Senators Coons, Capito introduce bipartisan bill to expand Made in America

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-DE) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) today introduced the Made in America Deduction Enhancement (MADE) Act, which will expand domestic production by providing a tax break for manufacturers that use “Made in America” component parts in their production process.

The manufacturing sector is critical to the economy, supporting nearly 40 million direct and indirect jobs in the United States, which represents over one-third of the U.S. workforce—more than any other sector. Manufacturing also has a significant multiplier effect. For every $1.00 spent in manufacturing, another $3.60 is added back into the economy. Despite this outsized role, manufacturers pay more in effective federal corporate taxes than many other sectors. 

To address this challenge, the MADE Act potentially doubles the 199 domestic production tax deduction (from 9% up to 18%) for manufacturers that use more than 75% of “Made in America” component parts in their production process.  The greater the percentage of “Made in America” inputs, the greater the deduction. An 18% deduction is equal to an additional 3% reduction in the corporate tax rate.

“Buying American is buying into the U.S. economy. All across this country, manufacturers, especially small manufacturers, have made the decision to buy from suppliers who sell component parts that are 100% made in America. Yet, these manufacturers pay significantly more in taxes than other industries. We should be supporting companies that make it a priority to buy American and incentivize other companies to do so.  I’m proud to introduce the MADE Act with Senator Capito—bipartisan legislation that will help U.S. manufacturers compete in the global economy,” said Senator Coons. 

“Manufacturers play a critical role in our economy, especially those who choose to support other American companies,” Senator Capito said. “Not only will the MADE Act help our manufacturers succeed and continue to drive economic growth, but it will also encourage other manufacturers to prioritize buying American. I’m excited to join Senator Coons in introducing this legislation, which will help manufacturers and small businesses in West Virginian and across the country.”

“A vibrant manufacturing sector is a key pillar of U.S. economic and employment strength. Senators Coons and Capito’s Made in America Deduction Enhancement (MADE) Act facilitates this by encouraging U.S. manufacturers to use more American-made inputs in their own production. We applaud Senators Coons and Capito for developing bipartisan legislation that will help grow the economy and strengthen manufacturing,” said Dr. Rob Atkinson, President of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation.

“This is the type of forward-looking, bipartisan legislation we need to stimulate greater manufacturing R&D in this country and at the same time encourage companies to expand their operations in the U.S.  Equally important, it goes a long way in providing small and mid-size manufacturers with an incentive to keep their eyes on ever-changing customer needs and expectations.  And its enactment will help open new job opportunities for thousands of young technologists who want to grow with America.  This is a bill that must be passed and signed into law this year to help revitalize the nation’s manufacturing sector,” said Rusty Patterson, Chairman and CEO of the National Council for Advanced Manufacturing.

The MADE Act has been endorsed by: Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF); National Council for Advanced Manufacturing (NACFAM); National Center for Defense Manufacturing and Machining (NCDMM); Association for Manufacturing Technology (AMT); Manufacturing Alliance of Communities (MAC); Delaware Manufacturing Extension Partnership (DEMEP); Reshoring Initiative; and American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).

Senators Coons, Cotton, Durbin, Hirono introduce bipartisan bill to protect US patent holders, inventors

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tom Cotton (R- Ark.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Mazie Hirono (D-Haw.) today introduced the STRONGER Patents Act to protect and support inventors and innovators and ensure that our patent system protects this essential property right. The STRONGER (Support Technology & Research for Our Nation’s Growth and Economic Resilience) Act is an improvement on the STRONG Patents Act, which Senator Coons introduced during the last Congress.

The STRONGER Patents Act seeks to strengthen the U.S. patent system through implementing measures to make it easier and less costly for patent holders to enforce their patents.  This Act is based on legislation that Senator Coons introduced last year with the goal of making the post-issuance proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) more fair and efficient. The key visions of this prior bill remain, and new provisions address recently emergent concerns about these proceedings and the continual weakening of patent rights by the courts.

