolen by cybercriminals or foreign governments. This is a critical national security problem that deserves action by Congress. But our actions must be thoughtful and responsible, and we must recognize that strengthening our Nation's cybersecurity is a complex endeavor with no single solution. According to security researchers and technologists, the most effective action Congress can take to improve our cybersecurity is to require better and more comprehensive data security practices. That is why earlier this year, I introduced the Consumer Privacy Protection Act. That bill requires companies to utilize strong data security measures to protect our personal information and to help prevent breaches in the first place. Companies that benefit financially from gathering and analyzing our personal information should be obligated to take meaningful steps to keep it safe. But rather than taking a comprehensive approach that addresses the multiple facets of cybersecurity, the Republican Majority appears to be focused entirely on passing the Senate Intelligence Committee's cybersecurity information sharing bill. While legislation to promote the sharing of cyber threat information could, if done right, be useful in improving our cybersecurity, it is a serious mistake to believe that information sharing alone is the solution. Information sharing alone would not, for example, have prevented the breach at the Office of Personnel Management, nor would it have prevented other major breaches, such as those at Target, Home Depot, Anthem, or Sony. Instead of ensuring that companies better safeguard Americans' data, this bill goes in the opposite direction, giving large corporations more liability protection and even more leeway on how to use and share our personal information with the government without adequate privacy protections. Also troubling is the fact that the Republican Majority has been intent on jamming this bill through the Senate without any regard for regular process or opportunity for meaningful public debate. Only last year, the Republican Leader declared his commitment to a more robust committee process and plainly stated that bills should go through committee. But the bill was drafted behind closed doors by the Senate Intelligence Committee, and it has not been the subject of any open hearings or any meaningful public debate. The text of the bill was only made public after it was reported to the Senate floor, and no other committee of jurisdiction including the Judiciary Committee was allowed to consider and improve the bill. The Judiciary Committee was prevented from considering this bill even though it contains numerous provisions that affect matters squarely within our jurisdiction. First and foremost, the bill creates a framework of information sharing that could severely undermine Americans' privacy. The bill also overrides all existing law to provide broad liability protections for any company that shares information with the government. It also overrides important privacy laws such as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), over which the Judiciary Committee has long exercised jurisdiction. CISA even amends the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and creates new exemptions from disclosure. This is just the latest attempt by the Majority Leader to bypass the Judiciary Committee and jam a bill through the Senate that contains provisions within the jurisdiction of the Committee. The bill reported by the Senate Intelligence Committee includes a broad and unnecessary FOIA exemption. FOIA falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Senate Judiciary Committee and changes affecting this law should not be enacted without full and careful consideration by the Judiciary Committee. This important transparency law certainly should not be amended in closed session by the Senate Intelligence Committee. Shortly after the text of the bill was released, I shared with Chairman Grassley my concern that the Judiciary Committee should also consider this bill. He assured me that there would be a robust and open amendment process if this bill were considered on the Senate floor. But only a few weeks later, the Republican leadership with Chairman Grassley's support attempted to jam the Intelligence Committee's bill through the Senate as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) without any opportunity for meaningful debate. Republicans and Democrats joined together to reject the Majority Leader's effort to force the cybersecurity bill onto the NDAA. Despite this rebuke from both sides of the aisle, just a few weeks later, the Majority Leader again attempted to jam the bill through the Senate in the final days before August recess, without any serious opportunity to debate and offer amendments. The Majority Leader's actions have been part of a consistent disregard for regular order. He has talked about providing an opportunity for fair debate, but at the same time he has used all procedural mechanisms to stifle process on this bill. Yesterday afternoon, the Senate moved to consideration of this bill but then not even two hours later, the Majority Leader moved to end debate. That speaks volumes about whether the Majority Leader is really interested in a full and open debate, and it is not how the United States Senate should operate particularly when it comes to a bill with such sweeping ramifications for Americans' privacy. Senator Feinstein, the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee, has consistently said that the Senate should have an opportunity to fully consider the bill and to receive the input of other committees with jurisdiction in this area. She has worked hard to improve the underlying bill with a Managers' amendment that addresses a number of my concerns, particularly in regards to FOIA, limiting the sharing of information for cybersecurity purposes only, and ensuring that the bill would not allow the government to use information to investigate crimes completely unrelated to cybersecurity. I appreciate these improvements, and Senator Feinstein's efforts to include them in the bill. But again, this bill still has some serious problems and requires a full, public debate. The bill still includes, for example, a FOIA exemption that I believe is overly broad and unnecessary. In July, the Department of Homeland Security wrote a letter to Senator Franken stating that in their view the bill raises significant operational concerns and certain provisions threaten to severely undermine Americans' privacy. Last week, the Computer & Communications Industry Association