[VIDEO] Sen. Coons to Zuckerberg and Dorsey: ‘Your algorithms shape what billions of people … understand to be true’

WASHINGTON — Today, U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, questioned Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on their platforms’ policies on social media content moderation – focusing on the impact on public discourse on COVID-19, vaccines, climate change, bigotry, and election integrity.

“[W]hether you wished for it or not, the inescapable fact is your algorithms, your policies, and your business decisions shape what billions of people across the world and a working majority of people here in our nation understand to be true. And that’s the case for election integrity, for a potential COVID-19 vaccine, for climate change, for hateful and dangerous stereotypes, and many other critical issues,” Senator Coons said to Zuckerberg and Dorsey. 

Yesterday, Senator Coons led 14 colleagues on a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg calling on the company to fully address the problem of anti-Muslim bigotry on its platform, which has enabled offline violence against Muslims in the United States and elsewhere around the world. 

Sen. Coons noted his letter to Facebook saying, “We focus particularly on anti-Muslim bias; on an issue that warrants specific attention given the tragic consequences of anti-Muslim hate speech in Myanmar, in Sri Lanka, in New Zealand, and right here in the United States, and I appreciate that Facebook has taken actions in response to these issues, but this letter points out why we need better metrics and transparency to actually evaluate your actions. So my colleagues and I urge better enforcement, in particular, of your Call to Arms policy, which could have made a difference in a recent tragedy in Kenosha, Wisconsin.”

In response, Zuckerberg confirmed that Facebook will respond to the letter’s inquiries and added that Facebook will soon detail the prevalence of hate content on its platforms and commit to an independent audit of their reports on content moderation policies.

On Twitter’s lack of a policy on misinformation about climate change, Senator Coons noted,“I cannot think of a greater harm than climate change, which is transforming literally our planet and causing harm to our entire world. I think we’re experiencing significant harm as we speak. I recognize the pandemic and misinformation about COVID-19, manipulated media also cause harm, but I’d urge you to reconsider that because helping to disseminate climate denialism in my view further facilitates and accelerates one of the greatest existential threats to our world.”

Full audio and video available here. A transcript is provided below.

Sen. Coons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the last four years, we have seen some unprecedented attacks on our democratic institutions, our social norms, of the ways in which we conduct ourselves in this democracy, and many would say on truth itself. And in today’s society, you can’t talk about truth without also considering the impact of social media and social media platforms. So if I might, Mr. Zuckerberg and Mr. Dorsey, free expression and open debate are of course core values of our society. But whether you wished for it or not, the inescapable fact is your algorithms, your policies, and your business decisions shape what billions of people across the world and a working majority of people here in our nation understand to be true. And that’s the case for election integrity, for a potential COVID-19 vaccine, for climate change, for hateful and dangerous stereotypes, and many other critical issues. I also want to recognize that it, in no small part, was the hard work of many led by your ingenuity and resolve that built these impressive American companies and revolutionized the way the world communicates. We need that same resolve to reckon today with what must be done to win our society’s battle for truth. Mr. Zuckerberg, as you know, yesterday I sent you, along with 14 of my colleagues – a total of 15 senators – we sent you a letter urging Facebook to do more to address hate speech and calls to violence on the platform. We focus particularly on anti-Muslim bias; on an issue that warrants specific attention given the tragic consequences of anti-Muslim hate speech in Myanmar, in Sri Lanka, in New Zealand, and right here in the United States, and I appreciate that Facebook has taken actions in response to these issues, but this letter points out why we need better metrics and transparency to actually evaluate your actions. So my colleagues and I urge better enforcement, in particular, of your Call to Arms policy, which could have made a difference in a recent tragedy in Kenosha, Wisconsin. You and I spoke last week. I appreciated our conversation. Can I count on you to provide specific and written responses to each of the questions in this letter, and then can we discuss them again?

Mr. Zuckerberg: Senator, yes, I read your letter, and I commit to getting back in detail with our team to address the important topics that you’ve raised. And one of your questions that I can actually answer right now – I think it was your second question about reporting in our quarterly transparency reports about the prevalence of hate speech that we find on our platforms – we will actually be adding that metric into our transparency reports this Thursday when we announce our latest transparency report.

Sen. Coons: Thank you, Mr. Zuckerberg. Let me just make sure I hear you right about prevalence because that’s one of my areas of concern is the absence from the report of the prevalence of hate content. You mean you’ll be reporting not just what percentage of hate speech on the platform you’re identifying, catching, proactively removing, but the total volume?

Mr. Zuckerberg: Senator, that’s my understanding is the prevalence of that content is a percentage of content on the platform, and over time our goal is going to be to get into more detail which is the subject of some of the questions that you’ve asked here, as well as we have already committed to an independent audit of the community standards enforcement reports so that way people can have full confidence in all of the numbers that we’re putting out. We’ve been doing these reports for less than a few years now, and we’ll continue to flesh them out and add more detail so that way people can apply the appropriate oversight and scrutiny to the work.

Sen. Coons: Thank you. I want to move on for a moment if I could about your Call to Arms policy. You said earlier today that Facebook made an operational mistake in not taking down an event page that called for people to bring weapons to a public park in Kenosha. As I think we all know, there was a tragic incident of vigilantism in Kenosha where a young man brought his AR-15 from Illinois to Kenosha and ended up with two protesters dead and one injured. You indicated this was because – this operational mistake – was because Facebook had just adopted its militia policy a week earlier, and contractors without specialized training didn’t pick up the violation, and I appreciate your frankness as to that in your answers to questions earlier today from Senator Durbin. But your response to Senator Durbin didn’t mention that the event page also violated a separate Call to Arms policy in place for over a year that contractors aren’t tasked to enforce. So I just have to ask as a follow-up – why didn’t you before, and also today, reference the Call to Arms policy when reviewing what went wrong in Kenosha?

Mr. Zuckerberg: Senator, my understanding is that that post did not necessarily violate that Call to Arms policy at the time. The Call to Arms policy does not prohibit anyone from saying, you know, “let’s go get our guns and do something.” For example, if people are organizing a hunting trip, that’s obviously not going to be something that should be against the policies. But what we do on some of these policies – which I’m glad to get the opportunity to address this – is some of these are context-specific and just require a higher level of context and expertise in the area to enforce. So we don’t necessarily have all of the 35,000 reviewers assess every single one of these policies. So I can follow up in more detail if you would like on the Call to Arms policy and the nuance there specifically, but that’s also a bit on how we operationalize these policies.

