Sens. Carper, Coons join group of bipartisan colleagues in calling for full funding for national sea grant program

WILMINGTON, DE – After the Trump administration proposed to eliminate the National Sea Grant College Program from his FY 2019 budget, U.S. Senators Tom Carper and Chris Coons (both D-Del.), joined a bipartisan group of senators in calling for the program to be funded – at a minimum – at its current funding level of $65 million.

In a letter to Chairman Jerry Moran (R-Kas.) and Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Carper, Coons and the other senators emphasized that the National Sea Grant College Program – which is a critical source of funding for University of Delaware’s College of Earth, Ocean and Environment in Lewes– provides critical support to local businesses, shoreline communities, and Delaware students.

“As senators from some of the states with Sea Grant programs, we see firsthand how this federal investment is leveraged locally to bring immense returns to coastal communities, fishermen, universities, and students,” wrote the bipartisan group of senators. “Any cuts to this funding would have a devastating impact and we strongly urge you to reject any proposals to reduce this program.”

U.S. Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Angus King (I-Maine), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Cali.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) signed the letter.

The Honorable Jerry Moran The Honorable Jeanne Shaheen

Chairman Ranking Member

Commerce, Justice, Science and Commerce, Justice, Science and

Related Agencies Subcommittee Related Agencies Subcommittee

Senate Appropriations Committee Senate Appropriations Committee

Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20510

Dear Chairman Moran and Ranking Member Shaheen:

As you work to draft the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, we urge you to reject the administration’s proposed elimination of the National Sea Grant College base program. We are grateful that the committee included an increase for this program in FY 2018, particularly as the increase was given in a challenging budget environment. For FY 2019, we continue to support at least the current funding level of $65 million for Sea Grant. Furthermore, we are aware that the Sea Grant Association has recommended $73 million in funding to carry out their important work.

As senators from some of the states with Sea Grant programs, we see firsthand how this federal investment is leveraged locally to bring immense returns to coastal communities, fishermen, universities, and students. Any cuts to this funding would have a devastating impact and we strongly urge you to reject any proposals to reduce this program.

Sea Grant’s work supporting waterfront and maritime businesses speaks for itself. The federal investment in Sea Grant centers yields $611 million in economic benefit, an 825% return on federal investment. This economic impact includes creating and sustaining 1,300 local businesses and 7,100 jobs. In 2016, Sea Grant has helped 19,900 fishers adopt sustainable fishing practices and trained 2,002 people in safe seafood handling methods.

Sea Grant staff also assist communities with projects to become more resilient and preserve coastline habitat. In 2016, Sea Grant staff helped 300 communities improve coastal resiliency, aided 494 communities in adopting sustainable development practices, and supported 4,600 resource managers in using ecosystem-based management strategies. They also helped preserve or protect 1,400,000 acres of wildlife habitat.

Finally, Sea Grant is helping to educate the next generation of freshwater and marine scientists. Last year, Sea Grant programs reached 781,000 K-12 students and in 2016 Sea Grant supported over 2,300 undergraduate and graduate students.

Sea Grant is vital to local businesses and an important part of preserving coastal communities for generations to come. We continue to support robust funding for Sea Grant at a minimum of the current funding level of $65 million and acknowledge the recommendations of up to $73 million in funding.

Sincerely,

Christopher S. Murphy
Susan M. Collins
Bill Cassidy M.D.
Margaret Wood Hassan
Richard Blumenthal
Angus S. King, Jr.
Edward J. Markey
Tom Carper
Dianne Feinstein
Tammy Baldwin
Debbie Stabenow
Sherrod Brown
Maria Cantwell
Sheldon Whitehouse
Gary C. Peters
Tim Kaine
Chris Van Hollen
Ron Wyden
Cory A. Booker
Amy Klobuchar
Christopher A. Coons
Tina Smith
Bernard Sanders
Elizabeth Warren
Kamala D. Harris
Jeff Merkley

###

Sen. Coons joins colleagues in calling on Trump Administration to halt expansion of short-term health insurance plans

WILMINGTON, DE – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) joined colleagues in a letter signed by 47 other Senators calling on the Trump Administration to halt a proposed regulation that would expand the use of short-term health care plans. These junk health insurance plans would raise premiums for older Americans and harm millions of people living with pre-existing conditions. The Senators expressed their opposition to the proposed rule to expand junk plans, CMS-9924-P, ahead of the deadline for public comment on April 23, 2018.