an organization that includes Google, Facebook, and Yahoo! voiced serious concerns that the bill fails to protect users' privacy and could cause collateral harm to innocent third parties. And this week, major tech companies such as Apple, Dropbox, Twitter, and Yelp have vocally opposed the bill citing concerns for their users' privacy. The latest version of the bill contains a number of improvements that I and other Senators have been fighting for, and I am glad to see that we are making progress. But we still have work to do on this bill, and the Senate must have an open and honest debate about the Senate Intelligence Committee's bill and its implications for Americans' privacy. I agree that we must do more to protect our cybersecurity, but we must be responsible in our actions. Legislation of this importance should not be hastily pushed through the Senate, without a full and fair opportunity for Senators to consider the ramifications of this bill. Unfortunately, by moving so quickly to end debate, it appears that the Majority Leader is trying to do just that. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-engel-and-congressman-welch-introduce-offending-oil,Congressman Engel and Congressman Welch Introduce the Offending Oil Polluters Act to Prevent American Taxpayers from Subsidizing Corporate Wrongdoing,2015-10-20,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Congressman Eliot Engel and Congressman Peter Welch, members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, have introduced H.R. 3760, The Offending Oil Polluters Act, legislation aimed at preventing companies from deducting losses that result from spilling oil or hazardous substances. Federal tax law currently prevents companies from deducting penalties paid as a result of breaking the law from their corporate taxes. However, money classified as something other than a penaltyincluding restitution, reimbursement, or compensatory payments to damaged partiesis deductible as an ordinary cost of doing business. Earlier this month, BP and the Justice Department reached a $20.8 billion settlement for damages caused by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. But under the current law, up to 75 percent of BP's bill is tax deductible, thus forcing the American taxpayer to cover more than $5 billion of the settlement's cost. The Offending Oil Polluters Act would prevent companies from deducting losses that result from spilling oil or hazardous substances, including deductions for the direct costs of clean-up, legal fees resulting from the discharge of oil or hazardous substances, payments or restitution related to the discharge, and any cost penalties that are required by Federal law, regulations, or certified in a settlement by Federal courts. Allowing a financial institution that has damaged the environment and harmed consumers the benefit of writing off related penalties is offensive and adds insult to injury to the taxpayer, Congressman Welch said. This legislation is a no brainer and Congress should act on it promptly to protect the American taxpayer. BP made an absolute mess in the Gulf, and the idea that they can somehow pawn the bill off on the American taxpayer is disgusting, Congressman Engel said. Those who do significant harm to our environment need to be held accountable to the public for their actions, not the other way around. The current laws provide too many escape hatches for polluters to use in order to avoid paying for the damage they've done. This needs to end, which is why we are introducing this piece of legislation to protect the American taxpayer from financial liability. I urge my colleagues in Congress to support The Offending Oil Polluters Act so that we can close this egregious loophole. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/richmond-school-welch-highlights-bipartisan-legislation-improve-call,"At Richmond School, Welch Highlights Bipartisan Legislation to Improve Call Completion in Rural America",2015-10-20,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"RICHMOND, Vt.Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) today visited Camels Hump Middle School in Richmond to highlight his bipartisan legislation to address the frequency of dropped telephone calls in rural America. In Vermont, rural school administrators regularly experience dropped calls while notifying parents of school cancellations due to inclement weather. In some rural areas of the country, nearly one in five inbound calls to landline phones are not completed or are of poor quality. Poor call completion in rural areas often stems from the use by retail long distance providers of third parties to deliver calls at reduced rates. As a member of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, Welch has been a strong advocate for improving rural call completion and connectivity in rural America and holding third party providers accountable. At the Richmond school, Welch highlighted his bipartisan legislation to tackIe the problem. The Rural Call Quality and Reliability Act would hold providers accountable by requiring them to register with the FCC and meet quality standards ensuring rural Americans can rely on their phone service. The bill explicitly prohibits providers from using any intermediary routing service that is not registered with the FCC. In April, Rep. Welch reintroduced a bipartisan resolution that outlines steps the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should take to improve telephone service in rural areas. ""Reliable telephone service is a lifeline for residents, businesses, and schools in rural parts of Vermont and the country. Vermonters living and doing business in rural parts of our state should have the confidence that every call they make and every call they receive are completed without disruption,"" Welch said.""It is simply unacceptable in the 21st Century for rural Americans to be frustrated by dropped calls due to telecom provider connection issues."" Today's event with Rep. Peter Welch at Camels Hump Middle School in Richmond, Vt., demonstrates yet again why it is so important to address the ongoing epidemic of calls failing to reach rural areas, said NTCA Chief Executive Officer Shirley Bloomfiled. When calls fail, this has a real and potentially dangerous impact on consumersand businessesas well as on schools, libraries, hospitals and other anchor institutions upon which rural communities depend. NTCAThe Rural Broadband Association thanks the congressman for his leadership and ongoing vigilance on this issue, including not only today's appearance but also sponsorship