“Supporting American inventors is not a partisan issue.  The value and importance of patents is astounding, contributing over $800 billion in value to the U.S. economy and the source of millions of jobs for Americans.  But, we must work together to ensure that the patent laws keep up with the innovators, so their ideas and businesses can fuel the American economy for generations to come.  This means working to ensure that a patent continues to play its historic role in enabling inventors and small businesses to get funding and protect their ideas from being copied by larger corporate infringers,” said Senator Coons, author of the STRONGER Patents Act. “It is in our best interest both nationally and globally to ensure that our patent system works for everyone.” 

“Strong rights in property—whether intellectual or tangible—have been a key driver behind U.S. economic might.  Eroding such rights would imperil innovation and job growth, so we need to maintain strong patent protections if we want our economy to grow at full speed,” said Senator Cotton. “I’m glad to see my colleagues from both sides of the aisle understand just how important patent rights are to our future. And I believe this bill will make sure intellectual-property rights are treated with the same respect as all our other rights.”

“America has a proud tradition of fostering some of history’s greatest inventors and innovators—Congress must do everything it can to ensure this continues in the future,” said Senator Durbin. “We must preserve and strengthen the ability of legitimate patent holders to protect their innovations, while taking steps to narrowly target and deter abusive patent troll behavior. This bill strikes that balance.” 

“America’s patent system drives innovation and fuels long-term economic growth. This is particularly true for the small businesses and entrepreneurs that form the backbone of Hawaii’s economy,” said Senator Hirono. “The STRONGER Patents Act supports innovation by restoring balance and improving quality in the patent process, and takes important steps to protect businesses harmed by abuses in patent litigation without placing unnecessary burdens on innovative start-ups, inventors, and universities.” 

The STRONGER Patents Act focuses on achieving the following:

·         Restoring investor confidence in patents by ensuring that the new administrative reviews at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) are balanced and efficient.

·         Restoring incentives for parties to reach license agreements without going to court by reestablishing that patents are property rights, enforceable with injunctions.

·         Helping universities and small businesses access the patent system, fostering the next generation of breakthrough technologies.

·         Ensuring that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has unfettered access to the fees it collects from the users of its services so that it can modernize its technology and issue patents of the highest quality.

Read a section-by-section summary of the bill here.

Read a one-pager on the bill here.

Key changes from last year’s STRONG Patents Act include addressing the problem of repetitive, harassing petitions in the administrative reviews at the USPTO, reducing duplication between these reviews and district court, and providing a new approach to amending patent claims during them.  Additionally, the STRONGER Patents Act proposes to restore the presumption of injunctive relief upon a finding that a patent is valid and infringed and addresses other cases in which courts have recently weakened patent rights. 

###

Sens. Coons co-sponsors Gigabit Opportunity Act to accelerate high-speed internet in low-income urban, rural communities

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Chris Coons announced that he will co-sponsor the Gigabit Opportunity Act or GO Act. The tech neutral, bipartisan legislation sponsored by Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) would accelerate the development of high-speed internet in low-income urban and rural communities.

“Access to fast, reliable, and affordable high-speed internet is essential to the success of our students, families, and businesses, especially in low-income and rural communities. I frequently hear of connectivity issues in the more rural areas of my home state of Delaware, including portions of Kent and Sussex Counties. I’m pleased to support this bill, which will complement existing efforts within states and localities, to help direct investment to communities most in need of assistance,” Senator Coons said. 

The GO Act has already garnered broad support from Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai and numerous stakeholders. Last week, U.S. Representative Doug Collins (R-Ga.) introduced a companion bill in the House of Representatives, co-sponsored by Representative Jason Smith (R-Mo.).

The legislation would expand broadband deployment by:

• Targeting investments to areas poised for growth: The GO Act directs investments to low-income and rural communities with the greatest potential for economic development by providing tax deferral and immediate expensing for companies investing in gigabit-capable broadband expansion.

• Streamlining patchwork regulations: The GO Act directs the FCC to release a framework that encourages states, counties and cities to voluntarily adopt streamlined broadband laws and be designated as a “Gigabit Opportunity Zone.”

• Eliminating barriers to investment: The GO Act temporarily defers capital gains for broadband investments and upgrades, and allows companies to immediately expense the cost of gigabit-capable equipment in “Gigabit Opportunity Zones.” The bill also allows states to issue tax-exempt bonds without a low-income geographic requirement.