“If finalized, the rule could increase costs and reduce access to quality coverage for millions of Americans, harm people with pre-existing conditions, and force premium increases on older Americans,” the Senators wrote. “This rule expands the sale and marketing of “junk plans” that exclude basic benefits including hospitalization, prescription drugs, mental health services, substance abuse treatment, and maternity care. We urge you not to finalize the proposed rule and instead work with us to ensure that all American families have choices of affordable, meaningful health care coverage.”

“We are committed to making health insurance premiums more affordable for all consumers and expanding the number of options, and we stand ready to work with the Administration and our colleagues in Congress to achieve these goals,” the Senators continued. “Unfortunately, creating a new class of health insurance plans that lack basic patient protections and could lead to higher prices for seniors, those with pre-existing conditions, and any American who wants to purchase a plan with comprehensive benefits does not achieve this goal.”

The letter, led by Senators Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) was joined by Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tom Carper (D-DE), Bob Casey (D-PA), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Doug Jones (D-AL), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Pat Leahy (D-VT), Ed Markey (D-MA), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Patty Murray (D-WA), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Gary Peters (D-MI), Jack Reed (D-RI), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Tina Smith (D-MN), Jon Tester (D-MT), Tom Udall (D-NM), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) also signed the letter.

The full text of the letter may be found below.

April 23, 2018

Dear Secretary Azar, Secretary Mnuchin, and Secretary Acosta:

As a caucus, we are determined to guarantee access to affordable health care options for Americans with pre-existing conditions. Therefore, we write to express serious concerns with the proposed rule on short-term, limited-duration insurance (CMS-9924-P). If finalized, the rule could increase costs and reduce access to quality coverage for millions of Americans, harm people with pre-existing conditions, and force premium increases on older Americans. This rule expands the sale and marketing of “junk plans” that exclude basic benefits including hospitalization, prescription drugs, mental health services, substance abuse treatment, and maternity care. We urge you not to finalize the proposed rule and instead work with us to ensure that all American families have choices of affordable, meaningful health care coverage.

In this proposed rule, short-term, limited-duration insurance is defined as “a type of health insurance coverage that was designed to fill temporary gaps in coverage that may occur when an individual is transitioning from one plan or coverage to another plan or coverage.” Under current law, these plans are limited to three months. What the rule proposes, however, is to extend the duration of these “short-term” plans to 12 months. Furthermore, the proposal seeks comments on whether the plans should be allowed for longer than 12 months, creating a permanent market for junk plans.

Approximately 133 million Americans under age 65 have a pre-existing condition. In the past, patients with pre-existing conditions faced difficulty getting comprehensive coverage, higher costs, or were barred access from coverage altogether. Current law ensures that no person can be denied coverage or charged more based on his or her health status. This rule reverses those critical consumer protections. These short-term plans force individuals and families to fill out medical questionnaires when applying, which are often used to deny coverage, charge more based on age, gender, or a pre-existing condition, or exclude coverage for the types of care that a person may need most, such as care for diabetes, high blood pressure, pregnancy, and countless other common conditions.

A significant portion of those with pre-existing conditions are older adults age 50 to 64. This proposed rule is likely to remove a number of younger and healthier Americans from the individual marketplaces, thereby imposing what AARP and others have called an “age tax” by significantly raising premiums for the older Americans and those with pre-existing conditions who must maintain comprehensive health coverage. Individuals buying these junk plans will also be forced to pay more for less care, as these plans will be exempt from existing marketplace rules. On average, the top two insurers who sold four out of every five short-term plans used 50% of premium dollars for company profits and overhead. Families cannot afford to buy health insurance that fails to cover them when they need it the most.

The patient community has expressed grave concerns about the proliferation of short-term plans – in fact, 113 groups, including AARP, American Heart Association, March of Dimes, and the National Alliance on Mental Illness, recently sent a letter expressing these concerns to Congressional leaders. Beyond that, several insurance companies and the American Academy of Actuaries have written about the adverse impact of these plans on the insurance market and patients.

We are committed to making health insurance premiums more affordable for all consumers and expanding the number of options, and we stand ready to work with the Administration and our colleagues in Congress to achieve these goals. Unfortunately, creating a new class of health insurance plans that lack basic patient protections and could lead to higher prices for seniors, those with pre-existing conditions, and any American who wants to purchase a plan with comprehensive benefits does not achieve this goal.