Sen. Coons: Thank you for that answer. I do want to follow up because just facially, it seemed to me that this was a violation of your own Call to Arms policy, but I look forward to that conversation. Mr. Dorsey, if I might, at a House Energy Committee hearing – I think it was two years ago – you committed to something that I was just discussing with Mr. Zuckerberg – an independent civil rights audit, but in your case, of Twitter. The audit released by Facebook in July has proven invaluable to bringing sunlight to some key areas in which Facebook does need to improve. Will you follow through on your commitment and commission to this independent audit of Twitter?

Mr. Dorsey: So we work with civil rights groups all over the country and around the world. To get feedback, we’re in constant conversation with them. And we do believe that being more transparent and making our transparency report a lot more robust, which today we still have some gaps, is important for any entity to audit independently of us. We believe that’s important because an audit like that could take away from the work that we need to do. We’d rather provide the information in a raw format so that people can do that work.

Sen. Coons: If I heard you right, you aren’t going to pursue an independent civil rights audit, but you are going to continue to release data and to consult with civil rights groups. I’d welcome a more thorough answer as to in which way having an independent outside audit would actually harm your transparency efforts.

Mr. Dorsey: I don’t mean it would harm it. I mean that we want to provide enough information so that people can do this work independently of us on their own timelines, and that’s where we need to make our transparency report more robust. And as I said, we have regular conversations with these groups and take feedback regularly.

Sen. Coons: You do, Mr. Dorsey, have policies against deep fakes or manipulated media, against COVID-19 misinformation, against things that violate civic integrity, but you don’t have a stand-alone climate change misinformation policy. Why not?

Mr. Dorsey: Well, misleading information , as you are aware, is a large problem. It’s hard to define it completely and cohesively. We wanted to scope our approach to start to focus on the highest severity of harm. We focused on three areas: manipulated media, which you mentioned, civic integrity, around the election specifically, and public health, specifically around COVID. You know, we want to make sure that our resources that we have have the greatest impact on where we believe the greatest severity of harm is going to be. Our policies are living documents. They will evolve. We will add to them, but we thought it important that we focus on our energies and prioritize the work as much as we could.

Sen. Coons: Well, Mr. Dorsey, and I’ll close with this, I cannot think of a greater harm than climate change, which is transforming literally our planet and causing harm to our entire world. I think we’re experiencing significant harm as we speak. I recognize the pandemic and misinformation about COVID-19, manipulated media also cause harm, but I’d urge you to reconsider that because helping to disseminate climate denialism in my view further facilitates and accelerates one of the greatest existential threats to our world. Thank you to both of our witnesses. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

###

Sen. Coons, Cindy McCain, UK Foreign Secretary, others highlight importance of US global leadership in COVID-19 response

At regional USGLC summit, government, business, and public health leaders agree a global pandemic requires a global response

Watch the full video here: https://youtu.be/ZpkOXH-xnow 

WILMINGTON, Del. — On Monday, U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition (USGLC), and more than 1,000 political, business, military, and community leaders convened virtually for a Mid-Atlantic Summit to discuss the importance of U.S. global leadership and how it benefits Delaware and the region. As COVID-19 cases reach record levels in the United States, policy, business, and global health leaders resoundingly agreed that America’s tools of diplomacy and development are more critical than ever to respond to COVID-19 to protect the health and safety of all Americans and to prevent the next global pandemic.

“U.S. diplomacy and development programs are critical to tackling the root causes of the world’s toughest challenges—especially as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to exacerbate humanitarian crises around the world, disrupt the global economy, and threaten the health and safety of our own country,” said Senator Chris Coons, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “It is imperative that the U.S. government address the global dimensions of this pandemic, because if we don’t take action, things will only get worse—across America and around the world. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Appropriations Committees, I will continue to support these and other investments to ensure that the United States takes decisive action to combat COVID-19 and restores its position as a world leader.”

“The global economy is facing its greatest crisis since the Great Depression— something we’re feeling acutely here in Delaware and the Mid-Atlantic region at large. This ongoing health pandemic shows the close connection between our health and our economy, and without action, U.S. businesses and American jobs could be in jeopardy, not to mention our country’s economic recovery,” saidRepresentative Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.). “I’m working with my colleagues in Congress to ensure that our response to COVID-19 helps those most in need— here at home and abroad— and invests in the tools and resources required to protect against future health threats.”

“Values-driven leadership in any way, shape, or form is a must and I believe something we can work toward now—and combatting human trafficking is a large part of that,” said Cindy McCain, Chair of the Board of Trustees, McCain Institute for International Leadership at Arizona State University. “Values-driven leadership is most important in this arena and something that the world is looking for the United States to fill.”

“In the context of pandemic…our whole team here realized that something like DFC is needed more than ever before,” said Adam Boehler, CEO, U.S. International Development Finance Corporation. “Many emerging countries don’t have the opportunity to do things like PPP… We were able to ensure in a lot of emerging economies that small and medium-sized businesses didn’t go out of businesses… We were able to ensure lots of people don’t lose jobs, [and] we were able to ensure development continues in those countries.”

“COVID-19 is the ultimate demonstration that what happens overseas matters to our country and has become the ultimate kitchen table issue in America, impacting the health, safety, and prosperity of our families and communities,” said Liz Schrayer, USGLC President & CEO. “And what we’ve heard today – from Senator Coons and our exceptional business, policy, and global health leaders – is that this global pandemic requires a global response. America’s diplomacy and development programs have always been a hallmark of U.S. leadership around the world and the stakes have never been higher as COVID-19 cases spike globally and exacerbate ongoing humanitarian crises and conflicts in its wake.”

Additional Mid-Atlantic Summit participants included the Honorable Jack Markell, Delaware governor (2009-2017); Dr. Agnes Binagwaho, Vice Chancellor, University of Global Health Equity in Rwanda; Dr. Mark T. Esser, Vice President, Microbial Sciences, AstraZeneca; Hon. Dan Glickman, Senior Advisor, USGLC and former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture (1995-2001); Tara Hogan Charles, Associate Director, Global Government Relations & Public Policy, Procter & Gamble; UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab; and Nancy Cordes, Congressional Correspondent, CBS News.

###

Sen. Coons, 14 colleagues press Facebook to take immediate action to combat anti-Muslim bigotry on its platform

WILMINGTON, Del. – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today led 14 colleagues on a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg calling on the company to fully address the problem of anti-Muslim bigotry on its platform, which has enabled offline violence against Muslims in the United States and elsewhere around the world.