###

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons: “The idea that this big and important bill would be rolled out in a last minute secret reveal is more reminiscent of a Trump reality TV show than a regular order.”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today joined Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC to discuss recent news regarding North Korea and the Senate Republicans’ health care bill.

“The idea that this big and important bill would be rolled out in a last minute secret reveal is more reminiscent of a Trump reality TV show than a regular order. And it doesn’t have to be this way. When the Affordable Care Act was passed, there were weeks of hearings at the committee level, more than 150 Republican amendments accepted into the bill, as it worked its way through regular order, Democrats stand ready to work with Republicans to address the challenges, the problems with the Affordable Care Act, we should be working on this in an open and bipartisan way rather than having the Republicans trying to jam through a secret bill that their own members don’t even know about, and that President Trump recently denounced the House version as being mean. I think there are real concerns from my state and folks all over the country about what is hidden in this secret bill.”

Full audio and video available here.

Excerpts from the interview below:

Senator Coons on North Korea: After this tragedy, after this assault on an American by North Korea, which as you pointed out will be very hard for us to hold them accountable for in any specific and concrete way, I question why anyone would be continuing to run groups, to take students, to take exchange programs into North Korea. This assault on Otto Warmbier by the North Koreans when he was in their custody, that led to his death, has been called out by a number of my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, here in the Senate today, as tantamount to murder of an American citizen. I am encouraged we’re calling for, pressing for the release of the three remaining Americans in North Korean custody. But this just highlights the fact that we don’t have a functioning strategy. At the same time that the Trump administration has urged all of us here in the Senate, I’ll remind you they brought the entire Senate over to the White House to brief us on their strategy with North Korea and they urged us to join them in creating more and more pressure on China for China to take tough action against North Korea. But, we’re also currently considering a budget proposal from the Trump administration that would slash the funding for our diplomats around the world by a third. That’s going to make it very difficult for us to actually carry through on a strategy that relies on encouraging our allies and our partners around the world to join us in imposing sanctions and increasing pressure on the North Korean regime. 

More on North Korea: That’s right. One of the challenges of international diplomacy and of working closely with our allies in the era of President Trump is his unpredictability. He has taken not slightly different positions on important issues, not a little hot, a little cold, but wildly different positions on things like the One China policy, our support for Japan and South Korea, our engagement with NATO, our commitment to Article 5, first as a candidate, then during the transition, then in his early months as president. President Trump has taken significantly different positions on central issues to U.S. foreign policy. I was recently at a regional security conference, in Singapore, with Senator McCain, Senator Barrasso, Republican colleagues, and we heard from a dozen of our allies and partners in the region that this unpredictability, this uncertainty about exactly where we’re going to come down, because of President Trump’s shifting positions and statements, is making it harder for us to project strength and to show a clear direction and a clear determination in standing up to the threat from North Korea, in standing up to Russia’s intervention and our last presidential election, and in charting some clear path forward in Syria, a very difficult and conflicted battle space right now. 

Senator Coons on Russia: I’m very concerned that we don’t have a strategy yet from the Trump administration. We had a bipartisan hearing earlier today on foreign relations to look at Authorization for Use of Military Force that would focus our work on ISIS. We have American troops on the ground in Syria. We have American pilots in the air. And these recent incidents where American pilots shot down, an Iranian drone shot down, a Syrian Assad regime Russian fighter jet. They have heightened the tension. I’m gravely concerned that we may be slipping into a hot war with Assad’s forces, with Iran or even with Russia. And we need a clear strategy from the Trump administration, both for how we’re going to move forward in fighting ISIS on the ground, in Syria, and for what our strategy is in Afghanistan, and in both of these places there are secondary risks with regard to Russia if we don’t have clear lines of understanding and clear lines of authority. Congress needs to step up and do its job in getting a modernized authorization for military force, but that authorization should only be coming once we have a clear strategy from the administration. 