For these reasons, we urge you not to finalize the proposed rule and instead to work with us to make health care more affordable for all families.

###

Sen. Coons, Democratic Senators introduce bill to limit use of solitary confinement

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chris Coons (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) yesterday introduced legislation to reduce the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ (BOP) use of solitary confinement and improve conditions for inmates separated from the general prison population.

The Solitary Confinement Reform Act limits solitary confinement to the briefest term and under the least restrictive conditions possible, improves access to mental health services for BOP prisoners in solitary confinement, and provides resources to state and local jurisdictions to assist them in reforming their own confinement practices. Additionally, the bill protects inmates’ civil rights through the creation of a Civil Rights Ombudsman position and bans the practice of placing LGBTQ inmates in solitary confinement as a means of protection.

“If the goal of our criminal justice system is to rehabilitate offenders and prepare them for successful reentry into our society, solitary confinement undermines this objective, causing psychological harm that is difficult, if not impossible, to undo,” said Durbin. “I’ve had the opportunity to hear directly from men like Anthony Graves, who spent 16 years in solitary confinement, about the devastating toll of isolation, and that’s why I’m certain of the need to restrict solitary confinement except in cases where it is absolutely necessary.”

“Solitary confinement should be a tool of last resort, not something used in our prisons for disciplinary and safety challenges,” said Coons. “The evidence remains clear: our current use of solitary confinement doesn’t achieve its intended goal of increasing prison safety or stopping criminal behavior. Moreover, widespread overuse of solitary confinement is causing lasting, irreparable harm to those inmates subjected to it. I’m proud to again join with Sen. Durbin to advance legislation that establishes limits on the use of solitary confinement and requires that its use be limited to the briefest amount of time and under the least restrictive conditions that are safe and sensible. Our criminal justice system should be about justice and rehabilitation — not just punishment. This bill continues to be an important step in reforming our criminal justice system.”

“The excessive use of solitary confinement in our nation’s prisons is a violation of human dignity and worth” Booker said. “There are far better ways to ensure the safety of correctional officers, prison workers, and people behind bars than locking someone up in solitary confinement. This bill is an important measure that will reduce the application of this often dangerous approach to punishing and controlling incarcerated people.”

“I’m proud to again support the Solitary Confinement Reform Act, which places commonsense restrictions on the use of this inhumane and counterproductive penalty,” Leahy said. “Solitary confinement has become far too common in our criminal justice system, placing the United States in violation of the Convention Against Torture and our own values. It is past time for Congress to take action.”

The Solitary Confinement Reform Act has been endorsed by the American Civil Liberties Union, National Religious Campaign Against Torture, Human Rights Campaign, National Alliance on Mental Illness, Campaign for Youth Justice, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights, Durbin held the first-ever Congressional hearing on solitary confinement in June 2012 where Anthony Graves – the 12th death row inmate in Texas to be exonerated – testified. As a result of the hearing, BOP agreed to Durbin’s request to submit the first independent assessment of its solitary confinement policies and practices.

In 2014, Durbin held a second hearing on solitary confinement in which he called for an end to the use of solitary confinement for juveniles, pregnant women, and those with serious and persistent mental illness. Damon Thibodeaux – a man held in solitary confinement for 15 years before his exoneration and release from prison – testified at the hearing.

In February 2015, BOP released the independent assessment Durbin requested following his first solitary confinement hearing. The report identified areas where operational and policy improvements are needed, including mental health care, time parameters for restrictive housing, and the segregation of inmates in protective custody.

In 2015, following the independent assessment, the Department of Justice undertook a review of BOP’s use of solitary confinement. In January 2016, President Obama announced that he had accepted a number of the Justice Department’s recommendations to reform and reduce the practice of solitary confinement in the federal prison system—including implementing the ban on juvenile solitary confinement that Durbin called for in 2014.

Experts estimate that 80,000 – 100,000 inmates are held in solitary confinement in the United States. Approximately 10,000 of those inmates are currently held in restricted housing in the BOP.

###

Senator Coons announces opposition to Pompeo nomination

WILMINGTON, DE — U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, announced today that he will oppose CIA Director Mike Pompeo’s nomination to serve as Secretary of State.