Senator Coons is joined on the letter by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

“Facebook is a groundbreaking company that has revolutionized the way we communicate.  Unfortunately, the connectivity that can bring people together in many positive ways also has been used to dehumanize and stoke violence against Muslims, Black people, Latinos, immigrants, the Jewish community, Sikhs, Christians, women, and other communities here and across the world,” the Senators wrote.

Of particular concern is how Facebook has addressed the targeting of mosques and Muslim community events by armed protesters through the platform. In June 2019, Facebook responded to concerns about these practices by creating a “call to arms” policy that prohibits event pages that call for individuals to bring weapons to a location. However, the Senators note that Facebook has not taken adequate steps to enforce this policy, which should have barred an event page in Kenosha, Wisconsin earlier this year, as well as a 2019 event page used to plan an armed protest at the largest Muslim community convention in the country.

“We recognize that Facebook has announced efforts to address its role in the distribution of anti-Muslim content in some of these areas,” the Senators wrote. “Nevertheless, it is not clear that the company is meaningfully better positioned to prevent further human rights abuses and violence against Muslim minorities today.”

“As members of Congress who are deeply disturbed by the proliferation of this hate speech on your platform, we urge you to do more.”

An independent civil rights audit of Facebook from July 2020 highlighted disturbing examples of anti-Muslim abuse on the platform ranging “[f]rom the organization of events designed to intimidate members of the Muslim community at gathering places, to the prevalence of content demonizing Islam and Muslims, and the use of Facebook Live during the Christchurch massacre…” These concerns have also prompted current Facebook employees to write a letter demanding action on anti-Muslim bigotry and calling for broader structural changes.

In their letter, the Senators urge Facebook to take a number of actions to address these issues including collecting and publishing the data needed to understand the scope of the problem, publishing readily available information to help the public evaluate its response, and implementing a plan to ensure robust enforcement of its call to arms policy.

“We thank Sen. Coons and his colleagues for holding Facebook accountable for anti-Muslim hate and violence on its platform,” said Muslim Advocates Executive Director Farhana Khera. “Since 2015, Muslim Advocates has warned Facebook that the platform’s event pages were being used by violent militias and white nationalists to organize armed rallies at mosques. With their letter, these senators are raising needed attention to this critical issue. We need to know what Facebook plans to do to end the anti-Muslim hate and violence enabled by their platform—and end it now.”

Groups supporting the letter include Muslim Advocates, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Center for American Progress, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights Campaign, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, Bend the Arc: Jewish Action, Free Press, Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, Interfaith Alliance, Japanese American Citizens League, MediaJustice, National Hispanic Media Coalition, Shoulder to Shoulder, Sikh Coalition, and UltraViolet.

A copy of the letter is here and below. 

November 16, 2020

Mark Zuckerberg

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Facebook, Inc.

1601 Willow Road

Menlo Park, CA 94025

Dear Mr. Zuckerberg:

We write to express our deep concern regarding anti-Muslim bigotry on Facebook.  An independent civil rights audit of the company from July 2020 highlighted disturbing examples of anti-Muslim abuse on the platform ranging “[f]rom the organization of events designed to intimidate members of the Muslim community at gathering places, to the prevalence of content demonizing Islam and Muslims, and the use of Facebook Live during the Christchurch massacre . . . .”   These concerns have also prompted current Facebook employees to write a letter demanding action on anti-Muslim bigotry and calling for broader structural changes.   As members of Congress who are committed to protecting the Muslim community, we urge you to take immediate action to combat this bigotry on Facebook’s platforms.

Facebook is a groundbreaking company that has revolutionized the way we communicate.  Unfortunately, the connectivity that can bring people together in many positive ways also has been used to dehumanize and stoke violence against Muslims, Black people, Latinos, immigrants, the Jewish community, Sikhs, Christians, women, and other communities here and across the world.  The enabling of hate speech and violence against any group is not acceptable.  We appreciate that Facebook has taken certain steps to combat these problems.  For instance, you recently reversed a prior decision that had allowed content denying the Holocaust, and you have altered your policies to ban blackface and certain anti-Jewish stereotypes.  But much more must be done to protect these vulnerable communities.  With regard to the Muslim community in particular, the civil rights audit noted advocates’ “alarm that Muslims feel under siege on Facebook” and explained how attacks on Muslims present unique considerations that require separate analysis and response compared to other kinds of attacks.   Yet, the auditors noted, “Facebook has not yet publicly studied or acknowledged the particular ways anti-Muslim bigotry manifests on its platform.”  

Of particular concern is how Facebook has addressed the targeting of mosques and Muslim community events by armed protesters through the platform.  In June 2019, Facebook responded to concerns about these practices by creating a “call to arms” policy that prohibits event pages that call for individuals to bring weapons to locations.   Yet, in August 2019, when advocates reported to Facebook that a militia group was using an event page to plan an armed protest at the largest Muslim community convention in the country for the second year in a row, it took Facebook more than a full day to remove the content, a delay that Facebook acknowledged was too long and an “enforcement misstep.”  

Other recent events have demonstrated how Facebook has not taken adequate steps to enforce this call to arms policy.  In August 2020, a group called the Kenosha Guard posted an event page titled “Armed Citizens to Protect Our Lives and Property,” calling for armed individuals to gather in Kenosha, Wisconsin, following the shooting of Jacob Blake.  Notwithstanding multiple reports by users that this page violated Facebook policies, Facebook did not take the page down.  An armed 17-year-old traveled from out of state to join this gathering, fatally shot two protestors that night, and is charged with their murder.  You stated that the failure to take down the event page and the Kenosha Guard’s group page was “largely an operational mistake” because contract content moderators without specialized training failed to detect that the pages violated a new militia policy Facebook had established in August 2020.   Your statement was misleading as to the event page, however, because it did not mention that the event page also violated the call to arms policy that had been in place for over a year.  Importantly, we understand that the contractors who review user-reported content are not instructed to enforce a core component of the call to arms policy.  It is not apparent that Facebook ensures meaningful enforcement of this policy, and that is not acceptable.  As the Change the Terms Coalition has explained, that “isn’t an operational mistake – that’s a design defect.”  