of a resolution condemning practices that lead to call failures and demanding action by the FCC to aggressively pursue those that engage in such practices. NTCA continues to press for a mix of effective rules, education and enforcement to stem the tide of call failures once and for all. Waitsfield and Champlain Valley Telecomapplauds Rep. Peter Welch for his continuing leadership to ensure that people in rural communities like the ones we serve can communicate seamlessly with other parts of the country, said Kurt Gruendling, Vice President of Marketing and Business Development for Waitsfield and Champlain Valley Telecom. This is not just a problem here in Vermont, but rather a nationwide epidemic affecting rural communities across the entire country. We hope that today's action will lead to legislation that reminds other carriers and intermediate providers of the importance of completing calls and the obligation to track whether calls are completing and to investigate why calls may be failing. We look forward to working with the congressman to achieve that goal. Rep. Welch is the founder and co-chair of the Rural Telecommunications Working Group within the House Energy and Commerce Committee. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-senate-must-pass-comprehensive-immigration-reform_not-partisan-legislation,"Leahy: Senate Must Pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Not Partisan Legislation",2015-10-20,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.20.15 Leahy: Senate Must Pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Not Partisan Legislation WASHINGTON (Tuesday, October 20, 2015) The Senate is poised to cast a procedural vote Tuesday on partisan immigration legislation that would harm communities and is staunchly opposed by law enforcement. A broad range of groups representing domestic violence victims, housing and low-income advocates, mayors, faith and civil rights leaders, labor groups, and immigrant rights organizations also oppose the bill. Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) urged Republican leaders Tuesday to instead work to pass comprehensive immigration reform, just as Democrats did in the last Congress. For the first time in more than two years, the Senate is turning its attention to an issue related to our broken immigration system. But in stark contrast to the comprehensive, hopeful legislation last reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the majority is simply scheduling a show vote today on a divisive, partisan proposal that has not even been considered in the Judiciary Committee. What a difference a change in leadership makes, Leahy said. Leahy served as chairman of the Judiciary Committee last Congress when the Senate approved the bipartisan Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. That bill was considered in committee over a three-week period and had extensive process on the floor. In contrast, the legislation being considered in the Senate today was removed from the agenda in the Judiciary Committee last week so that it would not be the subject of a markup. Leahy said: Rather than marking this legislation up in Committee with input and amendments from both sides, the bill before us was yanked off of the Judiciary Committee agenda once the Majority Leader decided to bring it straight to the floor. # # # # # Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, on the Stop Sanctuary Cities Policies and Protect Americans Act, S.2146 For the first time in more than two years, the Senate is turning its attention to an issue related to our broken immigration system. But in stark contrast to the comprehensive, hopeful legislation last reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the majority is simply scheduling a show vote today on a divisive, partisan proposal that has not even been considered in the Judiciary Committee. What a difference a change in leadership makes. There are few topics more fundamental to who we are as a Nation than immigration. A consistent thread through our history is the arrival of new people to this country seeking a better life. Immigration has been an ongoing source of renewal for America -- a renewal of our spirit, our creativity, and our economic strength. Two years ago, the Senate reaffirmed its commitment to these ideals when we approved S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. That legislation, which was supported by 68 Senators from both parties, would have meaningfully improved our great country by making our communities safer, strengthening our economy, improving border security, and keeping families together. It was a remarkable, bipartisan effort that was made better through the extensive amendment process in the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was an example of all that we can accomplish when we actually focus on the hard job of legislating. The bill we are considering today could not be more different. This legislation is not bipartisan. It does not reflect a desire to meaningfully improve what we all agree is a broken immigration system. Instead, this bill is, as the New York Times editorialized on Saturday, a class-action slander against an immigrant population that has been scapegoated for the crimes of a few, and left stranded by the failure of legislative reform that would open a path for them to live fully within the law. Those who support this bill point to a tragedy that captured our attention this summer. Any time an innocent person is killed, we have an obligation to understand what happened and try to prevent similar tragedies in the future. We all feel that way about the senseless and terribly cruel death of Kate Steinle. Her death was avoidable. Our system failed. Period. And it is heart-wrenching that such a beautiful, young life was taken by a man who should never have been free on our streets. We are motivated to do something in the wake of her death. Just as we are motivated to act in the wake of the senseless killings of nine men and women attending a bible study class in Charleston, South Carolina. Or the nine innocent people brutally murdered at an Oregon community college. These are moments that demand leadership. We should roll up our sleeves and start to address the problems that led us here. We should address gun violence and the criminals who threaten our safety instead of characterizing entire immigrant communities as criminals. Unfortunately, it does not appear that we will be given that chance. Rather than marking this legislation up in Committee with input and amendments from both sides, the bill before