NewzIntel.com

Category: US Senate

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley Oversight Unveils Disturbing Extent of FBI’s Anti-Catholic Bias

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today released Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) records revealing the Biden FBI’s anti-Catholic Richmond Memo was widely distributed to over 1,000 FBI employees across the country before it was publicly disclosed by a whistleblower in 2023.  
    Per the Grassley-obtained records, the Biden FBI’s targeting of Catholics based on biased sources was more widespread than previously known. In fact, Grassley found the FBI produced at least 13 additional documents and five attachments that used anti-Catholic terminology and relied on information from the radical far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). One FBI agent admitted over email, “[O]ur overreliance on the SPLC for hate designation [of traditional Catholics] is … problematic.”  
    A second FBI memo, released by Grassley, was drafted by the FBI Richmond field office for Bureau-wide distribution. The draft memo repeated the unfounded link between traditional Catholicism and violent extremism, but was never published due to backlash following the Richmond Memo’s public disclosure. The existence of this second memo contradicts former-FBI Director Christopher Wray’s testimony that the Richmond field office only produced “a single product.” 
    Grassley is urging FBI Director Kash Patel to continue producing records related to the Richmond Memo’s origins, as well as former-FBI Director Christopher Wray’s misleading and obstructive response to Grassley’s oversight of the memo. 
    “I’m determined to get to the bottom of the Richmond memo, and of the FBI’s contempt for oversight in the last administration,” Grassley wrote. “I look forward to continuing to work with you to restore the FBI to excellence and prove once again that justice can and must be fairly and evenly administered, blind to whether we are Democrats or Republicans, believers or nonbelievers.” 
    Find Grassley’s letter and the released FBI documents HERE. 
    Related: 
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley Recognizes C-SPAN’s Decades of Senate Coverage, Discusses Need for Public Access Across All Platforms

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley

    WASHINGTON – In a speech on the Senate floor, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) celebrated the 39th anniversary of C-SPAN 2’s first Senate broadcast on June 2, 1986. Earlier today, Grassley and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) introduced a bipartisan resolution to celebrate C-SPAN’s historic coverage and urge all television providers, including streaming services, to carry the network.

    [embedded content]

    VIDEO

    Today is the 39th year celebration of the United States Senate being covered by C-SPAN 2. 

    I’ve come to the floor countless times since my first term in the United States Senate. beginning in 1981. It’s a privilege to represent Iowans and my home state here in the greatest deliberative body in the world.

    For more than four decades, and counting, I’ve joined my colleagues here in this chamber to debate public policy, shed light on wrongdoing and celebrate historic milestones.

    I’ve cast votes on behalf of Iowans, giving my assent or dissent to nominations and legislation on matters both foreign [and] domestic, on issues from A to Z.

    For a period of time – spanning more than 27 years – I held the longest voting streak in Senate history. My 8,927 consecutive roll call votes ended in November of 2020, when I was quarantined for exposure to COVID-19.

    My good friend from Maine, Senator Susan Collins, now holds the baton, as she continues her unbroken voting streak since she was sworn into office in 1997.

    During the 116th Congress and now the 119th Congress, I’m honored to serve as Senate President pro tem. From this leadership position, I open the Senate daily, lead the Pledge of Allegiance and often take the opportunity to deliver brief remarks during what we call Morning Business.

    Since 1986, every minute of the people’s business conducted here in the Senate chamber has been made available live to the public, from memorable moments – including televising 16 Supreme Court nomination debates and three presidential impeachment trials – to subjects that are often very mundane.

    Thanks to C-SPAN 2, this public service allows our constituents to see the swearing-in of newly elected members, watch all-night sessions during vote-a-ramas and tune in to history being made.

    Speaking of the historic moments, it was 39 years ago today, [on] June 2, when C-SPAN 2 started its gavel-to-gavel coverage of the United States Senate. 

    That was seven years after C-SPAN started broadcasting live coverage of the U.S. House of Representatives in 1979. At that time, I was a member of the House and appreciated C-SPAN’s mission to foster civic engagement and let the sunshine in on the people’s business.

    So, today, I wish C-SPAN 2 a happy birthday and thank those who are dedicated to its mission to bring the people’s business to the people of our country. C-SPAN does not receive one penny of taxpayer dollars. It is funded primarily from satellite and cable providers.

    Senator Klobuchar of Minnesota and I have introduced a bipartisan resolution to recognize C-SPAN 2 and the public service it provides the American people through its live, nonpartisan coverage. Our resolution calls for television providers, including streaming services, to make C-SPAN public affairs programming available to all Americans in real time on all platforms. 

    For [the] tens of millions of Americans who have cut the cord and get their content from streaming services, they should not be cut off from the civic content made available by C-SPAN.

    C-SPAN gives our constituents a front row seat to the legislative branch, providing unfiltered access to debates and deliberations that impact their lives and their livelihoods.

    C-SPAN 2 has recorded more than 43,830 hours of Senate sessions that span the spectrum of political views, policy debates and personal testimony, including more than 169,000 speeches.

    It has documented more than 23,439 roll call votes, providing a live testimonial of Senate decision-making. Its coverage helps hold elected officials accountable to our constituents who are able to see every roll call vote, as it actually happens.

    And it just so happens, on C-SPAN 2’s inaugural day on June 2, 1986, I took my turn as presiding officer during the Senate session.

    I also delivered remarks to introduce a bill on human rights and free speech issues that involved protestors outside of the then-Soviet embassy here in Washington, D.C. Thanks to C-SPAN, Americans can watch history unfold before their very eyes.

    As an advocate for civic engagement and transparency, I applaud C-SPAN’s commitment to chronicling democracy in action here in the Congress.

    In fact, for more than 20 years, I’ve pushed to allow cameras into the federal courthouses, including the Supreme Court, to foster a better understanding of the federal judiciary and its role in our system of checks and balances and in resolving legal disputes.

    Keeping C-SPAN’s cameras rolling here in Congress keeps lawmakers accountable to our constituents by providing a valuable conduit for civic engagement and civic education. As James Madison wrote in 1822, after he had been President six years before, some 35 years after he helped write the Constitution:

    “A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a Farce or Tragedy; or perhaps both. Knowle[d]ge will for ever govern ignorance: and a people who mean to be their own Governours, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

    C-SPAN helps arm Americans with knowledge in real time in a refreshing, nonpartisan lens. In this era of civic discord and polarization, C-SPAN serves the public interest, not a partisan agenda. 

    I encourage my colleagues to support our bipartisan resolution that Sen. Klobuchar and I have introduced.

    And I’ll finish with another James Madison [quote], as he noted: an engaged and educated citizenry is necessary to advance the public good and secure the longevity of our republic.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: Grassley Discusses AI Whistleblower Protection Act During “A Starting Point” Interview

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) joined “A Starting Point” to share details about his AI Whistleblower Protection Act.
    The legislation provides explicit whistleblower protections to those developing and deploying Artificial Intelligence (AI). Currently, some AI companies’ restrictive severance and nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) create a chilling effect on current and former employees looking to make whistleblower disclosures to the federal government, including Congress.
    Video and excerpts of Grassley’s remarks follow.

    VIDEO
    On the Importance of Whistleblowers:
    “A whistleblower can be anybody, most often in government that I deal with, but sometimes in the private sector. People that know something isn’t right, [that a] law might be violated. People might be stealing taxpayers’ money [or] taxes aren’t being paid, whatever the case might be. They think it’s not right. They may not even think of themselves as a whistleblower. I think of them as just patriotic Americans that want the government to do what the government’s supposed to do: obey the laws [and] spend the taxpayers’ money the way Congress intended.”
    On the Need for AI-Specific Whistleblower Protections:
    “I’ve had [AI] whistleblowers come to me and say that things aren’t right. They want to expose it … That’s why we need laws that would protect whistleblowers within the AI community, as we would any place in government or in the private sector …
    “My bill will explicitly protect communications of current and former AI employees making legally protected disclosure to Congress or a federal agency or to a supervisor. It seems as time goes on, AI is growing. My timely legislation will bring transparency and accountability to the artificial intelligence sector before it’s too late.”
    On Shady Non-Disclosure Agreements:
    “[These] non-disclosure statements that would say ‘you can’t talk about this,’ and it just prohibits and inhibits people that know something’s wrong coming to Congress to talk about it. It’s a violation of free speech, [and] it’s a way of covering up things that are wrong, that either people in government don’t want public, or private business wants to keep the information within the business.”
    On the Free Market System:
    “I believe in the free enterprise system. And of course, that causes me to support pro-business, pro-growth policies. I don’t see my whistleblower protection interest in any way violating that, because the government is legitimately a referee within the free enterprise system. So, all of this legislation isn’t about upending any non-disclosure agreements or ending companies’ rights to confidentiality. This is pretty simply stated as being something to ensure people who see wrongdoing can speak up without retribution before more harm is done to the public.
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Grassley, Republican Colleagues Introduce Legislation to Bolster Violent Crime Laws

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley

    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today led 10 Republican colleagues in introducing legislation to strengthen violent crime statutes and help prevent future crime. The Combating Violent and Dangerous Crime Act would resolve conflicting court decisions by clarifying penalties for violent offenses like carjacking, robbery and kidnapping.

    “Under the Biden-Harris administration, our nation saw a massive spike in violent crime. As the Trump administration works to clean up the previous administration’s mess, Congress has a duty to resolve any legal ambiguities that may weaken our ability to hold criminals fully accountable,” Grassley said. “Our bill includes several modest, but meaningful, reforms to tamp down on future crime and ensure justice is served.”

    The Combating Violent and Dangerous Crime Act addresses ambiguity and conflicting applications of existing law by clarifying congressional intent. Among other provisions, the bill would:

    • Resolve conflicting circuit court decisions that have resulted in a higher burden to charge violent offenses;
    • Clarify that an attempt or conspiracy to commit an offence involving physical force meets the legal definition of a violent crime;
    • Increase the statutory maximum penalty for carjacking and remove a duplicative intent requirement needed to charge a carjacking offense;
    • Clarify that attempted bank robbery and conspiracy to commit bank robbery are punishable under the current bank robbery statute;
    • Outlaw the marketing of candy-flavored drugs to minors; and
    • Establish a new category of violent kidnapping offences, allowing for greater penalties for violent kidnapping.

    Grassley is joined by Sens. John Boozman (R-Ark.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Jim Risch (R-Idaho).

    Read the full bill text HERE. Read the section-by-section HERE.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: On Senate Floor, Grassley Pushes Back Against Baseless Democrat Obstruction of DOJ Nominees