“After careful consideration, I have decided that I will oppose CIA Director Mike Pompeo’s nomination to become Secretary of State.

“While I respect his background of military and public service and am encouraged by his stated commitment to our diplomatic corps, I remain concerned that Director Pompeo will embolden, rather than moderate or restrain, President Trump’s most belligerent and dangerous instincts.

“I do not make this decision lightly or without reservations. I am convinced Director Pompeo would be a strong advocate for the career professionals of the State Department and that he would repair some of the damage that vacancies and budget uncertainties have created over the past eighteen months. He is also knowledgeable and clear-eyed about the diplomatic and security challenges we face around the world.

“However, I remain concerned that Director Pompeo will not challenge the President in critical moments. On vital decisions facing our country, Director Pompeo seems less concerned with rule of law and partnership with our allies and more inclined to emphasize unilateral action and the use of force.

“Finally, Director Pompeo’s past statements as a Congressman and candidate on a range of issues give me great concern since the role of Secretary of State is in part to speak for all Americans on issues of our shared values to rest of the world.

“Given these reasons, I will oppose Director Pompeo’s nomination in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Monday.”

###

Sens. Alexander, Coons Honor U.S. Recipients of the 2017 Nobel Prizes

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.), along with National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt, yesterday hosted a reception in the U.S. Capitol to honor the U.S. recipients of the 2017 Nobel Prizes. The event recognized the scientists for their significant contributions to their fields and the advancement of human knowledge. National Academy of Engineering President C.D. Mote, Jr. and National Academy of Medicine President Victor J. Dzau also attended the reception.

The reception honored the following Nobel laureates:

Dr. Barry Barish and Dr. Kip Thorne, who shared one-half of the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics in recognition of “decisive contributions to the LIGO [Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory] detector and the observation of gravitational waves.”
Dr. Joachim Frank, who received one-third of the 2017 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for “developing cryo-electron microscopy for the high-resolution structure determination of biomolecules in solution.”
Dr. Michael Rosbash and Dr. Michael Young, who each received one-third of the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine “for their discoveries of molecular mechanisms controlling the circadian rhythm.”

Full audio and video of the event are available here.

###

At the CSIS Global Development Forum, Sen. Coons discusses the importance of modernizing development finance

WASHINGTON – This morning, U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate’s Foreign Relations and Appropriations Committees, delivered the keynote speech at the fourth annual Global Development Forum hosted by the Project on U.S. Leadership in Development at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS). In his remarks, Senator Coons discussed the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development (BUILD) Act of 2018, bipartisan legislation that Senator Coons introduced on February 27 with Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.). The bill would create a new U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, modernizing the U.S. Government’s development finance tools to provide for increased investments in the developing world.

Senator Coons remarks, as prepared, are below:

Thank you, Dan, for inviting me to participate in CSIS’ Global Development Forum and discuss the importance of development finance reform.

On February 27, I introduced the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development, or BUILD, Act of 2018 with Republican Senator Bob Corker, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Representatives Ted Yoho and Adam Smith also introduced a companion bill on the House side.

In the next ten minutes, I would like to explain to you why I introduced the bill, and why I hope to see the bill become law before the end of the year.

As I see it, this bill, which modernizes the way in which the U.S. government conducts development finance, solves at least three problems.

First, the bill provides the U.S. government with a 21^st century development finance institution with the ability to mobilize private capital at greater scale than the limited capacity we have today.

In September 2015, the countries of the world adopted the Sustainable Development Goals, or SDGs, a set of 17 specific objectives to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure prosperity for all as part of a new sustainable international development agenda.

I believe the United States can and should play a leadership role in marshaling the world’s efforts towards achieving these goals before 2030.

But there is no way that traditional aid, by which I mean large public-sector grants, or official development assistance, will be sufficient or the most effective way to harness resources necessary to bring the world’s poorest out of poverty.

Official development assistance is now dwarfed by private capital flows. According to the Organization for Cooperation and Economic Development, official development assistance as a percentage of gross national income worldwide has slightly decreased from 0.5 percent in 1960 to around 0.3 percent in 2017. Meanwhile, research shows that external financial flows to sub-Saharan Africa increased from $20 billion in 1990 to over $120 billion in 2012, primarily because of increased private capital flows and remittances.

It, therefore, stands to reason that the United States and other donor countries committed to alleviating global poverty should find the most effective ways to mobilize private capital flows for the purpose of development.