us was yanked off of the Judiciary Committee agenda once the Majority Leader decided to bring it straight to the floor. Others can speculate about what motivated the timing of today's vote. What we know for sure is that this action goes against precisely what the Majority Leader promised last year when he said that [b]ills should go through Committee. And if Republicans are fortunate enough to gain the majority next year, they would. It is disappointing that he has broken his promise on legislation of such importance. If this bill were to become law, it would create two new mandatory minimums and cost us millions of dollars that we do not have. This would deny funding for critical services in local communities, and do nothing to fix the broken immigration system we have today. At a time when the Judiciary Committee is engaged in a thoughtful, bipartisan effort to reform our criminal justice system and save taxpayers money in the process, it makes no sense to forego that process for considering this immigration bill. If we are really trying to make our communities safer, we should listen to the police officers and law enforcement officials who dedicate their lives to that very mission. We should listen to domestic violence advocates who say the approach in this partisan bill will have a dangerous effect on the lives of women and children at risk. They are telling us this bill will make our communities less safe. It will undermine the trust and cooperation between police officers and immigrant communities. It will damage efforts to prevent crime and weaken their ability to apprehend those who prey on the public. That is why the National Fraternal Order of Police is opposed to policies that would be implemented by this bill. It is why the National Taskforce to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women opposes this bill. It is why the U.S. Conference of Mayors opposes this bill. I ask unanimous consent that letters from the National Fraternal Order of Police and the National Taskforce to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women be included in the record. I agree with Senator Heller, who noted that For two years we haven't had a discussion and so all the sudden we're going to bring up an immigration issue and not talk about the bigger issue. The problems plaguing our immigration system demand that we respond thoughtfully and responsibly. We can do better. We owe it to the American public to do better. I urge senators to vote against cloture on this partisan bill that will not make us safer. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-the-stop-sanctuary-cities-policies-and-protect-americans-act-s2146-,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, on the Stop Sanctuary Cities Policies and Protect Americans Act, S.2146",2015-10-20,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.20.15 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, on the Stop Sanctuary Cities Policies and Protect Americans Act, S.2146 For the first time in more than two years, the Senate is turning its attention to an issue related to our broken immigration system. But in stark contrast to the comprehensive, hopeful legislation last reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the majority is simply scheduling a show vote today on a divisive, partisan proposal that has not even been considered in the Judiciary Committee. What a difference a change in leadership makes. There are few topics more fundamental to who we are as a Nation than immigration. A consistent thread through our history is the arrival of new people to this country seeking a better life. Immigration has been an ongoing source of renewal for America -- a renewal of our spirit, our creativity, and our economic strength. Two years ago, the Senate reaffirmed its commitment to these ideals when we approved S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. That legislation, which was supported by 68 Senators from both parties, would have meaningfully improved our great country by making our communities safer, strengthening our economy, improving border security, and keeping families together. It was a remarkable, bipartisan effort that was made better through the extensive amendment process in the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was an example of all that we can accomplish when we actually focus on the hard job of legislating. The bill we are considering today could not be more different. This legislation is not bipartisan. It does not reflect a desire to meaningfully improve what we all agree is a broken immigration system. Instead, this bill is, as the New York Times editorialized on Saturday, a class-action slander against an immigrant population that has been scapegoated for the crimes of a few, and left stranded by the failure of legislative reform that would open a path for them to live fully within the law. Those who support this bill point to a tragedy that captured our attention this summer. Any time an innocent person is killed, we have an obligation to understand what happened and try to prevent similar tragedies in the future. We all feel that way about the senseless and terribly cruel death of Kate Steinle. Her death was avoidable. Our system failed. Period. And it is heart-wrenching that such a beautiful, young life was taken by a man who should never have been free on our streets. We are motivated to do something in the wake of her death. Just as we are motivated to act in the wake of the senseless killings of nine men and women attending a bible study class in Charleston, South Carolina. Or the nine innocent people brutally murdered at an Oregon community college. These are moments that demand leadership. We should roll up our sleeves and start to address the problems that led us here. We should address gun violence and the criminals who threaten our safety instead of characterizing entire immigrant communities as criminals. Unfortunately, it does not appear that we will be given that chance. Rather than marking this legislation up in Committee with input and amendments from both sides, the bill before us was yanked off of the Judiciary Committee agenda once the Majority Leader decided to bring it straight to the floor. Others can speculate about what motivated the timing of today's vote. What we know for sure is that this action goes against precisely what the Majority Leader promised last year when he said that [b]ills should go through Committee. And if Republicans are fortunate enough to gain the majority next year, they would. It is disappointing that he has broken his promise