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is calling out Senate Democrats for obstructing Department of Justice (DOJ) nominees and undermining the Senate’s advice and consent role. 
    Grassley today went to the Senate floor to request unanimous passage of Patrick Davis’ nomination to be Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ’s Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA). Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has announced a blanket hold on all DOJ political nominees, objected to Grassley’s request. 
    Citing his reasons for objecting, Schumer claimed to have received insufficient response from DOJ regarding the Qatari jetliner gifted to the United States. Davis, as head of the DOJ OLA, would be responsible for facilitating this and all other DOJ responses to Congress. By obstructing Davis’ swift confirmation, Schumer is hamstringing his own efforts to communicate with DOJ.  
    “Obstructing [Davis’] nomination serves absolutely no one,” Grassley said on the Senate floor. “Many senators – myself included – have outstanding requests to the Justice Department that we expect answers to. I understand that some senators may complain that they haven’t received a response to their own outstanding requests. I’ve made such complaints myself over the years, under both Republican and Democrat administrations. But I don’t believe that obstructing this particular qualified nominee, who can help get the responses we need, will address their concern.”
    Schumer additionally stated that, by seeking unanimous consent on Davis’ nomination, “Republicans want the Senate to quietly rubber stamp a political nominee for the DOJ… no hearing, no debate, no scrutiny.” The Judiciary Committee held a hearing on Davis’ nomination on March 26 and both debated and advanced his nomination on April 10.
    The Senate confirmed the last two heads of the DOJ OLA – Carlos Uriarte and Stephen Boyd – by voice vote. Grassley has repeatedly stressed holds should be used selectively and urged Democrats to work with Republicans to confirm nominees in a bipartisan manner. 
    Video and a transcript of Grassley’s remarks follow. 
    [embedded content]
    VIDEO
    I come to the floor today concerned that the Senate’s advice and consent role is being undermined. It’s being undermined by obstruction from Senate Democrats that threaten to keep the Justice Department from functioning as the American people expect and the American people deserve. 
    The Office of Legislative Affairs serves as the crucial bridge between the Justice Department and this Congress. This relationship is essential, not only for the legislative process but also for maintaining constitutional oversight and accountability. 
    The Office of Legislative Affairs ensures that we, as lawmakers, have the timely information needed to craft legislation, conduct oversight and fulfill our constitutional duties. When we seek answers—whether it’s on criminal justice, or immigration, or national security—it’s the Office of Legislative Affairs that takes our questions and returns the responses. This function can’t run on autopilot.
    Yet today, the Office of Legislative Affairs is hobbled. It lacks a Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General to lead that office. Why? Because Senate Democrats have decided to impede the confirmation of all Justice Department nominees without exception. That is not the constitutional role of advice and consent; that is obstruction.
    Every senator has the right to raise concerns about nominees—that’s our constitutional role, that’s our duty. And holds of specific nominees for specific reasons at times is very appropriate. It’s an appropriate tool for any senator to use. I have even used that tool, and I’ve also done it on nominees.  
    But the process demands fairness and common sense. We should weigh each nominee individually, not slam the brakes on an entire agency, especially one [responsible] for keeping Americans safe.
    So I’m here at the floor because of the nomination of Patrick Davis, [who has been] pending on the Senate calendar for now two months. This is regrettable, because he’s an exceptionally qualified nominee. And this senator should know, because he worked for this senator. 
    Mr. Davis brings a strong record of public service and a deep understanding of the legislative process, gained from his time working for me on the Senate Judiciary Committee. I’m confident he will lead the Office of Legislative Affairs with diligence, with fairness and with integrity. He should be confirmed today, and I’m here to ask my colleagues to do just that.
    Obstructing his nomination serves absolutely no one. Many senators—myself included—have outstanding requests to the Justice Department that we expect answers to. I understand that some senators may complain that they haven’t received a response to their own outstanding requests. I’ve made such complaints myself over the years, under both Republican and Democrat administrations. But I don’t believe that obstructing this particular qualified nominee, who can help get the responses we need, will address their concern.
    I also understand that some senators are unhappy with the current administration and are using [holds on] Justice Department nominees to make their displeasure known. 
    To these colleagues, I’ll simply say that the obstruction of qualified nominees to lead the Office of Legislative Affairs makes it harder for the Department of Justice to engage with Congress, and harder for Congress to do its job. This ultimately ends up hurting the American people.
    I’m asking this body to uphold a fair confirmation process so that the Justice Department can effectively engage with Congress. 
    Blocking the confirmation of Patrick Davis does not serve the Senate, it does not serve the interests of justice and it does not serve the American People.
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reed Hammers Lutnick for Creating Waste, Inefficiency & Needless Bureaucratic Gridlock at Commerce

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WATCH: Sen. Reed warns Lutnick’s micromanagement and short-staffing of NOAA could leave states vulnerable to future disasters

    WASHINGTON, DC – In his partisan zeal to root out so-called waste, redundancy, and abuse, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is generating unprecedented bureaucratic waste and delays that are hampering the U.S. Department of Commerce’s mission, particularly at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).  Whistleblowers within the agency have come forward in the press to sound the alarm that Secretary Lutnick is causing bureaucratic gridlock and hindering the agency’s ability to assist local communities with preparations for extreme weather events.

    “Staff shortages and new layers of bureaucracy are suffocating NOAA and threatening its ability to accurately predict extreme weather events, ensure U.S. ports stay open and safeguard the nation’s commercial and recreational fisheries, say current and former agency officials,” according to E&E News by Politico.

    Things have gotten so bad at Commerce that even President Trump’s staunch ally U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has sounded the alarm.  Noting that NOAA has 5,700 contracts set to expire this year, Senator Cruz reported at a Congressional hearing last month that Secretary Lutnick typically reviews about two dozen contracts a week — at that pace, only 1,248 contracts would be reviewed in a year, and many of them require immediate attention and action.

    E&E News by Politico reported: “These contracts include everything from post-hurricane flood assessment to janitorial services,” Cruz said. He added that a data center at Texas A&M University was shut down for days, “depriving Texas emergency and water managers of critical drought forecasts that help them manage reservoirs and track storm surge data and hurricane forecasts in real time.”

    The report notes: “The coil around NOAA squeezes in two ways, they say. The first is personnel. More than 1,000 NOAA employees have left the agency since the start of the Trump administration, and the empty desks have led to staffing issues in key weather service offices — just as hurricane season approaches… The second issue is the slow pace of approval for outside contracts and grants… But fewer than 20 percent of outstanding grants have been approved, and more than 1,000 are in the queue with more added every day, according to a current NOAA official who was granted anonymity to speak without fear of reprisal.”

    Today, at a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies hearing, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) grilled Secretary Lutnick about the growing backlog of contracts that are still awaiting his sign off and how his inefficient and insufficient micromanagement tactics have slowed down the vital work of NOAA just as hurricane season is getting underway.

    “We’ve all been talking about bottlenecks, in fact, in the Department and elsewhere throughout the government. In fact, last month, Senator Cruz warned about the growing backlog of contracts awaiting approval at the Department of Commerce.  He warned that NOAA alone has 5,700 contracts set to expire this year. And it’s been reported in the press that you are insisting on personally reviewing every commerce contract over $100,000,” Reed asked.

    Secretary Lutnick admitted: “That is true.”

    Reed responded: “Well, that seems to be something that is not particularly efficient. And that results in the 5,700 contracts just in NOAA. So again, if you can’t find reliable support to do those reviews, I think you’re wasting your time, frankly.”

    To achieve costs savings and efficiently achieve its diverse missions, NOAA operations rely on a significant number of contractors.  While every Administration carefully reviews each contract to ensure it is an effective use of taxpayer dollars, what sets the Trump Administration apart is its own inefficiency and bureaucratic bottleneck that slows the reviews down to the point where the work in the contract either can’t be done or is approved at the last second and could raise costs in the long run.

    This is not a red state or blue state issue.  In addition to Senators Cruz and Reed, several other Senators – including Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Dan Sullivan (R-AK) — have raised concerns in recent months about missing or delayed funding, according to Politico.

    During the hearing, Reed pressed Lutnick about when the backlog of contract reviews would be completed and Lutnick, surprisingly, claimed there are no more NOAA contracts he needs to review:

    SEN. REED: Well, let’s go ahead and get those 5,700 contracts done. This weekend?

    SEC. LUTNICK: There are not, under any circumstances, any contracts in there. There are none.

    SEN. REED: How about this weekend?

    SEC. LUTNICK: None. 

    SEN. REED: Can you get it done this weekend? Work overtime with the gang and get it done?

    SEC. LUTNICK: There are no contracts waiting for me, and if there were, I’ll be there all night tonight, making sure they get turned out with my team, teaching my team how to do it.

    Noting that the Trump Administration has proposed drastic cuts to NOAA, slashing the agency’s annual budget from the current level of $6.1 billion down to $4.5 billion next year, and eliminating NOAA’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, Reed quoted longtime NOAA researcher Craig McLean, who served as NOAA’s top scientist during the first Trump Administration, and warned that the drastic cuts Secretary Lutnick is backing would “take us back to the 1950s in terms of our scientific footing and the American people” if enacted.

    Lutnick’s claim that the National Weather Service budget would remain unimpacted is undermined by steep cuts to other areas of NOAA, such as technology, research, and satellites that would grossly undercut the agency’s climate, weather, and ocean capabilities.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: New CBO Report Shows Trump’s Bill Would Slash Healthcare Coverage from 16 Million Americans & Raise Costs For Millions More

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed

    WASHINGTON, DC – Today, after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a new analysis showing 16 million people will lose coverage from the Republican reconciliation plan, including their failure to extend premium tax credits that Americans use to buy affordable health insurance, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) issued the following statement:

    “The Republican-plan would rip health care away from working people in order to fund a bigger tax windfall for the ultra-wealthy.

    “Republicans continue to try to mislead the American people about their true intentions, but this CBO report makes it very clear that under the Republican plan, 16 million Americans will lose their health care and health costs will go up for millions more. 

    “The America people aren’t fooled by misleading Republican sales pitches and gravity-defying claims that you can somehow slash hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicaid and not reduce care or services for a single person.  They can see Republicans are trying to effectively dismantle the Affordable Care Act.  The CBO report is clear: Republicans are trying to rip people’s health care away through a variety of tactics, including increased bureaucratic red tape and higher out-of-pocket costs.

    “Republicans should halt this foolish, big ugly bill and start working with Democrats on a bipartisan, fiscally responsible package that includes targeted tax cuts for the middle-class, not just the wealthy few, and strengthens Medicaid instead of slashing hundreds of billions of health dollars.”

    The CBO was established in 1974 under the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act to give Congress independent, objective budgetary and economic analyses.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Hickenlooper Statement on New Budget Estimate for Republicans’ Plan to Gut Medicaid, Increase National Debt

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Colorado John Hickenlooper

    Republicans’ House-passed bill would strip health insurance from 16 million Americans, raise national debt by $2.4 trillion according to CBO 

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper released the following statement on the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) latest estimate for how the cuts to Medicaid and other crucial services included in the House-passed Republican budget will kick millions of Americans off their health insurance and increase the national debt.

    “Kicking even more kids and their families off their health insurance to pay for big tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy? That’s exactly what another CBO report shows the Republicans’ extreme plan does.

    “Even the President’s friends are saying this is a horrible bill.”

    This latest CBO estimate reflects the last-minute Republican changes to their budget that in total would result in 16 million Americans losing health insurance and increase our national debt by $2.4 trillion.   

    Nearly 80 million Americans are enrolled in Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) nationally. Medicaid covers the care for over 60% of all nursing home residents.

    The Republican budget proposal calls for extreme Medicaid cuts of more than $700 billion, which would take away people’s health benefits; make it harder for them to see their health care providers; and prevent seniors from getting nursing home care.

    The Senate now must consider the House-passed budget. Hickenlooper has already voted against the Republican budget resolution on the Senate floor twice and offered amendments to prevent cuts to Medicaid. He will vote against the proposal again when it comes to the Senate.

