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-reaction-on-russian-hacking-of-a-vermont-electric-utility,Leahy Reaction On Russian Hacking Of A Vermont Electric Utility,2016-12-30,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.30.16 Leahy Reaction On Russian Hacking Of A Vermont Electric Utility Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On Russian Hacking Friday, December 30, 2016 State-sponsored Russian hacking is a serious threat, and the attempts to penetrate the electric grid through a Vermont utility are the latest example. My staff and I were briefed by Vermont State Police Colonel Matthew Birmingham this evening. This is beyond hackers having electronic joy rides this is now about trying to access utilities to potentially manipulate the grid and shut it down in the middle of winter. That is a direct threat to Vermont and we do not take it lightly. # # # # # 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-united-states-abstention-in-the-un-security-council-on-the-resolution-on-israeli-settlements,Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) To The United States Abstention In The UN Security Council On The Resolution On Israeli Settlements,2016-12-24,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.24.16 Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) To The United States Abstention In The UN Security Council On The Resolution On Israeli Settlements ""Ever since Oslo, Republican and Democratic administrations have opposed Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank as an obstacle to peace. That was not a throwaway line, but nevertheless,year after year the expansion of settlements into disputed territory continued and even accelerated as if the policy of the United States, and UN resolutions, didn't matter. ""Throughout theseyears, U.S. militaryaid to Israel has increased, evenasprospects for a two statesolution, which Israeli leaders have consistently claimed to want, have steadily diminished. And even asthe festeringIsraeli-Palestinian conflict has itselfbecome a threat to thenational security ofthe United States. ""I commend President Obama and Ambassador Power for makingclear that while wedeplore the failure of the Palestinian leadership to condemn violence andwill defend Israel against any foe, we will do so in a manner that says we must also defend America's interests as Ambassador Power did."" # # # # 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/the-year-closes-on-a-high-note-for-vermonts-transportation-future_---,The Year Closes On A High Note For Vermonts Transportation Future -- Leahy-Authored Bill To Facilitate Preclearance Travel Operations In Canada Is Signed Into Law,2016-12-22,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.22.16 The Year Closes On A High Note For Vermont's Transportation Future' -- Leahy-Authored Bill To Facilitate Preclearance Travel Operations In Canada Is Signed Into Law . . . Thursday News Conference In Burlington Spotlights Removal Of The Largest Hurdle For Swifter Cross-Border Air and Rail Travel Between Vermont and Canada BURLINGTON (THURSDAY, Dec. 22, 2016) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) was joined Thursday by federal and state officials, representatives of Amtrak, Porter Airlines and local chamber of commerce officials at the Burlington International Airport to mark the enactment of the Promoting Travel, Commerce, and National Security Act. The legislation, unanimously passed by the U.S. Senate in the last day of this year's session, was signed into law by President Obama on December 16th. Leahy penned the legislation earlier this year, which is needed to facilitate air travel and eventually, passenger rail service between Burlington and Canadian cities, and between other U.S. and Canadian destinations. The new law paves the way for expansion of preclearance facilities, operated by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, at land, rail, marine and air ports of departure in Canada, easing travel and commerce between the two countries. The event Thursday coincided with Porter Airlines first seasonal flight between Toronto City Airport and Burlington International. Toronto City Airport is a possible future preclearance site in Canada. The Leahy-led bill promotes two key national goals: enhancing U.S. national security, and increasing efficiency for travelers and commercial exchanges. Leahy has long advocated improving cross-border travel and was the driving force behind this effort, forging the bipartisan and bicameral coalition and guiding its passage through the Senate. Leahy said: Vermonters regularly talk to me about improving the travel experience between Canada and the United States. As we welcome the first Porter Airlines flight between Toronto and Burlington for the winter season, it's great to be able to celebrate the progress we have made this year. We still have more work to do, but with President Obama signing this into law, we removed the biggest hurdle standing in the way of improved air and rail travel between our countries. This year is closing on a high note for Vermont's transportation future. Customs and Border Protection Boston Field Office Director Ferrara said: This agreement marks an important step in enhancing security in the aviation, land, rail and maritime environments with a dual benefit of facilitating legitimate travel between the U.S. and Canada. Porter Airlines President and CEO Robert Deluce said: The longstanding and successful preclearance system in Canada will be enhanced with implementation of this legislation. Porter Airlines is pleased that our main operating base at Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport has been prioritized as an early addition to the program. Preclearance at Billy Bishop Airport will allow Porter to operate more effectively on our many existing U.S. routes, while also opening the door to serving new U.S. destinations. Burlington, Vt., is among Porter's current seasonal routes that can benefit by providing an even simpler entry point to the state. Senator Leahy is a leader in Congress who recognized the value of preclearance early on. This opportunity to create more two-way travel and trade between Canada and the U.S. will strengthen existing cultural and economic ties. We look forward to the Parliament of Canada also making necessary legislative updates to allow for preclearance at Billy Bishop Airport to become a reality. CEO of PortsToronto, owner and operator of Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport, Geoffrey Wilson said: PortsToronto, owner and operator of Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport, is pleased to be one step closer to securing a U.S. Preclearance Facility at Billy Bishop Airport. As the sixth busiest Canadian airport servicing the U.S., and the only one of Canada's top-tier airports without preclearance, Billy Bishop Airport is an important gateway. Preclearance will encourage trade and tourism between our two countries and provide easier access to the U.S. for our passengers, further enhancing the customer service experience at our award-winning airport. Preclearance also presents the ability to serve U.S. markets more broadly and creates opportunity to add new hub and regional U.S. markets to our network. We look forward to continuing to work with Canadian officials and U.S. CBP on implementing preclearance at Billy Bishop Airport and realizing the benefits associated with encouraging bilateral trade, facilitating convenient travel for business and leisure passengers, offering next-generation travel technology, and reinforcing national security. Senior Vice President, Government Affairs at Amtrak, Joe McHugh said: Amtrak appreciates the leadership of Senator Patrick Leahy and hard work by many others in working to pass the Promoting Travel, Commerce, and National Security Act. This Act is key to the long term strategy of the United States and Canada to make cross-border transit more efficient, fostering economic development and improving safety and security of our shared border. When implemented, Amtrak passengers can look forward to a more reliable, safer and more efficient cross-border experience. The United States currently operates preclearance facilities at 15 airports in six countries, including Canada. These facilities allow travelers to pass through Customs and Border Protection (CBP) inspections prior to traveling, expediting their arrival in the United States, and protecting national security by preventing those who should not be traveling to the United States from doing so before they arrive. Under a new agreement, the United States will expand its preclearance operations in Canada. The Leahy-authored legislation ensures that the United States has the legal authority to hold U.S. officials accountable if they engage in wrongdoing while stationed in Canada a necessary prerequisite to full implementation of this agreement. The new law will advance discussions regarding the creation of a preclearance facility at Montreal's Central Station, reestablishing passenger train service between Vermont and Montreal, and it is a step forward in improving the air service between Burlington International Airport and Toronto City Airport. The United States currently stations CBP Officers in select locations in Canada to inspect passengers and cargo bound for the United States before they leave Canada. These operations relieve congestion at U.S. airports, improve commerce, save money, and provide national security benefits. # # # # # 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/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-on-potus-announcement-banning-drilling-in-parts-of-atlantic-and-arctic-oceans,Comment of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On POTUS Announcement Banning Drilling in Parts of Atlantic and Arctic Oceans,2016-12-20,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.20.16 Comment of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On POTUS Announcement Banning Drilling in Parts of Atlantic and Arctic Oceans The President clearly listened to the countless voices of coastal residents who oppose the unnecessary risk that drilling poses to their way of life and to the coastal economies that depend on healthy oceans and pristine beaches. I agree with the President that these risks, as well as those posed to the wildlife and marine life that call these oceans home, should not be jeopardized to enable multi-billion dollar corporations to benefit from risky offshore drilling activities. I applaud President Obama for today's announcement, as well as that of the Canadian government. This important cross border work with Canada ensures that a joint withdrawal of the Arctic will prevent irreparable harm to the rare and fragile Arctic ecosystem. # # # # # 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/patrick-and-marcelle-leahy-pay-respects-to-john-glenn-at-memorial-service-in-columbus,Patrick And Marcelle Leahy Pay Respects To John Glenn At Memorial Service In Columbus,2016-12-17,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.17.16 Patrick And Marcelle Leahy Pay Respects To John Glenn At Memorial Service In Columbus COLUMBUS (SATURDAY, Dec. 17, 2016) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and his wife Marcelle Leahy on Saturday attended the memorial service here for the late former Senator John Glenn (D-Ohio). The Leahys and Glenns enjoyed an especially close bond of friendship in the United States Senate. The Leahys traveled to Columbus with Vice President Biden and Jill Biden, aboard the Vice President's plane. We met when John and I came to the Senate. Our friendship crystalized in an instant, and it blossomed and endured for years, said Patrick Leahy. We worked side by side, we spent time together, and Marcelle and I traveled together with John and Annie on Senate delegations to such countries as China and Vietnam. Leahy continued: Of the 371 senators I have served with, John stands out, for his decency, for his courage, and for his optimism about our country. It also was a joy and a tonic to see and feel the deep and everlasting bond of love and affection that John and Annie lived, each and every day. He was at the cusp of a generation of leaders who sought to challenge and inspire us. Godspeed, John Glenn. Our prayers, our hearts and a grateful nation's admiration are with you and Annie. Leahy also released a gallery of photos of John and Annie Glenn that he has drawn from his archives. These PHOTOS (LINK, BELOW) are available for immediate use: # # # # # 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-bipartisan-effort-stop-illegal-branding-fake-milk-real-milk,Welch Leads Bipartisan Effort to Stop the Illegal Branding of Fake Milk as Real Milk,2016-12-16,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Continuing his advocacy to protect Vermont's dairy farmers as well as the consumers' right to know, Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT), joined by Mike Simpson (R-ID) and 23 other members of Congress, today urged the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to exercise its legal authority to investigate and take action against the manufacturers of products they falsely claim to be milk. Dairy farmers continue to be buffeted by extreme financial hardships. Since 2014, milk prices have plunged 40 percent. During that same time, there has been a surge in the mislabeling of imitation milk products, including beverages produced from almond, soy, and rice. In a bipartisan letter to the FDA, Welch and his colleagues objected to the mislabeling of imitation plant-based products that do not have the unique attributes and nutritional value of milk, yet are marketed as milk. While consumers are entitled to choose imitation products, it is misleading and illegal for manufacturers of these items to profit from the milk name, said Welch and his colleagues. These products should be allowed on the market only when accurately labeled. We urge FDA to enforce this matter by requiring plant-based products to adopt a more appropriate name that does not include the word milk'. The letter can be read in its entirety below. Thanks to Congressman Welch for spearheading this effort to support our dairy sector, said Leon Berthiaume, CEO of the St. Albans Cooperative Creamery, Inc. Proper labeling of milk is of utmost importance to our industry and dairy farmers. Milk has its own unique, positive attributes that must be clearly communicated to consumers. While imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery; dairy imitators do not naturally provide the same level of nutrition to the people buying them as milk does, President and CEO of International Dairy Foods Association Michael Dykes said. Non-dairy beverages can mislead people into thinking that these products are comparable replacements for milk when in fact most are nutritionally inferior. You haven't got milk' if it comes from a seed, nut or bean, said Jim Mulhern, president and CEO of National Milk Producers Federation. In the many years since we first raised concerns about the misbranding of these products, we've seen an explosion of imitators attaching the word milk' to everything from hemp to peas to algae. We don't need new regulations on this issue, we just need FDA to enforce those that have been on the books for years. ### December 16, 2016 The Honorable Robert M. Califf, M.D. Commissioner Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993 Dear Commissioner Califf: We strongly believe that the use of the term milk by manufacturers of plant-based products is misleading to consumers, harmful to the dairy industry, and a violation of milk's standard of identity. We request that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) exercise its legal authority to investigate and take appropriate action against the manufacturers of these misbranded products. As you know, dairy farmers are facing a serious financial crisis. These hard working Americans have experienced deep cuts in income as milk prices have plunged 40 percent since 2014. While the Administration has taken steps to address this crisis, market forecasts predict that the dairy industry will continue to face depressed prices in the immediate future. Unless more is done, many more farmers will be forced to sell their herds. It is against this backdrop that we write concerning the mislabeling of imitation milk products. In recent years, there has been tremendous growth in the sale of plant-based products often labeled as milk. A recent Neilson survey revealed that in the past five years, sales of certain plant-based grew 250 percent to more than $894.6 million. By contrast, sales of milk fell 7 percent in 2015. While consumers are entitled to choose imitation products, it is misleading and illegal for manufacturers of these items to profit from the milk name. These products should be allowed on the market only when accurately labeled. We urge FDA to enforce this matter by requiring plant-based products to adopt a more appropriate name that does not include the word milk. As you are aware, milk has a clear standard of identity defined as the lacteal secretion, practically free from colostrum, obtained by the complete milking of one or more healthy cows (21 CFR 131.110). Milk, produced by the mammary gland, also has a unique nutritional value, providing an excellent source of protein and a wide array of vitamins and minerals, including calcium, vitamins A and D, and potassium. Plant-based products clearly fail to meet this standard of identity. They are unable to match the nutritional makeup of the product they mimic, yet they continue to be marketed as milk. While addressing this serious issue will not solve all the challenges confronting dairy farmers, it is an important part of the solution that will also provide consumers with the accurate information they expect. We urge you to initiate a thorough investigation and appropriate enforcement action. Thank you for your consideration of this request. We look forward to your timely response. Sincerely,",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-appointment-of-debo-p-adegbile-to-serve-as-a-commissioner-on-the-us-commission-on-civil-rights,"Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Appointment of Debo P. Adegbile to Serve as a Commissioner On the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights",2016-12-16,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.16.16 Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Appointment of Debo P. Adegbile to Serve as a Commissioner On the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights I applaud President Obama's wise appointment today of Debo P. Adegbile to serve as a Commissioner on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Debo brings a strong, independent and knowledgeable voice to the Commission. He has devoted much of his career to fighting for the civil rights of all Americans. Debo has also twice argued before the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act. At a time when religious and racial minorities feel afraid and threatened, and when Americans' voting rights are in their greatest jeopardy since the passage of the Voting Rights Act, the Commission will play an important role in ensuring that the American people are informed about the current state of federal civil rights policy and the enforcement of those laws. Debo's much needed expertise will serve the Commission well. I congratulate Debo on his appointment. # # # # # 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/grassley-leahy-comment-on-us-copyright-office-report-examining-the-legal-framework-of-software-enabled-consumer-products,"Grassley, Leahy Comment on U.S. Copyright Office Report Examining the Legal Framework of Software-Enabled Consumer Products",2016-12-16,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.16.16 Grassley, Leahy Comment on U.S. Copyright Office Report Examining the Legal Framework of Software-Enabled Consumer Products WASHINGTON The U.S. Copyright Office released ananalysisof how copyright law applies to software-enabled consumer products, which are becoming increasingly prevalent in the lives of American consumers. The report was prompted by a 2015 requestfrom Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). The senators issued the following statement: In everything from Fitbit to farm equipment, we've seen a sweeping expansion of smart technology in recent years and the emergence of the new internet of things. While this innovation presents new opportunities, it also poses important questions about privacy, consumer protection, public safety, cybersecurity, competition, and the development of the digital economy. To help us understand a critical component of these issues, we asked the Copyright Office for a study of how our copyright laws are implicated by the prevalence of software enabled devices. We greatly appreciate the Copyright Office's hard work in producing this timely study, which will prove invaluable to the Senate Judiciary Committee as we continue to work together to make informed policy choices that protect the interests of consumers, creators and innovators. -30- 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-bill-to-improve-criminal-justice-system_signed-into-law,Leahy Bill To Improve Criminal Justice System Signed Into Law,2016-12-16,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.16.16 Leahy Bill To Improve Criminal Justice System Signed Into Law Bipartisan Justice for All Reauthorization Act Renews Leahy's Groundbreaking Innocence Protection Act & Aims to Reduce Rape Kit Backlog WASHINGTON (FRIDAY, December 16, 2016) Legislation authored by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to help ensure that the criminal justice system functions fairly was signed into law on Friday by President Obama. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act aims to reduce the rape kit backlog by supporting grant programs that fund forensic testing. The bill, introduced by Leahy and Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), also renews the Innocence Protection Act, a landmark Leahy law which includes the Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant Program. That program facilitates the use of post-conviction testing of DNA evidence that can exonerate the wrongly convicted and hold the guilty accountable. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act also requires the Justice Department to assist state and local governments to improve their indigent defense systems and ensures implementation of the Prison Rape Elimination Act. Although there is more to be done, the Justice for All Reauthorization Act takes important steps to even the scales of our justice system. This criminal justice reform law will improve our indigent defense system, ensure access to post-conviction DNA testing, and make sure that the rights of crime victims, including survivors of sexual assault, are protected, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said. I will continue to fight alongside leaders like Kirk Bloodsworth, the first person exonerated by DNA evidence after being sentenced to die, and Debbie Smith, who fought for years to have her rape kit tested, to ensure our criminal justice system has integrity and inspires confidence. He added: When it is available and when it is used, DNA evidence can help convict the guilty, and exonerate the innocent. It can help make sure that the right people are caught and punished and aren't left on the street to commit other crimes. As we consider legislation next Congress, we must remember that we have a continuing obligation to look out for all victims and to create fairness in our criminal justice system. Leahy has long worked to reduce the rape kit backlog and advance several bills in support of sexual assault survivors. In 2014, he led the successful effort to pass legislation renewing the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Reduction Program. Leahy also included language in the Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Act, enacted in 2013, that significantly increased resources for survivors of sexual assault. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act builds on Leahy's work on VAWA by including key housing protections for victims of abuse whose partners get evicted for domestic violence. Finally, the bill builds upon the success of the Crime Victims' Rights Act by making it easier for crime victims to have an interpreter present during court proceedings and to obtain court-ordered restitution. A sectional analysis of the Justice for All Reauthorization Act 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://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-outlines-ethanol-reform-agenda-new-congress,Welch Outlines Ethanol Reform Agenda for New Congress,2016-12-14,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"BURLINGTON, Vt. With leaders of Vermont's environmental community at his side, Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) renewed his commitment to reform the federal ethanol mandate in the new Congress that convenes in early January. Joining Welch were representatives of the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation (NWF), Lake Champlain International, and Vermont Natural Resources Council. Speakers highlighted the harm to the environment resulting from a federal corn-based ethanol mandate. Welch will reintroduce the bipartisan Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Reform Act, which will reform the corn ethanol mandate while continuing to promote advanced biofuels, as well as the bipartisan Food and Fuel Consumer Protection Act, which would cap the maximum volume of ethanol blended into the transportation fuel supply at 9.7 percent. Despite its initial promise, the RFS has been a well-intended flop, Rep. Welch said. In addition to driving up the cost of feed for struggling dairy farmers, increasing the cost of food for working families, and ruining small engines, the Renewable Fuel Standard is wreaking havoc on our environment. I look forward to working with environmental leaders to build on our momentum and kick off the new Congress with a renewed sense of urgency to stop the environmental degradation caused by this misguided federal policy. Photos of today's event can be found here. The announcement comes as the National Wildlife Federation is expected to unveil a new study this week in Washington that will detail the harm inflicted on the environment by the RFS mandate, including the destruction of sensitive crops and habitats and the deterioration of water quality. Contrary to the claims of corn-based ethanol advocates, a recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) concluded that the RFS mandate is unlikely to meet its statutory goals for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions due its over-reliance on corn-based ethanol fuel blends instead of climate friendly advanced biofuels. Thank heaven leaders like Peter Welch are stepping forward to say what scientists have known for years: it makes no sense to use corn to fuel our cars. It wrecks the landscape and the climate, and keeps us from making a decisive turn toward clean electricity. Time to end this big payoff to big ag! said Bill McKibben, Senior Advisor and Co-Founder at 350.org. The RFS is the last of three federal incentives that have supported the expansion of the ethanol industry. In December 2011, Welch and other House RFS reform leaders were successful in eliminating a federal tax credit for blending ethanol into gasoline and a 54 cent per gallon tariff on imported ethanol. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/welch-sanders-call-reversal-fairpoint-layoffs,"Welch, Sanders Call For Reversal of FairPoint Layoffs",2016-12-14,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"BURLINGTON, Vt., Dec. 14 U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and U.S. Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., Tuesday called upon the CEOs of FairPoint Communications and the Illinois company that is set to purchase it, Consolidated Communications Holdings, to reverse the planned layoff of nearly 10 percent of FairPoint's workforce. It is particularly callous to destroy the livelihoods of loyal FairPoint workers just as the cold weather approaches and as families prepare to celebrate the holiday season, Sanders and Welch wrote to FairPoint CEO Paul Sunu. These workers helped build the company's value, yet they are being discarded as collateral damage of a sale designed to maximize profits for a tiny group of Wall Street hedge fund investors. In their letter to the CEO of Consolidated Communications, which is in the process of purchasing FairPoint, Sanders and Welch outlined FairPoint's checkered history in dealing with its Vermont workforce, stating FairPoint's relationship with its workforce was unnecessarily antagonist. The Charlotte, N.C.-based phone company purchased Verizon Communication's landline phone operations in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont in 2007. Instead of negotiating a reasonable labor agreement, [FairPoint] pursued drastic cuts to pay and benefits that led to a four-month strike in 2014-15, Sanders and Welch wrote. Just three months after the strike ended, FairPoint closed its South Burlington call center and laid-off more than 70 unionized workers. Most recently, FairPoint announced last month that it was laying off nearly 10 percent of its remaining workforce, presumably to make the company more attractive for the sale to Consolidated. Sanders and Welch said reversing the layoffs would be a significant demonstration of good faith on Consolidated's part. We urge you to reverse FairPoint's decision and send the clear message that Consolidated values its workers and the communities in which the company operates. We know the CWA and IBEW welcome the opportunity to work with Consolidated to help make its New England operations successful again, Sanders and Welch wrote. To read the letter to FairPoint, click here To read the letter to Consolidated Communications, click here ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/senators-call-for-national-intelligence-estimate-of-russian-tampering-in-us-election-request-confirmation-of-justice-dept-investigation,"SENATORS CALL FOR NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE OF RUSSIAN TAMPERING IN U.S. ELECTION, REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF JUSTICE DEPT. INVESTIGATION",2016-12-13,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.13.16 SENATORS CALL FOR NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE OF RUSSIAN TAMPERING IN U.S. ELECTION, REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF JUSTICE DEPT. INVESTIGATION In letters to Director James Clapper, Attorney General Lynch, Senators push Administration on Russian hacks WASHINGTON (TUESDAY, Dec. 13, 2016) U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Al Franken (D-MN), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Gary Peters (D-MI), Bob Casey (D-PA), Tom Udall (D-NM), and Ed Markey (D-MA) today called for a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) to determine the extent of Russian intervention in the 2016 United States presidential election, accompanied by an unclassified summary of its key judgments by January 20th, 2017. An NIE is the formal, authoritative assessment of the Director of National Intelligence related to a particular national security issue, which reflects the collective judgment of the nation's sixteen intelligence agencies. The senators also called on Attorney General Loretta Lynch to publicly confirm that nonpartisan career Justice Department officials are conducting a criminal investigation into the matter, and if not, to open one immediately. On Friday, the Washington Post reported that the CIA concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the election to assist Donald Trump. Direct and deliberate interference in our election is an unprecedented breach and threat to U.S. democracy and national securityit is absolutely critical that information about these matters be disclosed to the public and to Congress, the senators said. We strongly support calls for bipartisan investigations by Congressthis issue requires the full attention of the executive and legislative branches alike, and a conclusive, public national intelligence estimate will lay out the facts for the American people. The public also needs transparency and reassurance that federal law enforcement is actively investigating these matters and that, if the investigation finds evidence that Russian officials perpetrated or directed such acts, appropriate criminal charges will be announced. Full text of the senators' letter to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper: December 13, 2016 The Honorable James Clapper Director of National Intelligence Washington, D.C. 20511 Dear Director Clapper: We request an immediate National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) regarding Russian efforts to manipulate the recent U.S. presidential election, including public release of its key judgments no later than January 20, 2017. Recently disclosed U.S. intelligence findings as publicly reported that Russia interfered in the U.S. presidential election and sought to undermine our democratic institutions and the consequences thereof (including possible future such attacks on the United States) are deeply concerning. They make it imperative that information be provided to the public and Congress. Quite simply, deliberate interference in our election to favor a particular candidate is an unprecedented breach and threat to U.S. democracy and national security. On Saturday, December 10, 2016, the Washington Post reported that the CIA concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 presidential election to help a particular candidate win the election. It further reported that U.S. intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton's campaign chair. Russia was also reported to have had a role in cyber intrusions in at least two U.S. state election systems. These were described as individuals or actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost one candidate over the other. The Post quoted a senior U.S. official briefed at an intelligence presentation made to some U.S. senators as saying, It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia's goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected. Also reported was that intelligence agency briefers told some senators as recently as last week that it was now quite clear that electing Trump was Russia's goal. In fact, you were quoted in early October as saying, We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities. Under President Putin, Russia has taken aggressive actions that are contrary to American interests and those of its key allies. Its military has seized land in Georgia and Ukraine and aggressively tried to sow disinformation and instability in European democracies. It plants false news, promotes a distorted and false narrative about threats to Russia and ethnic Russians in border states, funds political parties sympathetic to Russian interests, and reportedly conducts cyberattacks against key Western interests. Its proxies were recently implicated in a coup plot in Montenegro and were involved in murdering more than 300 innocent civilians in a downed commercial airline over occupied eastern Ukraine. Russian military forces have aggressively probed NATO-member airspace and waters, and conducted reckless intercepts of U.S. aircraft in international airspace. It has reportedly tried to manipulate upcoming German elections. Finally, Russian State TV host and Putin confidant Dmitry Kiselyov also known as the Kremlin's Chief Propagandist warned this year that impudent U.S. behavior towards Russia may have nuclear consequences. Quite simply, Russia is determined to foster political chaos and institutional mistrust in the West and may have alarmingly succeeded in the United States. Given the serious nature of these matters, with unprecedented national security implications, we believe that our intelligence community must prioritize a conclusive, public NIE to lay out the facts of this serious matter for the American people. Threats to our national security and the sanctity of our democratic process must not become hostage to partisanship and narrow political interests. We know that Russia continues to make a concerted effort to undermine democratic institutions in the West and we fear we have fallen victim to their agenda. Such an attack on the United States must not go undisclosed. Thank you for your attention to this important issue. -- Full text of the senators' letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch: December 13, 2016 The Honorable Loretta Lynch Attorney General U.S. Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 20530 Dear Attorney General Lynch: We urge the Department of Justice to publicly confirm that objective career Department professionals are conducting a criminal investigation into whether officials in the Russian government intervened in, or directed others to intervene in, the 2016 U.S. presidential election to help one candidate over the other. If such an investigation is not ongoing, we urge you to open one without delay. On September 28, 2016, Director James Comey of the Federal Bureau of Investigation testified before the House Judiciary Committee and was asked about the Department's standard for commenting on whether an investigation is underway. Director Comey stated that [o]ur standard is we do not confirm or deny the existence of investigations, but he cited examples of exceptional circumstances that he said justified commenting on the existence of investigations, including when there is a need for the public to be reassured and where the public needed transparency.[i] Surely this is just such an exceptional circumstance. On December 9, the Washington Post reported that the CIA has concluded that Russia moved deliberately to help elect one candidate as president of the United States. The Post further reported that U.S. intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to Russia's government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from one U.S. party's national political committee and campaign chairman. Deliberate hacking of national political party and campaign staff email systems in order to tilt the election results in favor of the candidate deemed more sympathetic to Russian interests is an unprecedented breach and threat to U.S. democracy and national security. The public needs transparency and reassurance that the Department of Justice is actively investigating these matters and that, if the investigation finds evidence that Russian officials perpetrated or directed such acts, appropriate criminal charges will be announced. The American people need to know that threats to our national security and the sanctity of our democratic process will not go unexamined and unchallenged by the Department of Justice. We must ensure that a foreign government cannot undermine our democratic institutions and elections as a means to serve its own interests. We urge you to publicly confirm that a criminal investigation into these matters is underway or will immediately be opened. Thank you for your attention to this important issue. -30- 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-ranking-member-us-senate-judiciary-committee-on-republican-staff-report-on-planned-parenthood-and-fetal-tissue-donation,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy Ranking Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on Republican Staff Report on Planned Parenthood and Fetal Tissue Donation",2016-12-13,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.13.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy Ranking Member, U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on Republican Staff Report on Planned Parenthood and Fetal Tissue Donation Over a year after Republicans began pouring taxpayer dollars into five separate congressional investigations, there has been no credible finding including in the Republican Staff Report issued today that Planned Parenthood broke the law. While we do not know the total cost to taxpayers for these five duplicative Republican-led investigations, we do know that just one of the House investigations alone has cost the American people more than $1.5 million. It is important to understand these wasteful and ideological inquiries for what they are: a relentless partisan effort to attack and defund a women's health provider that millions of women across this country depend on each year for basic medical services. To be clear, the Republican Staff Report issued today has never been voted on or adopted by the Senate Judiciary Committee as an official report. Republicans should abandon their attacks on Planned Parenthood and instead focus on efforts that truly protect women's health. ##### 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/senators-cardin-feinstein-leahy-call-for-independent-nonpartisan-commission-to-investigate-russian-interference-in-election,"Senators Cardin, Feinstein, Leahy Call for Independent Nonpartisan Commission to Investigate Russian Interference in Election",2016-12-12,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.12.16 Senators Cardin, Feinstein, Leahy Call for Independent Nonpartisan Commission to Investigate Russian Interference in Election WASHINGTON U.S. Senators Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) called Monday for the creation of an independent, nonpartisan commission to comprehensively investigate alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election. The commission would fully investigate alleged Russian cyberattacks on U.S. political entities and election infrastructure, seek to identify those responsible, and recommend a response as well as actions the U.S. can take to defend itself in the future. Modeled on other independent commissions, this body would compile all available classified intelligence and open source information, conduct hearings and interviews, with subpoena power, and report its findings to Congress within 18 months from being formed. The membership of the commission would be individuals appointed by the bipartisan, bicameral Congressional leadership. After the White House announced it was conducting its own review into alleged Russian interference in the election late last week, reporting in The Washington Post raised serious further questions about this matter. And in October, the Director of National Intelligence confirmed that senior-level Russian officials were involved in the hacks of the emails of the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. The Senators' announcement Monday complements the call by bipartisan leadership in the Senate for Congressional investigations as well as support in the House of Representatives for an independent commission. We've seen what Russia can do with a MiG, but they can be equally destructive with a mouse. The American people deserve a nonpartisan, transparent, public investigation into this insidious attack on our democratic institutions, said Senator Cardin, ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee. Elections and the peaceful transfer of power are the foundational elements of our democracy. They have been attacked and undermined by the world's most destabilizing major power. As a nation it's time to get to the bottom of it and learn what we can do to prevent it from ever happening again. For the last 20 years, as chairman or ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I have worked to protect the voting rights of all Americans. But the right to vote the foundation of our democracy is undermined if a foreign country can interfere with our democratic process, said Senator Leahy, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is time to rise above the fray and engage in a serious, independent, and bipartisan investigation of the allegations that the Russians interfered with the American presidential election. This is larger than any one candidate or any one election. This is about protecting our democracy now, and going forward. An attack against our election system is an attack on our very way of life and must not go unchallenged, said Senator Feinstein, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. We need this commission to determine if my personal belief is correctthat the real intent of what appears to be a classic Russian covert influence campaign was to harm the candidacy of the Democratic candidate or undermine our democratic system. This bipartisan commission will help identify the specific actors' responsible and recommend a possible course of action to prevent this from ever happening again. About the Commission: The Commission to End Russian Interference in United States Elections will conduct a comprehensive review of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The Commission will provide the Congress, the Executive Branch, and the U.S. public with full information regarding how alleged Russian interference may have affected the 2016 election, as well as recommendations to protect our elections going forward, so that the American people and their leaders can have faith and confidence in the integrity of our elections, our Constitution, anddemocratic form of government. The Commission will be bipartisan, with members appointed by Republican and Democratic leadership of the Senate and the House of Representatives. Members of Congress would not be members of the Committee. The Members of the Commission would have access to all unclassified and classified information, including subpoena power, regarding all Russian activities with regards to the 2016 Presidential election. The Commission will produce a Report within 18 monthsoutlining the facts of what occurred, in an unclassified form with a classified annex,and make recommendations to the Congress and Executive on appropriate actions to defend our system of elections and government, including a plan to counter Russian interference in US elections. Vladimir Putin has repeatedly shown the world that he aggressively seeksto underminethe sovereignty of sovereign countries,democratic institutions, and the rule of law. He is a threat to democracy, peace, security, and human rights worldwide. The Commission's report would show how and to what extent his activities, and the activities of those who do his bidding,impact the political system of United States and the American people. # # # # # 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-the-fy17-continuing-resolution,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On the FY17 Continuing Resolution",2016-12-12,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.12.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On the FY17 Continuing Resolution Today, the Senate will vote to put the government on autopilot for the next four and a half months. Coupled with the continuing resolution we are currently under, that's seven months of Fiscal Year 2017 priorities funded or not under the terms of the Fiscal Year 2016 omnibus bill. Freezing in place an earlier year's priorities ignoring the many hearings, and the committee work, and the debates, and the oversight that the Appropriations Committees have invested in genuine, full-year funding bills for next year by definition means this stop-gap bill is chock-full of great mis-matches between our current priorities, and those set long ago for an earlier fiscal year. By definition it means wasted diversion of funds to past priorities, and giving short-shrift to changing circumstances, needs and priorities. What does that mean to Vermonters? It means cuts to food assistance needs. It means halted homeland security preparedness grants. It means uncertainty for affordable housing developers and transportation planners. It means we here in Congress didn't get our job done. What makes the vote on this continuing resolution all the more frustrating is the fact that we didn't need to be in this predicament today. The Senate Appropriations Committee carefully considered 12 individual appropriations bills. All but one were reported with broad if not unanimous support. Through September, October, and into November we negotiated in good faith and in a productive way with our counterparts in the House of Representatives. That is, UNTIL the order came to stand down. The word was that the President-elect didn't want us to pass a responsible, full-year budget. The word was that he wanted Congress once again to kick the can further down the road. Then, Democrats in both the Senate and House were shut out of the process. No consultation, and no negotiations. In the absence of what could have been an achievable omnibus appropriations bill, this continuing resolution does fulfill a few key priorities. It avoids a government shutdown, just before the holiday season. It provides the millions of dollars authorized earlier this week in the 21st Century Cures Act to fight opioid abuse and cancer. It rejects the National Defense Authorization Act's proposal to increase base defense spending through an increase in Overseas Contingency Operations funds. It provides billions of dollars in emergency disaster assistance for recent natural disasters. It supports additional funds to care for unaccompanied children from Central American and Mexico. And at long last, it provides overdue funds fully offset through the Water Resources Development Act authorization to address the shameful lead contamination crisis in Flint, Michigan. The people of Flint have waited far too long, while Congress has dragged its feet, to finally have access to the needed resources for the children and families suffering there. These are, surely, all reasons to support this continuing resolution. But, as with most things, there is another side to this story. The continuing resolution extends, without desperately needed reforms, the EB-5 immigrant visa program. I opposed the current continuing resolution for this same extension. As I have said numerous times, the EB-5 program has become mired in fraud and abuse. Almost everyone agrees it is broken. It is time we fix it. If EB-5 cannot be reformed due to a paralysis of leadership, the time has come for it to end, not be extended, without debate, in a continuing resolution. This continuing resolution again, negotiated behind closed doors by Senate and House Republicans does nothing to resolve the questions about how to sustain health care for miners and miners' widows. The Senate Finance Committee approved legislation in September to address this crisis in a bipartisan vote of 18 to 8. The Republican leadership has chosen chosen to not bring that legislation forward. Instead, now mine workers will be forced to spend the last dollars in their multiemployer health plan to cover this four month extension. What promises do we have that there will be a real commitment to provide for these men and women come next May? None. These mineworkers cannot afford thousands of dollars in monthly healthcare bills on the small pension payments they receive. Further, the continuing resolution includes a troubling, precedent-setting provision to expedite consideration of waiver legislation for the President-elect's announced nominee to serve as Secretary of Defense. The Framers of the Constitution provided that the Senate should provide advice and consent in the appointment of such Cabinet nominees. Congress subsequently sought to implement limitations on who could serve as Secretary of Defense, thereby ensuring that America's military would remain under civilian control. Circumventing these limitations requires an act of Congress. It's been done just once before, and not with any deal of levity. This continuing resolution, however, seeks to truncate the Senate's debate over granting, for only the second time in history, such a waiver. My opposition to the inclusion of this language stands apart from the nominee himself, as well as the legislation granting such a waiver, each of which should be debated fully. I oppose limiting the Senate's debate over the granting of such a waiver. That's what this language does. The Senate is the most deliberative body in the world. With this provision, we cede that designation, at least a bit, and pave the way for further erosions. Nonetheless, we face what is ironically both a complicated and straightforward decision: allow for a government shutdown, two weeks before the winter holidays, or approve this continuing resolution that casts aside Congress's responsibility to enact meaningful appropriations bills for the fiscal year. As the incoming Vice Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I don't take this decision lightly. I want the record to be clear. To Senate Republican Leaders, and Republican leaders in the House; to the President-elect, and the Vice President-elect: Democrats will not rubberstamp a partisan agenda in the 115th Congress. We will not tolerate being shut out of negotiations about how our taxpayers' dollars are spent. And we will not allow Congress to continue to buck its constitutional duties to quite simply do its job. # # # # # 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/preclearance-bill-to-ease-vt-canada-rail-and-air-travel-clears-congress-saturday-morning,Leahy 'Preclearance' Bill To Ease Vt.