on legislation of such importance. If this bill were to become law, it would create two new mandatory minimums and cost us millions of dollars that we do not have. This would deny funding for critical services in local communities, and do nothing to fix the broken immigration system we have today. At a time when the Judiciary Committee is engaged in a thoughtful, bipartisan effort to reform our criminal justice system and save taxpayers money in the process, it makes no sense to forego that process for considering this immigration bill. If we are really trying to make our communities safer, we should listen to the police officers and law enforcement officials who dedicate their lives to that very mission. We should listen to domestic violence advocates who say the approach in this partisan bill will have a dangerous effect on the lives of women and children at risk. They are telling us this bill will make our communities less safe. It will undermine the trust and cooperation between police officers and immigrant communities. It will damage efforts to prevent crime and weaken their ability to apprehend those who prey on the public. That is why the National Fraternal Order of Police is opposed to policies that would be implemented by this bill. It is why the National Taskforce to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women opposes this bill. It is why the U.S. Conference of Mayors opposes this bill. I ask unanimous consent that letters from the National Fraternal Order of Police and the National Taskforce to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women be included in the record. I agree with Senator Heller, who noted that For two years we haven't had a discussion and so all the sudden we're going to bring up an immigration issue and not talk about the bigger issue. The problems plaguing our immigration system demand that we respond thoughtfully and responsibly. We can do better. We owe it to the American public to do better. I urge senators to vote against cloture on this partisan bill that will not make us safer. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/bipartisan-group-legislators-applaud-epa-looking-flawed-renewable-fuel,Bipartisan Group of Legislators Applaud the EPA For Looking Into Flawed Renewable Fuel Standard,2015-10-19,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. Representatives Jim Costa (D-CA), Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Steve Womack (R-AR) released the following statement regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Inspector General research into lifecycle impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS): We are pleased that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Inspector General (IG) is looking into the effectiveness of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). While we believe the RFS was implemented with good intentions, the reality is that, given current conditions, the policy is flawed and is in need of reform. The current RFS has surpassed a sustainable state and is hurting American consumers, energy producers, livestock and poultry producers, food manufacturers, and retailers. The negative impacts of the RFS are known, and it is our hope that the IG's report provides much-needed clarity to the conflicting information the EPA has shared regarding the benefits of the RFS. In February 2015, Reps. Costa, Goodlatte, Welch, and Womack introduced H.R. 704, theRFS Reform Act. TheRFS Reform Acteliminates the corn-based ethanol requirement, caps the amount of ethanol that can be blended into conventional gasoline at 10 percent, and requires the EPA to set cellulosic biofuels levels at production levels. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/at-sjc-hearing-leahy-urges-senators-to-support-criminal-justice-reform,"At SJC Hearing, Leahy Urges Senators To Support Criminal Justice Reform",2015-10-19,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.19.15 At SJC Hearing, Leahy Urges Senators To Support Criminal Justice Reform This is an historic opportunity, and we must not squander it. WASHINGTON (Monday, October 19, 2015) The Senate Judiciary Committee is holding a hearing today on the bipartisan Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015, a bill to reduce some mandatory sentences and reform the criminal justice system. Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), a former prosecutor who has long advocated for comprehensive criminal justice reform, urged all Senators to support the legislation, noting that The problems facing our criminal justice system simply cannot continue to go unaddressed. When we lock up too many people, for longer than is necessary to keep our communities safe, it comes at an extraordinary price. We have fewer resources to support public safety efforts that actually work. And we are left with a criminal justice system that is anything but just,' particularly for many communities of color, Leahy said. He added: To solve complex problems in our communities, like addiction, Congress has too often resorted to simple, yet deeply flawed mandatory minimum sentences. It is time we fix our mistakes. And it is essential that this fix apply retroactively so that those currently paying the price for our mistakes are given a second chance. This is an historic opportunity, and we must not squander it. The Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act expands an existing judicial safety valve that allows judges to impose a sentence below the mandatory minimum sentence. This approach is also part of the Justice Safety Valve Act, bipartisan legislation coauthored by Leahy to restore judicial discretion and end the use of mandatory minimum sentences. Many of the provisions in the bill will apply retroactively for those currently serving long sentences, something Leahy pushed in a Washington Times op-ed with Cardinal Theodore McCarrick.In that September op-ed, Leahy and McCarrick noted that Applying these reforms retroactively will ensure that those currently serving unfair sentences can be reunited with their families. Witnesses at today's hearing, including Hilary Shelton of the NAACP, also spoke in support of the bill's retroactive reforms. The package also includes expanded provisions for the compassionate release of older and very ill federal prisoners. This is a priority that was also included in Leahy's bipartisan Second Chance Act reauthorization bill that was introduced in June. The Judiciary Committee is poised to mark up the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act this week. For more information on the