    CBO is a nonpartisan entity that offers impartial analysis on the costs and impacts of proposed legislation to Congress.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Restricting The Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    class=”has-text-align-center”>BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A PROCLAMATION
    During my first Administration, I restricted the entry of foreign nationals into the United States, which successfully prevented national security threats from reaching our borders and which the Supreme Court upheld.  In Executive Order 14161 of January 20, 2025 (Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats), I stated that it is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks, threaten our national security, espouse hateful ideology, or otherwise exploit the immigration laws for malevolent purposes. 
    I also stated that the United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those aliens approved for admission into the United States do not intend to harm Americans or our national interests.  More importantly, the United States must identify such aliens before their admission or entry into the United States.  The United States must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists or other threats to our national security.
    I directed the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, to identify countries throughout the world for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full or partial suspension on the admission of nationals from those countries pursuant to section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f).  After completing that process, the Secretary of State determined that a number of countries remain deficient with regards to screening and vetting.  Many of these countries have also taken advantage of the United States in their exploitation of our visa system and their historic failure to accept back their removable nationals. 
    As President, I must act to protect the national security and national interest of the United States and its people.  I remain committed to engaging with those countries willing to cooperate to improve information-sharing and identity-management procedures, and to address both terrorism-related and public-safety risks.  Nationals of some countries also pose significant risks of overstaying their visas in the United States, which increases burdens on immigration and law enforcement components of the United States, and often exacerbates other risks related to national security and public safety.
    Some of the countries with inadequacies face significant challenges to reform efforts.  Others have made important improvements to their protocols and procedures, and I commend them for these efforts.  But until countries with identified inadequacies address them, members of my Cabinet have recommended certain conditional restrictions and limitations.  I have considered and largely accepted those recommendations and impose the limitations set forth below on the entry into the United States by the classes of foreign nationals identified in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation.
    NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, hereby find that, absent the measures set forth in this proclamation, the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of persons described in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions.  I therefore hereby proclaim the following:
    Section 1.  Policy and Purpose.  (a)  It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks and other national security or public-safety threats.  Screening and vetting protocols and procedures associated with visa adjudications and other immigration processes play a critical role in implementing that policy.  These protocols enhance our ability to detect foreign nationals who may commit, aid, or support acts of terrorism, or otherwise pose a safety threat, and they aid our efforts to prevent such individuals from entering the United States.
    (b)  Information-sharing and identity-management protocols and practices of foreign governments are important for the effectiveness of the screening and vetting protocols and procedures of the United States.  Governments manage the identity and travel documents of their nationals and residents. They also control the circumstances under which they provide information about their nationals to other governments, including information about known or suspected terrorists and criminal-history information.  It is, therefore, the policy of the United States to take all necessary and appropriate steps to encourage foreign governments to improve their information-sharing and identity-management protocols and practices and to regularly share their identity and threat information with the immigration screening and vetting systems of the United States.
    (c)  Section 2(b) of Executive Order 14161 directed the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, within 60 days of the date of that order, to jointly submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, a report identifying countries throughout the world for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full or partial suspension on the entry or admission of nationals from those countries pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)).
    (d)  On April 9, 2025, the Secretary of State, with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, presented the report described in subsection (c) of this section, recommending that entry restrictions and limitations be placed on foreign nationals of several countries.  The report identified countries for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a full suspension of admissions and countries that warrant a partial suspension of admission.
    (e)  In evaluating the recommendations from the Secretary of State and in determining what restrictions to impose for each country, I consulted with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, appropriate Assistants to the President, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.  I considered foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism goals.  And I further considered various factors, including each country’s screening and vetting capabilities, information sharing policies, and country-specific risk factors — including whether each country has a significant terrorist presence within its territory, its visa-overstay rate, and its cooperation with accepting back its removable nationals. 
    I also considered the different risks posed by aliens admitted on immigrant visas and those admitted on nonimmigrant visas.  Persons admitted on immigrant visas become lawful permanent residents of the United States.  Such persons may present national security or public-safety concerns that may be distinct from those admitted as nonimmigrants.  The United States affords lawful permanent residents more enduring rights than it does to nonimmigrants.  Lawful permanent residents are more difficult to remove than nonimmigrants, even after national security concerns arise, which increases the costs and aggravates the dangers of errors associated with admitting such individuals.  And although immigrants are generally subject to more extensive vetting than nonimmigrants, such vetting is far less reliable when the country from which someone seeks to emigrate maintains inadequate identity-management or information-sharing policies or otherwise poses risks to the national security of the United States.
    I reviewed these factors and assessed these goals, with a particular focus on crafting country-specific restrictions.  This approach was designed to encourage cooperation with the subject countries in recognition of each country’s unique circumstances.  The restrictions and limitations imposed by this proclamation are, in my judgment, necessary to prevent the entry or admission of foreign nationals about whom the United States Government lacks sufficient information to assess the risks they pose to the United States.  The restrictions and limitations imposed by this proclamation are necessary to garner cooperation from foreign governments, enforce our immigration laws, and advance other important foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism objectives.
    (f)  After reviewing the report described in subsection (d) of this section, and after accounting for the foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism objectives of the United States, I have determined to fully restrict and limit the entry of nationals of the following 12 countries:  Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.  These restrictions distinguish between, but apply to both, the entry of immigrants and nonimmigrants.
    (g)  I have determined to partially restrict and limit the entry of nationals of the following 7 countries:  Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.  These restrictions distinguish between, but apply to both, the entry of immigrants and nonimmigrants. 
    (h)  Sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation describe some of the identity-management or information-sharing inadequacies that led me to impose restrictions.  These inadequacies are sufficient to justify my finding that unrestricted entry of nationals from the named countries would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  Publicly disclosing additional details on which I relied in making these determinations, however, would cause serious damage to the national security of the United States, and many such details are classified.
    Sec. 2.  Full Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Identified Concern.  The entry into the United States of nationals of the following countries is hereby suspended and limited, as follows, subject to the categorical exceptions and case-by-case waivers described in section 5 of this proclamation:
    (a)  Afghanistan
    (i)   The Taliban, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) group, controls Afghanistan.  Afghanistan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Fiscal Year 2023 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Entry/Exit Overstay Report (“Overstay Report”), Afghanistan had a business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visa overstay rate of 9.70 percent and a student (F), vocational (M), and exchange visitor (J) visa overstay rate of 29.30 percent.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Afghanistan as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (b)  Burma
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Burma had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 27.07 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 42.17 percent.  Additionally, Burma has historically not cooperated with the United States to accept back their removable nationals.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Burma as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (c)  Chad
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Chad had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 49.54 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.64 percent.  According to the Fiscal Year 2022 Overstay Report, Chad had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 37.12 percent.  The high visa overstay rate for 2022 and 2023 is unacceptable and indicates a blatant disregard for United States immigration laws.  
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Chad as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (d)  Republic of the Congo
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, the Republic of the Congo had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 29.63 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.14 percent.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of the Republic of the Congo as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (e)  Equatorial Guinea
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Equatorial Guinea had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 21.98 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 70.18 percent.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Equatorial Guinea as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (f)  Eritrea
    (i)   The United States questions the competence of the central authority for issuance of passports or civil documents in Eritrea.  Criminal records are not available to the United States for Eritrean nationals.  Eritrea has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Eritrea had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 20.09 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.43 percent.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Eritrea as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (g)  Haiti
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Haiti had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 31.38 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 25.05 percent.  Additionally, hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the United States during the Biden Administration.  This influx harms American communities by creating acute risks of increased overstay rates, establishment of criminal networks, and other national security threats.  As is widely known, Haiti lacks a central authority with sufficient availability and dissemination of law enforcement information necessary to ensure its nationals do not undermine the national security of the United States. 
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Haiti as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (h)  Iran
    (i)   Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism.  Iran regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks, is the source of significant terrorism around the world, and has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Iran as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby suspended.
    (i)  Libya
    (i)   There is no competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents in Libya.  The historical terrorist presence within Libya’s territory amplifies the risks posed by the entry into the United States of its nationals.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Libya as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (j)  Somalia
    (i)   Somalia lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Somalia stands apart from other countries in the degree to which its government lacks command and control of its territory, which greatly limits the effectiveness of its national capabilities in a variety of respects.  A persistent terrorist threat also emanates from Somalia’s territory.  The United States Government has identified Somalia as a terrorist safe haven.  Terrorists use regions of Somalia as safe havens from which they plan, facilitate, and conduct their operations.  Somalia also remains a destination for individuals attempting to join terrorist groups that threaten the national security of the United States.  The Government of Somalia struggles to provide governance needed to limit terrorists’ freedom of movement.  Additionally, Somalia has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Somalia as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (k)  Sudan
    (i)   Sudan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Overstay Report, Sudan had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 26.30 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 28.40 percent. 
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Sudan as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    (l)  Yemen
    (i)   Yemen lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  The government does not have physical control over its own territory.  Since January 20, 2025, Yemen has been the site of active United States military operations.
    (ii)  The entry into the United States of nationals of Yemen as immigrants and nonimmigrants is hereby fully suspended.
    Sec. 3.  Partial Suspension of Entry for Nationals of Countries of Identified Concern.
    (a)  Burundi
    (i)    According to the Overstay Report, Burundi had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 17.52 percent. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Burundi as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Burundi to the extent permitted by law.
    (b)  Cuba
    (i)    Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism.  The Government of Cuba does not cooperate or share sufficient law enforcement information with the United States.  Cuba has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Cuba had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 7.69 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 18.75 percent.
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Cuba as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Cuba to the extent permitted by law.
    (c)  Laos
    (i)    According to the Overstay Report, Laos had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 34.77 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 6.49 percent.  Laos has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Laos as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas, is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Laos to the extent permitted by law.
    (d)  Sierra Leone
    (i)    According to the Overstay Report, Sierra Leone had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.43 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.83 percent.  Sierra Leone has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Sierra Leone as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Sierra Leone to the extent permitted by law.
    (e)  Togo
    (i)    According to the Overstay Report, Togo had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 19.03 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.05 percent. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Togo as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B‑2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Togo to the extent permitted by law.
    (f)  Turkmenistan
    (i)   According to the Overstay Report, Turkmenistan had a B-1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 21.74 percent. 
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Turkmenistan as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Turkmenistan to the extent permitted by law.
    (g)  Venezuela
    (i)    Venezuela lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Venezuela has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Venezuela had a B‑1/B-2 visa overstay rate of 9.83 percent.
    (ii)   The entry into the United States of nationals of Venezuela as immigrants, and as nonimmigrants on B‑1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J visas is hereby suspended.
    (iii)  Consular officers shall reduce the validity for any other nonimmigrant visa issued to nationals of Venezuela to the extent permitted by law.
    Sec. 4.  Scope and Implementation of Suspensions and Limitations.  (a)  Scope.  Subject to the exceptions set forth in subsection (b) of this section and any exceptions made pursuant to subsections (c) and (d) of this section, the suspensions of and limitations on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation shall apply only to foreign nationals of the designated countries who:
    (i)   are outside the United States on the applicable effective date of this proclamation; and
    (ii)  do not have a valid visa on the applicable effective date of this proclamation.
    (b)  Exceptions.  The suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation shall not apply to:
    (i)     any lawful permanent resident of the United States;
    (ii)    any dual national of a country designated under sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation when the individual is traveling on a passport issued by a country not so designated;
    (iii)   any foreign national traveling with a valid nonimmigrant visa in the following classifications:  A-1, A-2, C-2, C-3, G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO-1, NATO‑2, NATO-3, NATO-4, NATO-5, or NATO-6;
    (iv)    any athlete or member of an athletic team, including coaches, persons performing a necessary support role, and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State;
    (v)     immediate family immigrant visas (IR-1/CR-1, IR-2/CR-2, IR-5) with clear and convincing evidence of identity and family relationship (e.g., DNA);
    (vi)    adoptions (IR-3, IR-4, IH-3, IH-4);
    (vii)   Afghan Special Immigrant Visas;
    (viii)  Special Immigrant Visas for United States Government employees; and
    (ix)    immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran.
    (c)  Exceptions to the suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation may be made for certain individuals for whom the Attorney General finds, in her discretion, that the travel by the individual would advance a critical United States national interest involving the Department of Justice, including when individuals must be present to participate in criminal proceedings as witnesses.  These exceptions shall be made only by the Attorney General, or her designee, in coordination with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security.
    (d)  Exceptions to the suspension of and limitation on entry pursuant to sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation may be made case-by-case for individuals for whom the Secretary of State finds, in his discretion, that the travel by the individual would serve a United States national interest.  These exceptions shall be made by only the Secretary of State or his designee, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security or her designee.
    Sec. 5.  Adjustments to and Removal of Suspensions and Limitations.  (a)  The Secretary of State shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director for National Intelligence, devise a process to assess whether any suspensions and limitations imposed by sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation should be continued, terminated, modified, or supplemented.  Within 90 days of the date of this proclamation, and every 180 days thereafter, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, describing his assessment and recommending whether any suspensions and limitations imposed by sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation should be continued, terminated, modified, or supplemented.
    (b)  The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately engage each of the countries identified in sections 2 and 3 of this proclamation on measures that must be taken to comply with United States screening, vetting, immigration, and security requirements.
    (c)  Additionally, and in light of recent events, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence, shall provide me an update to the review of the practices and procedures of Egypt to confirm the adequacy of its current screening and vetting capabilities.
    Sec. 6.  Enforcement.  (a)  The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with appropriate domestic and international partners, including countries and organizations, to ensure efficient, effective, and appropriate implementation of this proclamation.
    (b)  In implementing this proclamation, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations.
    (c)  No immigrant or nonimmigrant visa issued before the applicable effective date of this proclamation shall be revoked pursuant to this proclamation.
    (d)  This proclamation shall not apply to an individual who has been granted asylum by the United States, to a refugee who has already been admitted to the United States, or to an individual granted withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment of Punishment (CAT).  Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to limit the ability of an individual to seek asylum, refugee status, withholding of removal, or protection under the CAT, consistent with the laws of the United States.
    Sec. 7.  Severability.  It is the policy of the United States to enforce this proclamation to the maximum extent possible to advance the national security, foreign policy, and counterterrorism interests of the United States.  Accordingly:
    (a)  if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any provision of this proclamation to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this proclamation and the application of its other provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby; and
    (b)  if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any provision of this proclamation to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid because of the lack of certain procedural requirements, the relevant executive branch officials shall implement those procedural requirements to conform with existing law and with any applicable court orders.
    Sec. 8.  Effective Date.  This proclamation is effective at 12:01 am eastern daylight time on June 9, 2025.
    Sec. 9.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
    (b)  This proclamation shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
    (c)  This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable by law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty‑five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-ninth.
                                 DONALD J. TRUMP

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Gillibrand, Markey Slam Republican Plan To Rescind Over $1 Billion In Federal Funding For The Corporation For Public Broadcasting

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New York Kirsten Gillibrand

    Today, U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Ed Markey led a group of 29 senators in slamming a Republican attempt to rescind $1.07 billion in already-allocated funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which funds local public broadcasting stations across the country.  The $1.07 billion represents 100% of CPB’s funding through September 2027. This move follows President Trump’s executive order directing cuts to federal funding for PBS and NPR.  