The Overseas Private Investment Corporation, or OPIC, is a small but effective agency that helps promote investments in emerging markets. I first became familiar with its work in 1985 and learned in detail about its operations during my first four years in the Senate when I chaired the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Africa.

Congress has failed to authorize the agency since 2003. So, each year, an agency designed to make long-term investments in the developing world finds itself forced to rely on an annual appropriation or a 30-day continuing resolution to continue its operations. It goes without saying, but the congressional failure to authorize OPIC beyond short term fits and starts associated with government funding battles is not a recipe for success.

The BUILD Act creates and authorizes a new U.S. International Development Finance Corporation for 20 years, and it raises the maximum contingent liability to $60 billion. OPIC’s current portfolio limit is $29 billion, which hasn’t changed since 1998. OPIC currently has $23.2 billion committed – leaving it with less than $6 billion of capital left to lend.

Doubling the portfolio, the United States employs for development finance is significant, especially when you consider the downward pressure on traditional foreign assistance funding from the State Department and USAID. So, the bill expands the relative scale of private capital versus government grants currently available.

Second, the bill will allow us to employ a new updated suite of tools to partner with the private sector – a level of sophistication far greater than OPIC’s current instruments.

OPIC is constrained because it cannot invest in equity and it does not allow non-U.S. persons or entities to invest in its products. OPIC cannot make loans or guarantees in local currency.

The project you direct here at CSIS, Dan – the Project on Prosperity and Development – released a report in 2016 that showed how OPIC compares to fifteen European development finance institutions. There’s one striking difference between OPIC and almost all of the European DFIs – the authority to participate in equity investments. Our bill would fix that problem.

Investing as a limited equity partner is important for two reasons. First, our European partners including the United Kingdom’s Commonwealth Development Corporation and others can invest in equity, and now we will be able to coordinate with them for greater scale and greater impact. Second, equity investments have the potential to attract more capital because investors will see that governments have a seat at the decision-making table where they can drive the development outcomes and positive returns we all want to see.

The President and CEO of OPIC, Ray Washburne, did a great job last week in a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing of explaining OPIC’s limitations and why equity authority will allow our new development finance institution to collaborate with other countries on larger investments.

When you consider that the United States has a business community with significant capital to invest and a world-leading understanding of finance, it doesn’t make sense for us to be falling behind our allies on the use of modern development finance tools. With a larger portfolio, OPIC can take more risks and expand its investments in countries where it can achieve broad-based economic growth.

And because this new development finance institution will be closely linked to USAID, Foreign Service Officers serving in developing countries will have access to the new development finance institution’s range of tools to help address constraints to economic growth.

Third, this bill would give the United States the ability to compete with China for influence in Latin America, Africa, South Asia, and Southeast Asia. China and other countries are deploying capital at levels previously unseen.

Through its “One Belt, One Road” framework, China is investing in energy, infrastructure, telecommunications, and extractive industries throughout the world. I just led a bipartisan delegation of five senators to four countries in Africa, and Chinese influence on the continent is palpable – from closer ties between African and Chinese leaders to the visible presence of Chinese workers, services, and goods.

China is Africa’s largest economic partner, surpassing the United States as Africa’s largest trading partner in 2009. According to a report released by McKinsey & Company last year, foreign direct investment from China in Africa grew at an annual growth rate of 40 percent over the last decade.

Between 2000 and 2014, Chinese banks, contractors, and the government loaned more than $86 billion to Africa, according to research from the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. Mr. Washburne pointed out last week that China is also expanding its influence in Latin America, committing billions to renovate Port-au-Prince, Haiti. I also saw their influence last summer when I traveled to Vietnam with Senator McCain.

We will not follow the Chinese model, but the United States needs to show up with investment proposals in countries with growing populations and fragile institutions.

In addition to the bipartisan support for the BUILD Act in Congress, I am encouraged to see strong support from the Trump administration. The President’s National Security Strategy said: “The United States will modernize its development finance tools so that U.S. companies have incentives to capitalize on opportunities in developing countries. With these changes, the United States will not be left behind as other states use investments and project finance to extend their influence.”

Additionally, speaking in Da Nang, Vietnam in November 2017, President Trump said: “We are committed to reforming our development finance institutions so that they better incentivize private sector investment.”