Senator Coons on whether he has seen the Senate Republicans’ health care bill: Nope. And that is the biggest news here on the hill. That the context, the content, excuse me, of the Republican health care bill, their attempt at repeal and replace for Obamacare is being kept secret from every Democrat and from some Republicans. The idea that this big and important bill would be rolled out in a last minute secret reveal is more reminiscent of a Trump reality TV show than a regular order. And it doesn’t have to be this way. When the Affordable Care Act was passed, there were weeks of hearings at the committee level, more than 150 Republican amendments accepted into the bill, as it worked its way through regular order, Democrats stand ready to work with Republicans to address the challenges, the problems with the Affordable Care Act, we should be working on this in an open and bipartisan way rather than having the Republicans trying to jam through a secret bill that their own members don’t even know about, and that President Trump recently denounced the House version as being mean. I think there are real concerns from my state and folks all over the country about what is hidden in this secret bill.  

###

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons: “Trump has not yet presented to us a strategy for success in Afghanistan and in Syria”

Sen. Coons: “When the President sends American troops into harm’s way, those men and women, their families, and the American people deserve clear authorization from Congress, a robust debate in Congress, a strategy that outlines the path to success, and, at the moment, I am concerned that we have none of those three.”

Sen. Coons: “When it comes to our military, I’m not here to criticize the President or disagree with my colleagues across aisle – I’m here to work with them so that we can do our best to provide our troops with the strategy, the resources, and the support they need.”

Sen. Coons: “I want them to succeed.  We all want them to succeed. But what does success look like?  How do we define success? That requires a strategy. What are the national interests we are defending and advancing on these battlefields? We have to have a conversation between the branches, executive and legislative, about what our goals are in Afghanistan and in Syria and what it will take to achieve them.”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today attended the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing entitled “Reviewing Congressional Authorizations for the Use of Military Force.” At the hearing, Senator Coons questioned John Bellinger III, Senior Associate Counsel to former President George W. Bush, and Dr. Kathleen Hicks, former Principal Undersecretary of Defense for Policy.

“When the president sends American troops into harm’s way, those men and women, their families, and the American people deserve clear authorization from Congress, a robust debate in Congress, a strategy that outlines the path to success, and, at the moment, I am concerned that we have none of those three. President Trump has not yet presented to us a strategy for success in Afghanistan and in Syria.”

Full audio and video are available here.

Senator Coons’ opening remarks, as delivered, are below: 

Thank you, Chairman Corker. Thank you, Ranking Member Cardin. And, thank you to the witnesses. And, thank you, to Senators Flake and Kaine for their hard work in framing what we are debating and discussing today and for the committee as a whole for their engagement on this. I think this is an opportunity for us to demonstrate how the Senate can work together in an important and difficult constitutional moment.

When the President sends American troops into harm’s way, those men and women, their families, and the American people deserve clear authorization from Congress, a robust debate in Congress, a strategy that outlines the path to success, and, at the moment, I am concerned that we have none of those three. President Trump has not yet presented to us a strategy for success in Afghanistan and in Syria.  We have taken important steps on a bipartisan basis in this committee, and I am encouraged to see that we are having this hearing today and that there is more than not agreement between our witnesses.  But, I’ll note the absence of an administration witness. The decision to send Americans off to fight in battle deserves our thoughtful consideration and bipartisan effort to produce a clear path forward.

This isn’t a partisan issue. We have more than 8,000 of our troops deployed in Afghanistan, and there are reports that several thousand more American troops will soon be deployed. We have several hundred American troops deployed in Syria, who have recently been taking fire from both ISIS and Assad forces in one of the most dangerous and complicated battle spaces on Earth.

I want them to succeed.  We all want them to succeed.  But what does success look like?  How do we define success? That requires a strategy. What are the national interests we are defending and advancing on these battlefields? We have to have a conversation between the branches, executive and legislative, about what our goals are in Afghanistan and Syria and what it will take to achieve them. 

Particularly when it comes to our military, I’m not here to criticize the President or disagree with my colleagues across aisle – I’m here to work with them so that we can do our best to provide our troops with the strategy, the resources, and the support they need. 

###

Carper, Isakson, Coons Ask USTR to Bolster Poultry Farmers, Processors and Exporters in NAFTA Renegotiation Process

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, and U.S. Senators Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) and Chris Coons (D-Del), co-chairs of the Senate Chicken Caucus, led a bipartisan group of senators in sending a letter to U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Robert Lighthizer urging the administration to use the renegotiation process for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to break down unfair trade barriers and improve market access for American poultry farmers, processors and exporters.