We have similar concerns about Facebook’s efforts to ensure that the platform is not used to enable systematic violence and discrimination against Muslims around the world.  A United Nations report concluded that the company played a “determining”  role in violence against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, and Facebook has similarly acknowledged that the platform was used to “foment division and incite offline violence”  against the Rohingya.  Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident.  According to a New York Times report published a month after anti-Muslim violence erupted in Sri Lanka in March 2018, “Facebook’s newsfeed played a central role in nearly every step from rumor to killing,”  despite numerous attempts by Sri Lankan activists and government officials to warn Facebook about potential outbreaks of violence.  In an especially horrific episode of anti-Muslim activity on Facebook, in March 2019, a white nationalist gunman broadcasted his 17-minute slaughter of 51 Muslims at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, for the entire world to see using Facebook Live.  Reports indicate that the platform has also been used to support the internment of the Uyghurs in China and other human rights violations against this population, that Facebook and WhatsApp have been used to incite violence against Muslims in India, and that Facebook has been used to promote hate and violence in other areas around the world.

The civil rights audit and other reports have documented the shortcomings of Facebook that have led to these results over the years.  The United Nations explained in 2018 that Facebook launched its Myanmar-specific services without content moderators who spoke the necessary languages, without adequate technology, and without sufficient transparency and coordination with local organizations.  It also documented how speech in clear violation of Facebook’s policies remained on the platform notwithstanding multiple reports, and how even after the speech was taken down, re-posts continued to circulate months later.  Furthermore, the civil rights audit found that Facebook is not sufficiently attuned to how its algorithms “fuel extreme and polarizing content,” and thereby may “driv[e] people toward self-reinforcing echo chambers of extremism,” as seen in Myanmar and Sri Lanka.   Advocacy groups similarly detailed the extent and persistence of anti-Muslim hate content on Facebook India in multiple reports last year, concerns that have been amplified by recent allegations that some high-ranking employees at Facebook India have enabled hate speech against Muslims and others by applying the platform’s content moderation policies in a selective manner.  

We recognize that Facebook has announced efforts to address its role in the distribution of anti-Muslim content in some of these areas.  These include, for instance, adding country-specific staff and content moderators proficient in certain local languages, investing in proactive detection technologies, strengthening local fact-checking partnerships, and limiting the ability to reshare certain kinds of messages. 

Nevertheless, it is not clear that the company is meaningfully better positioned to prevent further human rights abuses and violence against Muslim minorities today.  In part, this is because Facebook still does not collect the information needed to evaluate the effectiveness of its responses.  For instance, Facebook reported that it took action on 22 million pieces of hate speech content in the second quarter of 2020, up from over 9 million in the first quarter.   It is not apparent, however, whether this is a sign of an improving or worsening problem, because this data lacks crucial context:  Facebook does not calculate or report on the overall prevalence of hate speech on the platform.  It is thus unclear how significant this increase is as a proportion of total hate speech or whether takedowns are increasing only because hate content on the platform is increasing.  Facebook recognizes that the statistic it reports “only tells part of the story,” and Facebook does estimate prevalence in other contexts.  Its failure to do so as to hate speech is concerning.  

In addition, the civil rights audit pointed out that for content that Facebook does remove, the company does not collect data about which protected groups were the target of the removed post.  This prevents Facebook and the public from understanding the volume of hate against a particular group, whether attacks against certain groups are consistently not removed, and whether there are gaps in Facebook’s policies that result in perpetuating or increasing hate speech and attacks against particular groups.  It is difficult to understand how Facebook can effectively combat hate speech without this information. 

There is also basic information that Facebook has or could readily make available, but which it has inexplicably declined to make public.  For instance, while pointing to its increases in country-specific staff and language-specific content moderators in certain areas, Facebook has declined repeated requests from advocates to provide detailed information about its country-specific staff or language-specific content moderators across the world.  Such information is necessary to evaluate Facebook’s suggestion that its additions are adequate and to determine whether there are gaps in coverage in other regions that should be addressed proactively before the next violent event.  Facebook similarly does not provide information about how the hate speech it has taken down is disaggregated by language or country of origin, information that would help identify volatile areas in need of further attention from content moderators or others at Facebook.  That is so even though Facebook has conceded that “[t]hese breakdowns are feasible for these count-based metrics” and that it “recognize[s] the value in having different subpopulations of the various metrics.”   The United Nations 2018 Myanmar report expressed “regret[]” that Facebook did not provide country-specific data about hate speech and deemed it “essential” that such information be disclosed.    

Though these concerns have been raised for years, Facebook thus far has not taken the steps required to effectively address hate and violence targeting Muslims.  In 2018, Facebook acknowledged that it “can and should do better” after its platform fueled violence in Myanmar and outlined steps it would take.   In 2020, Facebook “apologize[d] for” the human rights impacts that resulted from misuse of its platform in Sri Lanka and outlined more steps.   Despite these experiences, recent reporting suggests that today, Facebook is contributing to the spread of hate speech and violence against ethnic and religious groups in Ethiopia, where Facebook “dominates” the internet.   Meanwhile, it announced a call to arms policy to assuage concerns but has failed to adequately enforce it.  As members of Congress who are deeply disturbed by the proliferation of this hate speech on your platform, we urge you to do more.  We believe Facebook must frankly and openly detail the scope of the problem and take concerted and sustained actions to address this problem fully.  We respectfully request that you respond to the questions below by December 16, 2020.  As to each question, insofar as Facebook will commit to taking action, please provide details of its plan and expected timing.  

1.         Will Facebook commit to developing and implementing a plan to ensure robust enforcement of its call to arms policy, including through proactive review of event pages, content moderator review of user reports, and prioritization of highly reported events?  If not, why not?

2.         Will Facebook commit to collecting and publishing data about the overall amount and prevalence of hate content on the platform and whether hate content is increasing on its platform?  If so, please specify whether Facebook will break down this data by country and language.  If not, why not?

3.         Will Facebook commit to collecting and publishing data about which groups were the subject of the hate speech it removes and enforcement rates across groups?  If so, please specify the groups for which Facebook will provide this information.  If not, why not?

4.         Will Facebook commit to collecting and publishing country-specific or language-specific data on hate speech that is on or removed from the platform?  If not, why not?

5.         Will Facebook publish detailed information about the number of country-specific staff and language-specific content moderators it employs?  If not, why not?

6.         Will Facebook commit to studying regularly its civil rights and human rights impacts and making future human rights impact assessments or rights audits public in their entirety?  If not, why not?