-Canada Rail & Air Travel Clears Congress Saturday Morning,2016-12-10,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.10.16 Leahy 'Preclearance' Bill To Ease Vt.-Canada Rail & Air Travel Clears Congress Saturday Morning Leahy-Authored Bill To Facilitate Preclearance Operations In Canada Passes Senate, Headed to President's Desk Legislation Needed To Facilitate Passenger Air And Rail Service Between Vermont And Canada, And Other Travel Destinations [BREAKING] WASHINGTON (SATURDAY, Dec. 10, 2016) The Senate Saturdayunanimously passed long-awaited legislation authored by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to facilitate travel and commerce between the United States and Canada, the largest U.S. trading partner. Passage of the bill Saturday morning was one of the last actions of the Senate of this congressional session. The legislation, which will now go to the President's desk to be signed into law, is needed to facilitate air travel and eventually, passenger rail service between Burlington and Canadian cities, and between other U.S. and Canadian destinations. In March, Leahy introduced the bipartisan and bicameral Promoting Travel, Commerce, and National Security Act. The bill paves the way for expansion of preclearance facilities, operated by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, at land, rail, marine and air ports of departure in Canada, easing travel and commerce between the two countries. The Leahy-led bill promotes two key national goals: enhancing U.S. national security, and increasing efficiency for travelers and commercial exchanges. Leahy has long advocated improving cross-border travel and was the driving force behind this effort, forging the bipartisan and bicameral coalition and guiding its passage through the Senate. Leahy said: This agreement has long been a priority for Vermonters. It would make it possible to restore Amtrak service between Vermont and Quebec in the future. It's a win for Vermont's economy, and for Canadians who visit Vermont to sightsee, ski, shop and dine. This process has been a true bipartisan effort, at every level of government in both the United States and Canada have been fully supportive and engaged. Now, at last, we can confidently move to the next stages of getting passenger service to Montreal up and running. Many of us can't wait to hear those first whistles blow. The United States currently operates preclearance facilities at 15 airports in six countries, including Canada. These facilities allow travelers to pass through Customs and Border Protection (CBP) inspections prior to traveling, expediting their arrival in the United States, and protecting national security by preventing those who should not be traveling to the United States from doing so before they arrive. Under a new agreement, the United States will expand its preclearance operations in Canada. The Leahy-authored legislation ensures that the United States has the legal authority to hold U.S. officials accountable if they engage in wrongdoing while stationed in Canada a necessary prerequisite to full implementation of this agreement. The legislation will advance discussions regarding the creation of a preclearance facility at Montreal's Central Station, reestablishing passenger train service between Vermont and Montreal, and it is a step forward in improving the air service between Burlington International Airport and Toronto City Airport. The United States currently stations CBP Officers in select locations in Canada to inspect passengers and cargo bound for the United States before they leave Canada. These operations relieve congestion at U.S. airports, improve commerce, save money, and provide national security benefits. # # # # # 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-us-policy-on-cuba,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On U.S. Policy On Cuba,2016-12-09,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.09.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On U.S. Policy On Cuba The election of Donald Trump as our next President has ignited a rash of speculation about the future of U.S. policy toward Cuba. What we know is that President-elect Trump has said contradictory things about President Obama's decision to resume diplomatic relations with Cuba, as he has about some other issues. Among other things, he has tweeted that he plans to reverse the Obama administration's regulatory changes relaxing restrictions on U.S. engagement with Cuba unless the Cuban government agrees to a better deal. Despite that, we don't actually know what he will do. I hope before making a decision he listens to advocates on both sides of the issue, including Cuban Americans, a growing majority of whom support the resumption of diplomatic relations. As someone who has traveled to Cuba many times and seen firsthand the benefits of the policy of engagement for both the Cuban people and American people, I will do whatever I can to encourage the President-elect to continue that policy. The decision to resume diplomatic relations has been enthusiastically supported here and around the world. The number of Americans traveling to Cuba has risen dramatically. U.S. airline companies and cruise ships are carrying passengers there. Hotel deals have been signed. Yet the same five Members of Congress three in the Senate and two in the House have steadfastly opposed the new opening with Cuba. They continually say that the only Cubans who have benefited from the new opening are Raul Castro and the Cuban military. The Cuban government has benefited, that is unavoidable. It happens in any country with state-owned enterprises with which we have diplomatic and commercial relations, of which there are many. But it is false and misleading to say that they alone have benefited. In fact, the Cuban people, particularly Cuban entrepreneurs, have benefited and so have the American people. And they overwhelmingly want this opening to continue. These Members of Congress have insisted, year after year, that we should continue a policy of sanctions and isolation until the Castro regime makes significant and irreversible progress on human rights and political freedom for the Cuban people. Perhaps that is what President-elect Trump means by a better deal. Having met many times with Cuban government officials, as well as with Cuban dissidents who have been persecuted and imprisoned, no one is a stronger defender of democracy and human rights there than I am. Like President Obama, we all want the Cuban people to be able to express themselves freely, and to choose their own leaders in a free and fair election. I resent the assertions of those who remain wedded to the old failed policy, that to favor diplomatic relations is appeasement to the Castro government. I am as outraged as anyone when Cubans who peacefully advocate for human rights and democracy are harassed, threatened, arrested and abused, just as I am when such violations of human rights occur in other countries, including by governments whose armed forces and police annually receive hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. aid. For 55 years we have tried the approach of isolating and pressuring Cuba that is advocated by a dwindling, albeit passionate, minority in Congress. That approach has failed miserably. The Castro family and their shrinking circle of aging revolutionaries is still in power, and Cuba is still a country where political dissent is not tolerated. No one who knows the Castro government expected the resumption of diplomatic relations to quickly result in an end to repression or free elections. Those who label the policy of engagement a failure after just two years because the Castro government continues to persecute its opponents are either nave or not to be taken seriously. Change in Cuba will happen incrementally, as it does in most countries. But I have no doubt that in a lot fewer than 55 years the Cuban people will have a lot more freedom than they have had for the past 55 years. The record is indisputable: bullying the Cuban government, making threats and ultimatums, have achieved nothing in more than half a century. In fact, it isolated the United States and damaged our own interests. Consider for a moment what it would mean if we did what these Members of Congress advocate. Not only would we have no embassy in Cuba; to be consistent, we would withdraw our ambassadors and impose a unilateral embargo against China, Vietnam, Russia, Ethiopia, and many other countries where human rights are routinely violated, where political opponents, journalists, and human rights defenders are imprisoned and tortured, where there is no such thing as a fair trial, where civil society organizations are threatened and harassed, and where dissent is severely punished. And when we withdraw others will happily fill the vacuum, as they have in Cuba, which trades with countries around the world, including with many of our closest allies. In fact, I recall meeting in Havana with the ambassadors of at least a dozen European and Asian countries. They told me how much they like our embargo because their companies don't have to compete with American businesses. Is that what these isolationist Members of Congress want, or are they just concerned about human rights in Cuba? Would they rather have Cubans buy rice grown in China, or in Louisiana? Would they rather have Cubans buy milk from New Zealand, or from the United States? Would they prefer that China and Russia build ports and airports in Cuba, while we lower the flag at our Embassy, pound our chests, and demand that the Cuban government relinquish power? That argument is as illogical as it is inconsistent. For 55 years, Americans have been able to travel freely to Iran, Russia, Vietnam any country in the world but not to Cuba, which is only 90 miles away. The resumption of diplomatic relations changed that. Last year more than half a million Americans visited Cuba, and this year the number is even higher. But these Members of Congress want to turn back the clock and make it a crime for Americans to travel to one country in the world: Cuba. Fortunately, far more Republicans and Democrats in both the House and Senate support the right of Americans to travel freely to Cuba, and the right of U.S. farmers to sell their products on credit to Cuban buyers, which is still barred by the embargo. And the ability of Cuban private businesses, who are already benefiting directly from the new opening with the United States. They will benefit even more when the U.S. embargo a failed, self-defeating, vindictive policy if there ever was one is finally ended. Those who continue to defend the embargo should listen to these people. I hope President-elect Trump will listen to them. The purpose of a policy of engagement is to protect and defend the interests of the United States and the American people, and to promote our values and our products. Diplomatic relations is not a reward to a foreign government. Do the isolationists think that our Embassy in Russia is a reward to President Putin, or that having an ambassador in Moscow somehow conveys that we agree with President Putin's corrupt, repressive policies? Does anyone think that Russia's embassy in Washington is somehow a reward to the United States or to President Obama? Does anyone think that the Cuban government regards its ambassador here as a reward to us? The United States has interests in every country, even if it is just to stand up for the rights of Americans who travel, study, or work overseas. But there are many other reasons, like promoting trade and investment, protecting national security, law enforcement cooperation, and stopping the spread of contagious diseases. We either believe in the benefits of diplomacy or we don't. We either empower our diplomats, or we don't. Cuba, after a year of difficult negotiations, agreed to reopen embassies. Americans are traveling to Cuba in record numbers, including representatives of American companies, chambers of commerce, and state and local government officials. Our two governments have signed new agreements paving the way for cooperation on a wide range of issues, from the resumption of regular postal and commercial airline service, to cooperation on law enforcement and search and rescue. I understand that this is an emotional issue for some Cuban-American families, including some who are Members of Congress. But after 55 years, survey after survey shows that most Cuban Americans support the new policy of engagement. They want the United States to have an Embassy in Havana. There is a time for family politics and there is a time for what is in the interest of the nation as a whole. Diplomatic relations serve the national interest. I urge these Members of Congress to put what is in the interests of the American people above their personal interests, and listen to the overwhelming majority of the Cuban and American people who want the policy of engagement to continue because they believe it is the best hope for a free and prosperous Cuba. And I urge President-elect Trump to carefully weigh the pros and cons of this issue. I believe that if he follows his instincts, if he listens to Cuban private entrepreneurs, he too will conclude that it makes no sense to return to a failed policy of isolation. That policy has been used by Cuban officials as an excuse to justify their grip on power and their failed economic policies, it has divided the Cuban and American people, and no other country in this hemisphere supports it. The Cuban and American people share much in common: our history, our cultures, our families, our ideals, and our hopes for the future. We are neighbors whose economies are increasingly intertwined, and we should no longer be isolated from one another. As the Castro era nears its end, our policy today is focused on the next generation of Cuban entrepreneurs, activists, students, and leaders. They are Cuba's future, and we should endeavor to engage with them in every way that we can. # # # # # 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/comment-of-senators-chuck-grassley-r-iowa-and-patrick-leahy-d-vt-on-the-house-judiciary-proposal-to-reform-the-copyright-office,"Comment Of Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On The House Judiciary Proposal To Reform The Copyright Office",2016-12-08,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.08.16 Comment Of Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On The House Judiciary Proposal To Reform The Copyright Office We have been working together for the last year on a legislative proposal to modernize the U.S. Copyright Office in order to better fulfill its mission in a rapidly changing digital environment. Based on our extensive consultation with a broad range of stakeholders, we believe the Copyright Office should have more independence, accountability, and authority to make decisions in areas such as IT, budget, and staffing. Our draft Senate proposal would achieve these important goals. Now that our partners in the House have unveiled their policy proposal, we look forward to working with them next Congress on this 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 https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/statement-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-ranking-member-senate-judiciary-committee-floor-remarks-on-extending-the-eb-5-regional-center-program-without-reforms,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Floor remarks on extending the EB-5 Regional Center program without reforms",2016-12-08,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.08.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Floor remarks on extending the EB-5 Regional Center program without reforms I once again come to the floor, joined by Senator Grassley, to share my frustration with the EB-5 Regional Center program. Senator Grassley and I have been working for years to improve this flawed program, which is set to expire tomorrow. But once again Republican congressional leadership has rejected our bipartisan reforms and the program will be extended in the continuing resolution. Time and again, Republican leadership has caved behind closed doors to narrow corporate interests. I believe this is a serious mistake. The EB-5 program I once championed seems like a distant memory. The program was designed to bring jobs to underserved rural and distressed urban communities. And for some time it did just that. Communities in Vermont, like Warren and Vergennes, once used EB-5 to create and save jobs during difficult economic times. But that is the EB-5 of yesterday. Today EB-5 is mired in fraud and abuse. It suffers from obvious and outrageous flaws. It is a magnet for fraud. Securities violations are rampant. And the incentives that Congress created to promote investment and create jobs in rural and high unemployment areasthe sole reason why I championed this programhave been rendered obsolete through economic gerrymandering. Only three percent of EB-5 investors now invest in rural areas. Three percent. Less than 10 percent invest in true high unemployment areas. Almost every other EB-5 project uses gerrymandering to qualify as distressed, despite many being located in the most affluent areas of the country. The fact that a luxury hotel in Beverly Hills can use gerrymandering to claim it is located in a distressed community is troubling. But the fact that this type of abuse now represents almost 90 percent of the entire EB-5 program is appalling. Anyone who maintains that today's EB-5 program is about creating jobs is either a lobbyist for the real estate industry or is simply not paying attention. An untold number of the luxury developments that now dominate EB-5 would be pursued regardless of EB-5 financing. Financing provided through EB-5 represents a small portion of the capital stack. To claim that EB-5 is responsible for all of the jobs created by these projects is a farce. EB-5 merely allows developers to replace their conventional financing with dirt cheap capital subsidized by the sale of U.S. visas. This corporate handout is not just exploited by wealthy American developers. Chinese developers, and even the Chinese government itself, are now exploiting the EB-5 subsidy. This is beyond troubling. A foreign government should not be permitted to earn tens of millions of dollars from the sale of U.S. visas. The proposal I developed with Senator Grassley would address these abuses. Our proposal would require background checks and third party oversight of funds. It would create protections for defrauded investors. It would ban foreign government ownership of an EB-5 company. And it would end gerrymandering and provide modest incentives to direct a small portion of investment to underserved areasjust 15 percent to both rural and urban poor communities. But even this was too much for some developers. Gluttonous, shortsighted corporate greed blocked these critical reforms. Greed that was given a voice by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Republican leadership has allowed a couple of powerful developers who exploit this program's flaws to derail critical reforms. I find it shameful: the worst abusers of this program have been given veto power over its reform. Thankfully, Secretary Johnson is serious about improving EB-5. I commend his efforts to strengthen rules to address fraud, inadequate investment levels, and the abuse of development incentives. I will work with the Chairmen of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees and the next Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure that these reforms are implemented and enforced. But even Secretary Johnson has acknowledged that this problem ultimately needs a legislative solution. The EB-5 Regional Center program no longer serves the American people's interests. And it certainly does not serve the rural and urban poor communities as Congress intended. As the Vice Chairman of the Appropriations Committee next Congress, I will continue to press for broad, bipartisan reforms. I know Senators Grassley and Feinstein, the incoming Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, will not sit idly by either. Almost everyone agrees this is a broken program. It is time we fix it. If EB-5 cannot be reformed due to a paralysis of leadership, the time has come for it to end. # # # # # 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/letter-president-elect-trump-welch-suggests-steps-stabilize-dairy,"In Letter to President-Elect Trump, Welch Suggests Steps to Stabilize Dairy Industry",2016-12-07,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONToday Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) sent a letter to President-Elect Donald Trump outlining practical steps he can take to steady wildly fluctuating milk prices and restore stability to the dairy industry. Dairy farmers are imperiled by wildly fluctuating milk prices that threaten the very existence of many farms. Just in the last two years, producers have experienced a 40 percent drop in milk prices. Many dairy farms are selling milk below the cost of production and are on the brink of selling their herds. This boom and bust cycle has taken a substantial toll on Vermont farmers, Welch writes. The letter suggests the following steps for stabilization: Implement a supply management tool to help prevent volatility in milk prices; Reform the Margin Protection Program, which has failed to provide dairy farmers with sufficient support in the face of steep milk price declines; Increase demand for dairy products by opening new markets abroad and encouraging domestic consumption; and Ensure a reliable labor supply. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/fleming-elementary-school,Fleming Elementary School,2016-12-07,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.07.16 Fleming Elementary School On December 7, 2016, Senator Leahy conducted an online chat with the fifth graders of Fleming Elementary School. After having just finished their unit on government, Senator Leahy was quite impressed with the students' interest in the Constitution. He especially enjoyed answering their questions about the role of the three branches of government. 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-patrick-leahy-remarks-news-conference-with-cuban-entrepreneurs-russell-senate-office-building,Senator Patrick Leahy Remarks News Conference With Cuban Entrepreneurs Russell Senate Office Building,2016-12-07,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.07.16 Senator Patrick Leahy Remarks News Conference With Cuban Entrepreneurs Russell Senate Office Building I want to thank the representatives of the Cuban private business community who are here. This is an all too rare opportunity for Members of Congress and the news media to hear directly from people like you, and we greatly appreciate you coming all this way. Since President Obama and President Raul Castro re-established diplomatic relations we have seen what many would describe as remarkable changes between the United States and Cuba. Critics of the new opening continually say that the only Cubans who have benefited are Raul Castro and the Cuban military. The Cuban government has benefited, that is unavoidable. It happens in any country with state-owned enterprises with which we have diplomatic and commercial relations, of which there are many. But it is false and misleading to say that they alone have benefited. In fact, the Cuban people, particularly Cuban entrepreneurs, have benefited and so have the American people. And they overwhelmingly want this opening to continue. Our governments have engaged in discussions on a wide range of topics, from resuming regular mail service to law enforcement cooperation to agricultural exports. United States cruise ships and regular airline service has resumed. Cultural and educational visits are increasing. Cuban private businesses, as we will hear today, are benefiting directly from the new opening with the United States. They will benefit even more when the U.S. embargo a failed, self-defeating, vindictive policy if there ever was one is finally ended. Those who continue to defend the embargo should listen to these people. I hope President-elect Trump will listen to them. We have a long way to go, but this is what the people of both countries want, and I am convinced that there is no going back. # # # # # 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-and-leading-democratic-senators-again-call-on-wells-fargo-to-end-use-of-forced-arbitration-so-that-consumers-can-seek-justice-in-court,"Leahy, Franken & Leading Democratic Senators Again Call On Wells Fargo To End Use Of Forced Arbitration So That Consumers Can Seek Justice In Court",2016-12-07,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.07.16 Leahy, Franken & Leading Democratic Senators Again Call On Wells Fargo To End Use Of Forced Arbitration So That Consumers Can Seek Justice In Court WASHINGTON (Wednesday, December 7, 2016) Democratic Senators led by Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Banking Committee Ranking Member Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) are again pressing Wells Fargo to end the use of forced arbitration clauses and allow customers whose names were used to open fraudulent accounts to seek justice in court. The Senators reiterated their call after Wells Fargo refused to commit to end its use of forced arbitration in customer service agreements in a letter sent to lawmakers last week. Wells Fargo has used these clauses to deny customers access to the court system to challenge the creation of sham accounts by the financial institution. In fact, Wells Fargo asked a federal court in Utah to move a number of new sham account allegations to arbitration. We are shocked and appalled by this latest attempt to stack the deck against the victims of the bank's fraudulent scheme and your continued unwillingness to allow victims of this scheme to fully exercise their rights, the Senators wrote in a letter to CEO Timothy Sloan. In addition to Leahy and Brown, the letter was signed by Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). They added: Wells Fargo's demand to deny defrauded customers their fundamental rights demonstrates your complete failure to understand the gravity of the company's actions and an utter unwillingness, despite promises to the contrary, to actually put your customers first. Forced arbitration denies Americans their constitutional right to seek justice in a court of law and shields companies from accountability both from the courts and the public eye. We will not simply trust you to get this right as long as your actions continue to belie your words. We will not forget that your company has harmed millions of Americans. We will continue to watch closely and hold you accountable at every misstep. We strongly urge you to reconsider your use of forced arbitration. The Senators first wrote to Wells Fargo in September urging the company to reject forced arbitration clauses. In addition, the Senators have been leading legislative efforts to rein in the harm cause by forced arbitration agreements, including the Justice for Victims of Fraud Act of 2016 introduced last week by Senator Brown and others to prohibit the use of forced arbitration to resolve disputes over unauthorized credit card or other bank accounts, Senator Leahy's Restoring Statutory Rights Act to ensure that state and federal laws protecting victims are not undermined by arbitration, and Senator Franken's Arbitration Fairness Act to eliminate mandatory arbitration clauses in employment, consumer, civil rights, and antitrust cases. A copy of the December 7 letter to Wells Fargo CEO Timothy Sloan is online and below. A copy of the September 23 letter to former Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf is online, and a copy of the company's response to that letter is also 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-statement-following-final-passage-of-the-justice-for-all-reauthorization-act,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee Statement Following Final Passage of the Justice for All Reauthorization Act",2016-12-06,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.06.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee Statement Following Final Passage of the Justice for All Reauthorization Act For more than six years, I have championed the reauthorization of the Justice for All Act to ensure our criminal justice system lives up to our national pledge of liberty and justice for all. As a former prosecutor, I am committed to ensuring our criminal justice system has integrity and the confidence of the public it serves. From my time on the front lines as a State's Attorney in Vermont, in Chittenden County, and through the past 15 years I have served as Chairman or Ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, it has become clear to me that our system is deeply flawed. There is not always justice for all. I have met many innocent people who were wrongly convicted of crimes they did not commit. I have shared the story of Kirk Bloodsworth, one such man who was falsely convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl. He maintained his innocence, and in 1993 he became the first death row inmate to be exonerated by DNA. We know the system gets it wrong, and we have a responsibility to improve our criminal justice system. That is why I joined with Kirk years ago to introduce and enact the Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant Program. This was originally part of the Innocence Protection Act enacted in 2000, and it gives defendants like Kirk a chance to prove their innocence. To ensure that our justice system gets it right from the beginning, this bill provides the means to improve the quality of indigent defense. Ensuring good representation for those accused of crimes will mean fewer innocent people behind bars. It is an outrage when an innocent person is wrongly punished, and this injustice is exacerbated when the true culprit remains on the street. The American people deserve a system that gets it right the first time. Many Senators in this chamber know the story of my friend Debbie Smith who has become a champion for victims of sexual assault. She waited six years after being attacked before her rape kit was tested and the culprit was caught. No one should have to live in fear while their attacker remains free to victimize someone else. This legislation provides important resources to improve the quality and efficiency of forensic testing while expanding access to underserved populations like those in rural areas. It has been my great honor to serve as the most senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee since 1997. During this time, I have worked with Senators from both sides of the aisle to craft solutions to some of the most significant issues of our time. I am proud to have partnered with Senator Cornyn on this important legislation, and I hope we can continue to work together in the next Congress to continue to protect all victims and create fairness in our criminal justice system. As we look forward from this important step, I call on all those who work with me on this important legislation to continue to support efforts to correct costly mistakes in our criminal justice system. # # # # # 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-statement-on-voting-rights,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee Statement On Voting Rights",2016-12-06,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.06.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee Statement On Voting Rights An editorial this morning in The New York Times is entitled, Why the Lies About Voting Fraud? That is a question that many of us who have been fighting for the right to vote have been asking for decades. Ten years ago this Congress reauthorized the Voting Rights Act. During the course of many Senate and House Judiciary Committee hearings we fought against the false narrative that in-person voting fraud was at all common in our country. The evidence clearly and irrefutably shows that it is not. But of course that evidence does not stop those partisans who are determined to make it harder for Americans to cast their votes.Right after five justices on the Supreme Court gutted the core protection of the Voting Rights Act, several states led by Republican majorities enacted voting restrictions that made it harder for many Americans to vote. It is most troubling that our President-elect has decided to himself make an unfounded charge of widespread voting fraud. I can imagine he is disappointed in the fact that he did not win the support of a majority of Americans who voted last month but we should all hope that when our next President is presented with unfavorable realities he will not resort to spreading information that has no basis in fact. That cannot be the standard of American leadership. In an article published in The Valley News of West Lebanon, N.H., and reprinted this morning in Vermont Digger, researchers at Dartmouth explored President-elect Trump's allegation of widespread voting fraud and they found nothing to support his claim, noting voter fraud concerns fomented and espoused by the Trump campaign are not grounded in any observable features of the 2016 presidential election."" Many other analyses have also made this crystal clear. In a report to Congress, the Government Accountability Office concluded that no apparent cases of in-person voter impersonation [were] charged by DOJ's Criminal Division or by U.S. Attorney's offices anywhere in the United States, from 2004 through July 3, 2014. That is the reality. And yet, Republicans, including the President-elect, continue to peddle lies about voter fraud. This year we have seen a dangerous uptick in what some call fake news. These are articles that have no basis in reality or factual evidence but they are broadly circulated because they affirm a particular ideology, or because they are a proven way to make a quick buck by drawing the attention of unsuspecting online readers. Fake news stories get attention, and clicks. Some consider this despicable propaganda to be harmless, but it certainly is not without its victims. We know that the spread of lies through fake news can have real world consequences, even for the public's faith in the republic itself. There is no doubt that is how Russia sees it. It should not be too much to ask that our elected officials operate on facts and reality. We will have many debates over policy in the years to come but Americans deserve leaders who refuse to peddle in lies for political gain. And I call on leaders on both sides of the political aisle to no longer defend the indefensible. I ask that the New York Times editorial, Why Does Donald Trump Lie About Voter Fraud? be included in the Record. # # # # # 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/under-leahys-initiative-bipartisan-leaders-of-the-senate-judiciary-committee-urge-senators-to-address-rising-prescription-drug-prices,"Under Leahys Initiative, Bipartisan Leaders Of The Senate Judiciary Committee Urge Senators To Address Rising Prescription Drug Prices",2016-12-06,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.06.16 Under Leahy's Initiative, Bipartisan Leaders Of The Senate Judiciary Committee Urge Senators To Address Rising Prescription Drug Prices WASHINGTON (TUESDAY, Dec. 6, 2016) Senate Judiciary Committee members led by Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) are calling on all senators to support a bipartisan amendment to benefit consumers and deter pharmaceutical companies from blocking cheaper generic alternatives from entering the marketplace. Leahy, joined by other leading members of the panel, filed an updated version of their bipartisan Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples (CREATES) Act as an amendment to the 21st Century Cures Act, which the Senate is debating this week. The CREATES Act targets anticompetitive practices used by some brand-name pharmaceutical and biologic companies to block entry of lower-cost generic drugs. The bill was introduced in June by Leahy, Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), leaders of the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights. The Judiciary Committee also held a hearing on the issue of prescription drug prices earlier this year. Pharmaceutical companies should be compensated for their important work developing life-saving treatments, but predatory practices at the expense of consumers are unacceptable, Leahy said. As the Senate considers legislation to support healthcare innovation, we should be prioritizing the millions of consumers who deserve access to affordable drugs. The CREATES Act combats abusive behavior that drives up prescription costs. All senators should support this common sense amendment. The rising price of prescription drugs is having a major impact on families and seniors everywhere. Some brand-name drug companies are engaging in anti-competitive tactics that delay entry of lower cost generic drugs into the market, and this tactic is becoming more common, Grassley said. We need to start taking steps to ensure that our laws are not frustrated and consumers have access to less expensive generic drugs in a timely fashion. The costs of prescription drugs are just too high, Klobuchar said. More competition would bring the prices down, yet that competition is being blocked. Our bipartisan legislation will help bring costs down by putting an end to these unfair practices. Two of the biggest problems faced by American consumers are high drug prices and burdensome regulation. The CREATES Act tackles both of these by helping put an end to abuse of a regulatory loophole by branded pharmaceutical companies that has prevented the entry of lower-cost generic alternatives to several life-saving drugs,Lee said. I hope thisamendment is given a vote as the 21st Century Cures Act moves through the Senate. The CREATES Act and the amendment filed on Monday encourage name brand drug manufacturers to share product samples with generic companies in order for lower cost drugs to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The amendment further ensures patient safety by allowing the FDA to require additional information before approving a request for samples of high risk drugs. The original bill and the modified amendment also help generic drug companies develop safety protocols to bring their products to market. Finally, the amendment allows the FDA to more easily approve separate safety protocols. Text of amendment 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/leahy-bill-to-improve-criminal-justice-system_to-be-signed-into-law,Leahy Bill To Improve Criminal Justice System To Be Signed Into Law,2016-12-02,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.02.16 Leahy Bill To Improve Criminal Justice System To Be Signed Into Law Bipartisan Justice for All Reauthorization Act Renews Leahy's Groundbreaking Innocence Protection Act & Aims to Reduce Rape Kit Backlog WASHINGTON (FRIDAY, Dec. 2, 2016) Legislation long championed by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to help ensure that the criminal justice system functions fairly now goes to the White House for signature after the Senate overwhelmingly passed the bill late Thursday. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act aims to reduce the rape kit backlog by supporting grant programs that fund forensic testing. The bill, coauthored by Leahy and Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), also renews the Innocence Protection Act, a landmark Leahy law which includes the Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant Program. That program facilitates the use of post-conviction testing of DNA evidence that can exonerate the wrongly convicted and hold the guilty accountable. The bill also requires the Justice Department to assist state and local governments to improve their indigent defense systems and ensures implementation of the Prison Rape Elimination Act. I have long championed the Justice for All Act to make our justice system more fair, said Leahy, a former prosecutor. Our bill will strengthen indigent defense and expand the rights of crime victims. It will improve the use of forensic evidence, including rape kits, to provide justice swiftly. It will help protect the innocent by increasing access to post-conviction DNA testing. Leahy has long worked to reduce the rape kit backlog and advance several bills in support of sexual assault survivors. In 2014, he led the successful effort to pass legislation renewing the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Reduction Program. Leahy also included language in the Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Act, enacted in 2013, that significantly increased resources for survivors of sexual assault. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act builds on Leahy's work on the Violence Against Women Act by including key housing protections for victims of abuse whose partners get evicted for domestic violence. Finally, the bill builds upon the success of the Crime Victims' Rights Act by making it easier for crime victims to have an interpreter present during court proceedings and to obtain court-ordered restitution. It has been my great honor to serve as the chairman or ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee since 1997. During that time I have worked with Senators from both sides of the aisle to craft solutions to some of the most important problems of our time. I am proud to join with my partner Senator Cornyn on this legislation, and the many advocates who have helped guide our work, Leahy said. As we consider legislation next Congress, we must remember that we have a continuing obligation to look out for all victims and to create fairness in our criminal justice system. Senator Leahy's full statement on the Justice for All Reauthorization Act can be found here, and a sectional analysis can be found here and BELOW. # # # # # 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/house-approves-new-funding-states-battling-nationwide-opioid-epidemic,House Approves New Funding for States Battling Nationwide Opioid Epidemic,2016-12-01,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Last night, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved bipartisan legislation that will provide much-needed new funding for Vermont and other states battling the opioid epidemic devastating families and communities across the country. Also included in the bill is new funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for research on the treatment and cure of life threatening diseases. The legislation provides $1 billion in grants to states, localities, and service organizations working on the front lines of the epidemic. States experiencing a high incidence of opioid addiction will be given priority in the distribution of funds. The 21st Century Cures Act (H.R. 34) was developed by Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) and his colleagues on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. In addition to funding for opioid abuse and medical research, the bill includes two Welch-authored provisions. The Tick-Borne Disease Research Accountability Act (H.R. 789) will ensure coordination among federal agencies to promote Lyme disease research. The Ensuring Access to Quality Medicaid Providers Act (H.R. 3716) will reduce fraud and abuse in the Medicaid program. The legislation passed the House by a vote of 392-26. It is expected to pass the Senate before Congress adjourns for the year and be signed into law by President Obama. Across Vermont, families and communities are reeling from the devastating impact of opioid addiction. Three years ago, Governor Peter Shumlin turned a bright light on the hidden crisis in Vermont which led to a nationwide acknowledgment of an epidemic ravaging rural America, Rep. Welch said. Congress is finally poised to provide long overdue resources to assist states battling this heartbreaking scourge on our communities. In addition, this legislation will jumpstart research to find treatments and cures for life threatening diseases, including cancer and Alzheimer's. The 21st Century Cures Act sets aside $6 billion to implement the following cutting-edge health initiatives. $1 billion in federal grants to states fighting the nationwide opioid epidemic; $1.5 billion to fund BRAIN Initiative research to treat, cure, and prevent brain disorders; $1.8 billion to fund the Obama Administration's Cancer Moonshot initiative to accelerate research to prevent, treat, and cure cancer; $1.5 billion for research and development on drugs tailored to individuals, rather than one-size-fits-all treatments; and An expansion of mental health services Welch has been a longtime advocate for increased funding for medical research. His bipartisan legislation to increase NIH funding for pediatric cancer research was signed into law by President Obama in 2014. ###",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-dakota-access-pipeline-,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On The Dakota Access Pipeline,2016-12-01,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.01.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On The Dakota Access Pipeline I share the concerns of many of my fellow Vermonters for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, the Lakota Nation and their supporters who oppose the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Marcelle and I also are troubled by the recent news reports of how they are being treated by some government officials and law enforcement agents. I firmly believe that the construction of this pipeline should be suspended indefinitely pending approval by the Standing Rock Tribal Leaders. We must also pay serious consideration to the long term environmental impacts of this pipeline. Climate change is real, and as such we should take this pipeline's potential to significantly contribute to global climate change very seriously. In October, I joined Senator Bernie Sanders in sending a letter to President Obama raising these concerns. You can read that letter 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-urging-final-passage-of-the-justice-for-all-reauthorization-act,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Urging Final Passage of the Justice for All Reauthorization Act",2016-12-01,2016,2016-12,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"12.01.