    “Following the White House’s request to rescind $1.07 billion in federal funding for CPB, we write to express our strong opposition to any rescission of funding for public broadcasting and prohibitions of direct and indirect funding to the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio,” wrote the senators. “This funding is essential to the functioning of the public media system and the communities they serve, and any cuts in funding would have detrimental effects on local stations, which rely on this funding to provide critical services to millions of Americans across the country. Public broadcasting is an essential service that should be protected, not decimated. For this reason, we request that you prioritize maintaining and continuing funding for CPB.”

    The Corporation for Public Broadcasting supports over 1,500 local public television and radio stations that provide free, high-quality programming to millions of households across America. It provides young children who don’t get the chance to attend preschool with educational content that helps them learn to read; airs highly trusted nightly news programming; and shares critical public safety information during emergencies. Local public television stations also provide extensive coverage of local government and elections and host candidate debates, helping Americans stay connected with their elected leaders. Because public television and radio relies heavily on federal funding to operate, particularly in rural communities, losing this funding would force many of these stations to reduce much of their programming or, in some cases, close their doors.

    In addition to Senators Gillibrand and Markey, the letter was also signed by Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Gary Peters (D-MI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).  

    The full text of the letter is available here or below:  

    Dear Majority Leader Thune,

    Federal investment in the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) supports over 1,500 local and regional public television and radio stations that provide free, high-quality programming to millions of households across the country. Following the White House’s request to rescind $1.07 billion in federal funding for CPB, we write to express our strong opposition to any rescission of funding for public broadcasting and prohibitions of direct and indirect funding to the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio, as outlined in the Executive Order titled, “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media” released on May 1, 2025. This funding is essential to the functioning of the public media system and the communities they serve, and any cuts in funding would have detrimental effects on local stations, which rely on this funding to provide critical services to millions of Americans across the country.

    Our public broadcasting system is a unique American institution that is deeply embedded in our communities and a critical source of lifesaving public safety services, accurate information, and educational programming. The vast majority of the federal funding CPB receives is allocated to local radio and television stations across the country. These cuts will have an immediate and significant impact for stations in rural communities that heavily rely on CPB funding to provide critical services and could likely result in the elimination of programming or outright closure of stations in areas already faced with limited connectivity.

    According to Northwestern University, 55 million people in the United States have no or only one source of local news, and rural counties are far more likely to lose their local news outlets. This number could increase if the two-year advance appropriation for public media is not upheld, resulting in the drastic reduction or complete elimination of free, high-quality local programming. This is especially concerning given the importance of public broadcasting during public emergencies, such as natural disasters, transportation accidents, national security threats, or public safety matters. CPB funds are essential to ensuring that the broadcast infrastructure remains robust and operational in disaster situations, especially scenarios in which local public broadcasters serve as the only source of information for those who need a lifeline. Any cuts in funding will have drastic consequences for communities in need.

    And there is much more to their public safety services in addition to the critical local information they broadcast. Public television’s interconnection technology, which connects local public television stations to PBS, is also one of the backbone pathways for the delivery of our nation’s Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) services – enabling cell phone subscribers to receive geotargeted emergency text alerts no matter where they are in the country. A cut to public broadcasting funding would put this lifesaving service and its nationwide footprint at risk.

    Public television has also pioneered cutting edge technology that helps first responders communicate with each other over the broadcast spectrum without the need for mobile service or broadband. This datacasting technology and public television’s public safety partnerships is already helping with early earthquake warning and has been proven effective in a wide range of scenarios where broadband or cellular service are limited, including rural search and rescue, overwater communications, large event crowd control and more. But this is only possible if stations serving rural and remote areas with limited broadband are healthy and continue operating as they are today.

    On the education front, public television’s early childhood education services ensure that every family has access to high-quality, non-commercial educational content regardless of their ability to pay for such services. This is essential for over 50 percent of three and four-year old children who do not attend formal preschool.

    If funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is eliminated or rescinded, the impact would be devastating. Millions of people across the country whose stations rely on CPB funding for a significant percentage of their budget would be at risk of losing access to public television’s services. These are services that nobody else in the media world is providing, but it’s exactly the work for which public broadcasting was created, and they are delivering to our communities every day.  

    Public broadcasting is an essential service that should be protected, not decimated. For this reason, we request that you prioritize maintaining and continuing funding for CPB.

    We appreciate your consideration of this request and thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Crapo, Mullin, Kelly, Cramer Introduce Legislation to Strengthen Broadband Connectivity in Rural America

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Idaho Mike Crapo

    Washington, D.C.–U.S. Senators Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma), Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) and Kevin Cramer (R-North Dakota) introduced the Lowering Broadband Costs for Consumers Act of 2025 to direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to require proper contributions to the Universal Service Fund (USF) from edge providers and broadband providers.  Requiring edge providers to cover associated costs for rural fiber networks will reduce the financial burden on consumers and rural providers while strengthening broadband connectivity throughout rural America.

    “Idahoans rely heavily upon broadband technology,” said Crapo.  “Addressing the ‘digital divide’ in broadband deployment between rural and urban or suburban areas will ensure communities, regardless of size, can access the necessary connection for modern life.”

    Currently, more than 100,000 households in Idaho lack access to broadband internet, according to the U.S. Census.  On Idaho’s tribal lands, more than 83 percent of residents cannot connect to high-speed internet.

    “Fair contributions to the USF from edge providers are long overdue,” said Mullin.  “Video streaming services account for 75 percent of all traffic on rural broadband networks.  However, unrecovered costs from streaming companies are often shifted and borne by small rural broadband providers.  Available, affordable internet will close the digital divide and increase telehealth, educational and employment opportunities for those who previously went without.  Rural Oklahomans deserve the same connectivity as those living in urban areas.”

    “In an interconnected world, high-speed internet access is part of our daily lives–from scheduling a doctor’s appointment to keeping in touch with family,” said Kelly.  “This bipartisan bill will have big corporations contribute to the expansion of affordable high-speed internet in areas that desperately need it.” 

    The Lowering Broadband Costs for Consumers Act would:

    • Direct the FCC to reform the USF by expanding the base so that edge providers and broadband providers contribute on an equitable and nondiscriminatory basis to preserve and advance universal service.
    • Limit assessments of edge providers to only those with more than three percent of the estimated quantity of broadband data transmitted in the United States and more than $5 billion in annual revenue. 
    • Direct the FCC to adopt a new mechanism under the current USF high-cost program to provide specific, predictable and sufficient support for expenses incurred by broadband providers that are not otherwise recovered.
    • Limit the FCC’s authority over edge providers and broadband providers only to requiring contributions to the USF.

    Full text of the Lowering Broadband Costs for Consumers Act of 2025 can be found here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Coons, Whitehouse, colleagues demand answers from Justice Dept. on decision to shutter specialized unit for cracking down on global drug crime

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and several of their colleagues sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi questioning the Department of Justice’s plan to end the successful Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) program. 

    “As the Department’s website notes, OCDETF ‘is the centerpiece of the Attorney General’s strategy to combat transnational-organized crime and to reduce the availability of illicit narcotics in the nation.’ OCDETF oversees coordination of thousands of federal, state, and local law enforcement officials to implement a national strategy to dismantle transnational drug cartels, the financial networks that support them, and the flow of drugs from these cartels into the United States,” wrote the senators.

    The OCDETF program is the largest anti-crime task force in the country. In just the past two months, OCDETF resources have been used to secure prison sentences for two individuals operating a clandestine fentanyl lab in South Carolina and to take down three prolific Chinese money launderers who have pled guilty to laundering tens of millions of dollars in drug proceeds. Many OCDETF investigations target the cartels’ financial networks, an often-overlooked component of the U.S. strategy to combat drug-trafficking organizations. In Fiscal Year 2023, OCDETF investigations resulted in forfeitures and seizures totaling more than $423 million. 

    Reporting from Bloomberg revealed that the Trump administration plans to eliminate the OCDETF program, including its support for specialized investigators and prosecutors. Such a decision would kneecap America’s ability to dismantle cartels trafficking illicit fentanyl.

    “We seek to fully understand the Department’s plans to cease OCDETF operations. We also seek to ensure that the federal government continues to have a coordinated strategy for working with state and local stakeholders to investigate and hold accountable transnational criminal organizations operating in, or financing the operations of organizations that operate in, the United States,” added the senators.

    The senators requested answers to the following questions by June 13, 2025:

    1. How many cases has OCDETF led, or supported with funds, intelligence, or other resources, that disrupted fentanyl traffickers’ production, distribution, financing, or money laundering networks?
    2. Does the Department intend to cease or significantly reduce OCDETF operations?  If so, please specify how. 
    3. If the Department intends to cease or significantly reduce OCDETF operations:
      1. Why is the department choosing to cease or significantly reduce OCDETF operations?
      2. How will the department ensure that ongoing OCDETF investigations and prosecutions continue uninterrupted?
      3. According to GAO, “OCDETF cases must have a financial component” to facilitate the targeting of financial networks underpinning drug trafficking organizations. How will the Department ensure that OCDETF-enabled inter-agency coordination on investigations into the financial networks of fentanyl traffickers and transnational criminal organizations continues uninterrupted?
      4. How will the department ensure that federal, state, and local law enforcement relying on OCDETF’s Fusion Center intelligence products are not hampered by a cessation or reduction of OCDETF operations? 
      5. Does the department intend to designate another entity to coordinate investigations and prosecutions of transnational criminal organizations, unrelated to low-level offenders?  If so, which entity?

    In addition to Senators Coons and Whitehouse, the letter is signed by U.S. Senators Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

    The text of the letter is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reviewing Certain Presidential Actions

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    MEMORANDUM FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERALTHE COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT
    SUBJECT:       Reviewing Certain Presidential Actions
    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby directed:
    Section 1.  Background.  The President of the United States, as the unitary head of the executive branch, holds tremendous power and responsibility through his signature:  words on paper can become the law of the land, individuals are appointed to some of the highest offices in Government, national policies can be created or eliminated, and prisoners can go free.  In sum, the Nation is governed through Presidential signatures.
    In recent months, it has become increasingly apparent that former President Biden’s aides abused the power of Presidential signatures through the use of an autopen to conceal Biden’s cognitive decline and assert Article II authority.  This conspiracy marks one of the most dangerous and concerning scandals in American history.  The American public was purposefully shielded from discovering who wielded the executive power, all while Biden’s signature was deployed across thousands of documents to effect radical policy shifts.  
    For years, President Biden suffered from serious cognitive decline.  The Department of Justice, for example, concluded that, despite clear evidence that Biden had broken the law, he should not stand trial owing to his incompetent mental state.  Biden’s cognitive issues and apparent mental decline during his Presidency were even “worse” in private, and those closest to him “tried to hide it” from the public.  To do so, Biden’s advisors during his years in office severely restricted his news conferences and media appearances, and they scripted his conversations with lawmakers, government officials, and donors, all to cover up his inability to discharge his duties. 
    Notwithstanding these well-documented issues, the White House issued over 1,200 Presidential documents, appointed 235 judges to the Federal bench, and issued more pardons and commutations than any administration in United States history.  For instance, just 2 days before Christmas in 2024, the White House announced that Biden commuted the sentences of 37 of the 40 most vile and monstrous criminals on Federal death row, including several child killers and mass murderers.
    Although the authority to take these executive actions, along with many others, is constitutionally committed to the President, there are serious doubts as to the decision making process and even the degree of Biden’s awareness of these actions being taken in his name. 
    The vast majority of Biden’s executive actions were signed using a mechanical signature pen, often called an autopen, as opposed to Biden’s own hand.  This was especially true of actions taken during the second half of his Presidency, when his cognitive decline had apparently become even more clear to those working most closely with him.
    Given clear indications that President Biden lacked the capacity to exercise his Presidential authority, if his advisors secretly used the mechanical signature pen to conceal this incapacity, while taking radical executive actions all in his name, that would constitute an unconstitutional wielding of the power of the Presidency, a circumstance that would have implications for the legality and validity of numerous executive actions undertaken in Biden’s name.
    Sec. 2.  Investigation.  (a)  The Counsel to the President, in consultation with the Attorney General and the head of any other relevant executive department or agency (agency), shall investigate, to the extent permitted by law, whether certain individuals conspired to deceive the public about Biden’s mental state and unconstitutionally exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the President.  This investigation shall address:
    (i)    any activity, coordinated or otherwise, to purposefully shield the public from information regarding Biden’s mental and physical health;
    (ii)   any agreements between Biden’s aides to cooperatively and falsely deem recorded videos of the President’s cognitive inability as fake;
    (iii)  any agreements between Biden’s aides to require false, public statements elevating the President’s capabilities; and
    (iv)   the purpose of these activities, including to assert the authorities of the President.
    (b)  The Counsel to the President shall also investigate, in consultation with the Attorney General and the head of any other relevant agency, the circumstances surrounding Biden’s supposed execution of numerous executive actions during his final years in office. This investigation shall address:
    (i)   the policy documents for which the autopen was used, including clemency grants, Executive Orders, Presidential memoranda, or other Presidential policy decisions; and
    (ii)  who directed that the President’s signature be affixed.
    Sec. 3.  General Provisions.  This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
                                 DONALD J. TRUMP