President Trump’s Fiscal Year 2019 budget request also proposed a reformed and consolidated U.S. Development Finance Institution, and last week the Administration issued a statement expressing strong support for the bill. I am grateful for my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for partnering with me on this effort, including Senator Corker, Representatives Yoho and Smith, and our other cosponsors for the BUILD Act. And despite the limited number of days left on this year’s legislative calendar, I am optimistic that we can pass this bill into law.

Creating a new U.S. International Development Finance Corporation with clear linkages to USAID will help us be strategic about our investments abroad and advance U.S. interests by complementing our development assistance.

Thank you again for having me, and I look forward to our discussion.

###

ICYMI: Former GOP officials push McConnell, Senators to protect Special Counsel Mueller and pass Graham-Coons-Tillis-Booker legislation

WASHINGTON – In case you missed it, former elected Republicans and Republican-appointed federal judges and prosecutors are calling on Senate Republicans to pass the Special Counsel Independence and Integrity Act, bipartisan legislation introduced by U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

The letter is below and available here.

April 17, 2018

Dear Senators,

As former elected Republicans, and former federal judges and prosecutors appointed by Republicans, we urge you to pass the recently introduced, bipartisan, Special Counsel Independence and Integrity Act, sponsored by Senators Graham (R-SC), Coons (D-DE), Tillis (R-NC), and Booker (D-NJ). We believe that it is in the best interest of our country for Special Counsel Robert Mueller to be allowed to complete his investigation without undue interference.

This legislation would protect the special counsel from unjustified removal by providing that he “may only be removed for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause, including violation of policies of the Department of Justice.” Justice Department regulations already protect the Special Counsel against removal without cause, however those regulations may be amended or rescinded. Codifying the special counsel’s independence in law will ensure the integrity of the investigation by shielding the position from political interference.

New reporting points to an increased threat that the President may order removal of the special counsel before he concludes his investigation. This legislation is necessary to ensure that if the President directs removal of the special counsel, he will need to have a legitimate reason to do so. The legislation does not elevate the Special Counsel to a position where he is untouchable by the President; instead, it merely introduces measures to ensure that any action taken against the Special Counsel is consistent with upholding the rule of law. The legislation is also consistent with the United States Supreme Court’s 1988 decision in Morrison v. Olson, as it is narrowly and reasonably drafted to ensure it does not impede on the President’s constitutional appointment authority. The Court went so far as to say that “[t]he congressional determination to limit the Attorney General’s removal power was essential, in Congress’ view, to establish the necessary independence of the office of independent counsel.”

Major investigations into matters central to our nation are not new. When critical questions arise about core issues pertaining to our democratic process–in this case, foreign interference in our elections and the legality of conduct of top government officials–independent investigations can get the answers the public needs and deserves. During key moments in our history, there have been investigations into allegations of official wrongdoing. The results led to major and necessary reforms.

We urge you to support the work of Special Counsel Mueller to its conclusion, whatever it may be. We believe that inappropriate interference in the special counsel’s investigation would constitute a serious attack on our democratic institutions and the rule of law. Regardless of party affiliation, this should be of profound concern to every American—particularly those we elect to represent us.

Sincerely,

###

Sens. Carper, Coons, 168 members of Congress introduce resolution calling for Pruitt’s resignation

Cosponsored by 131 representatives and 39 senators – the most senators ever to sign on a resolution formally calling for a cabinet official’s ouster

Follows repeated abuses of power and ethics violations by EPA’s Pruitt

WASHINGTON – Today, Delaware U.S. Senators Tom Carper and Chris Coons joined 168 members of Congress, led by U.S. Senator Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and U.S. Representative Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), in introducing companion resolutions in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives formally calling on Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt to resign. The resolution comes in response to Pruitt’s repeated ethics violations, misuse of taxpayer dollars, and actions that fundamentally undermine the mission of the EPA – favoring big polluters at the expense of science, our environment, and the health of children and families.

A total of 39 senators and 131 representatives joined Udall and Castor in introducing the resolution seeking Pruitt’s ouster. The 39 cosponsoring senators represent the highest number of senators in U.S. history to sign on to a resolution formally calling for a cabinet official’s resignation. The full text of the resolution can be found HERE. The full list of Senate cosponsors can be found HERE and the full list of House cosponsors can be found HERE.