legislation, see the following documents: # # # # # Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Hearing on Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015 October 19, 2015 The problems facing our criminal justice system simply cannot continue to go unaddressed. When we lock up too many people, for longer than is necessary to keep our communities safe it comes at an extraordinary price. We have fewer resources to support public safety efforts that actually work. And we are left with a criminal justice system that is anything but just, particularly for many communities of color. To solve complex problems in our communities, like addiction, Congress has too often resorted to simple, yet deeply flawed mandatory minimum sentences. It is time we fix our mistakes. And it is essential that this fix apply retroactively so that those currently paying the price for our mistakes are given a second chance. This is an historic opportunity, and we must not squander it. The bipartisan bill we introduced this month is not perfect. I would like to go further. There are many mandatory minimums this bill does not impact. But the bill does not contain everything Senator Grassley would like either. That is the nature of compromise and it is the only way we can actually take a step toward passing historic legislation. Today we will hear testimony about necessary reforms that have garnered broad agreement. Because of Senator Grassley's leadership and building on the work of the last Congress, half of the members serving on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Republicans and Democrats, are sponsors of this bill. I expect those numbers to grow in the coming days. And I hope this coalition can work for more reforms in the future, but the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015 is a good start. I view this bill through the eyes of a former prosecutor. I still treasure the shield that I carried as State's Attorney in Chittenden County. It reminds me of the brave men and women on the front lines who protect us every day. These individuals deserve to have the resources they need to do their jobs effectively. I also think about the families affected by our criminal justice system. That includes the families of inmates like our witness, Debi Campbell, whose children grew up in foster care because she received a 19 year sentence for selling methamphetamine. She will be the first to admit she should have served some time. But 19 years? She had no criminal history points there was no violence involved. But she was sent away for almost two decades at enormous taxpayer expense. That simply does not make any sense. We have to do better. Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates knows that the reform we have proposed is desperately needed. The Justice Department now must dedicate a quarter of its budget to the Bureau of Prisons every year. That means less money for victim's services, law enforcement, and reentry programs. I thank Deputy Attorney General Yates for her leadership and for being here today. Many people deserve recognition today for their commitment to improving our criminal justice system. Along with Chairman Grassley, Senators Durbin, Lee, Whitehouse, Graham, Schumer, Booker, and Scott all sought compromise, worked through disagreements, and demonstrated that Congress is still capable of coming together on challenging, yet critical issues. I also want to thank Senator Paul for working with me on the Justice Safety Valve Act, which would have gone much further, extending the safety valve to all mandatory minimum sentences. The sentencing reform bill we consider today contains important improvements, but injustices will remain and our work will not be done until we end mandatory sentencing. While not in the room today, former Attorney General Eric Holder deserves special recognition. He long ago recognized inequities in our criminal justice system and the consequences of mass incarceration. Through his Smart on Crime initiative, he proved that addressing these inequities leads to a fairer and more effective system. Under Eric Holder's leadership, last year, for the first time in 40 years, the overall crime rate and overall incarceration rate declined together. I have learned over the past four decades that it often takes a few Congresses to make meaningful progress. We started this effort years ago and we have steadily increased support for it. If we continue to remember that we are here to serve the American people, historic reform is within our grasp. I thank all who have responded to the call to reform our criminal sentencing laws. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/feinstein-and-leahy-call-on-chinese-leaders-to-release-nobel-laureate-liu-xia-and-his-wife,Feinstein & Leahy Call On Chinese Leaders To Release Nobel Laureate Liu Xia And His Wife,2015-10-15,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.15.15 Feinstein & Leahy Call On Chinese Leaders To Release Nobel Laureate Liu Xia And His Wife Feinstein, Leahy Call for Release of Chinese Nobel Laureate, Wife Five-year anniversary of Liu Xia's arrest (THURSDAY, Oct. 15, 2015) -- Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) today released the following statement marking the five-year anniversary of the arrest of Liu Xia, the wife of Chinese democracy activist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo: This week marks the five-year anniversary that Liu Xia was placed under house arrest in China. She has never been charged with a crime and remains confined to her apartment because her husband, respected democracy activist Liu Xiaobo, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2010. Over the past five years, Liu Xia's health has sharply deteriorated. She suffers from anxiety, depression, severe back pain and had a heart attack last year. Her repeated requests to leave the country for medical treatment have been denied. We urgently request the Chinese government allow Liu Xia to seek medical treatment abroad and release Liu Xiaobo, the world's only jailed Nobel Peace Prize laureate. Such action would be a welcome humanitarian gesture. # # # # # Press Contact David Carle (Leahy), (202) 224-3693 Dean Lieberman (Feinstein), (202) 224-9629 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-sends-letter-nrc-demanding-seat-table-vermont-yankee,Welch Sends Letter to NRC Demanding Seat at Table for Vermont in Yankee Decommissioning,2015-10-14,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington Following up on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) testimony before