7.         Will Facebook commit to establishing and publishing criteria that must be met for Facebook to expand or maintain usage of its services in markets at risk of hate content fueling religious and/or ethnic violence to ensure Facebook does not enable human rights violations?  If so, please specify the outside input that Facebook will solicit in developing these criteria.  If not, why not?

8.         Will Facebook conduct an analysis of how it can better design its systems and algorithms to not just identify and take down hate speech, but limit the reach of this content and its ability to cause offline violence?  If not, why not? 

9.         Will Facebook commit to creating a working group led by a senior employee with expertise in anti-Muslim bigotry specifically tasked with monitoring, reviewing, and coordinating efforts to proactively remove anti-Muslim content on the platform?  If not, why not?

Thank you for your consideration of our views.  We appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely, 

###

Senate and House introduce Accelerating Access to Critical Therapies for ALS Act

WILMINGTON, Del. — This week, U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) along with Representatives Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) and Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) introduced an updated version of ACT for ALS, Accelerating Access to Critical Therapies for ALS Act, in the United States Senate and House of Representatives.

The two new pieces of legislation, S.4867 in the Senate and H.R.8662 in the House, create new pathways for faster and broader access to therapies for those most in need, including those facing a fatal disease like ALS.  

“We must do all we can to support the tens of thousands of Americans impacted by ALS, a terrible disease without a cure. ACT for ALS will expand early treatment options and support the cutting-edge research needed to improve quality of life and find a cure.  We should take steps to facilitate access to new therapies, drug treatments, and medical breakthroughs to aid Americans who suffer from ALS or other forms of neurodegenerative disease,” said Senator Chris Coons, co-chair of the Senate ALS Caucus.  

“For years I’ve been working with the ALS community to help increase research opportunities and ensure those living with this deadly disease have the support they need.   We’ve made progress, but even with promising treatments in clinical trials, patients unable to enroll in those research studies unfortunately have very few options for treatment.   Through a new pilot grant program, as well as other additional funding, this bipartisan legislation will help address barriers to utilizing the current expanded access pathway, while also broadly supporting the development of ALS treatments.  As someone whose family has been personally impacted by ALS, I’m proud to help Senator Coons lead this effort,” said Senator Lisa Murkowski. 

“This new legislation represents a monumental shift for those suffering from ALS and other neurodegenerative diseases.  It breaks the paradigm of disease research and creates a new pathway to deliver promising treatments.  With this new law, we can break through faster for those who have suffered so much,” said Congressman Jeff Fortenberry. 

“For too long, ALS and diseases like it have gone under researched and under resourced at the federal level.  That changes today.  The new ACT for ALS bill is the product of intense engagement over many months and is our best opportunity in decades to disrupt the status quo, move the ball forward, and expedite treatment options for those living with terminal illnesses like ALS.  I’ve been so proud to work alongside a diverse group of stakeholders—patients, advocates, scientists, researchers and doctors, both in and outside of government— to produce a bold, bipartisan piece of legislation that offers new hope to those suffering from ALS and other neurodegenerative diseases with few treatments and no cures.  I want to thank my partner in this effort, Congressman Jeff Fortenberry, and all those who worked with us to improve this legislation, and I am honored to give voice to the ALS patient community, without whom this effort would simply not be possible,” said Congressman Mike Quigley. 

The revised ACT for ALS addresses several challenges associated with ALS therapeutic development.  First, ALS clinical trials do not always employ expanded access programs that facilitate access to experimental treatments outside of the trial. This legislation tackles the financial barrier for therapies being tested from small biopharmaceutical companies by creating a grant program that funds access to investigational ALS treatments to patients not participating in the clinical trial. Additionally, the grant will fund a research project as part of providing expanded access to people living with ALS, adding to the understanding of how treatments impact the disease.

The revised legislation also invests in neurodegenerative disease research through a new Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Rare Neurodegenerative Disease Grant Program.  With this investment, Congress prioritizes making progress in the development of treatments and cures for ALS and other rare neurodegenerative diseases.  

Finally, ACT for ALS would establish an HHS Collaborative for Neurodegenerative Diseases jointly led by the FDA and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the first federal effort explicitly charged with the responsibility to speed the development and approval of therapies for neurodegenerative diseases.  This collaborative is charged with coordinating efforts across the public and private sector to accelerate therapeutic development and regulatory review of treatments and cures for ALS and neurodegenerative diseases, including: 

• Coordination among the centers of the Food and Drug Administration to achieve the goals specified in the draft guidance entitled “Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: Developing Drugs for Treatment Guidance for Industry,” published in September 2019; 
• Facilitation of access to investigational drugs for ALS; 
• Definition or development of the regulatory and translational pathway for emerging therapeutic categories; and
• Development and implementation of an ongoing mechanism to share feedback and information and develop strategies with the neurodegenerative disease community, including patients, treating physicians, national organizations that facilitate provision of care services, access and research, researchers, drug sponsors, drug manufacturers and Federal agencies. 

The bills have the full support and coordination of three leading ALS organizations in I AM ALS, The ALS Association and the Muscular Dystrophy Association.  The revised ACT for ALS addresses several challenges associated with ALS therapeutic development. 

“We made a commitment at the start of 2020 to firmly stand behind this legislation and the drive to make it a reality for ALS patients waiting for critical, needed treatments.  This bill will provide additional opportunities to access promising ALS therapies and create a collaborative focused squarely on expediting development and approval of new ALS treatments and cures.  We now look forward to working with the community and Congressional leaders to take one more step toward changing the course of history as we end ALS and other neurodegenerative diseases,” I AM ALS CEO Danielle Carnival, PhD, said.

“The strengthened Accelerating Access to Critical Therapies (ACT) for ALS Act could be transformative for the ALS community.  It will help provide effective treatments for everyone living with ALS today, and expanded access to experimental ones.  It creates the first federal entity explicitly charged with finding effective treatments for ALS as quickly as possible.  We thank Reps. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE), Mike Quigley (D-IL) and Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) for introducing this bill to meet these goals,” stated Neil Thakur, PhD, The ALS Association Chief Mission Officer. 

“The introduction of a strengthened ACT for ALS represents a substantial step forward in the effort to bring safe, effective, and innovative new treatments to the ALS community.  We are proud to endorse this bill, and in coordination with the ALS patient community, we call on Congress to pass this legislation as soon as possible,” said Kristin Stephenson, EVP, Chief Advocacy and Care Services Officer, Muscular Dystrophy Association.