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Restricts the Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    COMBATING TERRORISM THROUGH COMMON SENSE SECURITY STANDARDS: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Proclamation to protect the nation from foreign terrorist and other national security and public safety threats from entry into the United States.
    Pursuant to President Trump’s Executive Order 14161, issued on January 20, 2025, titled “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,” national security agencies engaged in a robust assessment of the risk that countries posed to the United States, including regarding terrorism and national security.
    In Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court upheld the President’s authority to use section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to protect the United States through entry restrictions.
    The Proclamation fully restricts and limits the entry of nationals from 12 countries found to be deficient with regards to screening and vetting and determined to pose a very high risk to the United States: Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.
    The Proclamation partially restricts and limits the entry of nationals from 7 countries who also pose a high level of risk to the United States: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela.
    The Proclamation includes exceptions for lawful permanent residents, existing visa holders, certain visa categories, and individuals whose entry serves U.S. national interests.
    SECURING OUR BORDERS AND INTERESTS: The restrictions and limitations imposed by the Proclamation are necessary to garner cooperation from foreign governments, enforce our immigration laws, and advance other important foreign policy, national security, and counterterrorism objectives.
    It is the President’s sacred duty to take action to ensure that those seeking to enter our country will not harm the American people.
    After evaluating a report submitted by the Secretary of State, in coordination with other cabinet officials, President Trump has determined that the entry of nationals from certain countries must be restricted or limited to protect U.S. national security and public safety interests.
    The restrictions are country-specific in order to encourage cooperation with the subject countries in recognition of each country’s unique circumstances.
    Some of the named countries have inadequate screening and vetting processes, hindering America’s ability to identify potential security threats before entry.
    Certain countries exhibit high visa overstay rates, demonstrating a disregard for U.S. immigration laws and increasing burdens on enforcement systems.
    Other countries lack cooperation in sharing identity and threat information, undermining effective U.S. immigration vetting.
    Some countries have a significant terrorist presence or state-sponsored terrorism, posing direct risks to U.S. national security.
    Several countries have historically failed to accept back their removable nationals, complicating U.S. efforts to manage immigration and public safety.
    MAKING AMERICA SAFE AGAIN: President Trump is keeping his promise to restore the travel ban and secure our borders.
    President Trump: “We will restore the travel ban, some people call it the Trump travel ban, and keep the radical Islamic terrorists out of our country that was upheld by the Supreme Court.”
    In his first term, President Trump successfully implemented a travel ban that restricted entry from several countries with inadequate vetting processes or significant security risks.
    The Supreme Court upheld the travel ban, ruling that it “is squarely within the scope of Presidential authority” and noting that it is “expressly premised on legitimate purposes.”
    This Proclamation builds on President Trump’s first-term travel ban, incorporating an updated assessment of current global screening, vetting, and security risks.
    JUSTIFICATION FOR FULL SUSPENSION BY COUNTRY
    Afghanistan
    The Taliban, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) group, controls Afghanistan.  Afghanistan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Fiscal Year 2023 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Entry/Exit Overstay Report (“Overstay Report”), Afghanistan had a business/tourist (B1/B2) visa overstay rate of 9.70 percent and a student (F), vocational (M), and exchange visitor (J) visa overstay rate of 29.30 percent.
    Burma
    According to the Overstay Report, Burma had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 27.07 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 42.17 percent.  Additionally, Burma has historically not cooperated with the United States to accept back their removable nationals.
    Chad
    According to the Overstay Report, Chad had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 49.54 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.64 percent.  According to the Fiscal Year 2022 Overstay Report, Chad had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 37.12 percent.  The high visa overstay rate for 2022 and 2023 is unacceptable and indicates a blatant disregard for U.S. immigration laws.  
    Republic of the Congo
    According to the Overstay Report, the Republic of the Congo had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 29.63 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.14 percent.
    Equatorial Guinea
    According to the Overstay Report, Equatorial Guinea had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 21.98 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 70.18 percent.
    Eritrea
    The United States questions the competence of the central authority for issuance of passports or civil documents in Eritrea. Criminal records are not available to the United States for Eritrean nationals.  Eritrea has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Eritrea had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 20.09 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 55.43 percent.
    Haiti
    According to the Overstay Report, Haiti had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 31.38 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 25.05 percent.  Additionally, hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the United States during the Biden Administration.  This influx harms American communities by creating acute risks of increased overstay rates, establishment of criminal networks, and other national security threats. As is widely known, Haiti lacks a central authority with sufficient availability and dissemination of law enforcement information necessary to ensure its nationals do not undermine the national security of the United States. 
    Iran
    Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism.  Iran regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks, is the source of significant terrorism around the world, and has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    Libya
    There is no competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents in Libya.  The historical terrorist presence within Libya’s territory amplifies the risks posed by the entry into the United States of its nationals.
    Somalia
    Somalia lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Somalia stands apart from other countries in the degree to which its government lacks command and control of its territory, which greatly limits the effectiveness of its national capabilities in a variety of respects.  A persistent terrorist threat also emanates from Somalia’s territory.  The United States Government has identified Somalia as a terrorist safe haven.  Terrorists use regions of Somalia as safe havens from which they plan, facilitate, and conduct their operations.  Somalia also remains a destination for individuals attempting to join terrorist groups that threaten the national security of the United States.  The Government of Somalia struggles to provide governance needed to limit terrorists’ freedom of movement.  Additionally, Somalia has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.
    Sudan
    Sudan lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  According to the Overstay Report, Sudan had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 26.30 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 28.40 percent. 
    Yemen
    Yemen lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  The government does not have physical control over its own territory.  Since January 20, 2025, Yemen has been the site of active U.S. military operations.
    JUSTIFICATION FOR PARTIAL SUSPENSION BY COUNTRY (Immigrants and Nonimmigrants on B-1, B-2, B-1/B-2, F, M, and J Visas)
    Burundi
    According to the Overstay Report, Burundi had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and an F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 17.52 percent. 
    Cuba
    Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism.  The Government of Cuba does not cooperate or share sufficient law enforcement information with the United States.  Cuba has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Cuba had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 7.69 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 18.75 percent.
    Laos
    According to the Overstay Report, Laos had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 34.77 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 6.49 percent.  Laos has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    Sierra Leone
    According to the Overstay Report, Sierra Leone had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 15.43 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.83 percent.  Sierra Leone has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals. 
    Togo
    According to the Overstay Report, Togo had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 19.03 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 35.05 percent. 
    Turkmenistan
    According to the Overstay Report, Turkmenistan had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 15.35 percent and a F, M, and J visa overstay rate of 21.74 percent. 
    Venezuela
    Venezuela lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.  Venezuela has historically refused to accept back its removable nationals.  According to the Overstay Report, Venezuela had a B1/B2 visa overstay rate of 9.83 percent.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Directs Review of Certain Presidential Actions

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    INVESTIGATING EXECUTIVE ACTIONS UNDER BIDEN’S PRESIDENCY: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing an investigation into who ran the United States while President Biden was in office.
    The Memorandum directs an investigation into whether certain individuals conspired to deceive the public about Biden’s mental state and unconstitutionally exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the President.
    The Memorandum also mandates an investigation into the circumstances surrounding Biden’s purported execution of the numerous executive actions during his final years in office, examining policy documents signed with an autopen, who authorized its use, and the validity of the resulting Presidential policy decisions.
    QUESTIONING WHO WIELDED THE EXECUTIVE POWER DURING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION: The combined nature of Biden’s documented cognitive decline and the repeated use of an autopen raises serious concerns about the legitimacy of his actions.
    Reports indicate that, for years, Biden suffered from serious cognitive decline.
    For example, although the Department of Justice found that Biden had violated the law by willfully retaining and disclosing classified materials, it ultimately concluded that Biden was unfit to stand trial given his incompetent mental state.

    Biden’s cognitive issues and apparent mental decline were reportedly even “worse” in private, with those closest to him attempting to conceal it from the public.
    Biden’s advisors severely restricted his news conferences and media appearances, scripting his conversations with lawmakers, government officials, and donors.

    Despite Biden’s cognitive deficiencies, the White House issued over 1,200 Presidential documents, appointed 235 judges to the Federal bench, and issued more pardons and commutations than any Administration in U.S. history.
    Just two days before Christmas in 2024, Biden commuted the sentences of 37 of the 40 most vile and monstrous criminals on Federal death row, including several child killers and mass murderers.

    The authority to take these executive actions is constitutionally reserved for the President, yet the Biden White House used an autopen to execute the vast majority of Biden’s executive actions, particularly during the second half of his Presidency.
    RESTORING PRESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTABILITY: President Trump believes Americans deserve answers as to whether President Biden signed these documents, and if not, who signed them, and under what circumstances.
    President Trump: “And you know what, they ought to find out who was using that autopen. Because whoever that person was, he or she was like the President of the United States … I think a President should sign it, not use an autopen. And we’re going to find out whether or not he knew what the hell he was doing. … So I think it’s something that we should really look at because that’s so important.”
    President Trump: “The real question – who ran the autopen, OK? Who ran the autopen? Because the things that were signed were signed illegally, in my opinion.”
    Since returning to office, President Trump has held numerous open-press signing events where the American public can witness President Trump’s signature and knowledge regarding the matters in question with their own eyes.
    Even the legacy media admits that President Trump is on track to becoming the most-accessible President in modern history.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Restricts Foreign Student Visas at Harvard University

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    RESTRICTING FOREIGN STUDENT VISAS AT HARVARD: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Proclamation to safeguard national security by suspending the entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University. 
    The Proclamation suspends the entry into the United States of any new Harvard student as a nonimmigrant under F, M, or J visas.
    It directs the Secretary of State to consider revoking existing F, M, or J visas for current Harvard students who meet the Proclamation’s criteria.
    The Proclamation does not apply to aliens attending other U.S. universities through the Student Exchange Visa Program (SEVP) and exempts aliens whose entry is deemed in the national interest.
    HARVARD HAS A DEMONSTRATED HISTORY OF CONCERNING FOREIGN TIES AND RADICALISM:
    The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has long warned that foreign adversaries take advantage of easy access to American higher education to steal information, exploit research and development, and spread false information.
    The University has seen a drastic rise in crime in recent years, while failing to discipline at least some categories of conduct violations on campus.
    Harvard has failed to provide sufficient information to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) about foreign students’ known illegal or dangerous activities, reporting deficient data on only three students.
    Harvard is either not fully reporting its disciplinary records for foreign students or is not seriously policing its foreign students.
    Harvard has also developed extensive entanglements with foreign adversaries, receiving more than $150 million from China alone. In exchange, Harvard has, among other things, hosted Chinese Communist Party paramilitary members and partnered with China-based individuals on research that could advance China’s military modernization.
    The Chinese Communist Party has sent thousands of mid-career and senior bureaucrats to study at U.S. institutions, with Harvard University considered the top “party school” outside the country. Xi Jinping’s own daughter attended Harvard as an undergraduate in the early 2010s.