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Urging Final Passage of the Justice for All Reauthorization Act Each morning in this chamber we pledge allegiance to our flag, and we end by declaring that we are one Nation under God with liberty and justice for all. It is not enough to say the words. It is our obligation to bring meaning to this promise. Today I hope the Congress will finally take an important step forward by passing the bipartisan Justice for All Reauthorization Act. I have long championed the Justice for All Act to make our justice system more fair. Our bill will strengthen indigent defense and expand the rights of crime victims. It will improve the use of forensic evidence, including rape kits, to provide justice swiftly. It will help protect the innocent by increasing access to post-conviction DNA testing. The Senate passed this bipartisan legislation in June, and the House approved a slightly modified version earlier this week. I am disappointed the House decreased authorizations for many programs I support. Still, the bill makes important changes and will improve the lives of many of our most vulnerable citizens. I urge my fellow Senators to consent to its immediate passage. As a former prosecutor, I am dedicated to ensuring that our criminal justice system has integrity and the confidence of the public it serves. I started out on the front lines as State's Attorney in Chittenden County, Vermont. And for the past 20 years I have served as Chairman or Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. During that time it has become clear to me that our system is deeply flawed there is not always justice for all. I have met many innocent people who were wrongly convicted of crimes they did not commit. Kirk Bloodsworth was one such young man. He was just out of the Marines in 1984 when he was falsely convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl. He was nearly executed until DNA evidence proved he was innocent in 1993. He became the first death row inmate in the United States exonerated by DNA evidence. But he was not the last. There were 149 innocent people exonerated just last year, the highest number on record. Our justice system failed not only these innocent people but also the victims of crime. We can and we must do more to fix this injustice. I believe we should eliminate the death penalty entirely because I know the system gets it wrong. But until we do away with the death penalty, we must improve the integrity of our criminal justice system. That is why I joined with Kirk years ago to enact the Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant Program. This was originally part of the Innocence Protection Act enacted in 2000, and it gives defendants like Kirk a chance to prove their innocence. That should not be too much to ask. We must also do more to ensure that our justice system gets it right from the beginning and that means improving the quality of indigent defense. Our system too often fails to provide a lawyer for every person accused of a crime, even if they cannot afford one. Our Founding Fathers recognized that no system could be fair if accusations by a King or a government went unchallenged. Without a vigorous defense it is impossible to determine who is actually guilty and who has been wrongly accused. This legislation requires the Department of Justice to provide technical assistance to States to improve their indigent defense systems, and it ensures that public defenders will have a seat at the table when States determine how to use their Byrne JAG criminal justice funding. Improving systems of indigent defense will mean fewer innocent people behind bars. It is an outrage when an innocent person is wrongly punished, and this injustice is compounded when the true perpetrator remains on the streets, able to commit more crimes. My brave friend Debbie Smith, a champion for victims of sexual assault, waited six years after being attacked before her rape kit was tested and the perpetrator was caught. Survivors like Debbie should not have to live in anguish while their attacker remains free. Our bill provides resources for forensic testing and specifically the creation of tracking systems so that testing can be done more efficiently. It will also help expand access to forensic exams in rural areas and for underserved populations. Sexual assaults must be prevented wherever they occur, including in our nation's prisons. That is why I strongly supported the Prison Rape Elimination Act when it was enacted in 2003. This bill imposes true accountability by withholding federal funds from states who do not implement protections to prevent sexual assaults in our prisons. It also protects grants designed to provide services for survivors of domestic and sexual violence. Our legislation also builds on the landmark protections provided for victims of domestic violence in the 2013 Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Act. Imagine a woman living with an abusive partner in public housing, but her name is not on the lease. One night he beats her and she calls the police. The man is arrested and the woman believes she is finally safe. But then the landlord says she must leave immediately, because the man is being evicted and she has no rights to stay. The Justice for All Act will allow this woman time to remain there while she either finds another place to live or can demonstrate she is eligible to remain under her own name. No person should be forced to choose between abuse and a place to live. And finally, our bill expands rights for victims of all crime. It builds upon the success of the Crime Victims' Rights Act by making it easier for crime victims to have an interpreter present during court proceedings and to obtain court-ordered restitution. It has been my great honor to serve as the most senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee since 1997. During that time I have worked with Senators from both sides of the aisle to craft solutions to some of the most important problems of our time. I am proud to join with my partner Senator Cornyn on this legislation, and the many advocates who have helped guide our work. I especially appreciate the work of the Innocence Project, the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, the National Domestic Violence Hotline, the Consortium of Forensic Science Organizations, Just Detention International, the National Criminal Justice Association, the National District Attorneys Association, Legal Aid DC, the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the Joyful Heart Foundation, and the National Center for Victims of Crime. As we consider legislation next Congress, we must remember that we have an obligation to look out for all victims and to create fairness in our criminal justice system. While we made some improvements this year, including passing the bipartisan Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act and the Sexual Assault Survivors' Rights Act, I am disappointed the Republican-led Congress failed to even allow a vote on bipartisan criminal justice reform legislation despite its strong support. As we look to the new Congress, I hope those who worked with me on this important issue will continue to support efforts to correct the costly mistakes of mandatory minimum sentences. I hope that we can again build the same kind of broad, bipartisan consensus in support of all victims of sexual assault and domestic violence that we did last Congress when we passed the Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act through the Senate. # # # 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-on-the-duplicity-of-the-double-standard,"Senate Floor Remarks of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On the Duplicity of the Double Standard",2016-11-30,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.30.16 Senate Floor Remarks of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On the Duplicity of the Double Standard For months no, for years in the lead up to the November 8th election, congressional Republicans spent countless taxpayer dollars to air their unsubstantiated concerns about corruption at the highest levels of our government. The Clinton Foundation must be dissolved, they said. Every action, every meeting, every activity of the Clinton Foundation should be revealed, they said. We cannot allow such a foundation to run so close to the Oval Office, they said. It is ironic sadly ironic, maddeningly ironic that since November 8th, I have heard neither shout nor whisper from congressional Republicans echoing the same concerns about our President-elect's personal and profitable business dealings. No outrage that the President-elect's family may charge the American taxpayer millions of dollars to rent space for the Secret Service at Trump Tower. No demand that the President-elect the Chairman and President of The Trump Organization dissolve his stake in the corporation he owns. Now, today, we hear that the President-elect will finally explain how he plans to address these conflicts of interest which he feels is a visual problem rather than an ethical one. Unless he does what I and others have called for divest his interest in, and sever his relationship to, the Trump Organization, and put the proceeds in a true blind trust it is nothing more than lip service. And until we know more about what role his family will have both in his business interests and the government's operation under a Trump administration, no one should consider this serious concern addressed. And here is the duplicity of congressional Republicans' double standard. After years of partisan witch hunts, and millions of wasted taxpayer dollars investigating bogus allegations against Hillary Clinton, and by extension, the Clinton Foundation, if Republicans fail to demand the same of Donald Trump that they demanded of her, they will, as E.J. Dionne said so eloquently in his column on November 27, be fully implicated in any Trump scandal that results from a shameful and partisan double standard. Mr./Madam President, I am hearing from Vermonters. They are worried. They are uncertain. Some of them are scared. Congress could do a great service to all our constituents if it led by example, not by convenient spoken platitudes. If my colleagues want to actually be the leaders they claim they are, do not start by validating an offensive and dangerous double standard. I ask unanimous consent that the text of E.J. Dionne's column, A Double Standard for Trump?, as published in the November 27 Washington Post, be printed in the Record. The Washington Post November 27, 2016 An ethical double standard for Trump and the GOP? By E.J. Dionne Jr. Republicans are deeply concerned about ethics in government and the vast potential for corruption stemming from conflicts of interest. We know this because of the acute worries they expressed over how these issues could have cast a shadow over a Hillary Clinton presidency. If Hillary Clinton wins this election and they don't shut down the Clinton Foundation and come clean with all of its past activities, then there's no telling the kind of corruption that you might see out of the Clinton White House, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) told conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt. Presumably Cotton will take the lead in advising Donald Trump to shut down his business activities and come clean on what came before. Surely Cotton wants to be consistent. The same must be true of Reince Priebus, the Republican National Committee chair whom Trump tapped as his chief of staff. When that 3 a.m. phone call comes, Americans deserve to have a president on the line who is not compromised by foreign donations, Priebus said earnestly in a statement on Aug. 18. Priebus, you would think, believes this even more strongly about a president whose enterprises might reap direct profits for himself or members of his family from foreign businesses or governments. Priebus must thus be hard at work right now on a plan for Trump to sell off his assets. The deals that she and her husband were pocketing hundreds of thousands of foreign money, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) told the Breitbart website, the right-wing outlet once led by the soon-to-be White House chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon. Issa added that Clinton wanted her activities to be behind closed doors and did that because she doesn't know where the line is. We can assume that Issa will press the president-elect about the dangers of doing business deals behind closed doors and instruct him about where the ethical line should be. And it would be truly heartening to know that Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a vociferous critic of the Clinton Foundation (There's a connection between what the foundation is doing and what the secretary of state's office is doing), plans to apply the same benchmarks to Trump. After all, when the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was asked last August on CNN if Trump should release his tax returns, his answer was both colorful and unequivocal. If you're going to run and try to become the president of the United States, Chaffetz replied, you're going to have to open up your kimono and show everything, your tax returns, your medical records. You are ... just going to have to do that. I eagerly await Chaffetz's news conference reiterating his kimono policy, since he made very clear that he sees his role as nonpartisan. My job is not to be a cheerleader for the president, he said. My job is to hold them accountable and to provide that oversight. That's what we do. Early, comprehensive hearings on the problems Trump's business dealings would pose to his independence and trustworthiness as our commander in chief would be a fine way to prove Chaffetz meant this. Republicans did an extraordinary job raising doubts about Clinton helped, we learned courtesy of The Post, by a Russian disinformation campaign. Does the GOP want to cast itself as a band of hypocrites who cared not at all about ethics and were simply trying to win an election? # # # # # 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/house-approves-bill-championed-by-leahy-to-improve-criminal-justice-system,House Approves Bill Championed By Leahy To Improve Criminal Justice System,2016-11-29,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.29.16 House Approves Bill Championed By Leahy To Improve Criminal Justice System . . . Renewal Of Leahy's Groundbreaking Innocence Protection Act Facilitates Post-Conviction Use Of DNA Evidence WASHINGTON (TUESDAY, November 29, 2016) The House on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved legislation long championed by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to help ensure that the criminal justice system functions fairly. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act supports critical grant programs which provide funding for forensic testing, including rape kits. The House-passed measure closely mirrors legislation coauthored by Leahy and Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), which passed the Senate in June. On Tuesday, Leahy called on the Senate to pass the slightly modified bill in order to get it to the President's desk and signed into law. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act provides tools to strengthen indigent defense, expand the rights of crime victims, improve the use of forensic evidence and test rape kits, and protect the innocent by increasing access to post-conviction DNA testing. Now that the House has finally passed this bipartisan legislation, the Senate should do the same this week, Leahy said. Leahy has long worked to reduce the rape kit backlog and advance several bills in support of sexual assault survivors. In 2014, he led the successful reauthorization of legislation to renew the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Reduction Program. Leahy also included language in the Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Act, enacted in 2013, to increase the resources for survivors of sexual assault and to reduce the rape kit backlog. The Justice for All Reauthorization Act also renews the Innocence Protection Act, a landmark Leahy law which includes the Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant Program. That program facilitates the use of post-conviction testing of DNA evidence that can exonerate the wrongly convicted and hold accountable the guilty. It also includes important measures to help ensure that all criminal defendants, including those who cannot afford a lawyer, receive effective representation. As a former prosecutor, I am dedicated to ensuring that our criminal justice system has integrity and the confidence of the public it serves. It is an outrage when an innocent person is wrongly punished, and it is unacceptable to let rape victims live in fear while evidence languishes in storage and criminals remain on our streets, Leahy said. As we consider legislation next Congress to support crime victims, we must remember that we as policymakers have an obligation to look out for all victims and to enact policies that create fairness in the criminal justice system. Our work today is an example of what we can do when we work together. # # # # # 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-committee-on-the-judiciary-on-senate-passage-of-s-2944-public-safety-officers-benefits-improvement-act-of-2016,"Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary On Senate Passage of S. 2944, Public Safety Officers Benefits Improvement Act of 2016",2016-11-29,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.29.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary On Senate Passage of S. 2944, Public Safety Officers' Benefits Improvement Act of 2016 Today, the Senate reiterates its commitment to our nation's law enforcement officers, firefighters, and other first responders. Forty years ago, we created the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program (PSOB) to support first responders who made the ultimate sacrifice. We have now passed legislation to make much needed improvements to the claims adjudication process, which for too long has been plagued by red tape and delays. Today's legislation builds upon my past efforts to improve the PSOB program. In 2003, I worked with a bipartisan group of senators to pass the Hometown Heroes Survivors Benefits Act, which recognized that law enforcement officers who suffer fatal heart attacks or strokes in the line of duty also deserve benefits. In 2009, I introduced the Dale Long Emergency Medical Service Providers Protection Act, which became law in 2012 and extended PSOB benefits to nonprofit Emergency Medical Service (EMS) providers. This change covered an estimated 1,200 EMS personnel in Vermont alone. Today's legislation will add transparency to the PSOB's decision-making process and should help expedite the review of applications for benefits. The legislation also includes an amendment I offered in the Judiciary Committee that improved this bill in three important ways. First, it ensured that children are not disqualified from receiving education benefits due to delays within the PSOB program, which can approach 10 years. At a Senate Judiciary hearing in April, the Honorable Karol Mason, Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs, testified that this situation is unconscionable. I agree. My amendment ensures it will never happen again. Second, a fallen officer or first responder's family should not have their claim denied simply because their employer fails to provide necessary paperwork to the PSOB Office. My amendment requires that the PSOB Office use every investigative tool it has to obtain what it needs from third parties to process a claim. This will ensure that officers and their families who are entitled to benefits are not further victimized by delays beyond their control. Finally, as originally drafted this legislation only applied to claims filed after it becomes law. I want these improvements to help those currently stuck in the backlog, and my amendment fixed this issue. One hundred twenty-three law enforcement officers have been killed in the line of duty so far in 2016. These families deserve a working and responsive PSOB program. This legislation, while only a modest step, demonstrates our shared commitment to those officers and their families. I urge the House of Representatives to quickly pass this legislation and send it to the President for signature. # # # # # 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--fiscal-year-2017-appropriations,Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On Fiscal Year 2017 Appropriations,2016-11-29,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.29.16 Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On Fiscal Year 2017 Appropriations Mr. President, for the past two years the Republican Party has enjoyed solid majorities in both the House and Senate. They control the schedule and the process. They can decide which legislation to call up for debate, and frankly for all intents and purposes, they can decide whether anything gets done around here. A good example is the nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. If he had been treated like other Supreme Court nominees throughout the entire history of this country, he would have received a hearing and a vote and he almost certainly would have been easily confirmed just as he was when he was nominated to the DC Court of Appeals. Instead, the Republican leadership did not even give Judge Garland a hearing, much less a vote. The Republican Senators refused to do their job. There are countless examples of this. It would behoove people in this country who complain about the do nothing Congress to remind themselves that the Republicans are in control. They can make it possible for work to get done, or they can make it impossible. Their track record for the past two years speaks for itself. Instead of a Congress that sets the standard for the world's democracies, we have been treated to a lesson of how not to get things done. The latest example is the fiscal year 2017 appropriations bills. I went back and reviewed the record. For months, the Republican leadership extolled the virtues of regular order. They spoke with great optimism and confidence about passing appropriations bills. Individual bills, not even an omnibus bill that has become the norm. They said over and over that they were going to do their job this year and pass these bills, the way we used to do. We on the Democratic side fully supported that goal. And we negotiated 12 individual appropriations bills that were reported, with one exception, with bipartisan majorities in most cases overwhelming majorities by the Appropriations Committee. Senator Lindsey Graham and I wrote the FY17 State and foreign operations bill. As we always do, we wrote a balanced bill and it was reported by the Appropriations Committee by a vote of 30 to 0. Our staffs have been meeting for weeks with their House counterparts to hammer out a conference agreement that the House and Senate can vote on and the President can sign. We could easily be finished by December 9th when the current funding resolution expires. So what is the problem? It's simple. Donald Trump was elected President, and now the Republican leadership has a different idea. Forget all those uplifting speeches about passing appropriations bills. Forget about so-called regular order. Forget about doing our jobs. What's their new plan? Throw ten months of work into the trash can. Now we are going to punt the ball down the field for another four months, and after that who knows? Maybe then we will do it again and end up with a continuing resolution for the rest of the year. There is no way to predict. For Members of Congress who may not be familiar with the intricate operations of Federal agencies and would prefer not to think about it, the idea of another four-month continuing resolution may not be a big deal. For those of us who do know, it's an example of government at its worst. Funding the government by continuing resolution means putting priorities and budgeting decisions on autopilot. It negates the hard work that has gone into reevaluating priorities from one year to the next. It negates the careful process of looking at federal agencies, account by account, to make adjustments, as warranted. It means largely making a carbon copy of an earlier appropriations bill or bills, regardless of changed circumstances or compelling need to modify earlier priorities. I want to mention a few examples of what this means for the State and foreign operations bill, which totals only one percent of the Federal budget. A continuing resolution will provide $433 million less than Senator Graham's and my bill for economic development, governance, and security programs, like the Power Africa initiative. It will mean $59 million less for programs to counter violent extremism. These programs have strong bipartisan support because they are the building blocks for stability where we have critical national security interests. A continuing resolution will provide $162 million less than our bill for global health, including for maternal and child health programs like vaccines for children and to combat malaria and tuberculosis. These programs literally mean life or death for millions of people, which is why they have had bipartisan support. Or at least they did before the Republican leadership scrapped the appropriations bills. A continuing resolution will provide $454 million less than our bill for security for U.S. diplomatic and consular personnel, for security upgrades for U.S. embassies and facilities overseas, and for cyber security programs. So when the Republican leadership blames others for not doing enough to protect our embassies and diplomats, as they have a habit of doing, they need only look in the mirror. Ironically, the continuing resolution will provide $538 million more for U.S. contributions to international financial institutions than the amount in Senator Graham's and my bill. That is because the 2016 Omnibus provided $220 million for the Strategic Climate and Clean Technology Funds which is not needed in FY17 because the U.S. will not be contributing to either of those funds in FY17. The balance of $318 million is not needed because U.S. contributions to several international financial institutions are lower in FY17 than in FY16. The continuing resolution will provide $161 million more than Senator Graham's and my bill for contributions to international organizations. We don't need to pay that additional amount because of reductions in assessments and exchange rate costs. The continuing resolution will provide $90 million more than our bill for assessed contributions to international peacekeeping. Again, we don't need to pay that additional amount due to reductions in several peacekeeping missions. These are just examples for State and foreign operations. Every appropriations bill has its own laundry list of reasons why a continuing resolution makes no sense, wastes taxpayer dollars, and wreaks havoc for the agencies that run the government. Continuing resolutions, beyond a few months, are illogical, wasteful, and harmful. We end up spending less for things both Republicans and Democrats strongly support, and we waste money on things we don't need. It is bad government 101. It is just what the Republican leadership ten months ago said they wanted to avoid. But that was then, and this is now. Senator McCain, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, denounced his colleagues for abandoning the regular appropriations process. He knows what it will mean for the U.S. military. Senator Mikulski, the Vice Chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, has called it absolutely outrageous. She aptly called it procrastinating instead of legislating. Another four-month continuing resolution is completely unnecessary, not to mention outrageous, wasteful, and irresponsible. It can still be avoided. Speaking for State and foreign operations, we can complete our conference agreement in less than one week. I suspect the other subcommittees could do the same, or close to it. Certainly we can finish these bills before Christmas. So why don't we? That's what the Republican leadership said they wanted. That's what regular order is. That's how the Congress is supposed to work. We should do it. We should do our jobs. # # # # 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-engage-vermonters-priorities-new-president-and-congress,Welch to Engage Vermonters on Priorities for New President and Congress,2016-11-28,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONAs President-elect Trump and a new Congress prepare to take office in January, Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) today announced that he will host a live, statewide telephone town hall meeting on Tuesday evening, November 29th at 7:15 p.m. EST. Welch will outline his agenda and listen to Vermonters' priorities, hopes, and concerns. Callers will be able to ask Welch questions on the call, which is expected to last one hour. WHO: Congressman Peter Welch WHAT: Statewide Telephone Town Hall Meeting WHEN: TOMORROW, Tuesday, November 29th at 7:15 p.m. EST TOPIC: Conversation with Vermonters about new Congress and President To connect Vermonters to the live call, Welch's office will use a technology that automatically calls all Vermont households in its data base. Alternatively, Vermonters and media can join the call directly by dialing 877-229-8493 at 7:15 p.m. and using 116275 as the passcode. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/reaction-of-senator-patrick-leahy-to-the-death-of-fidel-castro,Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy To The Death Of Fidel Castro,2016-11-26,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.26.16 Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy To The Death Of Fidel Castro Fidel Castro will be remembered as an ideologue who liberated the Cuban people from a corrupt dictatorship only to replace it with a family dynasty that maintained its grip on power through fear and repression. While the Cuban people for the first time enjoyed universal access to basic health care and literacy, Castro's failed economic policies, compounded by the U.S. embargo, left the country impoverished. For 55 years, the mere mention of Fidel Castro has incited fiercely emotional reactions from a deeply divided Cuban population, whether separated by the Florida straits or political ideology. Throughout those years, U.S. - Cuban relations were fraught with hostility, misunderstanding, and missed opportunities on both sides. The majority of Cubans alive today were born after the Revolution, and are chafing for a better life. Having visited Cuba many times, I have seen the benefits of the steps President Obama and President Raul Castro have taken to rebuild bridges between our countries. That process has only begun, and it is in the interests of both countries that it continue. 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-vermont-air-national-guard-deployment,Welch Statement on Vermont Air National Guard Deployment,2016-11-22,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) today released the below statement following the announcement of a Vermont Air National Guard deployment. The brave men and women of the Vermont Air Guard have my full support for a successful mission and a safe and speedy return home. This is a particularly tough time of year for Guard members to leave their families, jobs and communities. As we have in the past, I know that all Vermonters will join together to support those being deployed as well as the families they leave behind. The Vermont Air Guard truly represents the best of Vermont. I am humbled by their service and thankful for their sacrifice. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-comment_on-the-upcoming-deployment-of-the-vermont-air-national-guard--,Leahy Comment On The Upcoming Deployment Of The Vermont Air National Guard,2016-11-22,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.22.16 Leahy Comment On The Upcoming Deployment Of The Vermont Air National Guard (TUESDAY, Nov. 22, 2016) -- Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) issued the following statement related to the announced deployment of the 158th Fighter Wing to the Central Command Area of Operations. Leahy, co-chair of the Senate National Guard Caucus said: The brave men and women of the Vermont Air National Guard once again are answering the call. Our country knows that when you call in the Green Mountain Boys, you're calling in the best. Their outstanding reputation has been earned through skill and sacrifice. Our pride in them is matched by our gratitude to them, their families, their employers and their communities. Marcelle and I continue to be humbled by their tireless devotion to Vermont and the nation. We are so proud of all that the Air Guard does, and we are behind them throughout this process. Leahy continued: The stresses that deployments place on Guard families are many, and they are constant. It is important that we come together as a state to support not only our fellow Vermonters serving overseas, but everyone affected by their departure. The burden of separation falls on loved ones and employers, and it is so important that their sacrifices and contributions do not go unnoticed or unappreciated. Marcelle and I will have the men and women of the Vermont Air National Guard and their families in our thoughts and prayers throughout the coming months. # # # # # 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/thanksgiving-a-time-for-reflection-and-renewed-commitment,Thanksgiving: A Time For Reflection And Renewed Commitment,2016-11-21,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.21.16 Thanksgiving: A Time For Reflection And Renewed Commitment by Patrick Leahy In our family, as in homes across Vermont and the nation, this Thanksgiving will be a time of especially deep and emotional reflection. After a bitterly contested election that tested our civility and fanned the flames of intolerance, we now move into a period that may further test our national character and our institutions. We already are ending a year in which a majority of senators have broken not only with precedent, but with the sworn obligation to uphold our constitutional responsibilities, by refusing to even hold a hearing on a president's nominee to fill a vacancy on our highest court. I have heard from countless Vermonters about the pain felt right now by so many. This year has left us reeling, a feeling shared by all Vermonters, regardless of who we supported. It is real, it is deep, and it comes from a campaign marked by vitriol, intolerance and hate speech that should have no place in our public discourse. What happened in this election cannot be tolerated or normalized. All of us as citizens need to speak out against bigotry and intolerance whenever and wherever they appear. I am thankful to live in a nation that is both good and great -- the wealthiest, most powerful and most generous nation in the world, endowed with freedoms, rights, values and ideals, and quality of life that are the envy of the world. These trying times challenge us to find common ground and to remain engaged in our communities and beyond. We need to share of ourselves and express the respect and the empathy that we have for each other. We can help steady our communities, our nation and our loved ones by helping where there is need, listening where there is frustration, and acting where there is injustice. Vermonters know how to weather storms. When times are toughest, we always come together to focus on what's important: each other. I am thankful to be a Vermonter, where civility, public service, and the ability to reason and compromise with each other are fundamental virtues. This is The Vermont Way. The checks and balances of our system now may be strained as never before. But I have faith in our constitutional system of rights, responsibilities, and the rule of law that is our heritage as Americans. Many have sacrificed and many have died to protect this precious endowment. Vermont's delegation in Congress is engaged, committed and well-positioned for these challenges. I am thankful that my fellow Vermonters are returning me to the Senate and have given me the opportunity to bring their voices and our Vermont values to the Capitol. The results of this election have reshaped the policymaking landscape in Washington and show the need for checks and balances, now that one party controls the White House as well as both houses of Congress. There are many challenges ahead. Against this new backdrop I have decided that I will best be able to represent Vermonters' voices, and reflect Vermont values and ideals, as the vice chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Budgets are where we as a nation set our priorities, and the Appropriations Committee makes those one-by-one decisions in the 12 annual appropriations bills that fund our government. Both the Appropriations Committee and the Judiciary Committee are on the front lines of so many of today's pressing issues. These include the priorities we decide in funding the federal government in our annual appropriations bills, and the future of the Supreme Court. And as the senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, I will continue to offer a strong and outspoken voice in defending our Constitution, protecting and promoting human and civil rights, defending Americans' privacy, and fighting for judicial independence. My ongoing efforts range from economic development in Vermont and rebuilding our country's infrastructure, to protecting Lake Champlain, fighting efforts to roll back protections of our air, water, and public lands, and pressing forward with action on climate change. My priorities also continue to include championing crime victims and addressing the opioid scourge, protecting child nutrition and agricultural investments, supporting research on cancer and infectious diseases, promoting human rights, and investing in proven ways to help working families to thrive and advance. I am committed to continue working as the steward of the trust Vermonters have again invested in me. I am determined to give Vermonters a front-and-center seat as budget and policy priorities are decided. I am thankful for Vermont values and the ways I see Vermonters apply them each and every day. Our Vermont values are enduring, and they are precious. They are an example to others. They have been distilled and refined through time and experience. And they will help carry us forward. # # # # # [Patrick Leahy (D) is Vermont's senior United States senator.] 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-reports-of-senator-jeff-sessions-nomination-to-be-the-attorney-general-of-the-united-states-,"Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Reports Of Senator Jeff Sessions Nomination To Be The Attorney General Of The United States",2016-11-18,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.18.16 Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Reports Of Senator Jeff Sessions' Nomination To Be The Attorney General Of The United States The Attorney General serves as the chief law enforcement officer in the country. The Attorney General must be independent and fair. The Attorney General must be deeply committed to the rule of law and must ensure that all people are treated equally before the law. This means that he or she is also the chief protector of civil rights and civil liberties for everyone in our Nation. That has never been more important than in this moment, when hate crimes have spiked across the country, especially against Muslim and LGBTQ Americans. And when we have a President-elect who has proposed religious tests, a return to torture, and a deportation force that threatens to remove millions of immigrants. Senator Sessions and I have had significant disagreements over the years, particularly on civil rights, voting rights, immigration and criminal justice issues. But unlike Republicans' practice of unprecedented obstruction of President Obama's nominees, I believe nominees deserve a full and fair process before the Senate. The American people deserve to learn about Senator Sessions' record at the public Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. # # # # # 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-urges-epa-review-three-chemical-clusters-potentially-harmful-first,Welch Urges EPA to Review Three Chemical Clusters Potentially Harmful to First Responders,2016-11-17,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) today sent a bipartisan letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) urging the review for potential regulation of three chemical clusters that disproportionately affect first responders and emergency personnel. EPA's review of potentially toxic chemicals was directed by Congress in recently enacted toxic chemical safety legislation. Emergency response invariably involves a degree of risk, but we can help mitigate these inherent dangers by prioritizing chemicals that first responders disproportionately encounter. We commend EPA for its previous work assessing these chemical clusters and firmly believe they are strong candidates for further review, Welch's letter reads. The EPA review was authorized by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act which was signed into law by President Obama in June. The new law mandates the evaluation of potentially hazardous chemicals to determine if they pose an unreasonable risk to human health and the environment. EPA must select by the end of this year the first 10 chemicals that will be subject to this risk assessment. Welch and his colleagues are urging EPA to immediately review three classes of flame retardants, Chlorinated Phosphate Esters cluster, the Cyclic Aliphatic Bromides cluster, and the Tetrabromobisphenol A cluster. These chemicals are widely used in products such as household furniture, textiles, and electronic equipment, yet they can persist in the environment and potentially pose hazards to humans. First responders are often exposed to fumes containing these chemicals when responding to emergencies. Welch's bipartisan letter was signed by 26 House colleagues. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/breaking-leahy-to-serve-as-vice-chairman-of-senate-appropriations-committee-,BREAKING: Leahy To Serve As Vice Chairman Of Senate Appropriations Committee,2016-11-16,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"11.16.16 BREAKING: Leahy To Serve As Vice Chairman Of Senate Appropriations Committee The results of this election have reshaped the policymaking landscape in Washington and show the need for checks and balances, now that one party controls the White House as well as both houses of Congress. There are many challenges ahead. Against this new backdrop, I have decided that I will best be able to represent Vermonters' voices, and reflect Vermont values and ideals, as the ranking Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee. I do not come to this decision lightly. Both the Appropriations Committee and the Judiciary Committee are on the front lines of so many of today's pressing issues. These include the priorities we decide in funding the federal government in our annual appropriations bills, and the future of the Supreme Court. And as the senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, I will continue to offer a strong and outspoken voice in defending our Constitution, protecting and promoting human and civil rights, defending Americans' privacy, and fighting for judicial independence. My ongoing efforts range from economic development in Vermont and rebuilding our country's infrastructure, to protecting Lake Champlain, fighting efforts to roll back protections of our air, water, and public lands, and pressing forward with action on climate change. My priorities also continue to include championing crime victims and addressing the opioid scourge, supporting research on cancer and infectious diseases, and advancing food security and human rights around the world. All of these issues are at the forefront of Vermonters' interests and concerns. I am committed to continue working as the steward of the trust Vermonters have again invested in me. I am determined to give Vermonters a front-and-center seat as budget and policy priorities are decided. Right now, at this unusual time, with these results, the best way for me to amplify Vermonters' voices is as the Ranking Member of the 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://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/house-passes-welch-legislation-quantify-economic-benefits-outdoor,House Passes Welch Legislation to Quantify Economic Benefits of Outdoor Recreation,2016-11-15,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Last night, the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously approved bipartisan legislation authored by Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) that would direct the Department of Commerce to assess and quantify the contributions to job creation and consumer spending of the outdoor and recreation industry. The Outdoor Recreation's Economic Contributions (REC) Act would ensure that outdoor recreation jobs are counted by the federal government and would be measured as part of the overall GDP, for the first time ever. Welch introduced the REC Act in March with Reps. Don Beyer (D-VA), Dave Reichert (R-WA), and Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA). Vermont has unparalleled natural beauty that provides Vermonters and tourists year-round opportunities to enjoy the great outdoors. The consumer spending that results from that outdoor recreation is an important boost to Vermont's bottom-line. This legislation will ensure we have reliable data to accurately quantify the benefits of this key driver of our economy. ""Outdoor recreation is a critical cornerstone of our economy and brand identity and the Vermont ski industry is enormously grateful for Congressman Welch's leadership in championing this measure to support this vital sector of our economy,"" said Ski Vermont President Parker Riehle. Congressman Welch appreciates the multiple benefits that outdoor recreational activities bring to the economy. Our economy and the environment don't need to be at odds with each other, and this legislation will help to demonstrate that. At a time when it's never been more important to recognize the value of swimmable, drinkable, and fishable waters, this legislation couldn't come soon enough, said Executive Director of Lake Champlain International James Ehlers. ""Tourism is a major part of Vermont's economy and spurring growth in this sector is important to our success. Vermont's outdoor recreation is one of the strongest attributes for living, working and building business in Vermont and having strong data is at the center of ensuring good policy in this area. The Vermont Chamber is pleased that this legislation is moving forward,"" said President of the Vermont Chamber of Commerce Betsy Bishop. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/us-house-passes-welch-young-rural-call-quality-legislation,"U.S. House Passes Welch, Young Rural Call Quality Legislation",2016-11-14,2016,2016-11,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Improving Rural Call Quality and Reliability Act (H.R. 2566), legislation introduced by Iowa Congressman David Young and Vermont Congressman Peter Welch to address call quality and reliability standards in rural areas. Whether an emergency call or a business order, Vermonters should have confidence that their calls are completed without disruption, Congressman Welch said. This bill addresses the epidemic of dropped calls in rural America and will ensure calls to emergency responders, businesses, customers, family and friends are reliably connected. Americans deserve consistent, quality phone service no matter where they choose to live, Congressman Young said. I appreciate the support this important legislation has received from members on both sides of the aisle, especially Congressman Welch, as we continue to move it forward and improve phone service for folks in Iowa communities and across rural America. The Improving Rural Call Quality and Reliability Act requires intermediary providers to register with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and to meet quality standards ensuring rural Americans can rely on phone service. It also prohibits providers from using any intermediary routing services not registered with the FCC. It was examined by the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, during a hearing entitled Rural Call Quality and Reliability on September 8, 2016. The legislation was subsequently marked up by the subcommittee on September 13, 2016, before it was sent to the full committee for consideration. It was considered and passed by the full U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee on September 21, 2016. The legislation was originally passed by the U.S. House of Representatives as part of the Communications Act Update Act of 2016 (S. 253) on September 27, 2016, but was approved today as a standalone bill. The Improving Rural Call Quality and Reliability Act legislation heads to the U.S. Senate for final consideration. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-leads-bipartisan-group-of-senators-urging-dod-to-restore-guard-bonuses,Leahy Leads Bipartisan Group of Senators Urging DoD To Restore Guard Bonuses,2016-10-31,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.31.16 Leahy Leads Bipartisan Group of Senators Urging DoD To Restore Guard Bonuses . . . Leahy Is Co-Chair Of The Senate National Guard Caucus Senate National Guard Caucus Co-Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), with Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca.) and Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Ca.), is leading a bipartisan group of 30 senators in asking U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter to restore bonuses and benefits incorrectly awarded to National Guard soldiers through no fault of their own. The Department has sought to recoup the wrongly awarded benefits after an audit found that due to faulty paperwork, mistakes by recruiters, and at least one case of criminal fraud, soldiers who did not qualify for the bonuses had received them. For those soldiers who have not already paid back the wrongly awarded bonuses, Leahy and his coalition also ask that the Defense Department make the process for considering debt forgiveness easy to navigate. They also commended Secretary Carter for taking speedy action to suspend recoupment efforts until the situation can be more fully understood. In the letter to Secretary Carter initiated by Leahy, the senators wrote: Current reports allege that most, if not all, of the rank and file members of the California Guard simply accepted a bonus which they should not have been offered.If this is the case, then we believe these debts should be forgiven.For those who have already undertaken the burden to repay them, the Department should return the amount recouped, along with appropriate compensation. During the height of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Congress approved the Army to offer the most generous reenlistment bonuses in history for certain military specialties that were in high demand. As a result, tens of thousands of men and women extended their time of service, deploying for second, third or fourth times. An October 22 investigative report by the Los Angeles Times highlighted the stories of several soldiers forced to repay those bonuses and associated benefits, even when they were received through no fault of the soldiers. Joining Leahy in sending the letter to the Department of Defense were California Senators Dianne Feinstein (D) and Barbara Boxer (D), and Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Joe Manchin (D-W.V.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Robert Casey (D-Pa.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). A copy of the letter is available online. 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/with-calls-by-some-to-intimidate-voters-at-the-polls-leahy-and-schumer-press-doj-to-protect-americans-right-to-vote,"With Calls By Some To Intimidate Voters At The Polls, Leahy & Schumer Press DOJ To Protect Americans Right To Vote",2016-10-28,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.28.16 With Calls By Some To Intimidate Voters At The Polls, Leahy & Schumer Press DOJ To Protect Americans' Right To Vote The upcoming presidential election is the first since 1965 in which Americans will not have the full protections of the Voting Rights Act. Concerned by reports of voter intimidation throughout the country, Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Friday urged the Justice Department to ensure that Americans do not face intimidation at the polls. All Americans regardless of party affiliation deserve free and fair elections, the senators wrote in a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch. No eligible voter should be intimidated, harassed, or otherwise prevented from exercising their right to vote and to participate in the democratic process. We are a better country when more, not fewer, Americans are engaged in our democratic process. They added: We urge the Department of Justice to take every step necessary to ensure that voter intimidation and voter discrimination are not occurring at the polls. And anyone who engages in illegal acts of voter intimidation or discrimination should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Leahy is the lead author of the Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore and expand on the full protections of the Voting Rights Act. Schumer is a cosponsor of the legislation. Since the Supreme Court gutted the core of the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County v. Holder three years ago, states and localities throughout the country have passed sweeping laws that disproportionately suppress the voting rights of minorities. These laws have left voters without the protections they need to exercise their constitutional right to vote, as recently detailed by the New York Times. A copy of the October 28 letter to Attorney General Lynch isonline. 