“During his confirmation process 15 months ago, I warned my colleagues about Mr. Pruitt’s ‘unacceptably casual approach to meeting obligations as a public servant.’ Unfortunately, that warning fell on too many deaf ears in the Senate,” said Senator Carper, top Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee. “I have believed that Scott Pruitt was unfit to serve as EPA Administrator since he was nominated. Over the last year, though, he has managed to be even worse than I expected, with regard to his harmful policy, his ethical failings, his wasteful spending and his lack of accountability to the public that he is supposed to serve. While it is astonishing that an individual chosen to serve the American people would use such poor judgement so consistently, the fact that Scott Pruitt is doing so should not be at all surprising. Mr. Pruitt’s ethically questionable and anti-environment record was clear from the day President Trump sent his name to the Senate. He was the wrong choice last year, and he has absolutely no business running this agency today.”

“When I voted on Scott Pruitt’s confirmation last year, I voted not just no, but NO WAY,” said Senator Coons. “He has polarized EPA’s work even on issues with strong bipartisan support, such as the implementation of our recently updated chemical safety law. We cannot afford to have an environmental regulator that the public doesn’t trust – this lack of trust is a concern for my constituents and for companies in my state, who all want strong, dependable environmental regulations. For the sake of our environment, our health, and our country, Scott Pruitt should resign.”

The resolution follows numerous revelations about Pruitt’s ethical violations, widespread conflicts of interest, and repeated misuse of taxpayer dollars for his personal benefit, including:

The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office determined that the EPA violated federal law by purchasing a $43,000 phone booth for Pruitt’s office – and then hiding that purchase from Congress.
Pruitt entered into a sweetheart housing deal to rent a Capitol Hill condo from the wife of a lobbyist – paying just $50 a night, and only paying for the nights he slept there.
Pruitt has racked up hundreds of thousands of dollars in bills for luxury travel perks, including booking lavish first class and charter flights to Europe and elsewhere, staying in luxury hotels, and traveling with a huge entourage of staff and security.
Pruitt has reportedly reassigned or demoted EPA staffers who questioned his spending habits – at the same time that the EPA Inspector General is investigating him for giving unusual pay raises to favored aides.
Pruitt has deployed EPA enforcement officers to provide round-the-clock security with questionable justification.

As the lawmakers noted in the resolution, in addition to flouting the ethical standards of his office, Pruitt has done untold damage to the EPA and carried out a long list of actions to benefit his polluter friends – at the expense of the health, safety, and livelihood of American families, including:

Under Pruitt, the EPA is hemorrhaging staff and experts needed to protect the health and safety of the environment and the American people.
Pruitt has delayed the effective date of regulations, eased enforcement of existing regulations, and delayed the implementation of new regulations that are essential to protect public health and combat pollution.
Pruitt has failed to exercise the enforcement authorities and duties of the EPA, which are needed to investigate and deter pollution violations.
Pruitt has undermined the science at every turn, purging advisory committees of independent scientists and replacing them with mouthpieces for industry.

###

Sen. Coons on the U.S. patent system: “If corrective action isn’t taken in years to come, the broader public may be asking why all the newest and most advanced innovations and products…are created somewhere other than the United States”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today delivered remarks and questioned witnesses at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office oversight hearing.

“Yet, notwithstanding widespread and clear evidence of the value of a robust, intellectual property system, the system in the United States has experienced significant upheaval, particularly with respect to patents in recent years,” said Senator Coons. “In the past decade, there have been a variety of actions on the part of the judicial, executive, and legislative branches, which have had the cumulative effect of significantly weakening patent rights. And, the impact of these changes is becoming apparent. Last year, the United States fell from 1st place to 10th place in the ranking of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on the strength of each country’s patent system and, this year, it fell to 12th.”

Full audio and video of Senator Coons’ opening remarks available here.

Full audio and video of Senator Coons’ Q&A available here.

Senator Coons’ opening remarks are below:

Thank you very much, Chairman Grassley. Thank you both for holding this hearing and for your serious engagement in intellectual property matters. And, to Director Iancu, I want to begin by recognizing the exciting, the critical, the vital work of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and to thank you for your role in its leadership. You have the vital task of overseeing an office employing more than 12,000 people with the key mission of granting patents and registering trademarks. In fiscal year 2017, that meant receiving 650,000 patent applications and 600,000 trademark applications. And, as we know well, these are not just empty statistics but the lifeblood of innovation and thus of the American economy.