Link to Senate Bill: https://bit.ly/34GW6ou 

Link to House Bill: https://bit.ly/37POqlG 

###

Following letter from Carper, Coons, HHS takes action to preserve access to Provider Relief Fund

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Tom Carper and Chris Coons (both D-Del.) joined Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Tina Smith (D-Minn.) to announce that following their letter earlier this month to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex Azar, the Administration has updated requirements to preserve providers’ access to funding from the Provider Relief Fund (PRF) created as a response to the coronavirus pandemic.

“Our health care workers and hospital staff are frontline heroes in this pandemic,” said Senator Carper. “We need to make sure that hospitals and health care providers throughout our state,  especially those that serve vulnerable populations, have the resources they need to keep our communities healthy and safe. Today’s announcement helps ensure that these front line health care providers can continue to focus on managing this public health crisis.”

“Since the start of this pandemic, support for our health care systems has been a top priority. I’ve been working with my colleagues and with HHS to expand support for our health care providers – including a delegation effort to secure Nanticoke Hospital’s eligibility for $1.6 million in relief,” said Senator Coons. “I welcome this new announcement that HHS will ensure providers can access the assistance they need and ensure that quality health care remains accessible up and down our state. This move will help smaller providers stay afloat and continue essential services in our communities.”

“As we continue to face challenges from the pandemic, rural areas are in need of critical support,” Senator Klobuchar said. “This announcement is welcome news and we must continue to work with rural hospitals and health systems in Minnesota and around the country to help ensure that they can continue to serve low-income, elderly, and severely ill patients through this difficult time.”

“We need to help health care providers in small towns and rural areas stay afloat so they can continue their critical work during COVID-19,” Senator Smith said. “Some health care providers are having to lay people off while anticipating surges in patients this winter. This puts them in an impossible position. The last thing we should do is change the requirements for the Provider Relief Fund, which may force some health care providers to return funds they have already received.”

HHS is allowing more flexibility for providers in using PRF proceeds so that they can continue to respond to all of the challenges posed by the coronavirus pandemic. This will help to protect patients’ access to care and prevent providers — especially rural hospitals and hospitals that serve high-numbers of low-income, elderly, and severely ill patients — from being forced to return PRF funds that they have already received. 

HHS released initial reporting requirements in June for providers receiving PRF funds that directed these entities to define lost revenue as “any revenue that you as a health care provider lost due to coronavirus,” but HHS released updated reporting requirements on September 19 that directed providers to instead use changes in their net operating income to calculate lost revenue – a substantial change from the initial June guidance that was expected to reduce the amount of lost revenues that providers are able to report. That shift in reporting requirements would have changed the terms of the relief as hospitals and health systems initially understood them and likely created further uncertainty for providers at a time when they are already facing serious financial challenges.

Earlier this month, Senators Carper, Coons, Klobuchar and Smith, along with 18 colleagues, wrote a letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Alex Azar, expressing concerns about that change in reporting requirements for hospitals and health systems that receive relief funds from the Provider Relief Fund (PRF). That change could have forced providers to return relief funding that they had already received. Rural hospitals and hospitals that serve high numbers of low-income, elderly, and severely ill patients — could have been particularly burdened by the additional reporting requirements, due to their already thin financial margins.

Senators Carper, Coons, Klobuchar and Smith were joined on the letter by Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Doug Jones (D-AL), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Jack Reed (D-RI), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Gary Peters (D-MI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Angus King (I-ME), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ed Markey (D-MA).

Full text of the October 9 letter can be found here and below.

Dear Secretary Azar:

We write to express our concerns regarding the recent change in reporting requirements for health care providers that have received emergency relief through the Provider Relief Fund (PRF) and to respectfully request that you reinstate the original reporting requirements for determining lost revenue that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) first released in June of this year.

As you know, the CARES Act established the PRF to reimburse health care providers for health care-related expenses or lost revenue due to the coronavirus pandemic. The PRF has been critical in helping hospitals and health care systems across the country navigate the serious financial challenges posed by this pandemic, preventing many providers from being forced to permanently close their doors.

As a condition for receiving PRF funds, the CARES Act required these recipients to submit reports and maintain documentation to certify their compliance with program requirements. In June, HHS released initial guidance outlining some of these reporting requirements and directed providers to calculate lost revenue by comparing actual 2020 revenue with budgeted 2020 revenue or with 2019 revenue. On September 19, HHS released updated reporting requirements that directed providers to use net operating income to calculate lost revenue—a substantial change from the directions issued in June.

We have heard from hospitals and health systems in our states who are concerned that this change in the definition of lost revenue will force them to return funds to HHS that they have received from the PRF. In particular, rural hospitals and those that serve high numbers of low-income, elderly, and severely ill patients—which already operate on thin financial margins—may be especially impacted by this change.

We are concerned that this change in reporting requirements changes the terms of the relief as providers initially understood them based on the initial June guidelines—further exacerbating the financial challenges and uncertainty that these systems continue to grapple with as a result of the pandemic. Therefore, we respectfully request that you reinstate the original June requirements for determining lost revenue in order to prevent unnecessary financial uncertainty for hospitals and health care providers and to prevent them from being forced to return PRF funds that they have already received.

Thank you for your time and attention to this important measure. We look forward to working with you to continue supporting our hospitals and ensuring that this pandemic does not cause further, long-term disruptions to Americans’ access to care.

Sincerely, 

###

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons: Justice Barrett’s confirmation ‘may well change the arc of our history’

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, joined Rachel Maddow on MSNBC last night to discuss Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court.

On the consequences of Justice Barrett’s confirmation, Sen. Coons said: “Justice Barrett, within a couple of weeks, is going to have a chance to weigh in on the things that President Trump said he most wanted from her. Overturning the Affordable Care Act – that case is being heard just two weeks from tomorrow. Protecting his taxes and shielding him from accountability – that case will be heard this month. And quite possibly handing him the election by refusing to count our votes in appeals to the Supreme Court.”

On Justice Barrett’s conservative views, Sen. Coons said: “Judge Barrett, now Justice Barrett, convinced me from her writings and my questioning of her that she has a view of the law that’s to the right of Justice Scalia.”

On Trump’s judicial appointments, Sen. Coons said: “We’ve got to look at our courts as a whole because we’ve seen hundreds of conservative judges put on circuit courts and district courts all over this country in the last four years, in many cases, too young, too unqualified, and too far right to be allowed to sit peaceably without our re-examining the process, the results, and the consequences.” 

Full video is available here. A transcript is provided below.