    Harvard has failed to adequately address violent anti-Semitic incidents on campus, with many of these agitators found to be foreign students.
    Harvard has persisted in prioritizing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in its admissions, denying hardworking Americans equal opportunities by favoring certain groups, despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling against its race-based practices.
    These concerns have compelled the Federal government to conclude that Harvard University is no longer a trustworthy steward of international student and exchange visitor programs.
    HOLDING HARVARD ACCOUNTABLE: President Trump wants our institutions to have foreign students, but believes that the foreign students should be people that can love our country.  
    President Trump: “The students? Well, we want to have great students here. We just don’t want students that are causing trouble. We want to have students. I want to have foreign students.”
    President Trump: “We have people who want to go to Harvard and other schools, they can’t get in because we have foreign students there. But I want to make sure that the foreign students are people that can love our country.”
    President Trump: “We are still waiting for the Foreign Student Lists from Harvard so that we can determine, after a ridiculous expenditure of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, how many radicalized lunatics, troublemakers all, should not be let back into our Country. Harvard is very slow in the presentation of these documents, and probably for good reason!”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Enhancing National Security by Addressing Risks at Harvard University

    US Senate News:

    Source: US Whitehouse
    class=”has-text-align-center”>BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A PROCLAMATION
    Admission into the United States to attend, conduct research, or teach at our Nation’s institutions of higher education is a privilege granted by our Government, not a guarantee.  That privilege is necessarily tied to the host institution’s compliance and commitment to following Federal law.  Harvard University has failed in this respect, among many others.
    The Student Exchange Visa Program (SEVP) depends fundamentally on academic institutions’ good faith, transparency, and full adherence to the relevant regulatory frameworks.  This is for crucial national-security reasons.  The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has long warned that foreign adversaries and competitors take advantage of easy access to American higher education to, among other things, steal technical information and products, exploit expensive research and development to advance their own ambitions, and spread false information for political or other reasons.  Our adversaries, including the People’s Republic of China, try to take advantage of American higher education by exploiting the student visa program for improper purposes and by using visiting students to collect information at elite universities in the United States.
    Protecting our national security requires host institutions of foreign students to provide sufficient information, when asked, to enable the Federal Government to identify and address misconduct by those foreign students.  In my judgment, it presents an unacceptable risk to our Nation’s security for an academic institution to refuse to provide sufficient information, when asked, about known instances of misconduct and criminality committed by its foreign students.  This principle is one reason why SEVP regulations require foreign students to obey Federal and State criminal laws and require universities to keep records about foreign students’ studies in the United States — including records relating to criminal activity by foreign students and resulting disciplinary proceedings — and furnish them to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on request.
    Crime rates at Harvard University — including violent crime rates — have drastically risen in recent years.  Harvard has failed to discipline at least some categories of conduct violations on campus.  Given these facts, it is imperative, in my judgment, that the Federal Government be able to assess and, if necessary, address misconduct and crimes committed by foreign students at Harvard.
    Despite the risks described above, Harvard University has refused the recent requests of the DHS for information about foreign students’ “known illegal activity,” “known dangerous and violent activity,” “known threats to other students or university personnel,” “known deprivation of rights of other classmates or university personnel,” and whether those activities “occurred on campus,” and other related data.  Harvard provided data on misconduct by only three students, and the data it provided was so deficient that the DHS could not evaluate whether it should take further actions.  Harvard’s actions show that it either is not fully reporting its disciplinary records for foreign students or is not seriously policing its foreign students.  In my judgment, these actions and failures directly undermine the Federal Government’s ability to ensure that foreign nationals admitted on student or exchange visitor visas remain in compliance with Federal law.
    These concerns have compelled the Federal Government to conclude that Harvard University is no longer a trustworthy steward of international student and exchange visitor programs.  When a university refuses to uphold its legal obligations, including its recordkeeping and reporting obligations, the consequences ripple far beyond the campus.  They jeopardize the integrity of the entire United States student and exchange visitor visa system, compromise national security, and embolden other institutions to similarly disregard the rule of law.
    Harvard University has also developed extensive entanglements with foreign countries, including our adversaries.  According to The Harvard Crimson, Harvard has received more than $150 million in total contributions from foreign governments over the last 5 years, and over $1 billion from foreign sources.  Over the last 10 years, Harvard has received more than $150 million from China alone.  In exchange, Harvard has, among other things, “repeatedly hosted and trained members of a Chinese Communist Party paramilitary organization,” according to a probe by the House of Representatives Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party.  Harvard researchers have also partnered with China-based individuals on research that could advance China’s military modernization, according to the same probe.
    Finally, Harvard University continues to flout the civil rights of its students and faculty, triggering multiple Federal investigations.  Harvard’s discrimination against disfavored races in admissions was so blatant that the Supreme Court decision ending the practice nationwide bears Harvard’s name.  Yet even after that Supreme Court decision, Harvard and its affiliated organizations on campus continue to deny hardworking Americans equal opportunities.  Instead of those Americans, Harvard admits students from non-egalitarian nations, including nations that seek the destruction of the United States and its allies, or the extermination of entire peoples.  It is not in the interest of the United States to further compound Harvard’s discrimination against non-preferred races, national origins, shared ancestries, or religions by further reducing opportunities for American students through excessive foreign student enrollment.
    Considering these facts, I have determined that it is necessary to restrict the entry of foreign nationals who seek to enter the United States solely or principally to participate in a course of study at Harvard University or in an exchange visitor program hosted by Harvard University.  Such restrictions are authorized under sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), which authorize the President to suspend entry of any class of aliens whose entry would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  I have determined that the entry of the class of foreign nationals described above is detrimental to the interests of the United States because, in my judgment, Harvard’s conduct has rendered it an unsuitable destination for foreign students and researchers.  Until such time as the university shares the information that the Federal Government requires to safeguard national security and the American public, it is in the national interest to deny foreign nationals access to Harvard under the auspices of educational exchange.
    NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, hereby find that, absent the measures set forth in this proclamation, the entry into the United States of persons described in section 1 of this proclamation would, except as provided for in section 2 of this proclamation, be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions.  I hereby proclaim as follows:
    Section 1.  Suspension of Entry.  The entry of any alien into the United States as a nonimmigrant to pursue a course of study at Harvard University under section 101(a)(15)(F) or section 101(a)(15)(M) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F) or 1101(a)(15)(M), or to participate in an exchange visitor program hosted by Harvard University under section 101(a)(15)(J) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J), is suspended and limited, subject to section 2 of this proclamation.  That suspension and limitation shall expire, absent extension, 6 months after the date of this proclamation.
    Sec. 2.  Scope and Implementation of Suspension and Limitation on Entry.  (a)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall apply to aliens who enter or attempt to enter the United States to begin attending Harvard University through the SEVP after the date of this proclamation.
    (b)  The Secretary of State shall consider, in the Secretary’s discretion, whether foreign nationals who currently attend Harvard University and are in the United States pursuant to F, M, or J visas and who otherwise meet the criteria described in section 1 of this proclamation should have their visas revoked pursuant to section 221(i) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1201(i).
    (c)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall not apply to any alien who enters the United States to attend other universities through the SEVP.
    (d)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall not apply to any alien whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees.
    (e)  No later than 90 days after the date of this proclamation, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall jointly submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, a recommendation on whether an extension or renewal of the suspension and limitation on entry in section 1 of this proclamation is in the interests of the United States.
    Sec. 3.  Operational Action to Implement this Order.  The Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate to take all necessary and appropriate action to implement this proclamation.  The Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall also consider using their respective authorities under the INA to impose limitations on Harvard University’s ability to participate in the SEVP and the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System.  Any such actions should include an exception for any alien whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees.
    Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
    (b)  This proclamation shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
    (c)  This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-ninth.
                                 DONALD J. TRUMP

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rosen, Cortez Masto Demand Information on How Trump TSA Firings Are Hurting Nevada

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV)
    WASHINGTON, DC – Today, U.S. Senators Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) are demanding answers from the Trump Administration following a sweeping decision to terminate hundreds of Transportation Security Administration (TSA) employees, including those in Nevada. In a letter to Secretary Noem, the senators condemned the shortsighted firings, raised concerns about their impact on airport safety and Nevada’s tourism economy, and demanded transparency regarding the large number of terminations and the rationale behind them.
    The mass layoffs come at a time when TSA is already under pressure, with Real ID requirements going into effect just last month and airport travel reaching record levels. In 2024, TSA screened over 900 million passengers nationwide, and Las Vegas’s Harry Reid International Airport alone saw more than 58 million travelers — the highest in its history.
    “We are deeply troubled about the false justifications used for these meritless firings, and how, in the wake of Real ID requirements going into effect, this significant loss of staff is impacting the safety of Nevadans, our nation’s security, and the critical work performed at our airports,” wrote the senators.    
    “Moreover, we vehemently object to the Department of Homeland Security’s misguided decision in March to end the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) for tens of thousands of frontline TSA employees,” the senators’ letter continued. “The since-terminated, seven-year CBA was signed at a time when TSA employee’s pay lagged behind other government employees and the agency struggled with retention. 
    In the letter, Rosen and Cortez Masto requested specific information from the Trump Administration, including the number of employees terminated in Nevada, their job roles, the impact of Real ID enforcement on staffing needs, and whether those terminated received legally required notice. She urged immediate transparency and action to address this growing security risk.
    The full letter to the Administration can be found HERE.
    Senators Rosen and Cortez Masto have been fighting to support Nevada’s airports and travel industry. They secured $61 million in federal funding for airport improvements in Nevada after helping pass the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. In April 2024, they both announced nearly $28 million in grant funding for Harry Reid International Airport to enhance infrastructure, including runway improvements and safety upgrades. In 2024, Senator Rosen announced $7 million in funding she secured for a terminal expansion project at Reno-Tahoe International Airport. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warner, Kaine, Colleagues Press Trump Administration for Answers and Demand Reversal of Termination of Temporary Protected Status for Afghans Living in the U.S.