The Department of Commerce stats show that in 2014 IP-intensive industries contributed to 28 million jobs and $6 trillion in value to our national GDP. Research shows if a startup receives a patent, its chance of securing venture capital increases by over 50% and it’s likely to have better growth in employment and sales. Yet, notwithstanding widespread and clear evidence of the value of a robust, intellectual property system, the system in the United States has experienced significant upheaval, particularly with respect to patents in recent years. In the past decade, there have been a variety of actions on the part of the judicial, executive, and legislative branches, which have had the cumulative effect of significantly weakening patent rights. And, the impact of these changes is becoming apparent. Last year, the United States fell from 1st place to 10th place in the ranking of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on the strength of each country’s patent system and, this year, it fell to 12th.

One cause is the impact of the new post-grant proceedings at the USPTO before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, something I look forward to discussing today. While some form of post-issuance review at the USPTO is desirable, the current review system is systematically biased against patent owners based on statistics from its first five years. This dynamic has left investors with a growing impression that putting money behind innovative ideas backed only by a patent may not be a wise investment strategy to the detriment of innovators and ultimately the entire American economy.

Another critical problem facing our patent system is the lack of clarity on which inventions are and are not eligible for patent protection. Recent Supreme Court decisions have called into question whether patents are appropriate to protect innovations in some of the most dynamic areas of our economy — software developments and medical diagnostics. While the impact may be noticeable now to patent practitioners and inventors, if corrective action isn’t taken in years to come, the broader public may be asking why all the newest and most advanced innovations and products in these areas are created somewhere other than the United States.

Corrective action is partly the responsibility of Congress and to that end, I’ve introduced legislation designed to take the first steps at restoring the United States patent system to being the world’s gold standard, along with Senator Hirono who is with us today and my lead cosponsors, Senators Cotton and Durbin. I’ve reintroduced the STRONGER Patents Act, which aims to restore balance to the post-grant proceedings before the PTAB among other things. It does this by aligning PTAB standards to district court standards, better accounting for the fact that issued patents have already gone through a significant examination by a governmental agency. It also aims to correct some of the apparent abuses of post-grant proceedings including strict limits to curb repetitive abusive petitions and a standing requirement to ensure petitioners have a legitimate interest.

Additionally, along with my friend and colleague Senator Hatch, I’ve introduced the Big Data for IP Act, which encourages PTO to complete its ongoing IT upgrades and explore how new tools like machine learning and big data can improve the patent examination process. The universe of prior art continues to expand the volume of patent and trademark applications continues to rise, these are good things, but we need to ensure our examination systems keep pace. In exchange, PTO would receive an extension of its fee-setting authority, critical statutory authorization that gives the PTO the ability to anticipate an account for infrastructure development through responsible price setting.

Both of these bills have a thing in common. They recognize the centrality and importance of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to providing the foundation of our country’s innovative ecosystem. In fact, many of the proposals in the bill I just referenced, the STRONGER Patents Act, could be accomplished through the rule-making authority vested in you, Mr. Iancu, as the director. It was by design of the landmark Leahy-Smith American Invents Act of 2011 to ensure the agency could fine-tune these proceedings without required congressional intervention. I think the time for agency action to take such corrective measures is long overdue. I was encouraged by your recent speech before the U.S. Chamber of Commerce where you said we need to have a new dialogue in our country focused on the benefits of the patent system rather than solely the abuses. I could not agree more.

I look forward to beginning that dialogue today and to hearing your thoughts on what actions you think might be appropriate for the agency to take, so we can make our nations patent system better for today’s and tomorrow’s innovators. Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for convening this hearing.

###

Senator Coons: “I wish I shared Senator McConnell’s belief that the President won’t fire or interfere with Special Counsel Mueller, but I don’t.”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and co-author of the Special Counsel Independence and Integrity Act, released the following statement.

“I wish I shared Senator McConnell’s belief that the President won’t fire or interfere with Special Counsel Mueller, but I don’t,” said Senator Coons. “We should vote on the bipartisan legislation I’ve authored with Senators Tillis, Graham, and Booker that would ensure Robert Mueller can complete his work without interference because inaction now will be incredibly costly if President Trump does what he’s reportedly tried to do several times already. I would remind Senator McConnell of the old saying that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. That’s certainly true in this case.”

###

Related Issues