Q: Joining us now is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Delaware Senator Chris Coons. Senator Coons, it’s a real pleasure to have you here tonight. Thanks very much for joining us. 

Sen. Coons: Thanks, Rachel. It’s been a tough night, and I’m grateful for a chance to be on with you. 

Q: So I know that Democrats did everything they felt they could, including as many delaying tactics as they could extend to this process, up to and including working through this weekend, going into closed session, doing everything possible. But you said tonight on the Senate floor: “I fear we as a nation have not fully reckoned with the impact that a 6-3 conservative court will have on so many aspects of our lives.” Now that the process part of this is over and the hypocrisy part of this is over and this is done, what are your biggest concerns about the Court as it will now be constituted with a Justice Barrett on its right flank? 

Sen. Coons: Well Rachel, first, Justice Barrett, within a couple of weeks, is going to have a chance to weigh in on the things that President Trump said he most wanted from her. Overturning the Affordable Care Act – that case is being heard just two weeks from tomorrow. Protecting his taxes and shielding him from accountability – that case will be heard this month. And quite possibly handing him the election by refusing to count our votes in appeals to the Supreme Court that you were just discussing a few moments ago. So very quickly, right up front, we’ll see a couple of ways in which Justice Barrett, if she does sit and hear these things, may well change the arc of our history. But as I pointed out in my questioning of then-Judge Barrett on the Judiciary Committee, there’s over 120 cases over recent years, over recent decades, where Justice Ginsburg was in the majority and Justice Scalia in the minority of a 5-4 decision. And, Rachel, they covered an incredible range of things from labor rights to LGBTQ rights, from environmental protection to Native American rights, to criminal defense issues, to the ways in which consumers are protected. Judge Barrett, now Justice Barrett, convinced me from her writings and my questioning of her that she has a view of the law that’s to the right of Justice Scalia. I thought it was powerfully and chillingly symbolic that she asked Justice Thomas to symbolically swear her in tonight on the steps of the White House, treating the White House as a soundstage for the latest episode of Trump reality TV show, reelection theater, because it’s Justice Thomas, the farthest right justice, who has repeatedly said we should look back and reconsider all sorts of cases. Something like, for example, Obergefell, that millions of Americans have rested their lives on and have moved forward in reliance upon, to cases decades ago like Griswold v. Connecticut that I asked her about and she wouldn’t answer that is the foundation of privacy law. Rachel, I’m really worried about just how much this will mean in ways we are just now beginning to confront. 

Q: And this point in the process, Senator Coons, as you say, a difficult night for you and your colleagues in the Senate who did try to do everything possible to stop this from happening. What do you say tonight to Democrats and, I think, liberals and centrists across the country who are enraged by what has happened here? President Obama being denied the opportunity to appoint a nominee to the Court even when he picked somebody quite moderate, specifically as a way to try to appeal to Republicans and their sense of fair play. Mitch McConnell essentially engineering three vacancies on this Court for President Trump to fill and the kinds of radical transformation that’s ahead. You said tonight that Republicans are walking over a dangerous precipice. What do you say to Americans who want some kind of retribution or want to try to even this out somehow given what the Republicans have done? 

[…]

Sen. Coons: We’ve got to have a wide-open conversation about how we rebalance our courts. Yes, the two Supreme Court seats that have been stolen through these processes that are wildly hypocritical have been used to jam through nominees. We’ve got to look at our federal courts as a whole because we’ve seen hundreds of conservative judges put on circuit courts and district courts all over this country in the last four years, in many cases, too young, too unqualified, and too far right to be allowed to sit peaceably without our re-examining the process, the results, and the consequences. 

Q: Delaware U.S. Senator Chris Coons. Sir, I know this is just a remarkable time for a lot of different reasons, but thank you for taking time to help us explain this all tonight. Thank you so much, sir. 

Sen. Coons: Thank you, Rachel. 

###

Sen. Coons, colleagues introduce legislation to expand minority business support to rural areas

WASHINGTON — Today, U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), along with U.S. Senators Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and Thom Tillis, (R-N.C.), introduced the Reaching America’s Rural Minority Businesses Act of 2020 which would authorize the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) within the Department of Commerce to establish up to 10 business centers at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) to serve rural and underserved communities. MBDA’s existing Minority Business Centers are concentrated in select urban areas in 18 states, leaving vast swaths of the country without easy access to MBDA’s services.

“It’s urgent that Congress deliver comprehensive relief to small businesses struggling to survive the pandemic, but we must also ensure that ongoing recovery efforts reach underserved communities,” Senator Coons said. “This new bill would allow the Minority Business Development Agency to utilize the reach and relationships of HBCUs like Delaware State University to deliver the tools for growth to minority-owned small businesses. This is one of many ways we can prioritize equity and access as we chart the economic recovery.”

“The Minority Business Development Agency has been a lifeline for many minority business owners and entrepreneurs seeking to start and grow their businesses,” Senator Wicker said. “This bill would help extend these resources to more of rural America, leveraging the expertise and innovation of our nation’s historically black colleges and universities. I am glad to work alongside Senators Tim Kaine, Tim Scott, Chris Coons, and Thom Tillis to help make this expansion possible.”

“MBDA centers have long been integral in supporting minority-owned businesses, but many rural businesses face challenges tapping into these federal resources,” Senator Kaine said. “This difficulty is particularly devastating amid the ongoing economic crisis brought on by COVID-19. By combining the talent and expertise of HBCUs and MBDA centers, this bill will offer vital means for rural minority-owned businesses, helping them thrive and expand.”

“As a former business owner, I find it crucial that we deploy resources to our young people – especially in minority communities – to ensure that they have access to opportunity,” said Senator Scott. “I am proud to help draft and cosponsor the Reaching America’s Rural Minority Businesses Act, and I look forward to seeing more minority-owned businesses across the nation.”

“This bipartisan legislation is a big win for rural and underserved communities in North Carolina,” said Senator Tillis. “North Carolina’s HBCUs have the potential to become education, support, and training hubs for the rural minority businesses in the communities they support, and this legislation makes long-term future success possible for so many businesses and is a great way to focus on each individual need. I am proud to have worked on a bipartisan basis to introduce this legislation and applaud the administration for their continued investment in North Carolina’s HBCUs and our rural communities.”

The legislation would authorize $10 million a year for the creation of up to 10 rural business centers at HBCUs. Eligible institutions would not have to be located in a rural area, but would need to demonstrate how they would serve a rural or underserved minority population.