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, (both D-VA) joined nearly 100 of their congressional colleagues in pressing the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and State regarding the Trump Administration’s decision to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Afghan nationals living in the United States. Following the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, nearly 200,000 Afghans came to the U.S. From 2018 to 2022, nearly 20,000 of these individuals settled in Virginia—the most of any state after California.
    In the letter sent to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the lawmakers noted the thousands of lives this decision could endanger—particularly the lives of many Afghans who supported the U.S. efforts during the war in Afghanistan and face significant danger upon their return to Afghanistan. The lawmakers also urged the Trump Administration to reverse course and continue TPS for Afghans.
    “We write with deep concern about the Department of Homeland Security’s termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Afghanistan, which is scheduled to take effect on July 14, 2025. This decision is devastating for resettled Afghan nationals in the United States who have fled widespread violence, economic instability, challenging humanitarian conditions, and human rights abuses in their home country,” the lawmakers wrote. “Many of these Afghans fearlessly served as strong allies to the United States military during the war in Afghanistan, and we cannot blatantly disregard their service. We respectfully ask that you redesignate Afghanistan for TPS to ensure Afghan nationals in the U.S. are not forced to return to devastating humanitarian, civic, and economic conditions.”
    The lawmakers continued, “The Secretary of Homeland Security ‘may designate a foreign country for TPS due to conditions in the country that temporarily prevent the country’s nationals from returning safely, or in certain circumstances, where the country is unable to handle the return of its nationals adequately.’  This is why, following the withdrawal of American troops and the return of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan, in May 2022 the U.S. designated Afghanistan for TPS.”
    “The grave conditions that forced Afghan nationals to flee and seek refuge in the U.S. following the return of the Taliban to power remain. Because of this harsh reality, forcing Afghan nationals in the U.S. to return to Afghanistan would be reckless and inhumane, and would threaten the safety and well-being of thousands of individuals and families, especially women and girls,” the lawmakers stressed.
    The lawmakers closed the letter requesting the following information:
    Please provide any reports that credibly determine that conditions have improved in Afghanistan since 2023. 
    The TPS termination announcement stated that “there are recipients who have been under investigation for fraud and threatening our public safety and national security.” Please provide additional details on how the Administration made this determination and how widespread these allegations of fraud and threats are.
    Describe the collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security and Department of State to reach the determination that Afghanistan no longer meets the conditions for designation for TPS.
    Please provide any reports that indicate the Taliban is no longer a threat to Afghan nationals that assisted the United States military during the war in Afghanistan.
    What steps are you taking to ensure that Afghan nationals who previously had TPS will not be sent back to persecution or torture in Afghanistan?
    In addition to Warner and Kaine, the letter was signed by U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), John Fetterman (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Angus King (I-ME), Ed Markey (D-MA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Tina Smith (D-MN), Rev. Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Ron Wyden (D-OR). The letter is signed by 72 members of the U.S. House of Representatives.
    A copy of the letter is available here and below.
    Dear Secretary Noem and Secretary Rubio:
    We write with deep concern about the Department of Homeland Security’s termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Afghanistan, which is scheduled to take effect on July 14, 2025. This decision is devastating for resettled Afghan nationals in the United States who have fled widespread violence, economic instability, challenging humanitarian conditions, and human rights abuses in their home country. Many of these Afghans fearlessly served as strong allies to the United States military during the war in Afghanistan, and we cannot blatantly disregard their service. We respectfully ask that you redesignate Afghanistan for TPS to ensure Afghan nationals in the U.S. are not forced to return to devastating humanitarian, civic, and economic conditions.
    The Secretary of Homeland Security “may designate a foreign country for TPS due to conditions in the country that temporarily prevent the country’s nationals from returning safely, or in certain circumstances, where the country is unable to handle the return of its nationals adequately.”  This is why, following the withdrawal of American troops and the return of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan, in May 2022 the U.S. designated Afghanistan for TPS.  In September 2023, the U.S. extended and redesignated TPS for Afghanistan. The Administration’s decision to terminate TPS for Afghanistan negatively impacts approximately 9,000 Afghan nationals.
    In your announcement, you state that “there are notable improvements in the security and economic situation such that requiring the return of Afghan nationals to Afghanistan does not pose a threat to their personal safety due to armed conflict or extraordinary and temporary conditions.”  But you also concede that threats of violence and terrorism, as well as humanitarian concerns, remain.  The Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP), the Afghan affiliate of the Islamic State (ISIS), continues to launch attacks against ethnic and religious minorities and against the Taliban, leading to innocent civilian casualties. If Afghan nationals are forced to return to Afghanistan, they will be caught in the crossfire between the Taliban and ISKP.  According to Human Rights Watch, in 2024, Taliban authorities intensified their crackdown on human rights, especially against women and girls. Women and girls are banned from attending secondary school or university and are unable to move freely. The Taliban also continues to detain and torture journalists, curtailing free speech and media. The 2023 U.S. State Department Human Rights Report covering Afghanistan found that women’s rights rapidly declined and restrictions on freedom of expression increased. The horrific human rights conditions in Afghanistan are unsafe for Afghan nationals to return to and returning would put their personal safety at immediate risk.
    We are also deeply concerned about the State Department Human Rights Report finding that widespread arbitrary and unlawful killings against officials associated with the pre-August 2021 government have occurred.  Afghan nationals who assisted the U.S. military should not be put in harm’s way because they supported the U.S. in its fight against the Taliban. This would be a betrayal of those who bravely served alongside our servicemembers for nearly two decades.
    Afghan civilians still face devastating humanitarian and economic conditions. Over half of the population in Afghanistan needs urgent humanitarian assistance. Human Rights Watch reports that in 2024, 12.4 million people were facing food insecurity and 2.9 million were at emergency levels of hunger.  The World Bank also found that in Afghanistan, as of May 2025, “per capita income has stagnated, while poverty and food insecurity remain pressing challenges, exacerbated by high unemployment and restrictions on women’s economic participation.” 
    The grave conditions that forced Afghan nationals to flee and seek refuge in the U.S. following the return of the Taliban to power remain. Because of this harsh reality, forcing Afghan nationals in the U.S. to return to Afghanistan would be reckless and inhumane, and would threaten the safety and well-being of thousands of individuals and families, especially women and girls.
    In August 2021, Americans welcomed Afghan nationals at Washington Dulles International Airport in Virginia with open arms, and we refuse to turn our backs on them now.  We strongly urge you to reconsider your decision to terminate TPS for Afghanistan and ask that you respond to the following requests no later than two weeks of receipt of this letter:
    Please provide any reports that credibly determine that conditions have improved in Afghanistan since 2023. 
    The TPS termination announcement stated that “there are recipients who have been under investigation for fraud and threatening our public safety and national security.” Please provide additional details on how the Administration made this determination and how widespread these allegations of fraud and threats are.
    Describe the collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security and Department of State to reach the determination that Afghanistan no longer meets the conditions for designation for TPS.
    Please provide any reports that indicate the Taliban is no longer a threat to Afghan nationals that assisted the United States military during the war in Afghanistan.
    What steps are you taking to ensure that Afghan nationals who previously had TPS will not be sent back to persecution or torture in Afghanistan?
    Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter and we hope to receive your responses soon.
    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warner & Kaine Blast GOP Plan After New CBO Report Shows 16 Million Americans Would Lose Health Coverage

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) today responded to a new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) revealing that 16 million Americans would lose their health insurance under the Republican tax plan. The report highlights the devastating consequences of the GOP’s attempt to gut Medicaid and refusal to extend premium tax credits that help working families afford their health care. The senators issued the following statement:
    “Sixteen million people. That’s the cost of the Republican plan. This is not just a number – it represents moms, dads, kids, veterans, and retirees who will be forced to choose between rent and life-saving care. At a time when costs are already too high for too many Americans, this plan would rip coverage away from millions just to hand tax breaks to the wealthiest. It’s cruel, it’s shortsighted, and we are going to fight like hell to stop it.”
    Warner and Kaine have been sounding the alarm about the effects of the GOP plan on Virginia families if Republicans in Congress continue to insist on gutting vital programs in order to pay for tax breaks for the richest Americans, noting that the GOP bill would strip health insurance from Virginians, cut SNAP benefits, raise energy costs for Virginia households, jeopardize more than 20,000 Virginia jobs, raise taxes on minimum wage workers while giving the richest 0.1% a $188,000 tax cut, make tax filing more expensive, and explode the deficit.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Padilla, Chu Introduce Bicameral Legislation to Make Graduate Education More Affordable

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)

    Padilla, Chu Introduce Bicameral Legislation to Make Graduate Education More Affordable

    POST GRAD Act comes as Congressional Republicans push to make higher education more unaffordable through their billionaire-first budget bill
    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Representative Judy Chu (D-Calif.-28) introduced bicameral legislation to help students afford advanced education by restoring graduate students’ eligibility for receiving subsidized federal loans. The Protecting Our Students by Terminating Graduate Rates that Add to Debt (POST GRAD) Act would prevent graduate students from accruing interest on their subsidized graduate loans while in school, just like their undergraduate counterparts.
    Many professions, such as mental health clinicians, school administrators, nurse practitioners, and physical therapists, often require a graduate degree, but the high cost of borrowing can dissuade potential students from seeking these advanced degrees. Instead of addressing the higher education affordability crisis, Congressional Republicans recently passed a billionaire-first reconciliation bill that, among other harmful provisions, would eliminate the Grad PLUS loan program, a vital source of federal support for graduate students.
    Nationally, over 1.6 million student loan borrowers have Grad PLUS loans, amounting to $91 billion in debt. California has nearly 57,000 Grad PLUS borrowers, according to the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities.
    “Graduate students help fuel our economy, filling workforce shortages in critical sectors like health care, education, and STEM that often require advanced degrees. Yet, too many talented students in California and nationally cannot afford to pursue advanced degrees due to the rising cost of higher education,” said Senator Padilla. “As Republicans threaten to slash the Grad PLUS program entirely, we are taking a stand to make graduate school more affordable by reinstating subsidized federal student loans for graduate students so they don’t accrue interest while they are in school. We did this for decades, and now is the time to support our 21st century graduate workforce and expand educational opportunities for low-income communities.”
    “Many of the most rewarding and in-demand jobs in the U.S. require advanced degrees, but do not always come with high earning potential. A lifetime of debt should never be the cost for obtaining a graduate degree,” said Representative Chu. “At a time when our country is facing a shortage of specialized workers in critical fields, we should be doing everything we can to encourage students to enter these fields, rather than creating additional barriers to higher education. Democrats in Congress are committed to lowering costs and reducing debt, and that’s why I’m proud to be joined by Senator Padilla in introducing the POST GRAD Act as one important step in making higher education more attainable to everyone in America.”
    “The cost of graduate education often serves as a barrier to pursuing advanced degrees, including in psychology, where shortages of qualified, culturally competent providers persist. By reinstating subsidized federal student loans for graduate students, the POST GRAD Act would relieve a portion of the financial burden associated with financing a graduate degree. APA applauds Congresswoman Chu and Senator Padilla for their leadership on this important legislation, which would make graduate study more affordable and help build a workforce ready to meet the growing needs of our population,” said Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD, CEO of the American Psychological Association.
    The Budget Control Act of 2011 stripped graduate students of eligibility for Federal Direct Subsidized Loans, which they had access to from 1994-2012, costing students thousands of dollars, particularly as interest rates on graduate loans are now at their highest rate since 2006. The POST GRAD Act would reverse the harmful provision of the Budget Control Act and restore the eligibility of graduate students to receive Federal Direct Subsidized Loans. Furthermore, it would prevent graduate and professional students who fall into deferment due to economic hardship from accruing interest on their Federal Direct Subsidized Loans.
    The POST GRAD Act is cosponsored by Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
    The bill is endorsed by the following organizations: American Psychological Association, National Association of School Psychologists, National Education Association, AccessLex, Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, American Physical Therapy Association, American Association of Veterinary Medical Colleges, American Occupational Therapy Association, Association of Schools Advancing Health Professions, Association of Schools and Colleges of Optometry, Physician Assistant Education Association, American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine, Council on Social Work Education, American Dental Education Association, American Association of Colleges of Nursing, American Association of the Colleges of Podiatric Medicine, and the University of California System.
    Senator Padilla has consistently advocated on behalf of students to make higher education more affordable and accessible. Earlier this year, Padilla introduced the bipartisan RESEARCHER Act to bolster U.S. leadership in STEM by requiring federal research agencies to help address the financial insecurity crisis among graduate and postdoctoral researchers. Last year, Padilla and Representative Norma J. Torres (D-Calif.-35) hosted local students and advocates to reintroduce the Basic Assistance for Students in College (BASIC) Act, bicameral legislation to help ensure college students can meet their basic needs while pursuing their education. He also cosponsored the College for All Act to make public colleges and universities tuition free for 95 percent of students.
    Senator Padilla continues to support large-scale federal student loan forgiveness and cancellation, and he recognizes that this would be one of the most effective ways to close the racial wealth gap in the United States. During the Biden Administration, Padilla led numerous letters urging the President to provide meaningful student debt cancellation, along with multiple letters urging former U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona to leverage his authority under the Higher Education Act to provide expanded student debt relief to working and middle-class borrowers. Padilla also led his colleagues in calling on Secretary Cardona to consider additional student debt relief for borrowers experiencing financial hardship.
    Full text of the bill is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Padilla, Schiff Blast Trump Admin’s Plan to Gut California High-Speed Rail Funding

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)

    Padilla, Schiff Blast Trump Admin’s Plan to Gut California High-Speed Rail Funding

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff (both D-Calif.) released the following joint statement after Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy announced his plan to terminate billions of dollars of previously-allocated federal funding to the California High-Speed Rail Project: 
    “In Donald Trump’s corrupt world, there’s no need for high-speed rail when you can accept a $400 million jet from a foreign government. But for the millions of Californians left to pick up the tab for Trump’s reckless trade wars and rising costs of living, today’s announcement is devastating. 
    “High-speed rail is the future of transportation — with the potential to bring customers to new businesses, businesses to new employees, and to connect communities hundreds of miles away with affordable and faster transit. The fact is that the California High-Speed Rail Project is already the most audited public works project in the country. Rather than advance the progress being made in the Central Valley, Secretary Duffy has used a review process to appease President Trump and punish Californians who didn’t vote for him. We’ll keep fighting every partisan, self-defeating policy of this Administration as we build infrastructure fit for the 21st century.”
    Last year, Senators Padilla and Schiff and their California Congressional colleagues urged former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg to approve the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s grant application for $536 million in federal funds. Padilla previously supported the Department of Transportation’s announcement of $3.1 billion for the California High-Speed Rail Authority, as well as over $200 million for the agency from the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Grant Program. Padilla and the late Senator Dianne Feinstein previously announced $25 million for the Authority’s Merced Extension Design Project through the Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) discretionary grant program.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Wyden, Merkley, Colleagues Seek Information on Republican Budget Bill’s Potential to Close Rural Hospitals

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)

    June 04, 2025

    Washington D.C.— U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, both D-Ore., said today they have joined Senator Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., and Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., in requesting important information about the impact of House Republicans’ budget bill’s dangerous proposed cuts to federal spending on health programs, rural hospitals and their surrounding communities.