key House subcommittees in September, Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) today sent a letter to the NRC demanding Vermont have a seat at the table in decommissioning Entergy's Vermont Yankee plant in Vernon, Vermont. The lack of meaningful stakeholder participation in decisions related to Vermont Yankee's decommissioning is unacceptable. It is essential that Vermonters have a seat at the table throughout this process. The NRC has failed to substantively engage state and local officials and appears to be increasingly relying on the perspective of the nuclear energy industry. I request that you creatively engage local stakeholders in a manner that goes beyond standard regulatory procedures to ensure that their concerns are heard and addressed, Rep. Welch wrote. Welch first challenged the NRC in a joint hearing of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittees on Energy and Power, and Environment and the Economy. The letter can be found in its entirety below. October 14, 2015 The Honorable Stephen Burns Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your testimony at the September 9, 2015 joint hearing of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittees on Energy and Power, and Environment and the Economy. I want to reiterate the concerns I raised at the hearing regarding the decommissioning of Entergy's Vermont Yankee plant located in Vernon, Vermont. Specifically, I am deeply concerned about: 1) the lack of state and local stakeholder involvement in the decommissioning process; 2) questionable uses of the Decommissioning Trust Fund by Entergy; and 3) the reality that the use of the SAFSTOR decommissioning procedure will effectively delay the full cleanup and redevelopment of the Vermont Yankee site for decades. In addition, subsequent to that joint hearing, I have become very concerned about significant new developments in relation to Vermont Yankee emergency programs. The lack of meaningful stakeholder participation in decisions related to Vermont Yankee's decommissioning is unacceptable. It is essential that Vermonters have a seat at the table throughout this process. The NRC has failed to substantively engage state and local officials and appears to be increasingly relying on the perspective of the nuclear energy industry. I request that you creatively engage local stakeholders in a manner that goes beyond standard regulatory procedures to ensure that their concerns are heard and addressed. The Decommissioning Trust Fund should not be used for non-decommissioning expenses.It is my understanding that the fund can only be used for expenses that reduce radiological levels at the site.Yet the NRC has granted preliminary approval to Entergy for several exemptions, including authorizing payment for spent fuel management, attorney fees, and even the company's membership dues to the Nuclear Energy Institute. These unjustified expenditures will further delay an already lengthy decommissioning process. The NRC must be a careful steward of the fund to ensure that these ratepayer dollars are not diverted to pay for inappropriate or unauthorized expenses. I have significant concerns with the decision by Entergy to use the SAFSTOR method of decommissioning. The use of SAFSTOR will delay clean-up, waste disposal, and remediation of the Vermont Yankee site for generations. As a result, the community will be unable to redevelop the site for economically beneficial purposes. While SAFSTOR clearly benefits Entergy, its use will render economic harm to the community. As an alternative, the NRC should consider accelerated options for decommissioning such as DECON, which would allow for prompt cleanup, redevelopment, and reuse of the Vermont Yankee site. In addition to these three issues that I raised at the hearing, Vermont stakeholders have recently expressed concern about Vermont Yankee's emergency programs. Specifically, it is my understanding that Entergy is proposing to reduce the size of the Emergency Planning Zone, reduce funding to the state of Vermont for emergency preparedness, and dismantle Vermont Yankee's Emergency Response Data System (ERDS). These proposals raise serious questions as to the ongoing safety precautions in place for a site that continues to be the host for a significant amount of highly-radioactive waste. While I understand that the NRC has already ruled on the issue of dismantling ERDS, I strongly urge the Commission to not prematurely reduce the size of the Emergency Planning Zone. I would also urge the Commission to bring Entergy to the table to negotiate in good faith with the State of Vermont on a reasonable level of financial support for emergency preparedness activities going forward. As you know, Vermont Yankee is the first merchant nuclear power plant in the country to be decommissioned. It is critical, therefore, that the NRC work closely with Vermont's stakeholders to get it right by developing a model for the decommissioning of other merchant plants that respects and resolves the concerns of state and local stakeholders. I look forward to your timely response and stand ready to work with the Commission to address these issues. Sincerely, ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/joined-by-vermont-victims-advocates-leahy-announces-87-million-for-states-crime-victims-and-victims-of-domestic-and-sexual-assault,"Joined By Vermont Victims Advocates, Leahy Announces $8.7 Million For States Crime Victims And Victims Of Domestic And Sexual Assault",2015-10-09,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.09.15 Joined By Vermont Victims' Advocates, Leahy Announces $8.7 Million For State's Crime Victims And Victims Of Domestic And Sexual Assault . . . Tripling Of Support For Crime Victims Follows Leahy's Efforts To Lift Cap On Crime Victims Fund BURLINGTON, Vt. (FRIDAY, Oct. 9, 2015) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), a former prosecutor and longtime champion for crime victims and victims of domestic violence, Friday announced that Vermont will receive more than $8.7 million from the U.S. Department of Justice to support victims of crime and enhance programs that serve survivors of domestic and sexual violence. The funding includes a three-fold increase to the Vermont Center for Crime Victims Services (VCCVS), which will receive $4.8 million in Victims of Crime Awards in Fiscal Year 2015 appropriations. Leahy, the Ranking Member and previous Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and also the senior-most member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, led the effort to substantially increase