HBCUs would also be able to form a consortium with other HBCUs or institutions of higher learning, which would strengthen the capacity of an established center and broaden its outreach.

The rural business centers would provide education, training, and technical assistance to rural minority businesses. Specifically, the centers would assist with: 

• Adoption of broadband internet service, digital literacy, and e-commerce;
• Promoting manufacturing in the United States;
• Meeting gaps in the supply chain of critical supplies and essential goods and services;
• Improving transportation and logistics;
• Promoting trade and export opportunities; and
• Facilitating entrepreneurship in rural areas.

Click here to read a one-page summary of the legislation.

Click here to read the full bill text.

 ###

Coons hosts NASA astronaut, administrator for virtual conversation with Delaware students

WILMINGTON, Del. – Yesterday, U.S. Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) hosted a virtual event with astronaut Dr. Jeanette Epps, NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, Lt. Gov. Bethany Hall-Long, and 250-plus Delaware students.

The virtual event, which involved FAME Delaware and Delaware Space Grant Consortium students, focused on the importance of STEM education and NASA’s Artemis program.

“NASA’s Artemis mission has the goal of landing a woman on the moon by 2024, and it’s something that I’m grateful NASA is championing,” said Sen. Coons, a member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, which funds NASA.

“Inspiring the next generation of scientists, engineers, and explorers – the Artemis Generation – ensures America will continue to lead in space exploration and discovery,” said NASA Administrator Bridenstine. “Delaware is committed to STEM education, and is already making great contributions to America’s Moon to Mars exploration plans. The students who participated in today’s event are tomorrow’s NASA and aerospace workforce, and encouraging STEM early on in their education is critical to America’s future in space. We are grateful to Senator Coons for his leadership to promote STEM education, and look forward to continuing strong partnerships in the state of Delaware.”

“Open your minds to the new frontiers offered by a career in STEM fields, keep them open and take these opportunities, to learn and grow,” said Lt. Gov. Hall-Long. “You are the next generation of leaders that will guide us and expand STEM industry careers. Thank you to Sen. Coons and to NASA for hosting this event today and providing a unique opportunity for Delaware students to learn firsthand about all the amazing opportunities available to them.”

A research scientist and professor, Dr. Hall-Long also serves as the honorary co-chair of the Million Women Mentors, which promotes and connects young girls with leaders in STEM related fields.

To watch a video of yesterday’s virtual event, visit https://bit.ly/2Ttx71h.

Ahead of confirmation vote, Senators Coons, Carper join Delawareans to highlight #WhatsAtStake if ACA is overturned

WILMINGTON, Del. – Yesterday, just hours before the U.S. Senate voted on Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court, U.S. Sen. Chris Coons and Sen. Tom Carper (both D-Del.) joined Delawareans who are benefitting from the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, highlighting what’s at stake if the landmark health care law is overturned.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to serve on the Supreme Court threatens the health care protections that millions of Americans currently have under the ACA, including protections for the nearly 400,000 Delawareans living with preexisting conditions.

“It’s hard enough to fight the cancer. We shouldn’t also have to fight to live,” said Jan White, a small business owner from Newark who has been battling Stage 4 Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma for four years. “We need the ACA protections.”

“The ACA is not just benefiting me but thousands of Delawareans and millions of Americans all across this country,” said Carrie Dennis-Mayer, a small business owner from Middletown, Delaware. “What is interesting is that most people do not know the need for the Affordable Care Act until they really need it. And if you fall between the cracks of healthcare insecurity and healthcare uncertainty, then trust me, you’re grateful that ACA is there to help you.”

“It is amazing to me, galling to me, angering to me, that in the middle of a pandemic – a global health pandemic that has killed more than 225,000 Americans and infected more than 8,500,000 Americans – that the Trump administration is seeking to take away the protections of the Affordable Care Act from a majority of Americans,” said Senator Coons, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. “Don’t take my word for it; there’s a filing in the U.S. Supreme Court in a case that will be argued one week from the election. So, we are one week from an election and two weeks from an argument in the Supreme Court where the ACA is at risk.”

“Having failed nearly 100 times to repeal or chip away at the Affordable Care Act in Congress, Donald Trump and many of our Republican colleagues are now counting on the Supreme Court to do their work for them. And, with Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination, they are within one vote on the Supreme Court of achieving their goal,” said Senator Carper. “This isn’t a hypothetical. This nomination – and a subsequent ruling on the Republican lawsuit to strike down the ACA in its entirety – could have all too real and devastating consequences for Delawareans like Jan and our entire health care system, all in the midst of a deadly and unprecedented pandemic. It is shameful, and Senator Coons and I won’t stop fighting to make sure Americans know just how much is at stake here.”

###

Senator Coons to vote against Judge Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released the following statement on his vote against the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court:

“While Senate Republicans have been rushing to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett, they have done nothing to help the millions of Americans struggling through this pandemic. Across the country, too many Americans have lost jobs, closed small businesses, and been infected by COVID-19. But, instead of working together to pass a relief bill to deliver desperately-needed aid, my Republican colleagues chose to jam through a partisan nominee in the most rushed and unprecedented process in American history.

“I fear that Judge Barrett’s confirmation will have real and dire impacts on the American people. After reviewing her record and questioning her about her views, it’s clear that Judge Barrett will come to the Supreme Court with both a legal philosophy that is far outside the mainstream and a judicial activism that will put at risk numerous longstanding rights that the American people hold dear – the right to privacy, the right to control one’s own body, and the right to marry whomever they love. Judge Barrett has also expressed clear disagreement with past opinions upholding the Affordable Care Act, and she may well cast the deciding vote to overturn it, stripping from the majority of Americans critical coverage and protections in the middle of a public health crisis that has already taken the lives of more than 220,000 Americans.

“I fear that Judge Barrett’s confirmation will also do irreparable damage to our democracy. We are just eight days from Election Day. Never before in our nation’s history has the United States Senate confirmed a Supreme Court justice in circumstances such as these. I am further troubled by Judge Barrett’s refusal during her confirmation hearing to commit to recusing herself from any case involving an election dispute. This means that Judge Barrett could be the deciding vote to tip the election in President Trump’s favor – a vote that could undermine the integrity of our elections for generations to come.

“For all of these reasons, I will vote against Judge Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court. As my Republican colleagues rush this nomination forward, I urge each of them to reconsider and to think about the dire impacts this confirmation will have on our constituents and our nation as a whole.”

###