    “In short, the House-passed budget reconciliation bill is expected to have substantial and devastating impacts to health care access for working families across America, particularly in rural communities. ” the lawmakers wrote to Mark Holmes, PhD, Director of the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “We are deeply concerned that these cuts will increase uncompensated care and make it more difficult for rural hospitals to continue providing services to all patients, paying workers, and keeping their doors open.”

    “The magnitude of federal cuts to health programs will inevitably devastate health access for millions of Americans who will see their local hospitals forced to reduce services or close altogether,” they wrote. ”To help us better understand the devastation of these cuts, we are interested in the Sheps Center’s expert analysis of how this bill will impact rural hospitals and the communities they serve.” 

    The lawmakers request responses to the following questions by June 11, 2025:  

    •  Which U.S. rural hospitals treat the highest share of Medicaid recipients? Please identify these hospitals by name, state, and congressional district. 
    •  How many rural hospitals are currently in financial distress or at risk of closure? Please identify these hospitals by state and congressional district and whether these hospitals are eligible for any Medicare rural hospital designation. 
    •  If the health care cuts in the House-passed budget reconciliation bill were to become law, would the rural hospitals with the highest share of Medicaid recipients or that are currently in financial distress face risk of closure or having to reduce services (including obstetric and behavioral health care, emergency room services, etc.)?

    The full text of the letter is here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Shaheen Grills Secretary Lutnick on Impacts of Damaging Steel Tariff on Granite State Businesses, Defense Supply Chain

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen

    (Washington, NH) – U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), a senior member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations and Small Business Committees, today questioned U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick during a Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee hearing examining the U.S. Department of Commerce’s budget request. During the hearing, Shaheen grilled Secretary Lutnick on President Trump’s damaging steel tariffs – which were recently doubled – and drew attention to the impacts on New Hampshire businesses and the nation’s defense supply chain. You can watch the Senator’s full remarks and questions here.

    “Last month I visited a New Hampshire company that makes ball bearings for the aerospace industry. And I agree we should be protecting the aerospace industry in this country. It’s our biggest export in New Hampshire – aerospace parts. They were very concerned about the impact of the steel tariffs on their ability to get ball bearings. They said not only has their costs gone up, but the lead time to get the steel to make the bearings. They only have one domestic supplier. While they had suppliers in the Indo-Pacific and in Canada, those have been eliminated under the tariffs. They said that their lead times have gone from 20 weeks to two and a half years because of the tariffs. I think this creates a real challenge with respect to our national security. A good percentage of the work they do is with the Department of Defense,” Shaheen said of the impacts tariffs are having on a Granite State manufacturer.

    Secretary Lutnick dismissed Senator Shaheen’s concerns about rising costs for small businesses.

    Shaheen also raised concerns over Secretary Lutnick’s plans to eliminate the Manufacturing Extension Partnership whose Centers provide access to expert advisors and technological services that help grow the U.S. manufacturing base, reduce operating costs, develop new technology and jobs and compete on a global scale. Shaheen noted that in Fiscal Year 2023, every dollar of federal investment in the program generated $24.60 in new sales growth and $27.50 in new client investment.

    Senator Shaheen is helping lead efforts in Congress to mitigate the harmful impacts of President Trump’s tariffs. In January, Shaheen introduced the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes on Imported Goods Act which would limit the president’s ability to leverage sweeping tariffs that increase costs for American consumers and families. Her effort to pass this bill by unanimous consent was blocked by Senate Republicans. In recent months, Shaheen has traveled across the Granite State to visit businesses including Chatila’s Bakery, C&J, DCI Furniture, Mount Cabot Maple, American Calan Inc., NH Ball Bearings and Colby Footwear. to hear directly from Granite Staters impacted by the administration’s tariffs. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Following Senator Hassan’s Push, Prescription Drug Makers Improve Medication Labeling for Pregnant Woman

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Maggie Hassan

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) confirmed that following a bipartisan push led by U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan (D-NH), prescription drug manufacturers have taken action to improve medication safety labeling for pregnant women.  

    “Before 2015, FDA used a labeling system that made it hard for pregnant women to understand the health risks of different medications…The FDA replaced this system back in 2015 but as of earlier this year there were still several drugs on the market using the old system including common medications like antibiotics,” explained Senator Hassan at today’s hearing. “Doctor, has the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research brought all prescription drug manufacturers into compliance with pregnancy labeling standards?” 

    “Yes, thank you, we now have submissions from all of the drugs that were outstanding,” said Dr. Jacqueline Corrigan-Curay, the Acting Director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, confirming that Senator Hassan’s bipartisan push to get drug manufacturers to take action was successful.

    As of the beginning of this year, there were 17 medications on the market that used an outdated labeling system that makes it difficult for pregnant women to understand the health risks posed by these medications. For example, some of these medications used a single labelling category for two very different kinds of medications: medications where animal studies showed evidence of risk to pregnant women, and medications where there have been no studies at all on the risks to pregnant women. 

    In 2015, the FDA moved to replace this labeling system with better information for pregnant women, including narrative descriptions of the health risks posed by medications. Unfortunately, as of earlier this year, the makers of 17 drugs had still not changed their labels and adopted the FDA’s new and safer labeling system. 

    Today the FDA announced that, due to a bipartisan push from Senators Hassan and Budd, the agency worked with drugmakers to finally replace outdated medication labels on 17 drugs with new labels that will provide clear information to pregnant women about health risks. The issue has been highlighted by experts, who applauded today’s move. 

    “Navigating medications during pregnancy is extremely stressful for many women. I’m delighted to see the FDA moving to make medication labeling as helpful as possible during this time,” said Emily Oster, CEO of ParentData.   

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cassidy Announces $6.8 Million for Terrebonne Parish School Recovery Following Hurricane Ida

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Louisiana Bill Cassidy

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) announced Louisiana will receive $6,764,853.59 from the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for school recovery efforts following Hurricane Ida.
    “Education is opportunity,” said Dr. Cassidy. “This funding helps Terrebonne Parish give students the tools they need to succeed and strengthen the community for the future.”
    The Terrebonne Parish School Board will receive $6,764,853.59 in federal funding for repairs at the Louis Miller Vo-Tech campus and the School for Exceptional Children, both of which were heavily damaged during Hurricane Ida.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cassidy, Wicker, Gillibrand, Luján Lead Legislation to Make Rum Tax Cover Over Permanent

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Louisiana Bill Cassidy

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), and Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) today reintroduced legislation to modify the amount of revenue transferred to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands—known as the ‘rum cover over’—from the excise taxes collected on rum that is produced in or imported into the rest of the United States from the two U.S. territories.
    “Louisiana knows what it means to turn sugarcane into opportunity—from the fields of South Louisiana to the stills of our craft distillers,” said Dr. Cassidy. “Stability in the rum industry means more jobs in Louisiana and stronger U.S. supply chains.” 
    “The rum cover over is an important revenue stream that promotes economic development and helps create good-paying jobs throughout Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. However, the cover over continues to face congressional uncertainty that puts the wellbeing and stability of so many residents of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands at risk. This bipartisan bill would increase the amount that the territories receive from excise taxes on rum production, offering them more certainty and allowing them to fund critical services like health care and environmental protection,” said Senator Gillibrand.
    “For decades, the rum cover over has been vital in creating jobs and fostering economic development in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands,” said Senator Luján. “But the recurring threat of funding cliffs puts this vital support at risk and creates instability. This bipartisan legislation will safeguard these revenues and ensure that both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands can reliably count on rum excise tax funds to reinvest in their communities.”
    Background
     Under current law, excise tax collections on imported rum are transferred to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands at the rate of $13.25 per proof gallon; $10.50 per proof gallon is in permanent law, and the remaining $2.75 per proof gallon requires periodic reauthorization by Congress. This legislation would amend Section 7652 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, making $13.25 per proof gallon the amount covered over by law, eliminating the need for Congressional action and enhancing long-term sustainable economic growth in the two U.S. territories.
    This effort would also add a new provision that would require a portion of the funds transferred to Puerto Rico to go towards the Puerto Rico Conservation Trust. This private, nonprofit organization provides for the conservation of natural areas on the island, including through sustainable agricultural efforts, projects that promote the reforestation and restoration of Puerto Rico’s natural habitat, and the development of educational programs that foster the protection of natural areas on the island.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cassidy Releases Statement After Another Great Meeting with President Trump

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Louisiana Bill Cassidy

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) today releases a statement after President Trump invited him for another productive meeting along with other members of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee. The group discussed President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill.
    “There was very good conversation with President Trump about the One Big Beautiful Bill. The goal is to develop a bill that preserves the American Dream and keeps taxes low. The President and I want to eliminate tax on tips, stop illegal immigration, and develop American resources. I look forward to continuing the process while working to put Louisiana in the best position to benefit,” said Dr. Cassidy.
    In March, Cassidy met with President Trump at the White House to discuss reconciliation priorities. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Markey Hosts Roundtable on Republicans’ Proposed State AI Regulation Moratorium

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
    Washington (June 4, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, today hosted a virtual roundtable with advocates to discuss the 10-year ban on state artificial intelligence (AI) regulation proposed by Republicans in the House-passed reconciliation bill. Senator Markey previously delivered remarks on the Senate floor opposing the provision.
    “Rather than proposing any plan to address the risks and eliminate harms of AI, Republicans are pushing a 10-year AI moratorium that blocks others from acting,” said Senator Markey. “This is irresponsible and unnecessary. This broad language would prevent us from addressing housing discrimination, protecting the environment, safeguarding kids online, and stopping discriminatory hiring practices. Instead, Congress should pass my AI Civil Rights Act — the most comprehensive AI legislation introduced in Congress — that ensures AI serves the public good, not private profit.”
    Senator Markey was joined by Damon Hewitt, President and Executive Director at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; Alondra Nelson, Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress and former Acting Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy; James P. Steyer, Founder and CEO of Common Sense Media; and Cody Venzke, Senior Policy Counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
    “This moratorium would eliminate all state-level AI regulations for ten years with no federal alternative, effectively giving tech giants a blank check to experiment and deploy technology that has been shown to trample Americans’ civil rights, especially in Black and Brown communities, without any consequences. The moratorium language is broad and clumsy, potentially extending far beyond AI-specific laws and preventing enforcement of longstanding state civil rights and consumer protection laws as applied to modern technology.  This would be a direct attack on our civil rights, turning back the clock, allowing companies to discriminate through technology in ways that they cannot do in other mediums and transactions.  The only resolution here is to reject the moratorium in its entirety,” said Damon Hewitt, President and Executive Director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
    “American technological leadership has always emerged hand-in-hand with principled governance and this policy innovation has often been led by the states. A decade-long freeze on guardrails for responsible AI use would abandon the American public–and ignore its concerns–during a critical period of technological development. I commend Senator Markey for defending innovation, rights. and opportunities—because truly innovative technology must be just and fair,” said Dr. Alondra Nelson, Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, and former acting Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
    “At a moment when families are looking to their elected leaders to slow down and make sure AI is safe for kids, some Republicans in Congress are moving quickly on a budget bill that, among other things, would ban state AI laws for a decade. This is a gift to Big Tech companies and to the AI industry in particular: no rules, no accountability, and total control. Common Sense Media’s new poll shows that not only is this proposal unsafe — it’s wildly unpopular, too,” said James P. Steyer, Founder and CEO of Common Sense Media.
    “The “moratorium” on states’ ability to regulate AI is a massive hand out to Big Tech. States have stepped up to address discriminatory and untrustworthy AI, but the reconciliation would undercut every single one of those efforts. Instead of shaping legislation to address AI denying people a fair chance to access housing, education, or employment, the reconciliation bill would give AI companies a blank check to harm all of us in those spaces,” said Cody Venzke, Senior Policy Counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairman Capito Releases EPW Budget Reconciliation Text

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for West Virginia Shelley Moore Capito

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, released legislative text within the EPW Committee’s jurisdiction to be considered as part of Senate Republicans’ budget reconciliation bill.

    “This legislative text puts in motion plans that Senate Republicans pledged to take, like stopping Democrats’ natural gas tax and rescinding unobligated dollars from the so-called Inflation Reduction Act. I look forward to working with my colleagues to move our legislative package forward to enact President Trump’s agenda, which the American people overwhelmingly support,” Chairman Capito said.

    • Click HERE to view text.
    • Click HERE to view a section-by-section.
    • Click HERE to view a one-pager.

    MIL OSI USA News –