such funding by raising the cap on the Crime Victims Fund within the Omnibus Appropriations Bill. These funds provide direct aid to crime victims, helping with emergency shelter, transportation and legal assistance, as well as compensation for expenses such as hospital bills, burial costs and other restitution. The fund is financed by criminal fines and penalties, not taxpayer dollars. While the fund's reserves have significantly grown in recent years, the previous cap on the distribution of such funds limited their reach. Leahy said: This funding honors our commitment to ensuring that Vermonters victimized by crime are treated with the help, the care, and the dignity and respect that they need and deserve. Victims should not have to worry about how to pay for medical or dental expenses, or how to cover for lost wages when they are injured. They should not be victimized twice. The funding announced Friday by Leahy also includes $3.9 million in eight grants to domestic and sexual violence programs around the state, including awards for transitional housing, legal assistance and enhancing services for LGBT victims. Leahy author of landmark legislation enacted in 2013 that strengthened the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and renewed its charter, including these grant programs also led the fight in that bill for inclusion of all victims, regardless of immigration status, sexual orientation or tribal affiliations. Leahy made the announcement in Burlington City Hall's Contois Auditorium, where he was joined by Judy Rex, executive director of VCCVS, and Karen Tronsgard-Scott, executive director of the Vermont Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence. Rex said: This federal funding to support victims of crime has remained relatively flat for nearly 15 years. Coupled with the Center's declining state revenues, it has been very challenging to maintain services to crime victims. We now have the opportunity to do more than level-fund programs and services, and expand services to better meet the needs of crime victims. Tronsgard-Scott said: This funding restores some of the cuts to funding for services for victims of domestic and sexual violence. Organizations that serve their communities will be able to replace some of the nearly two dozen advocates whose positions have been cut over the past five years, and to initiate new and innovative approaches to making communities safer. The $8.7 million breaks down as follows: Victim of Crime Awards: Five grants totaling $4.8 million to the Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services, up from $1.6 million in 2014. In addition to providing direct services and compensation to victims, the funds will support victim advocates who work in state's attorneys offices. Violence Against Women Awards: Eight grants totaling $3.9 million for domestic and sexual violence programs. In addition to VCCVS and the Vermont Network, recipients include Circle Inc. of Barre ($444,392, to continue work with local police on lethality assessment and trainings); Womensafe in Middlebury ($753,166 to expand services in Addison County and Rochester); and two grants to Voices Against Violence and their partner organizations (enhancing legal services, including direct representation for up to 200 clients; and expanding transitional housing in Franklin and Grand Isle Counties). # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-we-ve-got-volkswagen-customers-red-states-and-blue-states-and-they,"Welch: Weve got Volkswagen customers in red states and blue states, and theyre mad as hell",2015-10-08,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONRep. Peter Welch (D-VT) today challenged Volkswagen United States CEO Michael Horn to explain how and why his company duped hundreds of thousands of Americansincluding 3,000 Vermontersinto buying the so-called clean diesel cars that are spewing up to 40 times the legal limit of harmful nitrogen oxide into the air. Earlier this week, Welch asked Vermonters what questions they would ask of Mr. Horn. At the hearing today, Welch requested that Mr. Horn provide an answer to each of the questions posed. I have some questions that came to me from Vermonters Let me give you a reflection of what these say. Number one, What will you, VW, be reading when you're in jail?' Number two, I just wonder what the hell you were thinking?' Three, How can we help out Vermonters who got these lemons?' Four, Why should the US allow you to sell vehicles in this country?'. These questions go on and on and reflect the white-heat anger that folks have about the deception. Rep. Welch asked. Welch is a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. His questioning of Mr. Horn occurred at a hearing of its subcommittee on Oversight and Government Reform.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-on-the-introduction-of-bipartisan-sentencing-reform-legislation-in-the-house-,"Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Introduction of Bipartisan Sentencing Reform Legislation in the House",2015-10-08,2015,2015-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.08.15 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Introduction of Bipartisan Sentencing Reform Legislation in the House [Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) issued the following comment Thursday after House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.) announced an agreement on bipartisan criminal justice reform legislation. The announcement comes one week after a bipartisan group of Senators including Leahy introduced the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015 to reduce the impact of some mandatory minimum sentences and apply those changes retroactively to inmates currently serving unfair sentences.] I commend Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Conyers for introducing legislation to reform our nation's criminal justice system. The bipartisan nature of the House bill, coupled with our bipartisan introduction of broader legislation in the Senate last week, marks a new chapter in criminal justice reform. With the support and leadership of the Chairman and Ranking Member in both chambers, I have great hope that Congress will pass legislation this year to improve our criminal justice system by focusing on the most serious offenders, allowing us to ease the pressure on our over-crowded prisons and reinvest the savings in keeping our communities safe. I look forward to reviewing the House bill and working with all members on this most important issue. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z