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-comments-on-fccs-adoption-today-of-privacy-rules-and-announcement-of-rulemaking-on-forced-consumer-arbitration,"Leahy Comments On FCCs Adoption Today Of Privacy Rules, & Announcement Of Rulemaking On Forced Consumer Arbitration",2016-10-27,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.27.16 Leahy Comments On FCC's Adoption Today Of Privacy Rules, & Announcement Of Rulemaking On Forced Consumer Arbitration Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On The FCC's Adoption Of Privacy Rules For Broadband Providers And Announcement Of Rulemaking On Forced Consumer Arbitration October 27, 2016 [The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on Thursday adopted a final order establishing rules for the use of consumer information by broadband service providers. For the first time there will be clear and meaningful regulations requiring express consumer consent before a broadband consumer provider can use information including financial and health information, as well as web browsing and app usage history. Senator Leahy, who is the author of the Consumer Privacy Protection Act, previously joined two letters to the FCC encouraging the adoption of strong privacy rules. Senator Leahy also urged the FCC to ban the use of forced arbitration clauses in broadband customer agreements. While the FCC did not adopt such a rule today, Chairman Wheeler announced that the FCC has begun the rulemaking process to address the use of forced arbitration by telecommunication providers. Senator Leahy has long raised concerns about the practice of forced arbitration. He is a long-time co-sponsor of the Arbitration Fairness Act and he introduced the Restoring Statutory Rights Act earlier this year.] The FCC took an important step today in the continued fight for consumer privacy. The Commission was right to adopt new rules requiring consumers to expressly consent before internet service providers may use their sensitive private information. However, I believe that there should be a higher standard for privacy protections across the Internet. We must also do more to ensure that the information we share with broadband providers and others is adequately protected against those who try to access it without authorization. That is why Congress must pass my Consumer Privacy Protection Act to require companies to enact stronger data security measures that will better protect consumers' personal information. In the digital age, there simply must be a higher standard for protecting our emails, photos, and web browsing history from hackers and criminals. I am also encouraged that Chairman Wheeler announced today that the FCC will be conducting a formal rulemaking in the coming months to address the prevalenceof unfair forced arbitration clauses by telecommunications providers. The evidence of the profound negative impacts of forced arbitration for consumers continues to mount forcing people into a shadow justice system without transparency must not be tolerated. # # # # # 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-comments-on-the-alarming-calls-by-some-republicans-for-permanent-obstruction-of-judicial-nominees-incl-scotus,"Leahy Comments On The Alarming Calls By Some Republicans For Permanent Obstruction Of Judicial Nominees, Incl. SCOTUS",2016-10-27,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.27.16 Leahy Comments On The Alarming Calls By Some Republicans For Permanent Obstruction Of Judicial Nominees, Incl. SCOTUS Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On The Alarming And Unprecedented Calls By Some Senate Republicans For Permanent Obstruction Of Judicial Nominees October 27, 2016 Eight months ago Republican senators attempted to justify their unprecedented obstruction of a Supreme Court nominee by claiming that the American people needed to be heard through the election. Now that we are on the eve of that democratic moment, some at last are making clear that this justification was simply a political farce. It should be alarming to anyone who cares about the fair administration of justice, and the integrity of America's judiciary, that some Republicans are already seeking to undermine the outcome of the upcoming election and further prevent our independent judiciary from fulfilling its constitutional role. These Republicans are proving that they have no intention of doing their jobs and that their blockade of judicial nominees is purely driven by politics. This amounts to piecemeal evisceration of the Constitution. I hope that reasonable Republicans will repudiate these calls for wholesale and enduring obstruction and get back to work to address skyrocketing judicial vacancies. Americans should not accept a Senate that has done almost nothing to address the vacancy crisis in courts throughout our country. Senators should honor their oaths of office and keep their word to the American people. # # # # # 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-presses-administration-to-take-on-opioid-distributors,Leahy Presses Administration To Take On Opioid Distributors,2016-10-26,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.26.16 Leahy Presses Administration To Take On Opioid Distributors Leahy Presses Administration To Take On Opioid Distributors (WEDNESDAY, Oct. 26, 2016) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) is urging the Department of Justice to increase enforcement efforts in order to keep addictive painkillers from entering communities in Vermont and across the nation. Leahy's push comes just days after the Washington Post reported that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) scaled back efforts to pursue drug companies who were flooding communities with powerful and highly addictive opioids. In a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Leahy noted concern that the DEA's apparent retreat from enforcement occurred just as our nation began to confront the scope of the opioid epidemicand just as the over-prescription of powerful opioid painkillers was recognized as a major driver of the crisis. With the opioid crisis plaguing communities in Vermont and across the country, Leahy said the Justice Department must ensure that its good faith attempts to work with the pharmaceutical industry do not compromise or hinder its enforcement efforts. We appreciate and commend the Justice Department for working together with drug manufacturers, distributors, pharmacies, and others, where feasible, to safeguard the supply chain for prescription opioids. But well-intentioned cooperation must not come at the expense of rigorous oversight of such entities, Leahy wrote in a letter also signed by Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). It is imperative that the DEA closely monitor the distribution process and prescribing practices, and vigorously pursue enforcement actions where there is abuse or danger to the public health or safety of Americans. In August, Leahy was joined by Vermont State Police Commander Matthew Birmingham in Williston to announce that six new positions including five detectives were added to the Vermont Drug Task Force to strengthen heroin trafficking investigations in Vermont, under a program that Leahy worked in the Senate Appropriations Committee to establish. He also introduced bipartisan legislation last month to authorize critical resources for the Anti-Heroin Task Force program that Leahy helped to create, which has proven effective in communities throughout the country. A copy of the letter sent by Senator Leahy and Senator Wyden to Attorney General Lynch is below and online. # # # # # October 26, 2016 The Honorable Loretta Lynch Attorney General U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 200530 Dear Attorney General Lynch: We write to bring your attention to recent reports in the Washington Post regarding the Justice Department's regulation of pharmaceutical distributors.1 We are concerned that the number of enforcement actions initiated by the Drug Enforcement Administration's Office of Diversion Control decreased significantly over the past five years. According to the Post, the judge who reviewed the diversion office's administrative caseload noted that civil case filings against distributors, manufacturers, pharmacies, and doctors plummeted from 131 in fiscal year 2011 to 40 in fiscal year 2014. The number of immediate suspension orders (ISOs) during the same period dropped from 65 to nine. The Post also reported a troubling allegation that wholesale drug distributors were going around the Office of Diversion Control and pressing higher level officials within the Justice Department in an effort to reach favorable resolutions to pending investigations. This startling decrease in enforcement activity occurred just as our nation began to confront the scope of the opioid epidemicand just as the over-prescription of powerful opioid painkillers was recognized as a major driver of the crisis. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, sales of opioid painkillers nearly quadrupled between 1999 and 2014, despite Americans not reporting an overall increase in their amount of pain.2 Nearly 250 million prescriptions are now written for opioid painkillers each year, more than one for every adult in the country.3 The National Institute on Drug Abuse reports that nearly 80 percent of heroin users reported using prescription painkillers before they began using heroin.4 We appreciate and commend the Justice Department for working together with drug manufacturers, distributors, pharmacies, and others, where feasible, to safeguard the supply chain for prescription opioids. But well-intentioned cooperation must not come at the expense of rigorous oversight of such entities. Diversion control is a powerful tool to combat opioid misuse. Rigorous enforcement, timely-brought cases, and meaningful penalties are also essential to ensure every part of the pharmaceutical supply chain adheres to the law. It is imperative that the DEA closely monitors opioid distribution and prescribing practices, while vigorously pursuing enforcement actions where systemic abuses endanger the public health or safety of Americans. This issue is of great importance to the Committees on Judiciary and Finance. The Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over criminal justice and drug enforcement policy, and is the authorizing committee for the Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration. The Finance Committee has jurisdiction over Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS). By 2020, public and private spending on substance abuse disorder treatment is expected to reach $42.1 billion, compared to $24.3 billion in 2009.5 Medicare and Medicaid are expected to account for a third of this spending.6 In addition, wholesale pharmaceutical distributors are subject to CMS regulations. Given these concerns, we would request that you respond to the following questions by November 28, 2016: According to the Post, the Justice Department stated that diversion investigators are increasingly using criminal authorities to compel registrants to surrender licenses. For each year since 2011, please provide information on the number of: Criminal enforcement actions that resulted in a registrant surrendering a license; Orders to show cause that resulted in the revocation or suspension or a registration; ISOs that resulted in the suspension of a registration; and Investigations opened and closed by the Office of Diversion Control. What factors have led to the decline in the use of orders to show cause and ISOs? Please describe any changes in policy or guidance that may have affected the use of these authorities. Has the Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act (Pub. L. No. 114-145) impacted the ability of the DEA to obtain ISOs? Please describe any current or expected impacts this law may have. What standard does the DEA apply when reviewing administrative cases sought by the Office of Diversion Controla preponderance of the evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt, as was reported by the Post? If the latter, why does the DEA believe that the standard it has chosen is appropriate for determining whether to bring an administrative case? The Post reported that Cardinal Health reached a settlement in 2012 with the Justice Department related to sales of controlled substances to Gulf Coast Medical Pharmacy. Four years later, no fine has been levied and negotiations are ongoing, according to the Post's reporting. Please provide the settlement agreement between the U.S. Government and Cardinal Health. What is the status of settlement negotiations, and why has the Department decided not to levy a fine in this case? How does the time gap between a settlement agreement and fine and the ongoing negotiationsin this case compare to other similar cases? How is the Department enforcing the terms of this agreement? Has Cardinal Health violated any of the terms of this agreement? The Post cites a $150 million settlement that the Justice Department reached with McKesson Corporation. According to securities filings the company made in 2015, the agreement settles all potential administrative and civil claims relating to investigations about the Company's suspicious order reporting practices for controlled substances.7 The filing went on to say that the company agreed to implement certain remedial measures and suspend the DEA registrations of four distribution centers in Colorado, Michigan, Ohio and Florida, for between one and three years.8 According to previous securities filings, the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of West Virginia brought similar claims that were being investigated subject to the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act.9 Please provide the settlement agreement between the U.S. Government and McKesson. Please describe the circumstances that led to the investigation of the distribution centers whose licenses were suspended, including but not limited to: The types and volumes of controlled substances involved in this case; The U.S. Attorney's offices involved in the cases; and The provisions of law that the government believed had been violated. How is the Department enforcing the terms of this agreement? Has McKesson violated any of the terms of this agreement? The Post's reporting suggests that the pharmaceutical distributors have more work to do in order to stem prescription opioid diversion in addition to the settlements outlined above in questions 5 and 6, what other steps has the DEA undertaken to work with the largest drug distributorsnamely, McKesson, AmerisourceBergen, and Cardinal Healthto safeguard the supply chain for prescription opioids and identify diversion? If so, what has been the result of those efforts? The Post reported multiple instances in which companies appeared to ignore or downplay concerns raised by employees or internal investigators. These actions appear to have led to the continued distribution of opioids to problematic pharmacies until regulatory or other outside enforcement forced distributors to take action. What, if any, DEA regulations govern how companies should respond to these kinds of internal reports? If no such regulations exist, does the DEA plan to develop guidance or regulations that would do so? An opioid overdose claims a life every 20 minutes in the United States, which is equivalent to78 people every day a fourfold increase since 1999.10 We have heard countless stories of people affected by the scourge of opioid addiction, and are sure you have as well. We also know that you and your Department take this public health crisis incredibly seriously, and we look forward to continuing to work with you to ensure that the Department and DEA have sufficient resources to fight it. If you or your staff has questions on this matter, please direct them to Senator Leahy's Judiciary Committee staff at (202) 224-7703 or Senator Wyden's Finance Committee staff at (202) 224-4515. Thank you for your attention to this important issue. Sincerely, Patrick Leahy Ranking Member Committee on the Judiciary Ron Wyden Ranking Member Committee on Finance cc: The Honorable Charles P. Rosenberg Acting Administrator Drug Enforcement Administration The Honorable Chuck Grassley Chairman Committee on the Judiciary The Honorable Orrin Hatch Chairman Committee on Finance 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/comment-on-proposed-merger-of-atandt-and-time-warner,Comment On Proposed Merger Of AT&T And Time Warner,2016-10-24,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.24.16 Comment On Proposed Merger Of AT&T And Time Warner Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Proposed Merger of AT&T and Time Warner October 24, 2016 Millions of Americans rely on AT&T for their satellite or cable television, as well as their wireless telephone service and broadband Internet access. And millions of Americans use Time Warner's entertainment and news content. This proposed massive consolidation of distribution and content raises potentially serious questions about competition, consumer choice, and privacy across the media, cable TV, wireless and broadband industries. Given the potential impact for consumers, the Senate Judiciary Committee should hold a public hearing on this proposed merger without delay. The antitrust regulators must also carefully consider whether it will benefit consumers in Vermont and across America. # # # # # 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/vice-president-bidens-cancer-moonshot-visit-to-vt/uvm/medical-center,"Vice President Biden's ""Cancer Moonshot"" Visit To VT/UVM/Medical Center",2016-10-20,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.20.16 Vice President Biden's ""Cancer Moonshot"" Visit To VT/UVM/Medical Center Senator Leahy invited Vice President Biden to UVM/UVM Medical Center to discuss Vermont's work on cancer research, in conjunction with President Obama's Cancer Moonshot initiative. Biden chairs the Cancer Moonshot Task Force and presented the Task Force's recommendations to President Obama this week (on Monday, Oct. 17). Webcast coverage of Friday's event at UVM begins at 10 a.m. Friday and can be viewed at this LINK: Cancer Moonshot Event N e w s B a c k g r o u n d e r Vermont And UVM Have A Track Record Of Initiative And Effort In Cancer Research And Prevention And In Supporting Cancer Patients Every Vermonter and every American is touched in some way by cancer through family, friends, coworkers, community, or themselves. Patrick and Marcelle Leahy are no different. Theirs is a personal experience, drawn from Marcelle's own successful fight against melanoma. Together they are committed to conquering cancer, promoting research and prevention, and widening access to care. Patrick Leahy was one of the first lawmakers chosen by the National Breast Cancer Coalition to be inducted into the Breast Cancer Hall of Fame. The University of Vermont and the UVM Medical Center right now are among research labs on such new frontiers as precision cancer treatment, and using genome mapping to treat patients. That is why Senator Leahy invited Vice President Biden to visit UVM and the UVM Medical Center in conjunction with the Vice President's leadership of the President's Cancer Moonshot Task Force initiative. Just this week on Oct. 17 -- Vice President Biden presented the Task Force's recommendations to President Obama. Born In Vermont' Cancer Research Advances Leahy authored the law establishing the National Program of Cancer Registries Inspired by a letter-writing campaign led by two Vermont breast cancer survivors, Joanne Rathgeb and Virginia Soffa, in 1992, Senator Patrick Leahy, joined by then-Representative Bernie Sanders in the House, introduced legislation to establish a national cancer registry. It was signed into law in October 1992. The Cancer Registries Amendment Act provided federal resources to set up a national system of cancer registries to record data on the incidence, stage, and treatment of cancer. The law also launched a five-year comprehensive study to examine why breast cancer death rates were higher for women in Northeastern states than in other parts of the country. Today, the National Program of Cancer Registries, under the oversight of the Centers for Disease Control, supports central cancer registries in 45 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Pacific Island Jurisdictions, representing 96 percent of the U.S. population. The information gathered by the cancer registries helps researchers monitor cancer trends and help set priorities for allocating resources to researching and fighting cancer. Leahy also led efforts creating the DoD Breast Cancer Research Program Senator Leahy initiated efforts to create the Breast Cancer Research Program based on the advocacy of Pat Barr, a Vermonter with breast cancer who helped start the National Breast Cancer Coalition, the first nationwide advocacy group for people with breast cancer. In October 1991, the National Breast Cancer Coalition sent 600,000 letters to Congress and the Bush Administration as part of its $300 million more campaign to increase funding for breast cancer research. Spurred by Pat Barr's advocacy and example, Leahy proposed a successful amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill in 1991 to provide $25 million for breast cancer research. At the time, the Department of Defense had research programs in the works for prostate cancer, but nothing similar for breast cancer incidence among servicewomen. This initial investment led to the establishment of the Breast Cancer Research Program, which by now has now received more than $3.16 billion in federal dollars. In 1994, Senator Leahy pushed then-Secretary of Defense William Perry to release the $25 million designated for breast cancer research. The funds had been put on hold at the Pentagon since they were appropriated by Congress in the preceding year. Senator Leahy joined breast cancer research advocates outside of the Capitol to protest the Department of Defense's withholding of the funds. Making cancer research a national priority: Leahy continues to lead efforts to support Appropriations to advance cancer research Institutional Development Award (IDeA) Program: Funded through the National Institutes of Health, the IDeA program enhances the biomedical research activities in 24 states, including Vermont. Senator Leahy has long fought to preserve and expand this program, including a $13 million increase in the Senate's FY17 Labor, Health, and Human Services Appropriations bill. In 2011, Senator Leahy led an effort to ensure a proposed reorganization of the translational research programs at the National Institutes of Health to preserve the IDeA program. The program has brought millions of dollars in research funding to Vermont, and it helped create and maintain the Vermont Lung Center, which focuses on translational research and lung biology. Targeted investments from IDeA have led to tremendous medical advances in treatment of diseases, including cancer. Childhood Cancers: Childhood cancers are extremely aggressive and especially difficult to cure. Leahy has been involved in efforts to better research and treat these forms of cancer, including as a cosponsor of the Childhood Cancer Survivorship, Treatment, Access, and Research Act. Supporting children and their families after a cancer diagnosis is also critically important, which is why Patrick and Marcelle Leahy have long been involved and volunteered with Tracy's Kids, a pediatric art therapy program. Federal Resources for Cancer Research: Each year Leahy fights to bolster funding for cancer research and to make cancer research a priority on the powerful Appropriations Committee. This year, he supported advancing a federal Appropriations bill for the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services that included $34.1 billion for the National Institutes of Health, which includes $5.42 billion for the National Cancer Institute. The bill also allocates more than $1 billion for the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, which supports such initiatives such as cancer prevention and control, breast cancer awareness, cancer registries, the Cancer Survivorship Resource Center, and research for colorectal, prostate, ovarian, skin, breast and cervical cancers. Office Of Senator Patrick Leahy 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/comment-on-the-passing-of-father-michael-cronogue-of-st-michaels-college,"Comment On The Passing Of Father Michael Cronogue, Of St. Michael's College",2016-10-14,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.14.16 Comment On The Passing Of Father Michael Cronogue, Of St. Michael's College Comment of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), On the Passing of Father Michael Cronogue, S.S.E., Of St. Michael's College October 14, 2016 Like everyone in the St. Michael's community, I was shocked and saddened to learn of the sudden passing of Father Mike. Teacher, advisor, friend, confidant there is no way to measure his impact on the lives he touched, in the St. Michael's community and beyond. Marcelle and I join countless others in sending prayers to Father Mike's family in this difficult time. # # # # # 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-bicameral-appeal-to-omb-white-house-urging-support-for-usdas-efforts-to-ramp-up-help-to-struggling-dairy-farmers,"Leahy Leads Bipartisan, Bicameral Appeal To OMB (White House), Urging Support For USDA's Efforts To Ramp Up Help To Struggling DAIRY FARMERS",2016-10-13,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.13.16 Leahy Leads Bipartisan, Bicameral Appeal To OMB (White House), Urging Support For USDA's Efforts To Ramp Up Help To Struggling DAIRY FARMERS Leahy Leads Bipartisan, Bicameral Appeal To OMB Urging Support For USDA's Efforts To Ramp Up Help To Struggling Dairy Farmers (THURSDAY, October 13, 2016) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) is leading a bipartisan, bicameral coalition of 56 members of the House and Senate, including Senator Bernie Sanders (I) and Representative Peter Welch (D), urging Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Shaun Donovan to free up safety net funds to help dairy farmers in Vermont and across the nation who are struggling with declining milk prices. In a letter sent Thursday, Leahy and his partners request that Donovan do all he can to support Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in using existing authorities to expand and maintain U.S. domestic markets, encourage the domestic consumption of dairy products, and help dairy farmers through the ongoing financial crisis. In the letter headed by Leahy, the coalition of lawmakers wrote: These dairy farms make up the backbone of our rural economy, and farms both large and small act as economic drivers, providing local jobs and supporting a wide array of other businesses. The last financial crisis that hit the dairy industry in 2009 forced far too many families to go out of business and sell off their herds. Farms that had been in families for generations were driven into ruin and forced to close their doors for good. Through the support of this administration, we can hopefully prevent many farms from needing to make that same difficult decision today. We hope you will work with us to support all of our dairy farmers across the country. The letter follows an exchange between Leahy and Vilsack at a Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee hearing in September, when Leahy shared several appeals and testimonials from Vermont dairy farmers struggling with plummeting prices. In response, Vilsack testified that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has exhausted its resources to stave off a true dairy crisis. Leahy told Vilsack that he would appeal to OMB to provide more resources and flexibility to USDA to help struggling dairy farmers who are enduring this financial crisis. The Agriculture Department on Tuesday announced another attempt at purchasing $20 million of cheddar cheese to reduce a private cheese surplus that has reached record levels as milk prices have plummeted. This move by USDA will also help food banks and other food assistance agencies, but is seen by many dairy farmers as a minimal investment compared to what is needed to help cope with low prices for producers, and with surplus supplies. Recent reports, according to USDA data, suggest that more than 43 million gallons of milk were dumped in fields, manure lagoons or animal feed, or have been lost on truck routes or discarded at plants in the first eight months of 2016. The full text of the letter is available BELOW and online at: [ https://www.leahy.senate.gov/download/20161013-dairy-support-letter-to-omb] October 13, 2016 The Honorable Shaun Donovan Director Office of Management and Budget 725 17th Street, NW Washington, DC 20503 Dear Director Donovan: We write today to share with you our mounting concerns about the financial crisis challenging our nation's dairy farmers and the entire U.S. dairy industry. Dairy farmers have seen their income cut in half as farm milk prices have plunged by 40 percent since 2014. With market forecasts showing that dairy farmers will continue to face depressed prices, we ask for your help as we search for ways to swiftly assist our nation's struggling dairy farmers. Although consumers have not seen this extreme price dip in grocery stores, our dairy farmers have been hit extremely hard by low farm milk prices that have sharply reduced incomes. This has placed the nation's dairy industry in a vulnerable position and threatens our states' rural economies. A number of factors have contributed to this situation. U.S. milk production has increased almost two percent above last year's level, while global milk production is up significantly, partly as a result of the European Union's decision to remove its milk production quotas and the loss of its export market to Russia. Globally-depressed prices are hurting U.S. farmers, and leaving the dairy industry with few options to deal with the glut of low-price milk on global markets. All of this comes as our dairy farmers are still adjusting to the new Farm Bill, and the many changes that were made to dairy support programs. U.S. dairy farmers are a key part of our agriculture community, agriculture economy and rural communities. In this difficult time, they need support as they face these significantly lower prices, which for many are below their actual cost of production. As this industry is reeling from low prices brought on by a flood of imports, challenges in our export markets, and poor economic growth projections, we urge you to act quickly to shield the nation's dairy farmers from further crisis. We have asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture to take any and all actions available in order to support U.S. dairy farmers, while being cautious to not stimulate overproduction further, and we now ask you to do all you can to support the Secretary of Agriculture in this work. These dairy farms make up the backbone of our rural economy, and farms both large and small act as economic drivers, providing local jobs and supporting a wide array of other businesses. The last financial crisis that hit the dairy industry in 2009 forced far too many families to go out of business and sell off their herds. Farms that had been in families for generations were driven into ruin and forced to close their doors for good. Through the support of this administration, we can hopefully prevent many farms from needing to make that same difficult decision today. We hope you will work with us to support all of our dairy farmers across the country. We look forward to working closely with you and dairy stakeholders in our states in determining the best course of action to take in managing the current dairy industry financial crisis. If we have any hope for our rural economies to rebound and grow economically, we must act quickly to address the financial crisis hitting the nation's dairy farms. Thank you for taking the time to address this important matter. Sincerely, PATRICK LEAHYUnited States Senator JOE COURTNEYMember of Congress ROBERT P. CASEYUnited States Senator TAMMY BALDWINUnited States Senator KELLY A. AYOTTEUnited States Senator SEAN PATRICK MALONEYMember of Congress BARBARA BOXERUnited States Senator JIM COSTAMember of Congress SUSAN M. COLLINSUnited States Senator ELIZABETH H. ESTYMember of Congress RICHARD BLUMENTHALUnited States Senator JAMES P. MCGOVERNMember of Congress DIANNE FEINSTEINUnited States Senator ANDY HARRISMember of Congress AL FRANKENUnited States Senator JOHN K. DELANEYMember of Congress KIRSTEN GILLIBRANDUnited States Senator CHELLIE PINGREEMember of Congress ANGUS S. KING Jr.United States Senator RICHARD M. NOLANMember of Congress AMY KLOBUCHARUnited States Senator TIMOTHY J. WALZMember of Congress EDWARD J. MARKEYUnited States Senator ANN MCLANE KUSTERMember of Congress CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHYUnited States Senator CHRISTOPHER P. GIBSONMember of Congress PATTY MURRAYUnited States Senator ELISE M. STEFANIKMember of Congress JACK REEDUnited States Senator SUZANNE BONAMICIMember of Congress BERNARD SANDERSUnited States Senator KURT SCHRADERMember of Congress JEANNE SHAHEENUnited States Senator GLENN GT' THOMPSONMember of Congress ELIZABETH WARRENUnited States Senator LOU BARLETTAMember of Congress SHELDON WHITEHOUSEUnited States Senator PATRICK MEEHANMember of Congress RON WYDENUnited States Senator RYAN A. COSTELLOMember of Congress MARIA CANTWELLUnited States Senator DAVE LOEBSACKMember of Congress MARTIN HEINRICHUnited States Senator DAVID CICILLINEMember of Congress CHARLES E. SCHUMERUnited States Senator ANN KIRKPATRICKMember of Congress TOM UDALLUnited States Senator MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAMMember of Congress PETER WELCHMember of Congress JOHN KATKOMember of Congress SUZAN K. DELBENEMember of Congress TIM MURPHYMember of Congress RON KINDMember of Congress TOM MARINOMember of Congress MARK POCANMember of Congress JAMES R. LANGEVINMember of Congress 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/comments-on-the-highway-deaths-of-five-young-vermonters,Comments On The Highway Deaths Of Five Young Vermonters,2016-10-10,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.10.16 Comments On The Highway Deaths Of Five Young Vermonters Comments Of Senator Patrick Leahy On The Highway Deaths Of Five Young Vermonters Monday, Oct.10, 2016 ""Marcelle and I join the entire Harwood community, and all Vermonters, in mourning the loss of these five young lives. We were shocked and deeply saddened by this unspeakable and unimaginable tragedy. We want their families to know that we are prayerful about their grief and their suffering."" # # # # # 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/29-vt-law-enforcement-agencies-receive-new-support-to-buy-bulletproof-vests-for-officers,29 VT Law Enforcement Agencies Receive New Support To Buy BULLETPROOF VESTS For Officers,2016-10-07,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.07.16 29 VT Law Enforcement Agencies Receive New Support To Buy BULLETPROOF VESTS For Officers Leahy: VT Law Enforcement Agencies Receive Support To Buy Bulletproof Vests For Officers . . . Funding Under Leahy Program Will Help Buy New Protective Vests For More Than 200 Vermont Officers (FRIDAY, Oct. 7, 2016) -- Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Friday announced that grants will be coming to Vermont to support the purchase of lifesaving protective vests for Vermont law enforcement officers, under the Leahy-authored Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program. The funding includes $68,400 to help 29 local police and sheriff departments buy 214 new bulletproof vests for their officers. Leahy is the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the author of the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program. He successfully fought for its reauthorization earlier this year. As a result, over the next five years more than 200,000 officers across the country will receive lifesaving vests. Law enforcement officers working on the frontlines must have the tools they need to protect themselves in the line of duty. We owe that to them and to their families. Leahy said. The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program was created because of a tragic shootout with police on the Vermont-New Hampshire border. It is perhaps the most tangible support that Congress can provide to law enforcement officers, and I take great comfort in knowing that more Vermont officers will have the protection of lifesaving vests with these grants. Leahy said the program, which provides matching funds for departments to purchase bulletproof vests, is vital to small communities that struggle under tight budgets to keep their officers safe. Further responding to those needs, Leahy improved the federal grant program by authoring a provision in 2009 to waive in whole or in part the matching requirement for small jurisdictions in Vermont and other states that are experiencing financial hardships. Leahy frequently hears from Vermont law enforcement officers about the escalating presence of powerful weapons found at the scenes of drug investigations. Since the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program first received funding in 1999, more than $1 million has been awarded to police departments in Vermont to buy more than 4500 protective vests for Vermont law enforcement officers. # # # # # Vermont Jurisdictions Receiving Bulletproof Vest Grants Jurisdiction Grant Amount Number of Vests Barre Town $284.50 1 Bellows Falls Village $3,156.76 8 Bennington Town $3,580.00 8 Berlin Town $928.50 3 Brattleboro Town $1,400.00 4 Castleton Town $3,200.00 8 Essex Junction Village $1,497.50 5 Fair Haven Town $3,193.50 8 Franklin County $1,350.00 4 Grand Isle County $2,247.50 5 Hardwick Town $1,032.00 3 Hartford Town $1,348.50 3 Lamoille County $4,968.00 12 Manchester Town $2,136.00 8 Middlebury Town $1,335.00 3 Milton Town $1,876.00 4 Pittsford Town $1,425.00 4 Rutland City $4,350.00 12 Rutland County $989.47 3 Royalton $775.00 2 Shelburne Town $2,000.00 5 South Burlington City $5,390.00 12 Springfield Town $1,547.50 5 St. Albans City $2,920.50 9 Vergennes City $3,325.00 7 Williston Town $2,070.00 5 Wilmington Town $2,528.01 9 Winhall Town $2,250.50 6 Woodstock Village $4,262.50 11 Totals for Vermont $68,401.13 214 # # # # # 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-to-the-award-of-the-nobel-peace-prize-to-colombias-president-juan-manuel-santos,Reaction To The Award Of The Nobel Peace Prize To Colombias President Juan Manuel Santos,2016-10-07,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.07.16 Reaction To The Award Of The Nobel Peace Prize To Colombia's President Juan Manuel Santos Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy To The Award Of The Nobel Peace Prize To Colombia's President Juan Manuel Santos [BURLINGTON, Vt. (FRIDAY, Oct. 7, 2016) -- Sen. Patrick Leahy, (D-Vt., and ranking member of the Senate's State Department And Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee) for several years has been a partner in supporting and advancing President Santos' peace initiative, through Leahy's work on the Appropriations Committee and in other ways.] Peacemaking requires courage and patience and grit, and President Santos has invested all of these qualities in forging peace in Colombia. The United States has been a partner in the peace process, and I have come to know and admire President Santos through our work together. This is a proud moment and deserved recognition for him, for his country, and for his partners, and it should help propel his efforts to finally end a half century of war. # # # # # 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-firefighters-and-ems-personnel-receive-19-million-in-federal-grants,Vermont Firefighters and EMS Personnel Receive $1.9 Million in Federal Grants,2016-10-07,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.07.16 Vermont Firefighters and EMS Personnel Receive $1.9 Million in Federal Grants Vermont Firefighters and EMS Personnel Receive $1.9 Million in Federal Grants BURLINGTON, Vt., Oct. 7 Vermont's congressional delegation announced Friday that firefighters and EMS personnel throughout Vermont are receiving $1.9 million through 15 federal grants. The awards are part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Assistance to Firefighters Grant program, which helps fire departments and EMS agencies train and purchase critically needed equipment. This year's grants will help buy a range of equipment, including turnout gear, breathing apparatus, hoses and nozzles, radios and cardiac monitors. These federal grants will help our first-responders protect Vermonters. Our firefighters and EMS personnel play an invaluable role in our communities and we are pleased to be able to help provide the resources they need, said Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.). The largest of the grant awards is for the Vermont Department of Public Safety's Fire Academy, which is receiving $500,000 for a burn building, a training facility that provides opportunities to practice firefighting scenarios. The Vermont Fire Academy is grateful to have received AFG funding that will allow us the opportunity to replace our live-fire training burn building. This is a real boost for the Vermont firefighting community. Thanks to all that continue to support this grant, said Peter Lynch, the state's chief of fire service training for the Vermont Division of Fire Safety in the Department of Public Safety. The federal grants were awarded to: Vermont Department of Public Safety (Vermont Fire Academy); $500,000 Underhill-Jericho Fire Department, Inc.; $228,262 Essex Fire Department; $180,000 St. Johnsbury Fire Department; $178,572 Ascutney Volunteer Fire Association; $156,762 Bellows Falls Fire Department; $142,858 Wardsboro Fire Department; $129,524 West Windsor Fire Department; $90,667 Cavendish Volunteer Fire Department; $85,715 West Weathersfield Volunteer Fire Department; $83,810 Pownal Rescue Squad; $43,610 Springfield Fire Department; $36,427 Montpelier Fire/Ambulance Department; $23,765 Brookfield Volunteer Fire Department; $19,048 Pownal Fire Department; $13,719 ##### 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-announce-9m-to-vt-for-innovative-linking-learning-to-careers-program,"Leahy, Sanders, Welch Announce $9M To VT For Innovative 'Linking Learning To Careers' Program",2016-10-05,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.05.16 Leahy, Sanders, Welch Announce $9M To VT For Innovative 'Linking Learning To Careers' Program Leahy, Sanders And Welch Announce $9 Million To Vermont For Innovative Linking Learning To Careers' Program BURLINGTON, Vt. (WEDNESDAY, October 5, 2016) Vermont's congressional delegation Sen. Patrick Leahy (D), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I), and Rep. Peter Welch (D) on Wednesday announced a nearly $9 million grant to support an innovative project to help Vermont students with disabilities in transitioning to the workforce. The grant from the U.S. Department of Education to the Vermont Agency of Human Services Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (Voc Rehab) is for the Linking to Learning Careers Program. These funds will support a new pilot project through the federal Disability Innovation Fund to evaluate a pioneering model to support students with disabilities in preparing for and entering the workforce. In a joint statement, Leahy, Sanders and Welch said: Our nation has made great progress since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, but we must continue to focus our attention and investments on helping individuals with disabilities in realizing their potential. It is unacceptable that the employment of transition-age young people with disabilities remains well below that of their nondisabled peers. Vermont Voc Rehab and its network of partners has long been recognized as a model for collaborative, high-quality intervention programming. These young people, their families and Vermont communities will benefit from this opportunity. Hal Cohen, secretary of the Vermont Agency on Human Services said: This grant award will enable agency staff to provide early intervention efforts for Vermont high school students with significant barriers to employment. This intervention will support these students to be prepared to enter post-secondary education and training to be successful in careers in the 21st Century labor market. Linking Learning to Careers will build on the existing vocational rehabilitation programs administered by Voc Rehab Vermont and enhance services within school-based settings. This project will provide 400 Vermont high school students throughout the state with access to improved services over the next three years, including community college courses, mentorships, transportation funding and work-based learning opportunities. This service delivery will test outcomes for improved early career success, including paid, competitive employment, postsecondary school enrollment, and improved confidence to achieve career goals. The results of the Linking Learning to Careers demonstration will provide qualitative and quantitative evidence of the impacts of these services, and the results may serve as a replicable model for services nationwide. Increased investments for transition youths with disabilities was authorized by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), which received the support of Vermont's delegation during its passage in 2014. Prompted by low employment outcomes and high reliance on benefits for youth with disabilities, this law authorized annual funding to Vermont to improve the long-term career trajectories of youth with disabilities. I am very excited Voc Rehab will have the resources to provide work experiences and college coursework to high school students with disabilities so they can build career pathways to high wage employment, said Diane Dalmasse, director at Voc Rehab Vermont. Our goal, in partnership with the Community College of Vermont, is to engage students in work based learning activities and coursework that will make them believe they can be successful in college and a chosen career. # # # # # 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/as-republicans-unprecedented-obstruction-continues-a-diminished-supreme-court-begins-its-new-term-with-only-eight-justices,"As Republicans Unprecedented Obstruction Continues, A Diminished Supreme Court Begins Its New Term With Only Eight Justices",2016-10-04,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.04.16 As Republicans' Unprecedented Obstruction Continues, A Diminished Supreme Court Begins Its New Term With Only Eight Justices As Republicans' Unprecedented Obstruction Continues, A Diminished Supreme Court Begins Its New Term With Only Eight Justices Leahy: A Supreme Court of only eight justices is unacceptable and Americans deserve better. Americans should not accept a Senate that has done almost nothing to address the vacancy crisis in courts throughout our country. WASHINGTON (Tuesday, October 4, 2016) The Supreme Court begins hearing oral arguments today without a crucial ninth justice, marking the second consecutive term that the Court has been diminished due to Republicans' refusal to fill the vacancy that has been open since February. Republicans' unprecedented obstruction of Chief Judge Merrick Garland's nomination has created uncertainty in the law, which has been harmful to businesses, law enforcement, and to families and children across the country. On Monday, the justices declined to rehear an important immigration case that affects millions of families throughout the country who have remained in legal uncertainty since June when the Court deadlocked because it lacked a critical ninth vote. Despite what the Republican Leader has said, there is absolutely no reason to be proud that the Supreme Court is now, for a second term, diminished, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said. A Supreme Court of only eight justices is unacceptable and Americans deserve better. Americans should not accept a Senate that has done almost nothing to address the vacancy crisis in courts throughout our country. He added: Senate Republicans should be working across the aisle to ensure that our independent federal judiciary can function. Instead, Republicans have refused to do their jobs and they have left town, avoiding their responsibilities to the American people and the independent judiciary that serves them. The New York Times wrote on Monday that the Republicans' refusal to take up Garland's nomination and deny the Supreme Court the ability to fully function is inflicting damage on the court and the country. Last term, the Supreme Court was unable to issue a final decision on the merits in a total of seven cases. This term, the Court will hear important cases on voting rights, racial discrimination in housing, and even the fees Americans pay at the ATM. Several other issues that impact the lives of millions of Americans are also likely to come before the Court, including environmental protection and women's health. # # # # # What's At Stake: The Diminished Supreme Court Enters a New Term Racial Discrimination in Housing Last year, in Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., a narrow majority of the Supreme Court held that disparate-impact claims are cognizable under the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA). Those who have long set their sights on cutting down on the Fair Housing Act, however, have not given up, and are now setting their sights on restricting who can bring suit under that law. In this Term, the Court will look at two cases regarding the Fair Housing Act, which the Court has consolidated for briefing and argument as (Wells Fargo v. City of Miami). Both cases were brought by the City of Miami against Bank of America and Wells Fargo for alleged reverse redlining practices that caused foreclosures predominantly in neighborhoods of color. In both cases, the banks are attempting to narrow standing under the Fair Housing Act by arguing for a standard that is higher than what is required under Article III of the Constitution. The banks are also challenging the ability of cities to bring FHA claims based on the injuries they suffered resulting from the banks' discriminatory practices, arguing that only borrowers who received toxic loans can seek relief. The argument date is set for November 8, 2016. Environmental Protection A challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan (CPP) to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions is set for argument before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals onSeptember 27, 2016. Public health advocates and environmental groups support the CPP as a critical undertaking in slowing the harmful effects of global warming and decreasing the negative health impacts of conventional energy generation pollution. Whatever the outcome in the D.C. Circuit, the case is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court. Women's Reproductive Health This summer, the Court could not come to a final decision on the merits in a case involving women employees' access to birth control as part of their health insurance through their jobs. In the case, Zubik v. Burwell, religiously-affiliated non-profit employers challenged the Obama administration's administrative accommodation allowing them not to comply with the contraception mandate under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) as a violation of their religious rights. The Court sent the case back to the lower courts. After this further consideration in the lower courts, the issue is likely to come back before the Supreme Court; without a full complement of justices, the Court will be likely to be unable to resolve it again. Immigration This summer, the eight justices deadlocked in a crucially important case challenging the Obama administration's executive action on immigration. As a result, the deferred action policies announced by the President in 2014 that would focus enforcement resources on dangerous criminals, grow our economy, and provide certainty to immigrant families across the country, have been halted. These efforts would have brought as many as 5 million people out of the shadows, and helped immigrant families, many of which include U.S. citizen children, live productive lives free of fear. The Department of Justice has filed a petition asking the Court to rehear the case; the petition is still pending, but could be taken up by the Court this term. In addition, the issue of immigration is back before the Supreme Court in a case that raises questions about the scope of noncitizens' due process rights (Jennings v. Rodriguez). The Court has been asked to decide whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was correct in deciding that detaining noncitizens longer than six months is constitutionally problematic and that those detainees must be afforded the type of bond hearings allowed under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) every six months. Death Penalty This term, the eight justices will hear two cases involving the death penalty - cases that are a matter of life and death. In one, they are faced with the question of how to determine when a person is too mentally disabled to receive the death penalty (Moore v. Texas). At issue is the State of Texas' use of a medical definition for mental disability that the medical community considers to be outdated. The Court will decide whether Texas can continue to use this outdated definition. In the second, a death row inmate, Duane Buck, is appealing his death sentence based on ineffective assistance from his attorney who called an expert witness at trial who testified that Buck was more likely to be dangerous in the future because he is black (Buck v. Davis). After his conviction, Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), who was then the Texas Attorney General, conceded in a different case that the government should not use experts who testify about race as a factor of future dangerousness. Despite the fact that Buck is appealing his sentence based on this discredited expert evidence, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied him any relief. Buck's appeal - and life - are now before the eight justices. Money in Politics In 2010, a narrow majority of five Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices reversed decades of precedent and a century of practice when it issued Citizens United v. FEC, and held that corporations can spend without limit to influence elections. Since then, the same narrow majority on the Roberts Court has repeatedly struck down commonsense campaign finance regulations. The future of these regulations hangs in the balance. The next significant campaign finance case that will likely come before the Court is Republican Party of Louisiana v. FEC, in which the constitutionality of soft money bans will be at issue. Soft money refers to the unlimited funds that corporations, wealthy individuals, and unions could give to political parties. McCain-Feingold had imposed a ban on political parties raising soft money, but with much of McCain-Feingold having been struck down by the narrow majority of the Roberts Court, the soft money ban has become the next target for conservative attorney James Bopp, who also litigated Citizens United and other related campaign finance cases. An incomplete Supreme Court is unlikely to be able to resolve cases like Republican Party of Louisiana and others that may come down the line. Consumer Protection The Court will hear two cases together (Visa v. Osborn and Visa v. Stoumbos) in which consumers seek to use federal antitrust law to hold accountable major credit card companies (Visa and Mastercard) and affiliated banks for an alleged conspiracy to keep ATM fees high. The outcome in the cases will have a real world impact on the pocketbooks of hard working families across the country. # # # # # 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/leading-senators-call-for-the-release-of-children-in-prolonged-detention-and-an-end-to-family-detention,Leading Senators Call For The Release Of Children In Prolonged Detention & An End To Family Detention,2016-10-04,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.04.16 Leading Senators Call For The Release Of Children In Prolonged Detention & An End To Family Detention Leading Senators Call For The Release Of Children In Prolonged Detention & An End To Family Detention WASHINGTON (Tuesday, October 4, 2016) A group of leading Senators pressed the Obama administration to end the detention of women and children who have fled gang violence in their home countries. The letter led by Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) came after world leaders met in New York for the United Nations Summit for Refugees and Migrants. In their letter to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, the lawmakers note that women and children as young as two-years-old have been in detention for nearly a year or longer at the Berks County Residential Center in Pennsylvania. The letter expresses concern that children at the detention facility are exhibiting serious health problems and experiencing psychological harms associated with prolonged detention. In addition to Leahy and Hirono, the letter is signed by: Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Senator Robert P. Menendez (D-N.J.), Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Senator Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.), Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Senator Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Senator Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.). A copy of the September 27 letter to DHS Secretary Johnson is below and online. # # # # September 27, 2016 The Honorable Jeh Johnson Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, D.C. 20528 Dear Secretary Johnson: We write to reiterate our strong belief that the policy of family detention is wrong and should be ended immediately. Although we were encouraged to hear your announcement in August that the average length of detention for asylum-seeking mothers and children from Central America's Northern Triangle has been reduced to 20 days or less, the ongoing use of family detention remains unacceptable. We are particularly concerned about the children who have been detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for prolonged periods at the Berks County Residential Center in Pennsylvania. These children range in age from two to sixteen and many have been in detention for nearly a year or longer. Recent reports from a number of media sources indicate the children are exhibiting serious health problems and experiencing psychological harms associated with prolonged detention. Detention of families should only be used as a last resort, when there is a significant risk of flight or a serious threat to public safety or national security that cannot be addressed through other means. We urge you to review these cases individually and release these children with their mothers immediately unless there is compelling evidence that they pose a specific public safety or flight risk that cannot be otherwise ameliorated through alternatives to detention. The mothers of these children fled three of the most dangerous countries in the world to seek refuge in the United States. The brutal physical, gender-based, and sexual violence in the Northern Triangle is well-documented. Many of these mothers have asylum claims based on rape, severe domestic violence, and murder threats, and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a stay barring the deportation of some of them until those claims can be fully resolved. The decision by ICE to detain these women and children while they pursue their claims has placed these mothers in the impossible position of choosing between their legal right to seek long-term refuge in the United States and the immediate well-being of their children. It is unconscionable to keep these children locked up and goes against our most fundamental values. There is strong evidence and broad consensus among health care professionals that detention of young children, particularly those who have experienced significant trauma as many of these children have, is detrimental to their development and physical and mental health. This evidence has been reinforced by specific examples of children in the Berks County facility who are experiencing adverse health outcomes due to detention. Reports indicate that room checks conducted by facility staff every fifteen minutes lead to habitual sleep deprivation among the children,[1] and a pediatric assessment of a six-year-old child suffering from chronic Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder indicates that after prolonged detention the child is now showing signs of extreme stress and anxiety.[2] Last week, the President hosted the Leaders' Summit on the Global Refugee Crisis. During this summit, the United States asked other countries to follow our lead and provide protection and increased resources for the millions of people currently facing persecution around the world. However, this summit took place against the backdrop of a system of family detention in the United States that is inconsistent with our country's longstanding commitment to provide safe and humane refuge to those fleeing persecution. The ongoing use of family detention is wrong. The prolonged detention of the mothers and children in Berks is taking a significant toll on their mental and physical wellbeing. We urge you to review these cases immediately and use your authority to release these children with their mothers unless there is compelling evidence that they pose a specific public safety or flight risk that cannot be mitigated through alternatives to detention. Sincerely, ___________________________ PATRICK LEAHY United States Senator ___________________________ MAZIE K. HIRONO United States Senator ___________________________ RICHARD J. DURBIN United States Senator ___________________________ PATTY MURRAY United States Senator ___________________________ ROBERT MENENDEZ United States Senator ___________________________ ELIZABETH WARREN United States Senator ___________________________ ROBERT P. CASEY, JR. United States Senator ___________________________ CORY A. BOOKER United States Senator ___________________________ TIM KAINE United States Senator ___________________________ KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND United States Senator ___________________________ EDWARD J. MARKEY United States Senator ___________________________ AL FRANKEN United States Senator ___________________________ BERNARD SANDERS United States Senator ___________________________ MICHAEL F. BENNET United States Senator ___________________________ BENJAMIN L. CARDIN United States Senator ___________________________ SHERROD BROWN United States Senator ___________________________ TAMMY BALDWIN United States Senator Enclosures cc: The Honorable Sarah R. SaldaaDirector of Immigration and Customs Enforcement 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-announces-93-m-in-grants-to-support-vt-crime-victims-and-domestic-violence-survivors,Leahy Announces $9.3 M. In Grants To Support VT CRIME VICTIMS and DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS,2016-10-04,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.04.16 Leahy Announces $9.3 M. In Grants To Support VT CRIME VICTIMS and DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS Leahy Announces $9.3 Million in Grants To Support Vermont Crime Victims And Domestic Violence Survivors Rural grants will reach underserved populations MIDDLEBURY, Vt. (TUESDAY, Oct. 4, 2016) U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Tuesday announced that Vermont will receive $9.3 million from the U.S. Department of Justice to support victims of crime throughout the state, including survivors of domestic and sexual violence. The funding includes 12 separate federal grants that will address a wide range of needs. Leahy, a former prosecutor, has long been the Senate's leading champion for crime victims. As the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over the Justice Department, Leahy was instrumental two years ago in raising the cap on the Crime Victims Fund, which supports several victim assistance programs. Leahy's success in raising the cap has led to a three-fold annual increase in funding, totaling $4.7 million this year. The Fund is supported through federal fines and penalties, and not with taxpayer dollars. Leahy said: As a former prosecutor I know something about what crime victims go through, and about the need for this help. When someone is the victim of a random street crime or a hit-and-run accident, they should not have to worry about how to pay their medical bills. When a woman flees her abuser, she needs a safe place to live, and a safe place for her children as well. When Leahy led the effort to reauthorize and strengthen the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in 2013, he succeeded in expanding protections to include LGBT, immigrant and tribal populations not previously supported by VAWA. This year's grants include funding to reach victims in rural areas who otherwise may not have sought the help they need. Leahy steered his VAWA bill through the Judiciary and through the Senate, and then won its approval by the House. Leahy said: A victim should not have to worry about reporting a sexual assault if they are gay or lesbian, or because they can't communicate due to language or other cultural differences. A victim is a victim is a victim, and all victims deserve the right to these services. Leahy made the announcement in Middlebury, where he was joined by Vermont victims' advocates and service providers. The $9.3 million comes from two sources of funding within the U.S. Department of Justice: Victims of Crime Act (VOCA): Two grants totaling $5 million to the Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services. The bulk of this, $4.7 million, is Vermont's allocation under the state victim assistance formula from the Crime Victims Fund. These grants also support victim advocates in state's attorneys' offices. Violence Against Women Act (VAWA): Ten grants totaling $4.3 million for domestic and sexual violence programs around the state. These include rural grants to reach victims in underserved populations. A full listing of all 12 grants follows (BELOW). # # # # # FY 2016 U.S. Department Of Justice Crime Victim And Domestic Violence Grants To Vermont 12 Grants Total $9.3 Million Office on Violence Against Women Grants (Violence Against Women Act) 10 grants totaling $4.3 million: WomenSafe, Inc., Middlebury: $346,740 transitional housing grant to provide assistance and support to victims of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking, with goal of moving victims to permanent housing. Will provide up to 83 housing sites for survivors and families through agreements with private landlords. Middlebury College, Middlebury: $299,305 Campus Program grant to work with community partners to develop campus-based coordinated responses to enhance victim services and combat violent crime against students on campus. Voices Against Violence/Laurie's House, St. Albans: $664,551 Rural grant. Working with project partners, VAV will address unmet needs of victims with mental health and substance abuse issues in rural areas of Grand Isle and Franklin Counties. Administered through Champlain Office of Economic Opportunity. Pride Center of Vermont, Burlington: $300,000 for outreach and services to underserved populations. Working with community partners, this project aims to increase LGBTQ comprehensive violence services in Franklin, Chittenden and Addison Counties. Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services (statewide): $827,087 STOP grant (Services, Training, Officers and Prosecution), to encourage partnerships between law enforcement, prosecution, courts and victim services. HOPE Works, Burlington: $682,384 to support programs to address children and youth experiencing domestic and sexual assault, including training for schools and social service providers and enhanced mental health services. Vermont Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence (statewide): $239,532 for grants to Vermont's Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Coalitions Program. Association of Africans Living in Vermont, Burlington: $326,817 to develop culturally specific services including crisis intervention, case management, outreach, and mental health services, for African immigrant women and families. Project Against Violent Encounters (PAVE), Bennington: $264,529 Rural Program award to strengthen community responses to domestic violence, dating violence and stalking-related crimes. Working in partnership with Department of Corrections and Manchester Police Department. Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services (statewide): $347,374 Sexual Assault Services program grant for direct intervention and assistance to victims. Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) Grants 2 grants totaling $5 million: Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services: $4.72 million award from the Crime Victims Fund to enhance crime victim services statewide. Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services: $274,000 for state victim compensation payments. # # # # # 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-to-the-vote-rejecting-the-peace-agreement-in-colombia,Reaction To The Vote Rejecting The Peace Agreement In Colombia,2016-10-03,2016,2016-10,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"10.03.16 Reaction To The Vote Rejecting The Peace Agreement In Colombia Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt., Ranking Member, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee On The State Department And Foreign Operations) To The Vote Rejecting The Peace Agreement In Colombia Monday, Oct. 3, 2016 The nearly even split in the vote illustrates the social, economic, and political divisions that are at the root of the conflict. Further bloodshed would only deepen those divisions. Any peace agreement requires painful compromises, particularly when both sides are responsible for numerous atrocities against civilians. Both sides have clearly had enough of war. Despite the vote, there is no turning back. I have confidence that President Santos, who has shown great political courage to get to this point, will find a way to bring the process to a satisfactory conclusion. # # # # # 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/house-passes-welch-legislation-improve-phone-service-rural-america,House Passes Welch Legislation to Improve Phone Service in Rural America,2016-09-29,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONThe U.S. House of Representatives has unanimously approved bipartisan legislation authored by Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) that will improve the quality and reliability of phone service in rural America. The Improving Call Quality and Reliability Act (H.R. 2566), co-sponsored by Rep. David Young (R-IA), passed the House on Tuesday evening. Welch introduced his bill after learning from Vermont small businesses, schools, and small telecommunication companies that calls were not connecting or being dropped. In some rural areas of the country, nearly one in five inbound calls to land line phones are not completed or are of poor quality, resulting in inconvenience for families and lost revenue for small businesses. ""Whether an emergency call or a business order, Vermonters should have confidence that their calls are completed without disruption,"" Rep. Welch said. This bill addresses the epidemic of dropped calls in rural America and will ensure calls to emergency responders, businesses, customers, family and friends are reliably connected."" For rural residents and businesses, the problem begins with how incoming calls are routed. Large telecommunications companies often rely on intermediate providers (least cost routers') to route calls from larger networks to local service providers. The least cost router' frequently declines to connect calls in rural areas to save money, leaving rural customers unable to consistently and reliably use their landline telephone. Welch's bill would for the first time hold these providers accountable. It would require them to register with the FCC and meet quality standards. Additionally, the bill explicitly prohibits providers from using any intermediary routing service that is not registered with the FCC. Welch's legislation will now be considered by the Senate. Read the full legislation here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://welch.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/leahy-sanders-and-welch-issue-joint-statement-rutland-s-designation,"Leahy, Sanders And Welch Issue Joint Statement On Rutlands Designation As A Refugee Resettlement Site",2016-09-28,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"We learned this morning that the City of Rutland will receive refugees who have fled the relentless violence in Syria and Iraq, sometimes with just the clothes on their backs. The vast majority of refugees admitted from Syria have been women and children, and when we see the photographs of children fleeing this awful tragedy, we see our own children and are called to do our part to help. We know the good people of Rutland and Vermont will welcome these newcomers into the community. Struggling families, fleeing peril and motivated to start their lives anew, always have and always will enrich America and contribute immeasurably to our state. We are also very pleased that in a separate announcement, the Department of Health and Human Service has awarded Vermont a $150,000 grant to help the newly resettled refugees obtain employment and achieve self-sufficiency. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/14-m-grant-will-help-shape-decisions-on-the-moran-plant-on-the-burlington-waterfront,$1.4 M. Grant Will Help Shape Decisions On The Moran Plant On The BURLINGTON WATERFRONT,2016-09-28,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.28.16 $1.4 M. Grant Will Help Shape Decisions On The Moran Plant On The BURLINGTON WATERFRONT Leahy: $1.4 M. Grant Will Help Shape Decisions On The Moran Plant On The Burlington Waterfront BURLINGTON, Vt. (WEDNESDAY, Sept. 28, 2016) -- In a major boost to economic development efforts on the Burlington Waterfront, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) announced on Wednesday a $1.4 million grant from the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) to the City for waterproofing and flood resiliency of the former Moran Plant. Previous high-water events on Lake Champlain have flooded the building and impeded redevelopment. The federal funding would help ensure that the ground-level space, with its vaulted ceiling heights, would be flood proof and available for use, maximizing the potential economic benefits of any redevelopment project. The funds require a one-to-one match and are restricted from being used for demolition. Part of the EDA grant agreement with the City will require a feasible development agreement before any federal funds can be expended. Leahy, who has collaborated with Burlington officials to identify federal funding for multiple city priorities like this one, said: Burlington's waterfront is one of Vermont's grandest jewels. Reclaiming the waterfront from its industrial past for all Vermonters to enjoy has been a goal I have worked on for many years. As the City and its potential partners develop final plans for the former Moran Plant, this grant is a catalyst and a good faith step toward making those plans a reality. If the City in the end decides that this project is not feasible, it will go forward knowing that every opportunity and resource was considered. U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker said: The Department of Commerce through our Economic Development Administration is pleased to partner with the City of Burlington to enable redevelopment of the Moran Plant so that it can be used year-round for publically supported commercial endeavors. This EDA investment will facilitate conversion of this city-owned asset to leverage additional private investment that can spur new business opportunities and jobs. Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger, who has continued the many years of work to increase the vibrancy and accessibility of the Lake Champlain waterfront, said: As he has on so many occasions over the last three decades, Senator Leahy has once again helped Burlington's waterfront revitalization effort, this time by providing an additional $1.4 million to help clean up and revitalize the Moran Plant. My goal for the last two years has been to give the Moran Plant every opportunity to succeed. With the assistance of the federal and state governments, we are continuing to experience the rebirth of the long-abandoned northern waterfront. # # # # # 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-praises-administrations-rule-issued-tonight-to-end-forced-arbitration-in-long-term-care-facilities,"Leahy Praises Administration's Rule, Issued Tonight, To End Forced Arbitration In Long-Term Care Facilities",2016-09-28,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.28.16 Leahy Praises Administration's Rule, Issued Tonight, To End Forced Arbitration In Long-Term Care Facilities Comment Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Administration's Long-Term Care Facility Rule and Forced Arbitration September 28, 2016 [The Department of Health and Human Services has published its final regulations for long-term care facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid. Among the new regulations is a prohibition on binding arbitration clauses in the agreements between patients and facilities. The ban on forced arbitration was recommended by Senator Leahy and other Democratic Senators last year in a letter to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid. Senator Leahy 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. He also recently sent a letter to Wells Fargo's CEO, asking him to immediately cease the practice of using forced arbitration. Senator Leahy is also a long-time co-sponsor of the Arbitration Fairness Act, S. 1133, and introduced the Restoring Statutory Rights Act, S. 2506, earlier this year.] I applaud the Department of Health and Human Services for banning the use of forced arbitration clauses by long-term care facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid programs. It is simply unacceptable to provide taxpayer dollars to organizations that deny consumers their day in court. Today's rule is a small but important victory in the long battle to root out these secretive, complicated arbitration clauses that favor corporate interests over consumer rights. Too often, long-term care facilities require potential residents and their families to decide whether to waive their legal rights by signing mandatory arbitration clauses that are slipped into a contract and written in legal jargon. These clauses are not in the interest of the consumer, yet the sad reality is that today too many Americans must choose between forfeiting their legal rights and getting adequate medical care. Ensuring that nursing home residents have access to information about potential safety concerns should be of paramount importance. # # # # # 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-joint-statement-on-rutlands-designation-as-a-refugee-resettlement-site,"Leahy, Sanders, Welch: Joint Statement On Rutland's Designation As A Refugee Resettlement Site",2016-09-28,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.28.16 Leahy, Sanders, Welch: Joint Statement On Rutland's Designation As A Refugee Resettlement Site Leahy, Sanders And Welch Issue Joint Statement On Rutland's Designation As A Refugee Resettlement Site Wednesday, Sept. 28, 2016 We learned this morning that the City of Rutland will receive refugees who have fled the relentless violence in Syria and Iraq, sometimes with just the clothes on their backs. The vast majority of refugees admitted from Syria have been women and children, and when we see the photographs of children fleeing this awful tragedy, we see our own children and are called to do our part to help. We know the good people of Rutland and Vermont will welcome these newcomers into the community. Struggling families, fleeing peril and motivated to start their lives anew, always have and always will enrich America and contribute immeasurably to our state. We are also very pleased that in a separate announcement, the Department of Health and Human Service has awarded Vermont a $150,000 grant to help the newly resettled refugees obtain employment and achieve self-sufficiency. # # # # # 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-on-aya-hijazi,Statement On Aya Hijazi,2016-09-28,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.28.16 Statement On Aya Hijazi Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On Aya Hijazi Congressional Record September 27, 2016 Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I want to speak about a matter in Egypt, a long-time ally of the United States, a country with a rich history and culture, but whose people have suffered for years due to corrupt, repressive governments and an anemic economy that stagnates under excessive statist control. This is the situation despite more than $75 billion in U.S. economic and military aid for Egypt over the past 50 years. Today, more than five years after public protests led to the resignation of President Mubarak, followed by the election of the Muslim Brotherhood, the military-supported coup that forcibly removed and imprisoned President Morsi and thousands of his followers, and the election that brought President al-Sisi, a former army general, to power, the United States and Egypt are struggling to preserve a long history of security cooperation. That cooperation is important to the Middle East region as a whole, but U.S.-Egypt relations face increasing challenges as President al-Sisi tightens his grip on power by persecuting political opponents, silencing members of the media -- including deporting American and other foreign journalists who criticize his policies -- and imprisoning representatives of civil society. The brutal torture and killing of Giulio Regeni, an Italian student and journalist who many believe was an innocent victim of the Egyptian police, occurred only four months after the Egyptian army attacked a convoy of tourists in September 2015, killing twelve and injuring ten, including an American who continues to suffer from her injuries for which she has received no compensation. Just last week, a court in Cairo froze the assets of some of Egypt's most prominent human rights defenders in an attempt to silence them and put their organizations out of business. The State Department responded by urging the Egyptian Government to ease restrictions on association and expression. These and other incidents have cast a dark cloud over efforts to find a common way forward with the al-Sisi government. In May 2015, after repeated appeals by me, Secretary of State Kerry, and others, the Egyptian Government finally released Mohammed Soltan, a young Egyptian-American who was imprisoned, along with his father, for nearly two years. His crime, if one can call it that, was taking part in a public protest. In return for his release he was forced to give up his Egyptian citizenship, a Hobson's choice that no citizen of any country should have to make. In the meantime, on May 1, 2014, the government arrested Aya Hijazi, 29 years old and also an Egyptian-American, whose husband, an Egyptian citizen, was also arrested, along with Sherif Talaat Mohammed, Amira Farag, and eventually Ibrahim Abd Rabbo, Karim Magdi, and Mohammed al-Sayyed Mohammed, for operating a nonprofit organization called the Belady Foundation, which is dedicated to helping abandoned and homeless children. Backing up for a moment: Aya's mother and father came to the United States to pursue master's degrees and because Aya's grandmother, who lived in Virginia, wanted her family nearby. Three of Aya's uncles, an aunt and their families live in Houston and are all American citizens. Aya grew up here, went to middle school and high school in Virginia, and graduated from George Mason University. At George Mason she was a volunteer for Search for Common Ground, a respected peacebuilding organization based in Washington. After graduating, Aya moved to Cairo where she met Mohammed Hassanein, who she married, and who, like Aya, wanted to be involved in social work.Together they founded Belady, which means our country, and which Aya and the members of her organization call an island of humanity. That same year Aya was accepted to study at the American University in Cairo, a prestigious institution that receives funding from the U.S. Government, focusing on social work and children's welfare. But she and her husband were arrested before she began her studies. The charges against them are as salacious as they are farcical: sexually abusing children and paying them to participate in anti-government demonstrations. Since then, Aya, her husband, and the five Belady volunteers have been in prison. After more than two years the government has yet to disclose a shred of evidence to support the allegations, and Aya, her husband, and the other defendants are still awaiting a fair, public trial and a chance to defend themselves. Aya Hijazi's case fits a pattern. We have seen it time and again, not only in Egypt but in other repressive societies where governments are unaccountable and abuse the judicial process to silence dissent and intimidate those who are perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be engaged in activities that may reflect poorly on the authorities. We all want relations with Egypt to improve, just as we want the Egyptian people to enjoy the rights and opportunities they deserve. With ISIS and other extremist groups infiltrating throughout the Middle East and beyond, impoverished Egyptian youths, who have few educational and professional options, are particularly vulnerable to ISIS recruitment. But the more governments curtail the rights and ability of people with grievances to express themselves and to seek redress through peaceful means, the more likely it is that they will resort to violence. This is not a new concept. Anyone who has read the Declaration of Independence understands it. It is what ultimately brought about the downfall of President Mubarak. The Egyptian Government has imprisoned Aya without trial for more than 850 days. That alone is inexcusable and a violation of Egyptian law, which holds that no one can be subjected to pre-trial detention for more than two years without being released with or without bail. On February 3, 2016, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights published a petition signed by 25 Egyptian human rights organizations against the detention of the Belady founders and volunteers. On May 20, 2016, the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organization submitted Aya's case to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, seeking her release. On May 21, Aya's trial date was postponed yet again, to November 19, 2016. Last week, White House officials called for her release. Aya has suffered emotionally and physically, she is often prohibited from writing to or receiving correspondence from her family, and her reputation, and that of the other defendants as well as her organization, has been tarnished by unproven allegations. She and the others should be immediately released. Absent proof, made available for all to see, that they have committed a punishable offense the charges should be dismissed. Egypt was among the 48 countries that voted for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948. That is a vote to be proud of, but the al-Sisi government's persecution of Aya Hijazi and others who have been subjected to lengthy imprisonment without trial, or whose only offense is to criticize government corruption and abuse or to participate in nonviolent social activism, makes a mockery of Egypt's vote. The Universal Declaration, among other rights, includes the following: Article 9: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. Article 10: Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him. Article 11(1): Everyone charged with a penal offense has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense. Article 19: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 20: Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. Each of these articles has been violated in Aya Hijazi's case. Mr. President, on January 20, 2017, the next president of the United States will take the oath of office. That is 116 days from today. The next president will immediately face every imaginable challenge, foreign and domestic, including the instability and violence in the Middle East and North Africa. I therefore urge the Government of Egypt, in the remaining months of the Obama Administration, and in particular President al-Sisi who also has a daughter named Aya and who I believe, if he examined this case, would agree that Aya Hijazi does not belong in prison, to recognize this opportunity and take steps to enable our next president to immediately engage with Egypt in a manner that brings our countries closer together, not farther apart. A key step would be the satisfactory resolution of the cases of Aya Hijazi, her husband and the Belady volunteers, and of United States nongovernmental organizations that have been prevented from working in Egypt on behalf of the Egyptian people. # # # # # 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-on-passage-of-the-survivors-bill-of-rights-act,Statement On Passage Of The Survivors Bill of Rights Act,2016-09-28,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.28.16 Statement On Passage Of The Survivors' Bill of Rights Act Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On Passage Of The Survivors' Bill of Rights Act September 28, 2016 Today, we take an important step forward for victims of crime by establishing key protections for survivors of sexual assault in our criminal justice system. I was proud to work with Senator Shaheen on this legislation when it passed in the Senate earlier this year. Her Sexual Assault Survivors' Rights Act addresses the unique challenges faced by sexual assault survivors. This bipartisan bill received overwhelming support in the Senate. The House has acted on a companion bill, H.R. 5578, that is nearly identical to what Senator Shaheen championed in the Senate. Today we pass the House measure and ensure that it will become law. In many jurisdictions across the country, survivors of sexual assault face a labyrinth of complex policies that deter them from pursuing justice. We have seen that even when survivors make the decision to come forward, sometimes evidence is not properly preserved or tested. This is not acceptable. Survivors of sexual assault should never feel abandoned by our criminal justice system. Senator Shaheen's Sexual Assault Survivors' Rights Act treats survivors with the dignity and respect that they deserve. It guarantees basic rights to survivors and serves as a model for reform across our Nation. It strengthens notice requirements to ensure that survivors understand their rights, and know the status of their cases. Senator Shaheen was an original cosponsor of the Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, which was signed into law in 2013 and significantly increased resources for survivors of sexual assault. We are building on that progress today by passing the Sexual Assault Survivors' Rights Act, but our work is not done. I urge the House to pass my bipartisan Justice for All Reauthorization Act, which increases protections for victims of crime and provides resources to ensure key evidence is tested. The Senate passed this bill in June by voice vote, and I hope the House will act soon so that it can become law. Today, I stand with survivors of sexual assault and with Senator Shaheen, whose work to protect the rights of victims is of great importance. # # # # # 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-on-recent-events-in-ethiopia,Statement on Recent Events in Ethiopia,2016-09-28,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.28.16 Statement on Recent Events in Ethiopia Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) On Recent Events in Ethiopia Congressional record September 27, 2016 MR. LEAHY. Mr. President, I want to bring the Senate's attention to the Ethiopian government's brutal crackdown on protestors over the past nine months. According to Human Rights Watch, more than 500 people have been killed by Ethiopian security forces in anti-government demonstrations since November 2015, including over 100 gunned down in early August of this year alone. These protests by the country's two largest ethnic groups, the Oromos and Amharas, reflect enduring tensions brought on by the Ethiopian government's longstanding marginalization and persecution of these communities. But such grievances are shared by even broader segments of Ethiopian society, including from other communities that have been forcibly evicted from their land in the name of development, and the journalists, civil society activists, and countless other political prisoners sitting in Ethiopian jails for speaking out against the government's repressive rule. The international community, including the United States, has paid too little attention to the Ethiopian government's repressive policies, focusing instead on the country's rapid development gains and the government's cooperation on regional security. But it is time for the Ethiopian government to acknowledge that grievances stemming from marginalization, abuse, and exclusive governance cannot be effectively addressed through the provision of basic services alone. The United States should set an example by redefining its relationship with Ethiopia, starting with the recognition of this reality. In too many developing countries, legitimate concerns about unaccountable governance are given short shrift as aspirational and inconvenient tradeoffs for positive relations with host governments. But the quiet diplomacy of the past backroom condemnation and public praise has proven unable to ensure the sustainability of U.S. investments by failing to protect and promote stability, let alone encourage meaningful reform by the Ethiopian government. It is precisely because Ethiopia is a strategic partner of the U.S. that we should encourage remedies to the underlying tensions in the country. That does not mean we walk away from our partnership, but we should examine the type of assistance we provide to the Ethiopian government to ensure it aligns with shared interests and activities that contribute to government capacity in a manner that addresses local concerns. This is not without its challenges, and the only government that has the ability to successfully reform Ethiopia is its own. Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn and the rest of the Ethiopian leadership should begin by reassessing its crowd control tactics, and ensuring accountability for those who have committed abuses. I support the call by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights for an independent, transparent, thorough and effective investigation into violations of human rights committed during the unrest, and if the Ethiopian government is interested in demonstrating its legitimacy it would welcome such an inquiry. I look forward to working with other Members of Congress, the Obama Administration and their successors to determine how best we can ensure that the assistance U.S. taxpayers provide to Ethiopia serves our long-term interests in the region. # # # # # 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-on-the-nomination-of-jeffrey-delaurentis,Statement On The Nomination of Jeffrey DeLaurentis,2016-09-28,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.28.16 Statement On The Nomination of Jeffrey DeLaurentis Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On The Nomination of Jeffrey DeLaurentis September 28, 2016 Mr. LEAHY: Mr. President, yesterday President Obama nominated Jeffrey DeLaurentis to be United States Ambassador to Cuba. If confirmed, Mr. DeLaurentis would be the first U.S. ambassador in Havana in more than half a century. I have known Jeff DeLaurentis since he became the U.S. chief of mission in Havana, and he is the obvious choice to be ambassador. He is a career diplomat who is universally respected by his peers, and by Democrats and Republicans in Congress, for his intellect, his integrity, and his thoughtfulness. The decision to resume diplomatic relations with Cuba has been widely supported, and the number of Americans traveling to Cuba is increasing dramatically. We need an Ambassador who knows Cuba, who is respected by the Cuban Government, and who will stand up for U.S. interests and values. Jeff DeLaurentis is that person. The Cuban people have their ambassador in Washington. The American people need their ambassador in Havana. Not surprisingly, one Senator who has opposed the resumption of diplomatic relations with Cuba criticized the nomination of Mr. DeLaurentis. While he did not challenge Mr. DeLaurentis' qualifications for the job, since he is obviously exceptionally well qualified, the Senator instead said rewarding the Castro government with a U.S. ambassador is another last-ditch legacy project for the president that needs to be stopped. He said the nomination should go nowhere until the Castro regime makes significant and irreversible progress in the areas of human rights and political freedom for the Cuban people. He was joined in his opposition to Mr. DeLaurentis' nomination by another Senator. Having been to Cuba many times where I have met with Cuban government officials, as well as with critics of the government including some who have been persecuted and imprisoned, no one is a stronger defender of human rights there than I am. Like President Obama, we all want the Cuban people to be able to express themselves freely, and to choose their own leaders in a free and fair election. For fifty years we have tried the isolationist approach advocated by a dwindling minority of Members of Congress, and it has failed miserably. The Castros are still in power, and Cuba is still a country where political dissent is not tolerated. No one who knows Cuba expected the resumption of diplomatic relations to quickly result in an end to repression or free elections. But I am confident than in a lot less than fifty years, the Cuban people will have a lot more freedom than they have had for the past fifty years. Consider for a moment what it would mean if we did what these Senators advocate. Not only would we have no ambassador in Cuba, to be consistent we would have no ambassador in China, Vietnam, Russia, South Sudan, Egypt, Ethiopia, or in any number of other countries where human rights are routinely violated, where political opponents, journalists and human rights defenders are imprisoned and tortured, where there is no such thing as a fair trial, where civil society organizations are threatened and harassed, and where dissent is severely punished. Is that what the Senators want, or are they just concerned about human rights in Cuba? Their argument is as illogical as it is inconsistent. The purpose of an ambassador is to represent the interests of the United States government and the American people. Appointing a U.S. ambassador is not a reward to a foreign government, any more than their ambassadors are a reward to our government. Do the Senators think that our ambassador in Russia is a reward to President Putin, or that having an ambassador in Moscow somehow conveys that we agree with President Putin's corrupt, repressive policies? Does anyone think that Russia's ambassador is somehow a reward to the Obama administration? Or that our ambassador in Vietnam legitimizes the repressive policies of that government? Does anyone think that the Cuban government regards its ambassador here as a reward to us? Let's be sensible. The United States has interests in every country, even if it is just to stand up for the rights of Americans who travel, study, or work overseas. But there are many other reasons, like promoting trade and investment, protecting national security and public health, and supporting educational and cultural exchange. We could do as these Senators urge and downgrade our diplomatic presence, and withdraw our ambassadors from every country where there is a repressive government. That, of course, would mean that our lower ranking diplomats would be relegated to meeting with foreign officials of lesser rank than ambassador. And, of course, those governments, like Cuba, would still have their ambassadors in Washington, with access to officials of comparable rank in our government. Would that help us advocate for U.S. interests, for U.S. values, for the American people? We either believe in diplomacy or we don't. We either empower our diplomats, or we don't. The Cubans, after a year of difficult negotiations, agreed to reopen embassies. Now, with their ambassador here conducting business, we are somehow better off without an ambassador there? Of course not. I understand that this is an emotional issue for some Cuban-American families. But after 55 years, Cuban-Americans overwhelmingly support the new policy of engagement. They want the U.S. to have an ambassador in Havana. There is a time for family politics and there is time for what is in the interest of the nation as a whole. Ambassadors serve the national interest, and that is what Jeff DeLauentis would do, and he would do so as a career diplomat with years of experience. Finally, Mr. President, I want to quote from Alan Gross, who as we all know, spent five long years in a Cuban prison. This is what Mr. Gross said about Mr. DeLaurentis' nomination: I advocate for the appointment of a U.S. Ambassador to Cuba and I have a very high regard for Ambassador Jeff DeLaurentis. Had there been diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Cuba in December 2008, a U.S. Ambassador could have prevented the loss of five years of my life. Any one in Congress who opposes this nomination goes against the best interests of the United States. We should listen to Alan Gross. He suffered in Cuba, as do thousands of Americans imprisoned overseas. They depend on our ambassadors to assist and advocate for them, just as we would if it were a member of our families. I urge these Senators to put what is in the interests of the American people over their personal interests, and to not obstruct the confirmation of Jeff DeLaurentis, a superbly qualified nominee, from becoming Ambassador to Cuba. # # # # # 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-continues-push-rein-skyrocketing-prescription-drug-prices,Welch Continues Push to Rein in Skyrocketing Prescription Drug Prices,2016-09-27,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONRep. Peter Welch (D-VT) today introduced bipartisan legislation with Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA) that would address a loophole in the Medicare 340B Drug Pricing Program that is contributing to the rising cost of health care for consumers and threatening access to lifesaving medications. The introduction of this legislation is the latest in Welch's efforts to fix the broken prescription drug market that has led to unrestrained price increases for consumers and providers. The full text of the Closing Loopholes for Orphan Drugs Act can be found HERE. Drug companies have been taking advantage of the orphan drug' loophole since 2014 at the expense of consumers and rural hospitals and healthcare providers, Rep. Welch said. Vermont hospitals rely on the 340B program to ensure they are able to continue to serve those with health care needs. These hospitals and those they serve cannot afford to have this critical program circumvented due to yet another market failure that allows big drug corporations to cash in at their expense. Congressman Welch and I have clarified the scope and intent of the designation for which drugs are excluded from the 340B Program pricing, which will enable hospitals and rural health centers to provide the best possible care options for our country's most vulnerable patients, Rep. Griffith said. This clarification will close the orphan drug loophole, currently allowing drug companies to charge healthcare facilities in Southwest Virginia and other rural and underprivileged areas a higher price than intended by the program as designed by Congress. The 340B Drug Pricing Program requires drug manufacturers to provide outpatient drugs to eligible health care organizations at significantly reduced prices. This includes Federally Qualified Health Centers, Critical Access Hospitals, Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program grantees, and certain types of hospitals and specialized clinics with a high proportion of Medicare and Medicaid patients. Vermont has 14 number of hospitals that participate in the 340B program. Current law excludes so called orphan drugs, which are designated by the Department of Health and Human Services and treat rare diseases, from this program. In 2013, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) implemented rulemaking, which limited this exclusion only to instances of these drugs being used for their orphan indication. However, in 2014, the pharmaceutical industry sued. Ultimately, a federal district court struck down the finalized rule, claiming that HRSA lacked the authority to issue rulemaking in this matter. ""The 340b program contains or reduces drug costs to the hospital and supports our ability to provide care and resources to underinsured and uninsured patients across the state. Many so-called orphan drugs are very expensive. The proposed legislation would open up access to these orphan drugs under the 340b program in many situations, and would result in significant savings to our institution,"" said Judy Tartaglia, CEO Central Vermont Medical Center. Welch's legislation would restore the original intent of Congress and close this loophole by limiting the orphan drug' exclusion to only apply in instances where the drug is used for the rare condition or disease for which it was designated. This will ensure the orphan drug' designation isn't exploited to prevent the offering of the 340B discount for non-orphan uses of the same drug. As co-chair of the House Democratic Caucus Prescription Drug Task Force and the co-chair and co-founder of the House Affordable Medicine Caucus, Welch has repeatedly taken on the pharmaceutical industry. He has introduced the Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act, which would allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate drug prices directly with pharmaceutical corporations. Earlier this year Welch led the fight against Pfizer skirting American tax obligations while jacking up prices for American consumers. In January, Rep. Welch testified before the Vermont Senate Health and Welfare and the House Human Services and Health Care committees on drug pricing transparency. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/in-wake-of-massive-data-breach-affecting-millions-of-customers-leahy-leads-senators-in-pressing-yahoo-for-answers,"In Wake Of Massive Data Breach Affecting Millions Of Customers, Leahy Leads Senators In Pressing Yahoo! For Answers",2016-09-27,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.27.16 In Wake Of Massive Data Breach Affecting Millions Of Customers, Leahy Leads Senators In Pressing Yahoo! For Answers Following Massive Data Breach Affecting Millions Of Customers, Leahy Leads Senators In Pressing Yahoo! For Answers WASHINGTON (Tuesday, September 27, 2016) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the author of a comprehensive data security and breach notification bill that requires companies to take reasonable steps to secure their customers' sensitive data and notify customers in the event of a hack, called on the leader of Yahoo! to disclose how a massive hack at their company went unnoticed for two years. In a letter to Yahoo! CEO Marissa Mayer, Leahy and leading Democratic Senators asked the company to provide a timeline of the hack, which compromised at least 500 million accounts, and when law enforcement and users were notified. The lawmakers are also seeking information about how widespread the hack is, and what Yahoo! is doing to prevent such a hack in the future. The stolen data included usernames, passwords, email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and security questions and answers. This is highly sensitive, personal information that hackers can use not only to access Yahoo customer accounts, but also potentially to gain access to any other account or service that users access with similar login or personal information, including bank information and social media profiles, the letter states. The letter continues: We are even more disturbed that user information was first compromised in 2014, yet the company only announced the breach last week. That means millions of Americans' data may have been compromised for two years. This is unacceptable. This breach is the latest in a series of data breaches that have impacted the privacy of millions of American consumers in recent years, but it is by far the largest. Consumers put their trust in companies when they share personal and sensitive information with them, and they expect all possible steps be taken to protect that information. Leahy introduced the Consumer Privacy Protection Act last year to establish a comprehensive approach to data security by requiring companies to take preventative steps to defend against cyber attacks and prevent data breaches, and to quickly notify customers in the event a data breach occurs. The measure addresses the kinds of security breaches that have affected retail stores in recent years, as well as breaches of personal email, online accounts, and cloud computing that have sent Americans' personal information, photos and even location out into public view. Cosponsors of Leahy's consumer privacy legislation also joined him Tuesday in the letter to Yahoo!. Democratic Senators joining the letter include: Al Franken (Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.), Ron Wyden (Ore.), and Edward J. Markey (Mass.). A copy of the September 27 letter to CEO Marissa Mayer is below and online. # # # # # September 27, 2016 Ms. Marissa Mayer Chief Executive Officer Yahoo Inc. 701 First Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Dear Ms. Mayer: We write following your company's troubling announcement that account information for more than 500 million Yahoo users was stolen by hackers, compromising users' personal information across the Yahoo platform and on its sister sites, including Yahoo Mail, Flickr, Yahoo Finance, and Yahoo Fantasy Sports. The stolen data included usernames, passwords, email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, and security questions and answers. This is highly sensitive, personal information that hackers can use not only to access Yahoo customer accounts, but also potentially to gain access to any other account or service that users access with similar login or personal information, including bank information and social media profiles. We are even more disturbed that user information was first compromised in 2014, yet the company only announced the breach last week. That means millions of Americans' data may have been compromised for two years. This is unacceptable. This breach is the latest in a series of data breaches that have impacted the privacy of millions of American consumers in recent years, but it is by far the largest. Consumers put their trust in companies when they share personal and sensitive information with them, and they expect all possible steps be taken to protect that information. In light of these troubling revelations, please answer the following questions to help Congress and the public better understand what went wrong and how Yahoo intends to safeguard data and protect its users, both now and in the future. We also request that Yahoo provide a briefing to our staff on the company's investigation into the breach, its interaction with appropriate law enforcement and national security authorities, and how it intends to protect affected users. When and how did Yahoo first learn that its users' information may have been compromised? Please provide a timeline detailing the nature of the breach, when and how it was discovered, when Yahoo notified law enforcement or other government authorities about the breach, and when Yahoo notified its customers. Press reports indicate the breach first occurred in 2014, but was not discovered until August of this year. If this is accurate, how could such a large intrusion of Yahoo's systems have gone undetected? What Yahoo accounts, services, or sister sites have been affected? How many total users are affected? How were these users notified? What protection is Yahoo providing the 500 million Yahoo customers whose identities and personal information are now compromised? What steps can consumers take to best protect the information that may have been compromised in the Yahoo breach? What is Yahoo doing to prevent another breach in the future? Has Yahoo changed its security protocols, and in what manner? Did anyone in the U.S. government warn Yahoo of a possible hacking attempt by state-sponsored hackers or other bad actors? When was this warning issued? Thank you for your prompt attention to this critical matter. Sincerely, ___________________________ PATRICK LEAHY United States Senator ___________________________ AL FRANKEN United States Senator ___________________________ ELIZABETH WARREN United States Senator ___________________________ RICHARD BLUMENTHAL United States Senator ___________________________ RON WYDEN United States Senator ___________________________ EDWARD J. MARKEY 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/senator-patrick-leahy-and-senator-benjamin-cardin-on-recent-developments-in-the-philippines-and-indonesia,Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator Benjamin Cardin On Recent Developments in the Philippines and Indonesia,2016-09-27,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.27.16 Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator Benjamin Cardin On Recent Developments in the Philippines and Indonesia Colloquy Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator Benjamin Cardin On Recent Developments in the Philippines and Indonesia Congressional Record September 26 2016 MR. LEAHY: Mr. President, according to recent reports, more than 3,000 people have been killed in the Philippines in the twelve weeks since President Duterte announced his campaign to wipe out illicit drug use. More than 1,000 of those deaths were at the hands of the Philippine National Police during counternarcotic operations, compared to 68 such killings this year in the months prior to President Duterte taking office, half of which happened in the period between his election and inauguration. The rest were killed apart from police operations, incited by President Duterte's violent rhetoric, which has been well documented. The vast majority of these individuals were low-level drug users, victims of a government seeking to make up for years of ineffective, corrupt law enforcement and rampant crime by terrorizing the population into submission. As the ranking member or chairman for more than 25 years of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that funds U.S. foreign assistance programs, I have been frustrated that we often fail to learn obvious lessons when it comes to foreign assistance investments. One example is that economic opportunity and security alone cannot assure stability. Stability requires legitimate governance and the protection of human rights. This is not just an aspiration; it is a practical, strategic imperative. As a former prosecutor and now ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, I know the difference between those who need help versus those who deserve to be punished. I also know, as do most people, that when governments condone extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances, and prey on vulnerable populations, they are sowing the seeds of instability, not preventing it. For roughly 700,000 Filipino drug users, the prospect of being summarily executed on the street has led them to turn themselves into the authorities. That would seem to be a good thing. But given the shortage of drug treatment centers, these individuals are either told to pledge that they will remain drug free and sent home to recover on their own, or they are imprisoned in overcrowded, inhumane conditions. By failing to address the needs of those who have risked coming forward, President Duterte is missing an opportunity to combat the drug trade in one of the most sustainable ways possible: by helping hundreds of thousands of people get the help they want to beat their addiction. No amount of killing will result in reforms that improve the judiciary, end corruption and impunity in law enforcement, or rehabilitate those caught in the vicious cycle of addiction. To the contrary, if President Duterte is serious about improving conditions in the Philippines, he should be focusing on improving services for Filipinos, not casting them aside; holding law enforcement accountable, not giving them a blanket license to kill suspects; and strengthening the judiciary, not undercutting it. In a troubling sign that these concerns are falling on deaf ears, President Duterte's most vocal opponent of his anti-drug policies, who President Duterte has publicly accused of being involved in drug trafficking and attempting to smear him, was recently removed from her position as the head of the Senate human rights panel investigating the killings. She was replaced by a Senator who supports giving the police the authority to arrest anyone without a warrant. I know that as Ranking Member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Cardin also has concerns with the situation in the Philippines, and I yield to him for any remarks he may wish to make. Mr. CARDIN: I thank my friend from Vermont for his raising this important issue, and appreciate the opportunity to join him today. The relationship between the United States and the Philippines is tremendously important for both our nations and both of our people. Yet I fear that today, because of the way in which the new government of President Duterte is approaching this issue, we may find ourselves at something of a crossroads. If the current trends continue we can expect that over 6,000 people will be dead as a result of extra-judicial killings in the Philippines by the end of this year. 6,000 people. This is not a situation in which there is occasional error or the over-zealous application of force. This is systematic, wide-spread, brutal, and beyond the bounds for a constitutional democracy. And as my colleague from Vermont pointed out, these dead are not just drug dealers although that would be troubling enough given the lack of due process but also include addicts, who need help, as well as innocent by-standers. I understand President Duterte's desire to stop the devastation caused by illegal narcotics. I believe that most of my colleagues do. We too have seen what drug trafficking and addiction can do in our communities. We also have a long history of both successful and unsuccessful efforts to combat narcotics but we have learned that there is a right way to approach this issue with law enforcement, due process and rule of law, with treatment and a wrong way. President Duterte, in advocating and endorsing what amounts to mass murder, has chosen the wrong way. Senator Leahy is absolutely right when he said that a lack of respect for rule of law and democratic governance breeds instability, distrust and sometimes violence. Filipino police have attributed most of the killings to suspects who ""resisted arrest and shot at police officers."" Yet it's been impossible to assess police claims that the killings were all lawful, since President Duterte has rejected calls to investigate these deaths. He has instead declared the killings as proof of the ""success"" of his anti-drug campaign and, along with other more forceful and colorful statements which appear to endorse vigilante killings, urged police to seize the momentum. Human rights groups, the United Nations, the U.S. government, and a Philippine Senate panel have expressed concerns about the killings, which allegedly have been carried out without legal proceedings as provided for under Philippine law and international obligations. As the distinguished gentleman from Vermont knows, I have been a strong supporter of Philippines law enforcement institutions, including recently introducing legislation which would increase law enforcement cooperation between our two countries. But these recent reports of thousands of extra-judicial killings as well as detentions and a lack of respect for international human rights commitments are profoundly troubling. They undermine our mutual goals of upholding liberal democratic values in the region and to strengthening international law. Indeed, as the Senator from Vermont knows, just this past week President Duterte said that he intends to reconstitute the constabulary, the most abusive para-police under the Marcos regime. For any historian of human rights abuses in the Philippines, this is a deeply troubling development. I would ask my friend and colleague if he shares my concerns with the direction that the Philippines appears to be going, and the implications for the US-Filipino relationship? Mr. LEAHY: Yes, like the Senator from Maryland I am deeply concerned with these events, and I believe that if the extra-judicial killings and state-sanctioned violence continue, and there is no accountability for the abuses that have been committed, there will need to be an appropriate response by the U.S. government. Mr. CARDIN: Indeed, as we celebrate the 70th anniversary of diplomatic relations between our two countries we should underscore that our alliance is needed now more than ever. With a more assertive China in the maritime domain, a changing global economic landscape, and an increase of transnational challenges confronting the region the U.S.-Philippines alliance is critical to both our nations. But this alliance is about more than just interests, narrowly construed. The relationship between our nations is more than an alliance. It is a genuine friendship. This is a deep relationship built on shared values, and a deep appreciation, both here and in the Philippines, of the importance of democracy, of rule of law, of due process, of the proper application of justice, and of constitutional order. It is because these extra-judicial killings shake the very foundation of that shared vision of shared values that I find these developments so deeply troubling. So I would also ask my colleague his opinion, as the author of the Leahy Law, whether he thinks that the application of ordinary US policy and law, and the Leahy Law in particular, is sufficient to meet the challenges that we see in the Philippines? Given the nature of these extra-judicial killings, how would unit-level vetting apply? And if the United States is unable to use the normal tools available, what are the other options that we might need to consider? Mr. LEAHY: I share the Senator's views about the importance of the U.S.-Philippines alliance, and his concerns with the implications of President Duterte's anti-drug policies for that alliance. I wrote the Leahy Law, which applies worldwide, to ensure that the U.S. is not complicit in human rights violations committed by forces that might receive U.S. assistance, and to encourage foreign governments to hold accountable perpetrators of such abuses. While there are ways we can find out which units were involved in these abuses, if President Duterte's government is unwilling to work with us, including by refusing to investigate allegations of abuses, then we are faced with a broader issue that cannot be remedied simply by withholding assistance from specific units or individuals. The Leahy Law should be used to encourage reform and accountability, but to address these systemic challenges it may be necessary to consider further conditions on assistance to the Duterte government to ensure that U.S. taxpayer funds are property spent and until that government demonstrates a commitment to the rule of law. I have asked the State Department to discuss this with us to help inform our deliberations on current assistance for the Philippines and on decisions we will make for appropriations in fiscal year 2017. Mr. CARDIN: I thank my colleague for his thoughtful response. I too am greatly concerned that unless we are able to see a more constructive approach on these issues from the government of President Duterte an approach that is just as serious about combatting the scourge of narcotics, but approaches the issue in a legal framework that we may need to consider taking these steps. This is an important relationship. I have many Filipino-American citizens in Maryland, and I care deeply about strengthening the US-Philippines Alliance, especially given the challenges that the regional order faces from a rising China, but this issue is critical as well. Mr. LEAHY: I thank my friend from Maryland for his leadership on the Foreign Relations Committee and for his interest in this issue. I look forward to working with him to respond to the challenges President Duterte's policies pose to our relations with his government, as we seek to continue our strategic cooperation with the Philippines. Mr. President, on a separate but related matter, we are seeing another missed opportunity to reform the criminal justice system in Indonesia. President Joko Widodo took office in 2014 amid the hopes of many that he would improve on the country's history of human rights abuses. Instead, he reinstated the death penalty for drug trafficking, and the head of his government's anti-narcotics agency recently expressed his approval of President Duterte's approach to combating illicit drugs. To the contrary, it is a serious mistake, and I urge President Joko to reverse course and focus on improving his police force and judicial system. Any government that uses capital punishment risks taking innocent life. But it is a particularly egregious practice in a country like Indonesia, where executions are peddled as effective justice despite a weak judicial system that is vulnerable to abuse, and to the detriment of its reform. Nor is torturing and burying those suspected of involvement in the drug trade effective law enforcement. It is an abuse of power, it prevents remedies to deeply flawed practices within the security forces, and it belies the legitimacy of the government. We have a complex relationship with both Indonesia and the Philippines due to our own history in the region. However, we also share many interests. I have supported assistance for both countries, but I have also supported conditions on U.S. assistance related to progress on human rights, and reform of the judiciary, police, and armed forces. Unfortunately, I fear that the progress that has been made is now at risk of being eroded. Often we are presented with the false choice of supporting human rights or national security. I see no such dichotomy here. Consider the impact of our complicity in these governments' actions, both on our own legacy and on the efforts we are undertaking to help improve security and stability in the region. The Philippines and Indonesia cannot combat extremism or profess to govern legitimately by murdering innocent and nonviolent people, by creating a culture of lawlessness and impunity. The United States is far from perfect. We have not done as well as we should in addressing the illicit drug problem in our own country. Many Americans need and want treatment, and cannot get it. But we should not support those who make a practice of using excessive force or the death penalty rather than protecting the rights of due process and fair trials. I ask that two articles on this subject, both published in The New York Times last month, be printed in the Record. # # # # # The New York Times Indonesia's Push to Execute Drug Convicts Underlines Flaws in Justice System By JOE COCHRANE AUG. 13, 2016 JAKARTA, Indonesia Sixteen years ago, Zulfiqar Ali left his native Pakistan for Indonesia in search of a new life. Last month, that life was on the verge of ending in front of a firing squad. Mr. Ali has been on Indonesia's death row since 2005, after he was convicted of heroin trafficking. A government-ordered inquiry later found that he was probably innocent. Still, in July, he was one of 14 convicts, most of them foreigners, who were taken to the prison island of Nusakambangan off Java's southern coast to be put to death. Minutes before they were to be executed, on July 29, Mr. Ali and nine other convicts were given a reprieve, for reasons the government has yet to explain. But four were shot dead as scheduled, including a Nigerian who supporters say was framed. And Mr. Ali, like the rest who were spared, remains condemned. More than a year after Indonesia drew international censure by putting to death 12 foreigners convicted of drug crimes, the country has resumed a war on narcotics by way of executions and has again put a spotlight on its profoundly flawed justice system. Critics in Indonesia and abroad say those flaws go so deep that the country should not employ the death penalty at all. Researchers have found that many condemned convicts were tortured by the police into confessing, did not receive access to lawyers or were otherwise denied fair trials. The resumption of executions means that the government has ignored that there is something seriously wrong with our judiciary and law enforcers, said Robertus Robet, a lecturer and researcher at the State University of Jakarta's sociology department. He characterized the government as trigger-happy. When you execute someone, you execute the possibility of finding out the truth, he said. Amnesty International has denounced the manifestly flawed administration of justice in Indonesia that resulted in flagrant human rights violations. Similar concerns have been raised by the United Nations and the European Union, which sent a delegation to try to persuade Indonesia to spare inmates who were condemned to die last year. Indonesia has long had the death penalty, but its use was sporadic in the years before President Joko Widodo took office in October 2014. Declaring drug abuse a national emergency, Mr. Joko denied clemency appeals from 64 death row inmates who had been convicted of drug crimes, most of them foreigners, and the government set a goal of executing all of them by the end of 2015. That did not happen, but five drug convicts were put to death in January of that year, and eight more in April. (An Indonesian was also executed for murder in January.) Among the convicts executed in April, seven of whom were foreigners, were Andrew Chan, 31, and Myuran Sukumaran, 34, Australians who were arrested in 2005 trying to smuggle heroin out of Bali, the resort island. The men admitted their guilt, but their lawyers said the judge in the case was corrupt, having offered a lesser sentence in exchange for a bribe. Indonesia rejected appeals by the Australian government to spare them, and Australia withdrew its ambassador in protest. Also executed in April was Rodrigo Gularte, 42, a Brazilian convicted of drug smuggling who had repeatedly been given a diagnosis of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Indonesian law forbids the execution of mentally ill convicts. Dave McRae, a senior research fellow at the Asia Institute at the University of Melbourne in Australia who has researched the use of capital punishment in Indonesia, said that the deficiencies in the justice system here could be found in most countries that still used the death penalty. A lot of the objections to Indonesia's use of the death penalty inconsistent and arbitrary sentencing and application of the death penalty, allegations of corruption and wrongful convictions, questions over access to lawyers and interpreters and adequacy of representation are questions that are raised all over the world, he said. Such concerns have been raised about the cases against some of the convicts spared last month and some who were executed, including the Nigerian, Humphrey Jefferson Ejike Eleweke. Mr. Eleweke was arrested in 2003 after the police found heroin at a restaurant he ran in Jakarta, the capital; he said an employee had planted it. His lawyers say that the police beat him until he confessed. They also say that by law, an 11th-hour appeal for clemency issued to Mr. Joko should have automatically halted his execution. Last week, legal activists filed a complaint with a judicial watchdog against Indonesia's attorney general, saying that Mr. Eleweke's execution and those of two others should have been stopped because of those appeals, according to local news reports. We cannot have the death penalty here because of the judicial system it's problematic, it's dysfunctional, said Ricky Gunawan, director of the Community Legal Aid Institute, a nongovernmental organization that represented Mr. Eleweke. Another allegation of corruption emerged just before the executions last month, when one of the men put to death, an Indonesian named Freddy Budiman, was quoted as saying that he had paid senior law enforcement officials more than $40 million to let his drug smuggling operation continue before he was arrested. That accusation was included in a report released by a rights activist, Haris Azhar, who had interviewed Mr. Budiman in prison; shortly thereafter, the police, the military and Indonesia's anti-narcotics board, all of which were implicated in the report, filed a criminal defamation complaint against Mr. Azhar. On Thursday, Mr. Joko ordered those agencies to investigate the corruption allegations. The case of Mr. Ali, the Pakistani who was spared execution, has also raised concerns. Mr. Ali, who immigrated to Indonesia in 2000, was accused of drug dealing in 2004 by a friend, Gurdip Singh, who had been caught with heroin; Mr. Singh later said the police had pressured him and offered a reduced sentence to name accomplices. Mr. Ali's lawyers say their client was arrested without a warrant at his home, where no drugs were found, and signed a confession after being beaten so badly in custody that he needed two operations. Though Mr. Ali retracted his confession and Mr. Singh withdrew his accusation, both men were sentenced to death in 2005. But the severity of Mr. Ali's beating drew attention to the case, and the government ordered an unusual inquiry, which concluded that he was likely to be innocent. The government never acted on those findings, and Mr. Ali and Mr. Singh were among those who nearly faced a firing squad. He was never involved in drugs, Mr. Ali's wife, Siti Rohani, who lives in West Java Province with their three children, said in an interview. A spokesman for Mr. Joko, Johan Budi, denied that the judicial system was dysfunctional, saying the executions had followed legal procedures. Mr. Ali, along with Mr. Singh and several of the other convicts who were given reprieves, is still in prison on Nusakambangan Island, where Indonesia conducts executions. Ms. Siti said she and her husband's family in Pakistan were in a torturous state of limbo. We're just confused because there is no certainty about my husband's fate, she said. M. Rum, a spokesman for the attorney general's office, declined to explain why Mr. Ali and the other convicts had been given reprieves, saying only that it was for judicial and nonjudicial reasons. But he said the executions would eventually be carried out. A version of this article appears in print on August 14, 2016, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Indonesia Deploys Firing Squads to Fight Drugs. # # # # # The New York Times Body Count Rises as Philippine President Wages War on Drugs By JASON GUTIERREZ AUG. 2, 2016 MANILA Since Rodrigo Duterte became president of the Philippines just over a month ago, promising to get tough on crime by having the police and the military kill drug suspects, 420 people have been killed in the campaign, according to tallies of police reports by the local news media. Most were killed in confrontations with the police, while 154 were killed by unidentified vigilantes. This has prompted 114,833 people to turn themselves in, as either drug addicts or dealers, since Mr. Duterte took office, according to national police logs. Addressing Congress last week in his first State of the Nation address, Mr. Duterte reiterated his take-no-prisoners approach, ordering the police to triple their efforts against crime. We will not stop until the last drug lord, the last financier and the last pusher have surrendered or been put behind bars or below the ground, if they so wish, he said. But human rights groups, Roman Catholic activists and the families of many of those killed during the crackdown say that the vast majority were poor Filipinos, many of whom had nothing to do with the drug trade. They were not accorded an accusation and a trial, but were simply shot down in the streets, the critics say. These are not the wealthy and powerful drug lords who actually have meaningful control over supply of drugs on the streets in the Philippines, said Phelim Kine, a deputy director of Human Rights Watch in Asia. Critics of the president's campaign have rallied around the case of Michael Siaron, a 29-year-old rickshaw driver in Manila, who was shot one night by unidentified gunmen as he pedaled his vehicle in search of a passenger. When his wife rushed to the scene, a photographer took a picture of her cradling his body in the street, and the photograph quickly gained wide attention. Scribbled in block letters on a cardboard sign left near his body was the word pusher. His family members insist that he was not involved in the drug trade, though they said he sometimes used meth. Indirectly acknowledging criticism that his policies trample over the standard judicial process, Mr. Duterte said that human rights cannot be used as a shield to destroy the country. He has called for drug users and sellers to turn themselves in or risk being hunted down, a threat backed up by the bodies piling up near daily on the streets of Philippine cities. The approach appears to be driving down crime: The police say that they have arrested more than 2,700 people on charges related to using or selling illegal drugs, and that crime nationwide has fallen 13 percent since the election, to 46,600 reported crimes in June, from 52,950 in May. Mr. Duterte's crackdown has been hugely popular. Filipinos, pummeled by years of violent crime and corrupt, ineffective law enforcement, handed him an overwhelming victory in the May presidential election, and have largely embraced his approach. A national opinion poll conducted after his election and just before he took office found that 84 percent of Filipinos had much trust in him. The model for Mr. Duterte's policies is Davao City, where he was mayor for most of the past 20 years. Draconian laws there, including a strict curfew and a smoking ban as well as a zero-tolerance approach to drug users and sellers, have been credited with turning the city into an oasis of safety in a region plagued by violence. The dark side of that approach was that more than 1,000 people were killed by government-sanctioned death squads during his administration, according to several independent investigations. Mr. Duterte has denied having direct knowledge of death squads, but he has long called for addressing crime by killing suspects, whom he calls criminals and has referred to as a legitimate target of assassination. He has repeatedly said that those hooked on meth, the most popular drug here, were beyond saving or rehabilitation. He ran for president largely on the pledge of applying the same policies nationwide, promising to kill 100,000 criminals in his first six months in office. While the number may have been typical Duterte bravado, the threat of mass killing appears to have been real. On Tuesday, the International Drug Policy Consortium, a network of nongovernmental organizations, issued a letter urging the United Nations drug control agencies to demand an end to the atrocities currently taking place in the Philippines and to state unequivocally that extrajudicial killings do not constitute acceptable drug control measures. Ramon Casiple, a political analyst at the Institute for Political and Electoral Reform, said that he shared those concerns but that it was too early to decide whether Mr. Duterte's approach is effective. Let's give him his 100 days, Mr. Casiple said. Mr. Duterte has recently raised his sights beyond street-level users and dealers, accusing five police generals of protecting drug lords, though he presented no specific evidence. He also publicly accused a mayor, the mayor's son and a prominent businessman of drug trafficking, threatening their lives if they did not surrender. But the people killed on the street tend to be more like Mr. Siaron, the rickshaw driver. Mr. Siaron lived with his wife in a shack above a garbage-strewn creek. Having never finished high school, he survived on odd jobs like house painting and working in fast-food restaurants. Lately he had been pedaling a rickshaw, earning about $2 a day ferrying passengers through the warren of alleyways in a run-down part of metropolitan Manila. On the night he died, he had stopped by his father's fruit stand to ask for an apple. Then he told his father he would seek one more fare before heading home. As he rode off, gunmen on motorcycles sped by, pumping several bullets into him. What happened next turned him into a national symbol of the human toll of Mr. Duterte's war. When she heard he had been shot, Mr. Siaron's wife, Jennilyn Olayres, ran into the street, burst through police lines and collapsed next to him on the asphalt. The photographer snapped the picture: a distraught woman cradling her lifeless husband under a streetlight, a Piet of the Manila slums. The police have not commented publicly about the case and have not accused Mr. Siaron of selling drugs. My husband was a simple man, Ms. Olayres said at his wake several days later. He may have used drugs, but he was not violent and never bothered anyone. His only concern was looking for passengers so we can eat three meals a day. During his speech to Congress, Mr. Duterte dismissed the photo, which had appeared on the front page of The Philippine Daily Inquirer the previous day under the banner headline Thou shall not kill. There you are sprawled on the ground, and you are portrayed in a broadsheet like Mother Mary cradling the dead cadaver of Jesus Christ, he said. That's just drama. But if the antidrug campaign has targeted people on the margins of society, Mr. Siaron is an apt symbol. We're small people, insignificant, Ms. Olayres said through sobs as she stood next to her husband's coffin. We may be invisible to you, but we are real. Please stop the killings. A version of this article appears in print on August 3, 2016, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Body Count Is Rising as Philippines Wages War on Drugs. 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-on-the-supreme-court-nomination-of-chief-judge-merrick-garland-9-27-2016,Statement On the Supreme Court Nomination of Chief Judge Merrick Garland,2016-09-27,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.27.16 Statement On the Supreme Court Nomination of Chief Judge Merrick Garland Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Supreme Court Nomination of Chief Judge Merrick Garland September 27, 2016 Eleven years ago this week, following the death of Chief Justice Rehnquist, the Senate confirmed Chief Justice John Roberts to the Supreme Court. After his Judiciary Committee hearing in September, he was given full and fair consideration by the Senate and confirmed about two weeks later on September 29. This ensured that the Supreme Court was not missing a justice when it began its term on the first Monday in October. The Senate acted responsibly eleven years ago when a Republican was in the White House. But not today. Under Republican leadership, the Senate is deliberately leaving the Supreme Court short-handed. Chief Judge Merrick Garland deserves the same consideration that Chief Justice Roberts received eleven years ago. Like Chief Justice Roberts, Chief Judge Garland is eminently qualified. Like Chief Justice Roberts, he hails from the Midwest, and is a D.C. Circuit Court judge who has earned the respect and admiration of those who have worked with him. Yet unlike Chief Justice Roberts, who was confirmed in about two months, Chief Judge Garland has been pending before the Senate for more than six months. That is longer than any Supreme Court nominee in history. No hearing. No vote. No consideration at all by the Senate. Our independent judicial branch is fundamental to our constitutional system of government. The Senate's duty to consider judicial nominations under the Constitution is not a political game. This Republican obstruction has consequences for all Americans. Because Senate Republicans refuse to do their jobs, the Supreme Court has been repeatedly unable to uphold its essential constitutional role as the final arbiter of the law. The uncertainty in the law has been harmful to businesses, law enforcement, and to families and children across the country. This term, the Supreme Court will consider cases that will impact our voting rights, our religious rights, our access to fair housing, and even the ATM fees we pay. The Court may also decide to hear important cases on the rights of transgender students to be treated equally, environmental protection and climate change, women's reproductive health, and money in politics. The Supreme Court needs to be at full strength to provide the American people certainty and clarity of our rights under the Constitution. The same Republicans who expedited consideration of Chief Justice Roberts have since February used the excuse of the election year to justify their prolonged obstruction. Yet, there is no election year exception in the Constitution for the President's duty to nominate Supreme Court justices. And there is no election year exception in the Constitution to excuse Senators from providing advice and consent on those nominations. And there is no election year exception in the Constitution for the Supreme Court's role as final arbiter of the law. Our history proves that this is the case: the Senate has confirmed Supreme Court nominees in election years more than a dozen times. Most recently, Justice Kennedy was confirmed by a Democratic-led Senate during President Reagan's final year in office, a presidential election year. It took a Democratic Senate just 65 days to confirm Justice Kennedy. President Obama's nominee, Chief Judge Garland, has been pending in the Senate with no action for 195 days. The Judiciary Committee plays an important role in the examination of Supreme Court nominees, reviewing the nominee's records and holding public hearings so that the American people can hear from that individual. Ever since the Judiciary Committee started holding public confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominees more than a century ago, the Senate has never denied a Supreme Court nominee a hearing and a vote. The current Republican leadership has broken with this century of practice to make its own shameful history. Even when a majority of the Committee has not supported a Supreme Court nominee, the Committee has still sent the nomination to the floor so that all 100 Senators can fulfill their constitutional role of providing advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees. When I became Chairman of the Judiciary Committee in 2001 during the Bush administration, I and Senator Hatch who was then the Ranking Member memorialized in a letter this agreement regarding President Bush's Supreme Court nominees. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this letter be included in the Record. This is an important point. Senators are free to make their own decision to vote against a Supreme Court nominee, but that does not justify the complete refusal to provide any process whatsoever. I have heard the other side offer the example of some Republican Senators pledging to vote no on Justice Fortas' nomination to replace Chief Justice Warren in an election year as justification for their obstruction today. That example does little to prove their point. In 1968, there was no current vacancy on the Court, as Chief Justice Warren's resignation was conditional upon the confirmation of his successor. That meant that there was never any fear that the Supreme Court would be operating at less than full strength. Just as importantly, public hearings went forward and the full Senate was able to consider the nomination. Everett Dirksen, the Republican Leader who also served as the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee at the time, did not sign on to that pledge and proceeded to work with the Chair of the Committee to move forward with hearings. We worked across the aisle to ensure that the Supreme Court would be fully functioning with Chief Justice Roberts's nomination 11 years ago. Thirty years ago the Senate voted to confirm both Justice Scalia and Chief Justice Rehnquist. More than a dozen Supreme Court justices have been confirmed in the month of September. That is not surprising given that the Supreme Court begins its terms on the first Monday in October. Chief Judge Garland should have been confirmed by Memorial Day. We have had more than six months to examine his record, and it is not as if the Senate has been consumed with considering other nominees. The last time we confirmed a single judicial nominee was on July 6th. Republicans refuse to allow votes even on uncontroversial district court nominees that have been pending more than a year. Our independent Federal judiciary is suffering as a result of this unprecedented obstruction. It is long past time for the Senate to do its job. We must treat our co-equal branch of government with respect. There is no reason why the Senate should not do its job in an election year. There is much work left to be done and Senate Republicans are calling for yet another long recess. The resolution introduced today by the senior Senator from Connecticut would keep the Senate here to do its job for Chief Judge Garland's nomination. It should not require a resolution to keep us accountable to the oath we all swore to uphold the Constitution. The Senate Majority Leader must let us get to work for the American people. We should immediately consider Chief Judge Garland for the Supreme Court of the United States. Our highest court should not be diminished any further by Republican obstruction here in the Senate. # # # # # 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/the-presidents-intention-to-nominate-jeffrey-delaurentis-as-us-ambassador-to-cuba,The President's Intention To Nominate Jeffrey DeLaurentis As U.S. Ambassador To Cuba,2016-09-27,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.27.16 The President's Intention To Nominate Jeffrey DeLaurentis As U.S. Ambassador To Cuba Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt., Ranking Member, Senate State Department And Foreign Operations Subcommittee) To The President's Announcement Of His Intention To Name Jeffrey DeLaurentis As U.S. Ambassador To Cuba Tuesday, Sept. 27, 2016 I have known Jeff DeLaurentis since he became the U.S. Chief of Mission in Havana, and he is the obvious choice to be Ambassador. He is a career diplomat who is universally respected by his peers, and by Democrats and Republicans in Congress, for his intellect, his integrity, and his thoughtfulness. The decision to resume diplomatic relations with Cuba has been widely supported, and the number of Americans traveling to Cuba is increasing dramatically. We need an Ambassador who knows Cuba, who is respected by the Cuban Government, and who will stand up for U.S. interests and values. Jeff is that person. The Cuban people have their ambassador in Washington. The American people need their ambassador in Havana. # # # # # 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-senators-in-demanding-answers-from-dhs-on-use-of-private-prisons,Leahy Leads Senators In Demanding Answers From DHS On Use Of Private Prisons,2016-09-26,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.26.16 Leahy Leads Senators In Demanding Answers From DHS On Use Of Private Prisons Senator Leahy Leads Senators In Demanding Answers From DHS On Use Of Private Prisons WASHINGTON (MONDAY, Sept. 26, 2016) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), with other leading senators, pressed the Obama administration Monday on the use of private prisons and contract facilities by the Department of Homeland Security. The letter comes amid an internal review at DHS regarding its use of private prisons, and the senators urged DHS to ensure the review was meaningful and genuine. In their letter to DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson, the senators state that we strongly oppose the use of for-profit prison companies in immigration detention and raise alarm about the lack of transparency in detention contracts, which has too often led to poor conditions and exorbitant costs to the taxpayers. For far too long, the contracting process and the management of contract facilities housing immigrant detainees have been opaque. The lack of transparency has led to a lack of accountability. Unlike federally-run institutions, these facilities are not obligated to provide to DHS or Congress information about their cost, operational efficiency, or ability to provide adequate detention conditions. And the results are unacceptable, the senators wrote. The senators also expressed concern about the pivotal role the private prison industry has played recently in institutionalizing mass family detention and increasing detention of asylum seekers. In addition to Leahy, the letter is signed by Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii.). The letter comes less than a week after the director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Sarah Saldaa, told the House Judiciary Committee that ICE's prisons are almost completely contractor run and closing them would turn our system upside down. A subcommittee of DHS's Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) is expected to provide Secretary Johnson and Director Saldaa a report of its review by November 30, 2016, including a recommendation of whether the agency should end its use of private immigration detention. A copy of the September 26 letter to DHS Secretary Johnson is below and online. # # # # # September 26, 2016 The Honorable Jeh Johnson Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, D.C. 20528 Dear Secretary Johnson: In August, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced plans to curtail and ultimately end the Bureau of Prisons' use of private prisons. We applaud that effort and are encouraged that you have asked a subcommittee of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) to review the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) use of private immigration detention and to determine whether DHS should follow suit. We strongly oppose the use of for-profit prison companies in immigration detention, whether through direct contracting with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or through subcontracting involving a locality or the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) as the middleman. We are also concerned about the detention conditions in state and local facilities with which DHS contracts and expect the Department to improve oversight over those facilities as part of this review process. While we are encouraged by the HSAC review, we are concerned that testimony by a senior leader at the Department suggests that the review will be conducted with a limited expectation of reform. Specifically, ICE Director Sarah Saldaa testified last week before the House Judiciary Committee that ICE's prisons are almost completely contractor run and closing them would turn our system upside down. Her testimony, coming before HSAC has prepared its report, calls into question whether the HSAC review process will be a genuine, meaningful process, or whether the outcome is already predetermined. While ending private detention would fundamentally reshape the detention system, we believe that such a change is needed. Given the significant taxpayer dollars involved and the troubled history of contract facilities, we ask that you take the following steps while conducting your review: 1) halt all new and pending detention facility procurements, including RFIs, RFPs, solicitations, new contracts, long-term contract renewals, and expansions of existing contracts; 2) include in the review the Department's contracts where other government entities (such as local governments and USMS) have subcontracted to a private prison company; 3) include in the review the Department's contracts with publicly run facilities, such as state and locally managed prisons and jails; 4) provide Congress with the specific information, enumerated below, about the costs and conditions of confinement in these facilities and commit to providing that information to Congress in the future on a regular basis; and 5) commit to a HSAC review process that is transparent and includes input from outside experts. For far too long, the contracting process and the management of contract facilities housing immigrant detainees have been opaque. The lack of transparency has led to a lack of accountability. Unlike federally-run institutions, these facilities are not obligated to provide to DHS or Congress information about their cost, operational efficiency, or ability to provide adequate detention conditions. And the results are unacceptable. They include exorbitantly expensive contracts like that seen with the family detention facility in Dilley, Texas, run by the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), which costs American taxpayers more than $700,000 a day or $260 million a year to detain fewer than 2,400 mothers and children per day. We also see conditions in other facilities giving rise to detainee complaints of sexual assault and abuse by detention staff, as well as reports of woefully inadequate medical care. In addition to the record profits the private prison industry is reaping from American taxpayers, we are troubled by the pivotal role the industry has played in institutionalizing mass family detention and increasing detention of asylum seekers. Starting in 2014, mass family detention facilities were erected in a matter of months, in order to detain children and mothers fleeing brutal violence and persecution in Central America. ICE managed to stand up these mass detention facilities with alarming speed because the nation's two largest private prison companies were ready and eager to make this happen through no-bid, fixed-price contracts that were negotiated without Congressional or public input, resulting in an enormous windfall to the prison industry. In addition, during this administration the number of detained asylum seekers has increased exponentially from 10,742 in fiscal year 2009 to 44,270 in fiscal year 2014. Many asylum seekers are detained in privately-owned or privately-run facilities for prolonged periods of time. It is extremely troubling that private prison companies are reaping profits from detaining the most vulnerable immigrants in our country, including children, asylum seekers, rape victims, and torture survivors. Given the above mentioned concerns and in an effort to increase transparency in the HSAC review process as well as future contracts, please provide the following information regarding each contract the Department has for immigration detention with a non-federal facility by November 1: Documentation adequately establishing that the rates charged by the non-Federal detention facility to the agency are justified on the basis of actual costs associated with the operation of the facility with respect to Federal detainees, and that those costs are necessary and reasonable (taking into account all applicable credits that may reduce the contractor's net costs). All medical and mental health policies in use at the facility, including the training and certification required for medical and mental healthcare professionals treating detainees at the facility; complete staffing patterns for medical and mental health staff, including any variations for different shifts, weekends, and holidays; and policy and procedure manuals. The certifications and credentials held by each medical and mental health care professional treating detainees in the facility, how medical and mental health services are accessed by detainees who do not speak English, the number of detainees attended to by medical and mental healthcare professionals on-site, and, for each such detainee, a description of the detainee's illness or injury, and how any injuries were caused. For each detainee who has died within the past two years, any death review conducted by the ICE Office of Detention Oversight (ODO) or DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG), and any corrective action plans developed in response to the ODO or OIG death review. The design capacity, rated capacity, and operational capacity of the facility. Reports describing the number of incidents of detainee misconduct and the nature of the misconduct, which shall include assaults on staff of the facility by detainees and assaults on detainees by other prisoners/detainees; and the policy on placement in segregated housing units, the total number of detainees placed in segregated housing units in the facility per month, the reason for placement in such units, and the length of stay for each detainee in segregated housing. If applicable, the annual cost of contracts for facilities with guaranteed minimum bed space and fixed-price contracts. Please also note how much of the above-described information DHS already collects as a condition of its contracts with non-federal facilities. DHS's decision to conduct this review is an important step, and we expect the findings will support a decision to promote greater accountability of non-federal facilities and ultimately put an end to the government's reliance on for-profit prison companies. We look forward to the subcommittee's report on November 30, 2016 and to working with you to improve our immigration detention system. Sincerely, 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/signing-of-final-peace-agreement-in-colombia-,Signing Of Final Peace Agreement In Colombia,2016-09-26,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.26.16 Signing Of Final Peace Agreement In Colombia Reaction Of Senator Patrick Leahy To The Sept. 26 Signing Of A Final Peace Agreement In Colombia, Ending 5 Decades Of Civil War Monday, Sept. 26, 2016 Today was a very long time in coming. During decades of war that killed hundreds of thousands and uprooted millions, every Colombian citizen and family paid a price. President Santos staked his political reputation on the negotiations, the outcome of which was never certain. He deserves great credit for having the vision and the courage for staying the course. We also owe thanks to the governments of Cuba and Norway that helped facilitate the talks, and to the Obama administration for its strong support for a political settlement that offers the Colombian people the best chance to build a unified, peaceful country. In many respects the agreement signifies the end of the beginning. It is up to the Colombian Government, the FARC leaders, and the Colombian people to work together to implement it in a manner that finally and effectively addresses the poverty, injustice, inequality, insecurity and impunity that were at the heart of the conflict. At a time when people throughout Latin America are looking for a social, economic and political model that can bring lasting prosperity and security, they and the United States also have a strong interest in Colombia's success. # # # # # 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/congressional-delegation-announces-2-million-grant-vermont-affordable,Congressional Delegation Announces $2 Million Grant for Vermont Affordable Housing,2016-09-23,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"BURLINGTON, Vt., Sept. 23 The Vermont congressional delegation announced Friday a $2 million grant to Housing Vermont to help provide affordable housing to low-income families in the state. While the economy has certainly improved since the Great Recession, far too many people in Vermont and across the country are still struggling to get by on stagnant wages. Many pay 50 percent or more of their limited incomes to keep a roof over their heads, leaving little for food, childcare, transportation and health care, said Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) These funds will help get us a little closer to the day when all Vermonters have safe, decent and affordable housing. Housing Vermont is a Burlington-based nonprofit founded in 1988, which creates permanently affordable rental housing and enables investments in economic and community development to benefit Vermonters through partnerships with local organizations, public agencies and the private sector. Housing Vermont has built 5,120 affordable apartments in 171 developments throughout the state. We are excited to get these federal funds to Vermont. This $2 million will strengthen our ability to build more affordable housing, said Nancy Owens, president of Housing Vermont. There is a tremendous shortage of affordable housing in Vermont. These funds will really help us serve our mission by helping low-income Vermonters in high-need communities secure affordable housing. The funds announced by the delegation today are part of $91.5 million in grants from the U.S. Treasury's Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, which were awarded to 32 organizations throughout the United States for the development of affordable housing and community facilities in low-income communities. The awards were made through the fiscal year 2016 round of the Capital Magnet Fund. The Capital Magnet Fund was part of the same legislation that created the National Housing Trust Fund. Sanders led the 15-year effort to pass the National Housing Trust Fund and Leahy led the effort to ensure the Capital Magnet Fund was enacted in 2008. Vermont is receiving $3 million from the National Housing Trust Fund to build, preserve, and rehabilitate affordable rental housing. Affordable housing is a high priority in Vermont. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julin Castro visited Vermont this month at Leahy's invitation to spend time with Vermont's housing partners to discuss the array of successes and challenges of achieving affordable housing in Vermont and rural America. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/congressional-delegation-announces-2-million-grant-for-vermont-affordable-housing,Congressional Delegation Announces $2 Million Grant for Vermont Affordable Housing,2016-09-23,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.23.16 Congressional Delegation Announces $2 Million Grant for Vermont Affordable Housing Congressional Delegation Announces $2 Million Grant for Vermont Affordable Housing BURLINGTON, Vt., Sept. 23 The Vermont congressional delegation announced Friday a $2 million grant to Housing Vermont to help provide affordable housing to low-income families in the state. While the economy has certainly improved since the Great Recession, far too many people in Vermont and across the country are still struggling to get by on stagnant wages. Many pay 50 percent or more of their limited incomes to keep a roof over their heads, leaving little for food, childcare, transportation and health care, said Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) These funds will help get us a little closer to the day when all Vermonters have safe, decent and affordable housing. Housing Vermont is a Burlington-based nonprofit founded in 1988, which creates permanently affordable rental housing and enables investments in economic and community development to benefit Vermonters through partnerships with local organizations, public agencies and the private sector. Housing Vermont has built 5,120 affordable apartments in 171 developments throughout the state. We are excited to get these federal funds to Vermont. This $2 million will strengthen our ability to build more affordable housing, said Nancy Owens, president of Housing Vermont. There is a tremendous shortage of affordable housing in Vermont. These funds will really help us serve our mission by helping low-income Vermonters in high-need communities secure affordable housing. The funds announced by the delegation today are part of $91.5 million in grants from the U.S. Treasury's Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, which were awarded to 32 organizations throughout the United States for the development of affordable housing and community facilities in low-income communities. The awards were made through the fiscal year 2016 round of the Capital Magnet Fund. The Capital Magnet Fund was part of the same legislation that created the National Housing Trust Fund. Sanders led the 15-year effort to pass the National Housing Trust Fund and Leahy led the effort to ensure the Capital Magnet Fund was enacted in 2008. Vermont is receiving $3 million from the National Housing Trust Fund to build, preserve, and rehabilitate affordable rental housing. Affordable housing is a high priority in Vermont. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julin Castro visited Vermont this month at Leahy's invitation to spend time with Vermont's housing partners to discuss the array of successes and challenges of achieving affordable housing in Vermont and rural America. ##### 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-brown-and-leading-democratic-senators-call-on-wells-fargo-to-end-use-of-forced-arbitration-on-consumers,"Leahy, Brown & Leading Democratic Senators Call On Wells Fargo To End Use Of Forced Arbitration On Consumers",2016-09-23,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.23.16 Leahy, Brown & Leading Democratic Senators Call On Wells Fargo To End Use Of Forced Arbitration On Consumers Leahy, Brown & Leading Democratic Senators Call On Wells Fargo To End Use Of Forced Arbitration So That Consumers Can Seek Justice In Court WASHINGTON (FRIDAY, Sept. 23, 2016) Democratic Senators led by Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Banking Committee Ranking Member Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) are calling on Wells Fargo to end the use of forced arbitration clauses that prevent customers whose names were used to open fraudulent accounts from seeking justice in court. Arbitration clauses force consumers to waive their rights to bring a claim in court or to band together in a class action, before any dispute has arisen. These clauses also deny access to the courts even when consumers are seeking to enforce their rights under fundamental state and federal laws. Instead, consumers must seek justice individually, on a case-by-case basis in closed-door arbitration proceedings that are often stacked in favor of the corporate defendant. In a letter to Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf, the Senators call on the company to end its use of forced arbitration clauses which were used to deny customers access to the court system to challenge Wells Fargo's creation of sham accounts. In addition to Leahy and Brown, the letter was signed by Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). The ability to force customers into secret arbitration proceedings allowed Wells Fargo to continue its outrageous practices with impunity for far too long, the Senators wrote. Wells Fargo customers have attempted to sue Wells Fargo in open court over the sham accounts, including a case filed more than three years ago. The suits were forced behind the closed doors of arbitration and it took years before the public learned the truth of the allegations. If either of the lawsuits had been able to proceed in court, countless Wells Fargo customers might have been saved from being charged their hard-earned dollars for unauthorized accounts. They added: One concrete step you can and should take to fix this issue and restore your customers' trust is to immediately end Wells Fargo's use of mandatory arbitration clauses in your customer agreements. A copy of the September 23 letter is online and below. ##### September 23, 2016 Mr. John Stumpf Chief Executive Officer Wells Fargo 420 Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94104 Dear Mr. Stumpf: Federal authorities revealed this month that over the course of five years, Wells Fargo employees opened as many as two million sham accounts in the names of Wells Fargo customers and charged customers for those accounts without their permission. According to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) consent order addressing this egregious conduct, Wells Fargo collected millions in profits from charging its customers overdraft fees, monthly service fees, annual fees, finance and interest charges, and late fees on these sham accounts. A major reason that these outrageous practices continued for at least five years is that Wells Fargo's customer account agreement includes a forced arbitration clause. These clauses eliminate consumers' ability to bring a claim in open court or to band together in a class action, before any dispute has arisen. Forced arbitration clauses deny access to the courts even when consumers are seeking to enforce their rights under fundamental state and federal laws. Instead, consumers must seek justice individually, on a case-by-case basis in closed-door arbitration proceedings that are often stacked in favor of the corporate defendant. Even more troubling is the fact that arbitration proceedings are kept secret, so that other customers are deprived of the knowledge that their experiences might be part of a more widespread problem. This forced arbitration system helps hide fraudulent schemes such as the sham accounts at Wells Fargo from the justice system, from the news media, and from the public eye. This is unacceptable. It is particularly unacceptable that forced arbitration clauses in contracts for real customer accounts were used to deny customers access to the court system to challenge Wells Fargo's creation of sham accounts. We have serious concerns that your forced arbitration policies thrust consumers into a system with little transparency or oversight. Fortunately for American consumers, the CFPB, through its enforcement authority, is seeking to hold the company accountable by requiring restitution for Wells Fargo customers and other civil penalties against the company. There can be little doubt, however, that the ability to force customers into secret arbitration proceedings allowed Wells Fargo to continue its outrageous practices with impunity for far too long. Wells Fargo customers have attempted to sue Wells Fargo in open court over the sham accounts, including a case filed more than three years ago.[1] The suits were forced behind the closed doors of arbitration and it took years before the public learned the truth of the allegations. If either of the lawsuits had been able to proceed in court, countless Wells Fargo customers might have been saved from being charged their hard-earned dollars for unauthorized accounts. In your testimony earlier this week before the Senate Banking Committee you said I accept full responsibility for all unethical sales practices in our retail banking business, and I am fully committed to doing everything possible to fix this issue, strengthen our culture, and take the necessary actions to restore our customers' trust.[2] One concrete step you can and should take to fix this issue and restore your customers' trust is to immediately end Wells Fargo's use of mandatory arbitration clauses in your customer agreements. Unfortunately, at the hearing, when asked, you were unwilling to pledge that Wells Fargo would not continue to force its customers into arbitration for disputes related to Wells Fargo's opening of sham accounts. Accordingly, we ask that you provide answers to the following questions so that we can better understand the situation at Wells Fargo and how we can prevent similar fraudulent practices in the future: Please provide a copy of the current basic customer agreement and any other customer agreements that have been in place since 2011 for Wells Fargo customers that open credit cards or bank accounts. How many allegations concerning the unauthorized creation of accounts has Wells Fargo received through September 2016? When was the first? Of those allegations, how many did Wells Fargo force into arbitration? When its customers sued Wells Fargo over these fraudulent accounts, who was responsible for the legal strategy in response? Specifically, who decided that your legal strategy would be to deny people access to the courts and force people to submit to mandatory arbitration on fraudulent accounts? Does Wells Fargo, or its selected arbitrator, have policies that prevent customers from making information about their allegations or resolution public? What percentage of these allegations were heard by the same arbitrator or arbitration provider? Did Wells Fargo disclose to its investors allegations concerning the unauthorized creation of accounts? How and when did the company do so? In light of your commitment to do everything possible to fix this issue and restore your customers' trust, will you end Wells Fargo's use of mandatory arbitration clauses in your customer agreements? Thank you for your prompt attention to this very important issue, and we look forward to your response. Sincerely, PATRICK LEAHYUnited States Senator SHERROD BROWNUnited States Senator RICHARD J. DURBINUnited States Senator AL FRANKENUnited States Senator RICHARD BLUMENTHALUnited States Senator ELIZABETH WARRENUnited 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/-leahys-speech-just-now-on-the-senate-floor-time-has-come-to-reform-eb-5-or-to-end-it,"Leahy's Speech Just Now On The Senate Floor: Time Has Come To Reform EB-5, Or To End It",2016-09-22,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.22.16 Leahy's Speech Just Now On The Senate Floor: Time Has Come To Reform EB-5, Or To End It Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) spoke back-to-back on the Senate Floor Thursday morning, as the EB-5 reform issue goes down to the wire. The program's authorization expires on Sept. 30. Some in Congress are pushing for a simple extension of the program. Leahy and Grassley are insisting on reforms, if the program is to go forward at all. In their tandem remarks on the Senate Floor, both said they will not support a simple extension of EB-5 without reform. Leahy has made this clear many times earlier this year. Leahy Thursday went further to say that he will oppose the forthcoming CR (the stop-gap government funding bill that's the last big must-pass bill of this sessionwhich ends in just a few days) if it includes a simple extension and not the reforms that Leahy, Grassley and their House allies have been pressing for. Grassley is the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Leahy is the Ranking Member. For years Leahy and Grassley have been pushing for EB-5 reforms on which they have held hearings introduced reform legislation. LINK to speech on the Leahy website: https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/floor-remarks-on-extending-the-eb-5-regional-center-program-without-reforms Senator Patrick Leahy Senate Floor Remarks: Don't Extend EB-5 Program Without Reforms Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Floor remarks on extending the EB-5 Regional Center program without reforms Senate Floor September 22, 2016 I come to the floor today, joined by Senator Grassley, to share my concerns about the EB-5 Regional Center program. This program's authorization is set to expire at the end of the month, but Senate leadership wants to extend the EB-5 program as part of the continuing resolution. If this flawed program is not reformed, I believe it should end. I can no longer support a straight extension of this program. For years, I strongly supported the EB-5 program. I even championed its reauthorization. I did so because EB-5 was designed to bring investment and jobs to underserved rural and urban communities. And for some time, that is what it did. In my home State of Vermont, communities like Warren and Vergennes used EB-5 to create and save jobs during difficult economic times. They are EB-5 success stories. But that is the EB-5 of yesterday. The EB-5 program of today is mired in fraud and abuse. It has strayed from its important policy goals. The incentives that Congress created to direct investment to underserved areasthe very reason why I supported this programhave been rendered meaningless. The program has become an unintended boon for the wealthiest business districts in the country. Affluent areas now dominate the program by exploiting incentives intended for underserved areas, a practice Department of Homeland Security Secretary Johnson has rightly described as gerrymandering. It has gotten to a point where a luxury hotel in Beverly Hills qualifies as a distressed urban area. Only in the world of EB-5 is Beverly Hills considered economically distressed. This type of abuse is not the exceptionit is the rule. Currently, 90 percent of EB-5 capital goes to areas that rely on gerrymandering to qualify as distressed. Ninety percent. That is why the civil rights community, led by The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, has so strongly criticized this program. Far from being a tool for economic development and job creation, EB-5 now serves as a corporate subsidy for wealthy developers, allowing them to save tens of millions of dollars on financing. It is no wonder these developers fight so hard against reforms that would restore incentives to invest in rural and poor urban areas. I am not suggesting affluent areas should never qualify for EB-5 financing. I am merely suggesting that they should not qualify for the unique incentives that Congress intended for underserved communities that have more trouble attracting capital. Unfortunately, gerrymandering and abused incentives are only part of the problem. In recent years EB-5 has become riddled with fraud. Review after review conducted by the GAO, the Inspector General, and our Judiciary Committeehave revealed serious vulnerabilities in the program. Investors have been defrauded; they have lost money and their immigration benefits have been put in jeopardy. And communities that once hoped to benefit from this program have been left to pick up the pieces. From California to Florida, and from Texas to even my home State of Vermont, allegations of fraud have stained this program. Since 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission has filed dozens of EB-5 related enforcement actions. As of last year, over 50 more Federal investigations were ongoing. Fraud will continue unabated until we give the Department of Homeland Security the tools it needs to guard against abuse. We have an obligation in Congress to ensure that our Federal agencies are able to do their jobs. The Department of Homeland Security has made some administrative improvements to EB-5, but Secretary Johnson has made it clear to both me and Senator Grassley that congressional action is necessary. For five years I have worked across the aisle to reform EB-5. In 2013, I included EB-5 reforms in the Senate-passed Comprehensive Immigration Reform. But the House of Representatives failed to allow a vote on those reforms. Since then, I have worked with Senator Grassley to review and reform the EB-5 program. Last year, he and I negotiated far-reaching reforms with our counterparts in the House Judiciary Committee. We pushed to have that four corners agreement included in the omnibus appropriations bill at the end of last year. But big city developers still viewed our reforms as a threat to their bottom line. They worked aggressively to block our efforts. Unfortunately, leaders in Congress sided with the developers and extended the EB-5 program without reform. Senator Grassley and I will not relent in our efforts to reform this program. At the very beginning of the New Year, we worked together to continue a series of public hearings and to keep pushing for reform. We are united in our belief that it is unacceptable that Congress has failed to respond to an overwhelming consensus for reform. A full revamping of the program is required. A Band-Aid is not good enough. Powerful corporate interests must not be allowed to derail improvements that can guard against fraud, protect investors, and help our most distressed communities. Powerful developers want only window-dressing reform proposals that do little to change the status quo. And we cannot accept so-called reforms that the SEC believes would, in fact, leave holes in enforcement efforts. Senator Grassley and I, along with our counterparts on the House Judiciary Committee, have put forward meaningful reforms. These reforms were developed in consultation with the Department of Homeland Security and the SEC. They are tailored to prevent the rampant fraud we are seeing today, and they are necessary to save EB-5 from itself. As the American people learn more about how the EB-5 program is being abused, the louder the calls will be for its reform, or even its termination. I believe we can still fix EB-5. But I cannot support simply extending it, yet again. While I do not come to this decision lightly, I cannot support a continuing resolution that leaves these flaws in place. The time has come to reform EB-5, or to end it. # # # # # 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/floor-remarks-on-extending-the-eb-5-regional-center-program-without-reforms,Floor remarks on extending the EB-5 Regional Center program without reforms,2016-09-22,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.22.16 Floor remarks on extending the EB-5 Regional Center program without reforms Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, Floor remarks on extending the EB-5 Regional Center program without reforms September 22, 2016 I come to the floor today, joined by Senator Grassley, to share my concerns about the EB-5 Regional Center program. This program's authorization is set to expire at the end of the month, but Senate leadership wants to extend the EB-5 program as part of the continuing resolution. If this flawed program is not reformed, I believe it should end. I can no longer support a straight extension of this program. For years, I strongly supported the EB-5 program. I even championed its reauthorization. I did so because EB-5 was designed to bring investment and jobs to underserved rural and urban communities. And for some time, that is what it did. In my home State of Vermont, communities like Warren and Vergennes used EB-5 to create and save jobs during difficult economic times. They are EB-5 success stories. But that is the EB-5 of yesterday. The EB-5 program of today is mired in fraud and abuse. It has strayed from its important policy goals. The incentives that Congress created to direct investment to underserved areasthe very reason why I supported this programhave been rendered meaningless. The program has become an unintended boon for the wealthiest business districts in the country. Affluent areas now dominate the program by exploiting incentives intended for underserved areas, a practice Department of Homeland Security Secretary Johnson has rightly described as gerrymandering. It has gotten to a point where a luxury hotel in Beverly Hills qualifies as a distressed urban area. Only in the world of EB-5 is Beverly Hills considered economically distressed. This type of abuse is not the exceptionit is the rule. Currently, 90 percent of EB-5 capital goes to areas that rely on gerrymandering to qualify as distressed. Ninety percent. That is why the civil rights community, led by The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, has so strongly criticized this program. Far from being a tool for economic development and job creation, EB-5 now serves as a corporate subsidy for wealthy developers, allowing them to save tens of millions of dollars on financing. It is no wonder these developers fight so hard against reforms that would restore incentives to invest in rural and poor urban areas. I am not suggesting affluent areas should never qualify for EB-5 financing. I am merely suggesting that they should not qualify for the unique incentives that Congress intended for underserved communities that have more trouble attracting capital. Unfortunately, gerrymandering and abused incentives are only part of the problem. In recent years EB-5 has become riddled with fraud. Review after review conducted by the GAO, the Inspector General, and our Judiciary Committeehave revealed serious vulnerabilities in the program. Investors have been defrauded; they have lost money and their immigration benefits have been put in jeopardy. And communities that once hoped to benefit from this program have been left to pick up the pieces. From California to Florida, and from Texas to even my home State of Vermont, allegations of fraud have stained this program. Since 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission has filed dozens of EB-5 related enforcement actions. As of last year, over 50 more Federal investigations were ongoing. Fraud will continue unabated until we give the Department of Homeland Security the tools it needs to guard against abuse. We have an obligation in Congress to ensure that our Federal agencies are able to do their jobs. The Department of Homeland Security has made some administrative improvements to EB-5, but Secretary Johnson has made it clear to both me and Senator Grassley that congressional action is necessary. For five years I have worked across the aisle to reform EB-5. In 2013, I included EB-5 reforms in the Senate-passed Comprehensive Immigration Reform. But the House of Representatives failed to allow a vote on those reforms. Since then, I have worked with Senator Grassley to review and reform the EB-5 program. Last year, he and I negotiated far-reaching reforms with our counterparts in the House Judiciary Committee. We pushed to have that four corners agreement included in the omnibus appropriations bill at the end of last year. But big city developers still viewed our reforms as a threat to their bottom line. They worked aggressively to block our efforts. Unfortunately, leaders in Congress sided with the developers and extended the EB-5 program without reform. Senator Grassley and I will not relent in our efforts to reform this program. At the very beginning of the New Year, we worked together to continue a series of public hearings and to keep pushing for reform. We are united in our belief that it is unacceptable that Congress has failed to respond to an overwhelming consensus for reform. A full revamping of the program is required. A Band-Aid is not good enough. Powerful corporate interests must not be allowed to derail improvements that can guard against fraud, protect investors, and help our most distressed communities. Powerful developers want only window-dressing reform proposals that do little to change the status quo. And we cannot accept so-called reforms that the SEC believes would, in fact, leave holes in enforcement efforts. Senator Grassley and I, along with our counterparts on the House Judiciary Committee, have put forward meaningful reforms. These reforms were developed in consultation with the Department of Homeland Security and the SEC. They are tailored to prevent the rampant fraud we are seeing today, and they are necessary to save EB-5 from itself. As the American people learn more about how the EB-5 program is being abused, the louder the calls will be for its reform, or even its termination. I believe we can still fix EB-5. But I cannot support simply extending it, yet again. While I do not come to this decision lightly, I cannot support a continuing resolution that leaves these flaws in place. The time has come to reform EB-5, or to end it. # # # # # 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-on-military-sales-to-saudi-arabia,Statement On Military Sales to Saudi Arabia,2016-09-21,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.21.16 Statement On Military Sales to Saudi Arabia Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) On Military Sales to Saudi Arabia Congressional Record September 21, 2016 Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I want to address the issues at the heart of S. J. Res. 39, the resolution introduced by Senators Paul, Murphy, Lee and Franken regarding the sale of $1.15 billion in military equipment to the Government of Saudi Arabia. Despite obvious differences in our systems of government and concerning the rights of women and other issues, the United States and Saudi Arabia have a longstanding partnership that has benefitted both countries. For roughly six decades security cooperation has been an important part of the relationship, fueled by military sales to Saudi Arabia under both Republican and Democratic administrations. For its part, the Government of Saudi Arabia has pledged to work with the United States in countering terrorism in the region. But what has been unfolding in Yemen since the spring of 2015 should concern all Senators. There have been frequent, credible reports of Saudi Arabian armed forces indiscriminately attacking civilian-populated areas, targeting civilians, and otherwise misusing U.S.-origin weapons; of humanitarian access being impeded; and of a lack of serious investigations of, and accountability for, those who have alleged to have caused civilian casualties. I am not opposed to training and equipping our allies, or selling them the weapons they require, to combat terrorism. But the conditions under which we provide such support must include a commitment to avoid civilian casualties, and to ensure that if egregious harm is done to the civilian population there are thorough investigations, punishment if warranted, and assistance is provided to the victims. We should also be confident that the strategy and tactics of our allies are achieving goals that we share. Since the earliest reports of harm inflicted by Saudi forces on the civilian population in Yemen I have repeatedly raised this issue with the Department of State. Although the Department and Saudi officials have offered assurances that effective steps are being taken to avoid civilian casualties and to investigate when they occur, the attacks and casualties have continued. Efforts by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to conduct an independent investigation into war crimes in Yemen have to date been rebuffed by the Saudi government. There is scant evidence that the assurances reflect a meaningful change in strategy or tactics, or that the Saudi military operations in Yemen are achieving their goals. That is why I cannot support the provision of military equipment, particularly on this scale, to any country as long as legitimate concerns regarding the manner in which such equipment is being used remain unaddressed. It is inconsistent with the laws of war, and it implicates, at least indirectly, the United States. I need to be convinced that the Saudi government is taking effective steps to reduce civilian casualties, to address the harm caused by its operations, and to support the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid to those in need. Therefore, I will support the resolution and oppose the motion to table. # # # # # 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-unveils-legislation-to-authorize-critical-anti-heroin-task-force-program,Leahy Unveils Legislation To Authorize Critical Anti-Heroin Task Force Program,2016-09-20,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.20.16 Leahy Unveils Legislation To Authorize Critical Anti-Heroin Task Force Program Leahy Unveils Legislation To Authorize Critical Anti-Heroin Task Force Program WASHINGTON (Tuesday, September 20, 2016) In his continued effort to combat the epidemic of opioid abuse affecting Vermont, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced bipartisan legislation Tuesday to authorize critical resources for the Anti-Heroin Task Force program that has proven effective in communities throughout the country. Leahy helped to establish the Anti-Heroin Task Force program in 2014, but without authorization, its critical funding is at risk. Leahy successfully included language in the Senate Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA) to provide resources to these programs, yet despite overwhelming support, the language was stripped at the last minute. The bill Leahy introduced Tuesday during Prescription Opioid and Heroin Epidemic Awareness Week will help pave the way for state and local law enforcement agencies to secure necessary federal funding and support for anti-heroin task forces around the country. The bill, which is cosponsored by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), also authorizes anti-methamphetamine task forces. States are seeing an influx of powerful, deadly opioids that law enforcement has never seen before. In Congress we must support smart policies to reduce the demand for these poisons. And we must support targeted enforcement efforts to keep them out of our communities in the first place, Leahy said in a statement on the Senate floor. Last month, Leahy was joined by Vermont State Police Commander Matthew Birmingham in Williston to announce that six new positions including five detectives were added to the Vermont Drug Task Force to strengthen heroin trafficking investigations in Vermont. This expansion of the Task Force was made possible through a $1.4 million grant awarded from the Department of Justice's Anti-Heroin Task Force program. The program targets areas with high rates of primary treatment admissions for heroin and other opioids. Vermont was one of only six states to receive the grants, which totaled $5.8 million. This legislation would provide the Anti-Heroin Task Force program with stability and the resources to help more states just like it is helping Vermont, Leahy said. Our work in Congress on opioid abuse and addiction did not end when we passed CARA. If we are serious about combatting drug addiction, we have to invest in our communities. We have to build on what we know is working by giving law enforcement agencies the tools they need to do their jobs effectively. This addiction is a public health and safety emergency, and Congress should provide the needed resources to combat it. # # # # # Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Introduction of Legislation to Strengthen the Anti-Heroin Task Force Program Senate Floor September 20, 2016 I have come to this Floor many times to speak about the toll that the abuse of prescription opioids and heroin has taken on our communities. When I talk to Vermonters about this crisis whether at Judiciary Committee field hearings in our state, or in conversations at kitchen tables and on street corners I hear how opioid abuse destroys lives, tears apart families, and overwhelms communities. I am proud of our small state, where law enforcement and community leaders have joined together to take a comprehensive and constructive approach to fighting addiction. Together they have created innovative and successful programs such as the Rapid Intervention Community Court in Burlington, and Project VISION in Rutland. The Boys & Girls Clubs throughout Vermont are working with schools and public health officials to help children affected by the epidemic and to prevent them from being swept up in that world. Local television stations are participating in public awareness campaigns to educate our citizens about drug abuse. These are positive efforts that make me proud to be a Vermonter. But I am not here just to praise the good work in my state; I am here to work for my state and all states coping with this drug addiction scourge. Earlier this year, Congress took an important step forward by passing the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA. This new law treats addiction as the public health crisis that it is, and I was proud to support this legislation in the Senate. However, the final product fell short. CARA did not include the funding necessary to put its programs to work. And the final legislation stripped out many of the best practices included in the Senate bill, including my provision to authorize the anti-heroin task force program that I helped to establish. This provision was approved overwhelmingly by the Senate, but was stripped out at the last minute by the House. This was a short-sighted decision that could hamper law enforcement agencies' ability to keep illegal opioids out of our communities. The legislation I introduce today with Senator Grassley will help ensure that state and local law enforcement agencies can get the necessary funding and support for anti-heroin task forces around the country. This bill would authorize the Attorney General to provide grants to law enforcement agencies engaged in statewide collaborative efforts to investigate and stop the unlawful trafficking of heroin, fentanyl, carfentanil, and prescription opioids. The bill also authorizes grants to support task forces to combat the trafficking of methamphetamines. States are seeing an influx of powerful, deadly opioids that law enforcement has never seen before. Communities that have been struggling with heroin and prescription drug abuse are now encountering opioids like fentanyl and carfentanil, which can kill even in small amounts. In Congress we must support smart policies to reduce the demand for these poisons. And we must support targeted enforcement efforts to keep them out of our communities in the first place. I know that these task forces work. Last month I heard from Vermont law enforcement officials who shared examples of how the Vermont Drug Task Force is helping them to combat heroin trafficking in our state. The Vermont Drug Task Force has seen a significant increase in heroin investigations so far this year: up 70 percent over the same period last year. The task force has seized the equivalent of more than 94,000 bags of heroin this year alone, with a street value of more than $1 million. The recent addition of five new investigator positions, as the result of Vermont's $1.4 million anti-heroin task force grant, could not have come at a more critical time. This legislation will provide the Anti-Heroin Task Force Program with stability and the resources to help more states, just like it is helping Vermont. Our work in Congress on opioid abuse and addiction did not end when we passed CARA. If we are serious about combatting drug addiction, we have to invest in our communities. Let's build on what we know is working by giving law enforcement agencies the tools they need to do their jobs effectively. # # # # # 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-on-the-introduction-of-legislation-to-strengthen-the-anti-heroin-task-force-program,Statement On the Introduction of Legislation to Strengthen the Anti-Heroin Task Force Program,2016-09-20,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.20.16 Statement On the Introduction of Legislation to Strengthen the Anti-Heroin Task Force Program Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Introduction of Legislation to Strengthen the Anti-Heroin Task Force Program September 20, 2016 I have come to this Floor many times to speak about the toll that the abuse of prescription opioids and heroin has taken on our communities. When I talk to Vermonters about this crisis whether at Judiciary Committee field hearings in our state, or in conversations at kitchen tables and on street corners I hear how opioid abuse destroys lives, tears apart families, and overwhelms communities. I am proud of our small state, where law enforcement and community leaders have joined together to take a comprehensive and constructive approach to fighting addiction. Together they have created innovative and successful programs such as the Rapid Intervention Community Court in Burlington, and Project VISION in Rutland. The Boys & Girls Clubs throughout Vermont are working with schools and public health officials to help children affected by the epidemic and to prevent them from being swept up in that world. Local television stations are participating in public awareness campaigns to educate our citizens about drug abuse. These are positive efforts that make me proud to be a Vermonter. But I am not here just to praise the good work in my state; I am here to work for my state and all states coping with this drug addiction scourge. Earlier this year, Congress took an important step forward by passing the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA. This new law treats addiction as the public health crisis that it is, and I was proud to support this legislation in the Senate. However, the final product fell short. CARA did not include the funding necessary to put its programs to work. And the final legislation stripped out many of the best practices included in the Senate bill, including my provision to authorize the anti-heroin task force program that I helped to establish. This provision was approved overwhelmingly by the Senate, but was stripped out at the last minute by the House. This was a short-sighted decision that could hamper law enforcement agencies' ability to keep illegal opioids out of our communities. The legislation I introduce today with Senator Grassley will help ensure that state and local law enforcement agencies can get the necessary funding and support for anti-heroin task forces around the country. This bill would authorize the Attorney General to provide grants to law enforcement agencies engaged in statewide collaborative efforts to investigate and stop the unlawful trafficking of heroin, fentanyl, carfentanil, and prescription opioids. The bill also authorizes grants to support task forces to combat the trafficking of methamphetamines. States are seeing an influx of powerful, deadly opioids that law enforcement has never seen before. Communities that have been struggling with heroin and prescription drug abuse are now encountering opioids like fentanyl and carfentanil, which can kill even in small amounts. In Congress we must support smart policies to reduce the demand for these poisons. And we must support targeted enforcement efforts to keep them out of our communities in the first place. I know that these task forces work. Last month I heard from Vermont law enforcement officials who shared examples of how the Vermont Drug Task Force is helping them to combat heroin trafficking in our state. The Vermont Drug Task Force has seen a significant increase in heroin investigations so far this year: up 70 percent over the same period last year. The task force has seized the equivalent of more than 94,000 bags of heroin this year alone, with a street value of more than $1 million. The recent addition of five new investigator positions, as the result of Vermont's $1.4 million anti-heroin task force grant, could not have come at a more critical time. This legislation will provide the Anti-Heroin Task Force Program with stability and the resources to help more states, just like it is helping Vermont. Our work in Congress on opioid abuse and addiction did not end when we passed CARA. If we are serious about combatting drug addiction, we have to invest in our communities. Let's build on what we know is working by giving law enforcement agencies the tools they need to do their jobs effectively. # # # # # 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-on-the-un-summit-on-the-global-refugee-crisis,Statement On The UN Summit On The Global Refugee Crisis,2016-09-20,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.20.16 Statement On The UN Summit On The Global Refugee Crisis Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy On The UN Summit On The Global Refugee Crisis September 20, 2016 With the exception of climate change, no issue more urgently requires collective action by the world's governments than the calamity facing tens of millions refugees and internally displaced people. The protracted conflicts in Syria and South Sudan alone have uprooted millions. Tens of thousands of Central American children have braved the journey north seeking safety in our own country. Syrians fleeing to Europe have exposed deeply rooted prejudices. It is worth recalling that those same European countries were the source of countless desperate people who were welcomed by the United States and others during World War II. We are seeing some of the same xenophobic reactions here toward Muslims and Central Americans, and this summit takes place against the backdrop of a U.S. system of family detention that has resulted in small children being detained for more than a year. The psychological harm of such detention is well-documented and the policy is incompatible with our country's longstanding commitment to those fleeing persecution. Since the days of the pilgrims, America has been a haven for people fleeing persecution. We take pride in the words engraved on the Statue of Liberty. Canada and many other countries have likewise welcomed those seeking refuge from foreign conflicts. By hosting the UN Summit, President Obama has stepped forward when others have shamelessly called for erecting new barriers. Our generation will be judged by how we respond to humanitarian catastrophes that have forced us to confront this question: Will we recognize our common humanity and responsibility to help those who have lost everything and are fleeing for their lives, or will we succumb to fears and excuses to turn our backs? No country can shoulder the current humanitarian burden alone, but President Obama is right that we can set an example by doing our part as the country with the largest economy and a longstanding tradition, by contributing our share to help refugees stranded overseas and by welcoming those who are eligible to resettle 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/leahy-column-marking-5th-anniv-of-leahy-smith-patent-reforms,Leahy column marking 5th anniv. of Leahy-Smith patent reforms,2016-09-16,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.16.16 Leahy column marking 5th anniv. of Leahy-Smith patent reforms A Modern Patent System Helps Energize Vermont's Economy, And The Nation's By Patrick Leahy Five years ago, in front of an audience of school-aged inventors, President Obama signed into law the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. That law contained the most extensive reforms of the U.S. patent system in 60 years, creating the foundation for an innovative patent system for the 21st Century. As we commemorate this legislative feat, six years in the making, it is important to reflect on how the America Invents Act has changed our patent system, and to look ahead to the work still to be done. The story of innovation in Vermont is truly the American story. The first government-issued patent was granted by Thomas Jefferson, signed by George Washington, and given to Samuel Hopkins, from Pittsford, Vermont. Since that first patent was issued in 1790, Vermont inventors and small businesses have been taking chances on new ideas and changing the lives of Americans in the process. American innovation and creativity are vital engines of our economy, in the Green Mountain State, and across the land. Vermont has been at the top of the list of patents filed per-capita, among all the states. While our nation's Founders recognized the importance of promoting innovation in the Constitution, for too long our patent system unlike the inventors who used it remained stagnant. That's why I set out a decade ago to work with Democrats and Republicans to begin drafting the America Invents Act. Like a determined inventor looking to achieve their vision, we worked together to update the patent system for the modern era. The result was the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, a new law enacted in 2011to improve patent quality and make our patent system even more competitive on the global stage. By giving the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) much-needed tools, including more control over the fees it collects, the America Invents Act ensures that high quality patents are issued by the PTO. The America Invents Act also corrected an anomaly of the U.S. patent system, harmonizing it with the rest of the world. Our system now grants patents to the first inventor to file an application, ensuring that American innovators are not at a competitive disadvantage in the global economy. Enactment of the America Invents Act was more than a victory for American inventors; it was a demonstration that Congress could still work in a bipartisan, bicameral matter. It showed what we can achieve when we put aside rhetoric and negotiate in good faith. We held countless bipartisan, bicameral meetings, briefings, and discussions with all interested parties, over the span of multiple Congresses. We never gave up. The six-year process that resulted in enactment of this important law is one of which we can all be proud. In an increasingly partisan Congress, I embraced the opportunity to lead a legislative process that was, from start to finish, both bipartisan and bicameral. It is only in that spirit that we can continue to make progress that will support innovation for the next generation and beyond. I have continued to work across the aisle to improve the patent system. Despite important reforms in the America Invents Act, there are too many bad actors misusing the system to target others and stifle innovation. Abusive conduct in our patent system is a threat to America's innovation economy. It costs Vermont businesses and consumers billions of dollars each year. So I have continued to work over the last two Congresses to advance new legislation to curb abusive patent litigation. The bipartisan Protecting American Talent and Entrepreneurship Act (PATENT Act), which I coauthored, would make necessary and commonsense reforms to curb abuses within the patent system. The bill would take concrete steps to deter abusive conduct and promote efficiency in the patent system, while preserving the strength of our patent laws that have made the United States one of the most dynamic and innovative countries in the world. While the bill has bipartisan support, Senate Republican leaders have decided not to bring it to the Senate floor for consideration and a vote. But the problems of abusive behavior are not going away, and I remain committed to working on these issues. Our position as the leader of the world's economy depends on the innovation of our most creative Americans. We need a streamlined, efficient patent system that produces high quality patents and limits counterproductive litigation. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act made great strides to realize that goal five years ago and we must continue to build on that legacy in the years to come. # # # # # [Patrick Leahy (D) represents Vermont in the U.S. Senate and is the author and Senate sponsor of the 2011 law that reformed and updated U.S. patent law, the Leahy-Smith America Invents 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://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-calls-for-senate-action-on-bipartisan-reforms-to-protect-older-americans-from-workplace-discrimination,Leahy Calls For Senate Action On Bipartisan Reforms To Protect Older Americans From Workplace Discrimination,2016-09-15,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.15.16 Leahy Calls For Senate Action On Bipartisan Reforms To Protect Older Americans From Workplace Discrimination WASHINGTON Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) is urging the top leaders of the Senate Health Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee to take up his bipartisan bill to protect older Americans from workplace discrimination. Leahy, in a bipartisan letter with Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), noted that the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act (POWADA) would restore critical workplace protections for older Americans that were stripped away following the 2009 Supreme Court's decision in Gross v. FBL Financial. That decision made it far more difficult for older workers to fight age discrimination. We are concerned that the Gross decision has allowed employers to discriminate on the basis of age with impunity as long as it is paired with other reasons, the senators wrote. They added: The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act would make clear that when an older worker shows that age was a motivating factor in employment discrimination, the burden is on the employer to prove it was not. This bill further extends the same standard of proof to other workplace discrimination claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. This measure is crucial for all Americans to be fully protected under the law. We urge you to swiftly take action and report this important legislation to reaffirm Congress' commitment to equal rights in the workplace. Full text of the letter, below: September 15, 2016 The Honorable Lamar Alexander Chairman, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee 455 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Chairman Alexander: We write to express our strong support for S.2180, the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act, and ask that you mark up the bill quickly. This bill will restore vital civil rights protections for older workers that were restricted following the Supreme Court's decision in Gross v. FBL Financial, Inc. The Gross decision made it far more difficult for older workers to fight age discrimination. This bipartisan bill restores the intent of Congress to protect all workers from discrimination. Our Nation was founded on the principles of equal rights and opportunity for all Americans. In pursuit of these principles, Congress has enacted a wide array of civil rights laws to eliminate discrimination in society, including the workplace. Congress passed the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to extend protections against workplace discrimination to older workers. We strengthened those protections in the Civil Rights Act of 1991. We are concerned that the Gross decision has allowed employers to discriminate on the basis of age with impunity as long as it is paired with other reasons. In fact, age discrimination complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission jumped nearly 30 percent between 2007 and 2008[1]. The American Association of Retired Persons found that more than one third of registered voters age 50 and over experienced or knew someone who had experienced age discrimination.[2] The Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act would make clear that when an older worker shows that age was a motivating factor in employment discrimination, the burden is on the employer to prove it was not. This bill further extends the same standard of proof to other workplace discrimination claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. This measure is crucial for all Americans to be fully protected under the law. We urge you to swiftly take action and report this important legislation to reaffirm Congress' commitment to equal rights in the workplace. Sincerely, PATRICK LEAHYCHARLES GRASSLEY Ranking Member Chairman cc: The Honorable Patty Murray Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions 154 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 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-have-not-confirmed-a-single-judicial-nominee_in-more-than-two-months,Senate Republicans Have Not Confirmed A Single Judicial Nominee In More Than Two Months,2016-09-15,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.15.16 Senate Republicans Have Not Confirmed A Single Judicial Nominee In More Than Two Months While GOP Refuses To Act, Judicial Vacancies Increase To 90; And Because Of GOP Inaction, SCOTUS Nominee Merrick Garland Has Been Pending For Six Months WASHINGTON - Senate Republicans have not allowed the confirmation of a single judicial nomination since July while at the same time refusing to give Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland a hearing or a vote. On Thursday, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy said that Republicans should confirm the backlog of judicial nominees, including Chief Judge Garland, before leaving town for another recess. The Republican leadership should not schedule recess until we confirm Chief Judge Garland and the 30 judicial nominees pending on the Executive Calendar, said Leahy, who as chairman of the Judiciary Committee in 2008 steered 10 of President Bush's judicial nominees to confirmation in the month of September alone. Those 10 confirmations reduced the number of judicial vacancies all the way to 34, roughly one-third of the 90 that exist today. There is no good reason we cannot do for these nominees this September what I did for President Bush's judicial nominees eight years ago. Among the nominees pending on the Senate calendar are five nominees to fill vacancies on the Court of Federal Claims (CFC). All five were nominated over two years ago, and they were unanimously approved by the Judiciary Committee twice. One of those nominees, Armando Bonilla, would be the first Hispanic judge to hold a seat on the CFC if he is confirmed. Yet Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) continues to block these nominees. Senate Republicans have also refused to confirm the longest pending district court nominees on the calendar, Edward Stanton of Tennessee and Julien Neals of New Jersey, despite the support of their Republican and Democratic home state Senators. At the same time, Republicans have taken the unprecedented step of denying even a hearing for Chief Judge Garland, the Supreme Court nominee who was unanimously awarded the American Bar Association's highest rating. Because of Republican obstruction, Garland is now the longest pending Supreme Court nominee in history. If Senate Republicans do not take up his nomination this month, the Supreme Court will begin its new term without a ninth justice and will continue to be unable to serve as the final arbiter of law. There is still time for Republicans to change course and allow the Senate to do its job on Chief Judge Garland's nomination in time for the new term, Leahy said. As we mark Constitution Day tomorrow, it is wrong that we face a constitutional crisis solely because of Republican inaction, but it is a constitutional crisis they can fix. # # # # # 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/days-after-welch-and-duckworth-s-request-oversight-committee-calls,"Days After Welch and Duckworths Request, Oversight Committee Calls Hearing on Prescription Drug Pricing",2016-09-14,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONLess than a week after Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) and Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) called on House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz to hold a hearing on recent prescription drug price hikes, the Chairman announced a hearing to investigate the cause of and potential solutions to prevent skyrocketing drug prices. In light of recent unacceptable price increases in the lifesaving EpiPen, Welch and Duckworth last week wrote a letter to Chaffetz requesting the hearing. Earlier this year, you convened a hearing on the exorbitant price increases for Daraprim, Isuprel, and Nitropress. Executives from Turing and Valeant produced documents for the hearing and testified. We were able to get a glimpse at what motivated these companies to increase the prices simply because they could. In light of recent intolerable and inexplicable price increases in the life saving EpiPen, we write to request that the Oversight and Government Reform Committee hold a second hearing on this issue to take a broad look at the root cause of skyrocketing prescription drug prices as well as possible solutions, the lawmakers wrote. Today the requested hearing was announced for Wednesday, September 21st. Prescription drugs can be life-saving and pain-reliving, but the skyrocketing prices are killing consumers, Rep. Welch said. Meanwhile, big pharmaceutical corporations are raking in record profits. It is a bipartisan responsibility to ensure no parent has to lose a child because they can't afford medication. I look forward to working with my Committee colleagues to find bipartisan solutions to fix this broken market. Recent indefensible price hikes for EpiPens and other lifesaving medications underscore the cost of leaving corporate greed unchecked: when people can't afford the medications they or their children need, lives are at risk, Rep. Duckworth said. We called for this hearing to shed light on how these outrageous prices have been set and, hopefully, offer solutions to prevent similar price-gouging in the future. I'm relieved the Chairman has recognized the need for this hearing. As co-chair of the House Democratic Caucus Prescription Drug Task Force and the co-chair and co-founder of the House Affordable Medicine Caucus, Welch has long been a champion of lowering the price of prescription drugs for consumers. He has introduced the Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act, which would allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate drug prices directly with pharmaceutical corporations. Earlier this year Welch led the fight against Pfizer skirting American tax obligations while jacking up prices for American consumers. In January, Rep. Welch testified before the Vermont Senate Health and Welfare and the House Human Services and Health Care committees on drug pricing transparency. Duckworth, a member of the Oversight and Government Reform committee who has championed working parents and prioritized cutting waste and abuse in government, served in the Reserve Forces for 23 years and later served as the Secretary of the Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs and Assistant Secretary for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in Washington. In Congress, she coauthored the bipartisan Clay Hunt SAV (Suicide Prevention for American Veterans) Act, which passed both the House and Senate unanimously and was signed into law to improve mental health care services for Veterans and reduce Veteran suicide. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-joins-in-introducing-bill-to-overhaul-va-health-system-appeal-process,Leahy Joins In Introducing Bill To Overhaul VA Health System Appeal Process,2016-09-14,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.14.16 Leahy Joins In Introducing Bill To Overhaul VA Health System Appeal Process Leahy And 9 Other Senators Introduce Bill To Overhaul The Veterans Health System Appeal Process (WEDNESDAY, Sept. 14, 2016) Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) is among ten senators who this week introduced legislation to reform the appeals process for veterans benefits. The bill is sponsored by Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and cosponsored by Leahy and Sens. Jon Tester (D-MT), Angus King (I-ME), Tom Udall (D-NM), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Robert P. Casey, Jr. (D-PA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Patty Murray (D-WA). Because of redundancies and inefficiencies in the current process, most veterans wait years for decisions on their appeals. The new bill (the Department of Veterans Affairs Appeals Modernization Act) would replace the current appeals process which today stands at more than 450,000 appeals awaiting decisions with one that Leahy and the other senators said is simple, fair and transparent. Leahy said: I'm proud to be part of the effort to modernize the Department of Veterans Affairs appeals process, a reform that is extremely important to veterans in Vermont and across the nation. This bill is the product of the experience and recommendations of veterans, to revolutionize the appeals process and to more quickly get to veterans the benefits they need and were promised. Improvements that make a difference in veterans' experience with the VA health system deserve to be and must be a high priority for Congress. Blumenthal said: The current appeals process for veterans benefits is a quagmire that no longer serves veterans and their families. Without reform, thousands of our nation's veterans will continue to languish for years without receiving a fair and just consideration of their appeal, and denied access to the benefits they need and deserve. Today, I am proud to introduce legislation that is the product of true collaboration between all stakeholders with this kind of rare consensus, I am confident that we can send a clean appeals reform bill to the President's desk this year. The legislation introduced Wednesday would give veterans clear options after they receive an initial decision by consolidating the current appeals process into three distinct tracks: Local Higher Level Review: This lane would provide the opportunity for a quick resolution of the claim by a higher-level adjudicator at the VA Regional Office. This lane would be a good option for veterans who are confident they have all the evidence necessary to win their claim. New Evidence: This lane would be for submitting new evidence at the VA Regional Office. This lane would serve as a good option for veterans who believe that they can succeed on their claim by providing additional evidence. Board Review: In this last lane, intermediate steps currently required by statute to receive Board review would be eliminated. Furthermore, hearing and non-hearing options at the Board would be handled on separate dockets so these distinctly different types of work can be better managed. # # # # # 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-on-the-pending-nominees-to-the-us-court-of-federal-claims,Statement On the Pending Nominees to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims,2016-09-14,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.14.16 Statement On the Pending Nominees to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On the Pending Nominees to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims September 13, 2016 For two years, President Obama's five eminently qualified nominees to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims have been awaiting a vote. This Court has been referred to as the keeper of the nation's conscience and the People's Court. It was created by Congress approximately 160 years ago and embodies the constitutional principle that individuals have rights against their government. As President Lincoln said, It is as much the duty of Government to render prompt justice against itself, in favor of citizens, as it is to administer the same between private individuals. That is what this Court does it allows citizens to seek prompt justice against our government. Yet two years of obstruction by a single Senator, the junior Senator from Arkansas, has forced the Court to operate without one-third of its allotted judges. While these five nominees have been waiting for a vote, another judge retired, leaving the court with only 10 judges for 16 seats, or a vacancy rate of 38 percent. This takes Senate Republican obstruction of judicial nominees to a new level. The Court's jurisdiction is authorized by statute, and it primarily hears monetary claims against the United States Government deriving from the Constitution, Federal statutes, executive regulations, and civilian or military contracts. For example, the Court has presided over such important cases as the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s and the World War II internment of Japanese-Americans. It also presides over civilian and military pay claims, and money claims under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause. I have heard no objections to the qualifications of any of the five nominees to this court. One of these nominees, Armando Bonilla, would be the first Hispanic judge to hold a seat on the Court. He is endorsed by the Hispanic National Bar Association. He has spent his entire career now spanning over two decades as an attorney for the Department of Justice. He was hired out of law school in the Department's prestigious Honors Program, and has risen to become the Associate Deputy Attorney General in the Department. Mr. Bonilla should be confirmed without further delay. Another nominee, Jeri Somers, also has a long record of public service. She served her country in the Air Force, retiring with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. She spent over two decades serving first as a Judge Advocate General and then as a Military Judge in the United States Air Force and the District of Columbia's Air National Guard. In 2007, she became a Board Judge with the U.S. Civilian Board of Contract Appeals and currently serves as its Vice Chair. Armando Bonilla and Jeri Somers are just two of the five nominees that Senate Republicans have been denying a confirmation vote. These are two individuals that have done right every step of the way in their careers and are willing to serve the American people on this important Court. They have dedicated the majority of their careers in service to our nation. They deserve better than the treatment they are receiving from the Senate. During the Bush administration, the Senate confirmed nine judges to the Court of Federal Claims with the support of every Senate Republican. So far during the Obama administration, only three Court of Federal Claims nominees have received confirmation votes. That is nine CFC judges during the Bush administration to only three so far in the Obama administration. It appears that the Senate Republicans' obstruction playbook leaves no court behind. It spans from the very top with their complete refusal to give a hearing and a vote to Chief Judge Merrick Garland, to the Article III circuit and district courts, to the Article I Court of Federal Claims, where citizens go to sue their government. This blockade of all five CFC nominees makes no sense, especially because not a single Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee raised a concern about these nominees either during the Committee hearings on these nominations two years ago or during the Committee debate two years ago or last year. None of President Bush's nominees to the Court of Federal Claims spent longer than four months on the Senate floor before receiving a confirmation vote. Two of them waited only a single day. After two years, it is well past time for these five nominees to receive a vote so they can get to work on the shorthanded Court of Federal Claims. # # # # # 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-durbin-statement-house-committee-passage-repeal-wall-street-reform,"Welch, Durbin Statement on House Committee Passage of Repeal of Wall Street Reform",2016-09-13,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONU.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and U.S. Representative Peter Welch (D-VT) released the following statement regarding the Financial CHOICE Act, legislation by U.S. Representative Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) that would gut the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010. The bill was just narrowly passed by Hensarling's House Financial Services Committee, over bipartisan opposition. ""This bill's 500+ pages are stuffed full of goodies and giveaways for Wall Street banks at the expense of Main Street families and businesses. The bill would gut consumer protections and unleash the same predatory forces that caused the financial meltdown of 2008 and led to the Great Recession. ""It would repeal the Volcker Rule, which prevents banks from gambling with their customers' money. It would cripple the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which protects consumers from the kind of abusive practices that we just saw from Wells Fargo. And it would dramatically increase debit card swipe fees, which would be like dropping an $8 billion per year tax increase on America's small businesses to benefit the same big banks that got us into the mess in the first place. ""Chairman Hensarling and his fellow committee Republicans are turning their backs on American families and small businesses with this big bank bonanza bill. The better choice would be to keep critical Wall Street reform protections in place and reject this misguided bill."" ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-guest-column-about-constitution-day,Leahy Guest Column About Constitution Day,2016-09-13,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.13.16 Leahy Guest Column About Constitution Day Constitution Day: Protecting Our Democracy By Patrick Leahy When the Framers signed the United States Constitution, they created a federal system of government with three co-equal branches, designed to work cooperatively but also designed to serve as checks and balances. As we celebrate the 229th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution, Americans across this great nation take time to reflect on its enduring legacy and the many challenges that our constitutional system of government faces. Those of us who took an oath to uphold the Constitution and that includes every U.S. senator have a duty to ensure that our government created by and sustained by our Constitution continues to function for the good of the American people. The Senate plays a unique role in relation to the president and the judiciary. Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution provides that the president with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Judges of the Supreme Court. With this language, the Framers imposed on the Senate the duty to consider a president's judicial nominees. This year, unfortunately, Senate Republicans decided to shirk that fundamental constitutional duty. Within hours of the news in February that Justice Antonin Scalia had passed, Senate Republican leadership declared that they would block any consideration of President Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court. No hearings. No consideration by the Judiciary Committee or committee vote. No up-or-down confirmation vote in the Senate. This partisan obstruction of a Supreme Court nomination is not only unprecedented but it is contrary to the constitutional design of the Framers. Senate Republicans' shutdown of any consideration of the Supreme Court nominee diminishes both of the other co-equal branches of government. It imposes a novel time limit on one of the most important constitutional roles of our president. And it diminishes the role that our highest court can play while it operates with a long-standing vacancy. Six months ago, President Obama fulfilled his constitutional duty by nominating an exceedingly well-qualified jurist to serve on the Supreme Court: Chief Judge Merrick Garland. He is a dedicated public servant who has served for nearly two decades on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals known as the second highest court in the land. He has earned bipartisan praise for being an undeniably fair-minded judge. In 2010, Republican Senator Orrin Hatch said Chief Judge Garland would be a consensus nominee and there was no question he could be confirmed to the Supreme Court. Instead of evaluating his qualifications and reviewing his record, however, Republicans have blocked his nomination on the premise that a president should not be able to appoint a Supreme Court justice in the final year of the term of office. Such a limiting provision on the president's powers is found nowhere in the Constitution. There is no election year exception in Article II. And the history of our country reflects this fact. Vacancies on the Supreme Court are rare. Vacancies in even-numbered years are rarer still. Yet, more than a dozen Supreme Court justices have been confirmed in presidential election years. Most recently, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was confirmed by a Democratic-led Senate during President Reagan's final year in office in 1988. Appointments to the Supreme Court are among the most important and consequential powers that a president possesses under our Constitution. And the American people have twice voted in record numbers to elect President Obama to exercise this power. In doing so, Americans have granted him the same constitutional authorities of all of our previous presidents for each year he serves. Moreover, the American people rightfully expect their senators Republicans and Democrats alike to continue to do their jobs regardless of whether it is an election year. This year should be no different. We should do our jobs in the Senate rather than do damage to our independent judicial system. This summer when the Supreme Court completed its most recent term, the damage of Republican obstruction became clear. In seven cases, the diminished high court could not serve as the final arbiter of law when it was unable to garner a majority to issue a final decision on the merits. In another death penalty appeal a matter of life and death the justices also deadlocked. And just last month, the high court deadlocked on consideration of an election law case that will impact the constitutional rights of millions of voters ahead of this year's election. Next month, the Supreme Court will start its new term and begin hearing cases involving pressing constitutional questions that affect millions of Americans. There is still time for the Senate to correct its course and consider Chief Judge Garland's nomination. There should not be an empty seat on the bench when the Supreme Court convenes on the first Monday in October. If there is, it will represent the disrespect that Senate Republicans have not only for the president's powers under the Constitution but for the independent judiciary that the Constitution created. On this Constitution Day, I hope that all Americans will take a moment to consider the damage that this partisan obstruction is having on our constitutional system of government. I take seriously the oath I took to uphold the Constitution. I hope that all senators will commit to making sure that our constitutional system of government endures for the next generation. # # # # # [Sen. Patrick Leahy, Vermont Democrat, is ranking member of the Senate Judiciary 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/grassley-leahy-to-senate-leadership-reform-investor-visa-program-now-or-let-it-expire,"Grassley, Leahy to Senate Leadership: Reform Investor Visa Program Now or Let it Expire",2016-09-12,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.12.16 Grassley, Leahy to Senate Leadership: Reform Investor Visa Program Now or Let it Expire Grassley, Leahy to Senate Leadership: Reform Investor Visa Program Now or Let it Expire WASHINGTON Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy are calling on Senate leadership to reform the flawed EB-5 foreign investor visa program or allow it to expire. The program, which allows foreign nationals to invest $1 million (or $500,000 in rural or high unemployment areas) in a commercial enterprise in exchange for green cards and U.S. citizenship, has been beset with fraud, abuse and national security vulnerabilities. The program is set to expire at the end of September. In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran and Ranking Member Barbara Mikulski, the senators cite fraud, securities violations, money laundering, investor exploitation and failed projects as evidence of the need for reforms. If the program is going to continue in some form, at a minimum, we should provide the Department of Homeland Security with the tools necessary to expand background checks, site visits, audits, and the vetting of projects and investors alike. We must also better monitor compliance with securities laws, increase program transparency, raise minimum investment thresholds and restore program incentives so more money goes to the communities that need it, as Congress intended. The Department must also be authorized to sanction regional centers and other program participants for noncompliance, the senators said in the letter. Grassley and Leahy introduced legislation to reform the program last year, and have worked with bipartisan counterparts in the House of Representatives to restore integrity in the program, reduce fraud and abuse and return the program to its original intent of assisting rural and economically depressed parts of the country. Full text of the letter follows: September 8, 2016 The Honorable Mitch McConnell Majority Leader United States Senate 317 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 The Honorable Harry Reid Minority Leader United States Senate 522 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510 Dear Majority Leader McConnell and Minority Leader Reid: We write to oppose a straight reauthorization of the EB-5 Regional Center program in any continuing resolution or appropriations bill that will cover fiscal year 2017. The program has become plagued with fraud and abuse, and if not reformed it should be allowed to expire on September 30th. The rampant abuse of the EB-5 Regional Center program has been well documented in recent years. Internal Department of Homeland Security reviews, the Government Accountability Office, media outlets, and our Committee have uncovered serious problems with the program. Cases of fraud and securities violations, money laundering, exploitation of investors, abused program incentives, and failed projects have become all too common. Secretary Jeh Johnson has publicly acknowledged significant concerns involving the program and has called on Congress to provide much-needed reforms. It is past time that we do so. If the program is going to continue in some form, at a minimum, we should provide the Department of Homeland Security with the tools necessary to expand background checks, site visits, audits, and the vetting of projects and investors alike. We must also better monitor compliance with securities laws, increase program transparency, raise minimum investment thresholds and restore program incentives so more money goes to the communities that need it, as Congress intended. The Department must also be authorized to sanction regional centers and other program participants for noncompliance. As Chairman and Ranking Member of the committee that oversees the EB-5 Regional Center program, we have been working for years to identify and address concerns raised by the program's misuse. We implore you to consider reforms we have put forward and recommendations that have been made in conjunction with the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee to improve this flawed program. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Charles E. Grassley Patrick Leahy Chairman Ranking Member cc: Chairman Cochran and Ranking Member Mikulski Senate Committee on Appropriations 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-welcomes-bipartisan-house-bill-to-reform-foreign-investment-program-eb-5,Senator Leahy Welcomes Bipartisan House Bill To Reform Foreign Investment Program (EB-5),2016-09-12,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.12.16 Senator Leahy Welcomes Bipartisan House Bill To Reform Foreign Investment Program (EB-5) Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, On The Need To Reform The EB-5 Program September 12, 2016 [Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) issued the following comment Monday after House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.) introduced legislation to reform and reauthorize the EB-5 Regional Center program, which is currently authorized through September. The legislation, H.R. 5992, the American Job Creation and Investment Promotion Reform Act, is a companion to legislation of the same name introduced last year by Senator Leahy and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). The four leaders of the Judiciary Committees pressed to include these reforms as part of the omnibus appropriations bill last December, but their efforts were blocked by House and Senate leadership. Last week, Senators Leahy and Grassley wrote to Senate leadership opposing any reauthorization of the EB-5 program that did not include broad and necessary reforms.] Rampant fraud and abuse within the EB-5 Regional Center program prevents the program from serving its original purpose, which was to create jobs and direct capital to underserved areas starved for investment. As I have said before, the program needs to be reformed or it needs to end. The bipartisan bill introduced in the House today represents good progress and reflects a proposal I developed with the leaders of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees last year, which was supported by the civil rights community. Importantly, the House proposal includes additional reforms that I suggested to require transparency and promote accountability in the use of investor funds. It ensures that investors and the Department of Homeland Security can better track investments and requires a third party to sign off on any expenditures. The bill also provides protections for good faith investors who are defrauded, allowing them to adjust their investment without jeopardizing their immigration benefits. I look forward to working with both the House and Senate to ensure that this program, if it is to continue, includes critical protections against fraud and abuse and serves the distressed areas that Congress intended. # # # # # 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/key-house-subcommittee-holds-hearing-welch-s-bipartisan-bill-improve,Key House Subcommittee Holds Hearing on Welchs Bipartisan Bill to Improve Rural Phone Service,2016-09-09,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Peter Welch,W000800,welch.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTONThe House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology held a hearing this week on Rep. Peter Welch's (D-VT) bipartisan legislation to improve the quality and reliability of phone calls in rural areas of the country. Welch introduced the legislation after learning from Vermont small businesses, schools, and small telecommunication companies about calls not connecting or being dropped throughout the state. Welch arranged for Mr. Eric LeBeau, General Manager of Ferrisburgh's Dakin Farm to testify at the hearing about the company's experience with customer calls being dropped in the middle of ordering products. LeBeau told the Committee how his company was harmed by call completion issues from 2010 through 2012. This is about basic telephone service. And it's pretty astonishing when you think about it that you can't have confidence as a business or individual that your call is going to go through, Rep. Welch said in the hearing. [This hearing is] an indication that this committee is sincerely committed to making certain that the tools of the modern economylet alone the telephoneare available to folks in rural America. That's red states, blue, states, its all of us. His full remarks can be found here. For rural residents and businesses, the problem begins with how incoming calls are routed. Large telecommunications companies often rely on intermediate providers (least cost routers') to route calls from larger networks to local service providers. The least cost router' frequently declines to connect calls in rural areas to save money, leaving rural customers unable to consistently and reliably use their landline telephone. Welch's bill with Rep. David Young (R-IA) would for the first time hold both the intermediary provider and the originating providers accountable. It would require intermediary providers to register with the Federal Communications Commission and meet call rural quality standards. Additionally, the bill explicitly prohibits providers from using any intermediary routing service that is not registered with the FCC. Read Welch and Young's full legislation here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/housing-is-not-a-political-issue-its-a-moral-issue,Housing Is Not A Political Issue; Its A Moral Issue,2016-09-09,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.09.16 Housing Is Not A Political Issue; It's A Moral Issue A Report On HUD Sec. Julin Castro's Visit To Vermont Housing Is Not A Political Issue; It's A Moral Issue A Report On HUD Sec. Julin Castro's Visit To Vermont by Patrick Leahy Last week President Obama's chief housing officer, Secretary Julin Castro of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), accepted my invitation to visit Vermont. In his first visit to the Green Mountain State since he took office in 2014, he remarked how surprised he was to see so much green. In fact our uniquely rural nature is why I had invited him to our state and why I had gathered a panel of Vermont's housing partners and homelessness advocates to discuss the array of successes and challenges of achieving affordable housing in our state and rural America. Vermont is a state where affordable housing is not a slogan, but a real priority. Vermont's rural nature means that for many the greatest challenge is isolation. Housing costs continue to rise, and for years Vermont has maintained a one percent vacancy rate. Our rural communities remain challenged with meeting the complex needs of our most vulnerable citizens, but we continue to make significant gains. For instance, with the help of federal HUD investments, Vermont saw a 25 percent decrease in chronic homelessness last year. This is an impressive achievement, and a result of ingenuity and collaboration at every level. Yet even with these gains, we will not be able to meet our goals of eradicating homelessness just as we will not overcome inequality, advance education or build a stronger economy unless we invest in housing. In Vermont, we know the value of Housing First, and our ability to build stronger depends on our ability to first build together. The strength of our rural network results in a collective mission of servicing shelters, developing downtowns and supporting self-sufficiency. No one should ever be without help, without hope, or without a home. We know that the challenge of affordability, and the cost burdens that keep our families up at night, are not limited to only the lowest-income households. These challenges are steadily inching up the income scale and reaching the middle class. And there is no magic bullet when it comes to solving these challenges. We need to treat the chronic symptoms of an underemployed workforce, tight housing market and tepid wage growth with a host of remedies in affordable housing. We need direct housing cost help to these families, we need services, and we need more housing production. That is why last week I was proud to announce with Secretary Castro that Vermont would be the second state in the nation to receive a new $3 million investment in affordable housing from the National Housing Trust Fund. It's why I was glad to travel with the Secretary to Burlington's Old North End to welcome 40 families to their new homes at the Bright Street Cooperative. It is why I am an outspoken advocate for federal programs that support housing and homeownership. I am immensely proud of our statewide unity and resiliency. And I am grateful for those providers who populate communities far away from where we gathered last week, for whom helping to build a home is a part of helping to build the community. It is often said that investing in housing is investing in our economy and our future. I believe, and even more so after the testimony heard last week, that investing in affordable housing is also investing in our friends, our families and our neighbors. It is investing in a future where access to housing is a universal human right, especially where, as the Secretary noted, the grass is truly greener. # # # # # [Patrick Leahy (D) represents Vermont in the U.S. Senate and on 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/leahys-message-on-the-anniversary-of-9/11,Leahy's Message On The Anniversary Of 9/11,2016-09-09,2016,2016-09,Democrat,House,VT,Patrick Leahy,L000174,www.leahy.senate.gov,,,legacy,"09.09.16 Leahy's Message On The Anniversary Of 9/11 [Following Is Senator Patrick Leahy's Message On The 15th Anniversary Of 9/11] Rekindling The Common Spirit That United Us After 9/11 It is hard to believe that 15 years ago this Sunday the Twin Towers fell, smoke from the Pentagon could be seen from miles away, and a plane went down in a Pennsylvania field. For those who lived through that horrible day, the memory still feels fresh. Of course, this is especially true for those who lost loved ones. This weekend, Americans across the country will gather to remember the thousands of innocent lives that were taken so callously and indiscriminately in those terrorist attacks. And we remember the first responders, law enforcement, intelligence, and military personnel who work every single day to keep our country safe. This year, we must also take a moment to remember the spirit that united us in the days after the attacks. Americans of all races, religions and backgrounds stood together in solidarity to support one another and stand against the cowardice of terrorism. Following the attacks, President George W. Bush visited a mosque. At a joint session of Congress, he reminded Americans that, No one should be singled out for unfair treatment or unkind words because of their ethnic background or religious faith. In the years after September 11, our country did not always live up to those words. But we must remember the ideals, values, and humanity that sustained us through those first dark days. In today's political environment, it is easy to lose sight of that common spirit. Some are trying hard to divide us. A federal judge has been accused of bias because of his ethnic heritage. Religious and ideological tests for visitors to the United States are discussed as though they are serious policy proposals. The sacrifices of war heroes and Gold Star families are belittled. And that is just the beginning. On this fifteenth anniversary of September 11, we must reject this divisiveness. While Americans will continue to mourn the loss of so many on September 11 and in the wars that followed, we will never lose sight of the core principles that so many generations of Americans fought to protect. # # # # # Press Contact Press Contact David Carle: 202-224-3693 Next Article Previous Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z