“With the ratification of NAFTA in 1994, the United States, Canada and Mexico committed to a shared goal of eliminating tariffs on goods exchanged between the three nations,” the senators wrote.“Unfortunately, in practice, this goal has proven difficult to achieve. This has been particularly true for American poultry, which continues to face trade barriers in North America more than 20 years after NAFTA’s enactment.”

“Contrary to the promises of NAFTA, Canada has continued to impose stringent, protectionist trade policies that limit sales for American poultry exporters. As a result, the Administration’s commitment to improving the terms of NAFTA presents American poultry exporters with a unique opportunity to eliminate Canadian trade barriers, which have hampered growth for more than 20 years,” the senators continued. “We strongly urge you to focus on this issue during your talks with Canadian trade representatives, and we expect that progress will be made.”

In addition to Senators Carper, Isakson and Coons, Senators Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.) Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) signed the letter. The text can be found below.

June 14, 2017

The Honorable Robert Lighthizer

U.S. Trade Representative

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

600 17^th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20508

Dear Ambassador Lighthizer:

We write to you as a bipartisan group of Senators representing states where poultry growers and processors are a key part of the state economy.  The poultry industry, like much of the agricultural community, thrives when U.S. products have access to markets abroad.

We understand that the Administration desires to improve the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) through negotiations with both Canada and Mexico. We support efforts by your office or others in the executive branch that could result in greater market access for American exports. This support stems from our conviction that, ultimately, improved access to international markets for American exporters will create American jobs. We write to urge strong consideration for American poultry farmers, processors and exporters in the negotiation process, both in eliminating trade barriers imposed by Canada against American poultry and in ensuring that our poultry trade with Mexico remains robust.

With the ratification of NAFTA in 1994, the United States, Canada and Mexico committed to a shared goal of eliminating tariffs on goods exchanged between the three nations. Unfortunately, in practice, this goal has proven difficult to achieve. This has been particularly true for American poultry, which continues to face trade barriers in North America more than 20 years after NAFTA’s enactment.

Under NAFTA, American poultry exports have been denied significant access to the Canadian market. Shortly after NAFTA began, Canada refused to open its market to American poultry exports, forcing the United States to bring a case before a NAFTA dispute settlement panel. After a panel ruling in favor of Canada in this initial case, Canada continued its strict quotas on poultry from the United States. For American exports in excess of the quota, Canada imposes a tariff of 249%, according to data from the United States International Trade Commission. As a result of these trade barriers, the quantity of American poultry exports to Canada has remained low in comparison to similar markets. For example, in 2016, the U.S. exported almost five times as much poultry to Mexico as it did to Canada.

Contrary to the promises of NAFTA, Canada has continued to impose stringent, protectionist trade policies that limit sales for American poultry exporters. As a result, the Administration’s commitment to improving the terms of NAFTA presents American poultry exporters with a unique opportunity to eliminate Canadian trade barriers, which have hampered growth for more than 20 years. We strongly urge you to focus on this issue during your talks with Canadian trade representatives, and we expect that progress will be made. 

We also want to highlight that any NAFTA renegotiation should take into account the importance of the Mexican market to our agricultural exporters. American poultry’s market access has improved significantly in Mexico due to years of cooperation between U.S. and Mexican trade representatives, which eventually brought down previously imposed trade barriers. In 2010, Mexico became the largest export market for American poultry, and between 2010 and 2016, the quantity of American poultry exports to Mexico increased by over 40%. Mexico is currently our largest export market for poultry, and 2016 alone saw exports of nearly $1 billion in U.S. poultry to Mexico. As the Administration works with Mexican trade representatives, we urge you to ensure that this mutually beneficial trade relationship continues.

We thank you for your attention to this important matter, and for your understanding of the importance of exports to a healthy poultry industry.  We look forward to working with you to ensure a vibrant export market for U.S. poultry.

Sincerely,

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons: “It is Attorney General Sessions’ job to be here today and the fact that he has again chosen to skip this hearing is unacceptable”

Sen. Coons: “The Attorney General, I believe, has chosen to skip this hearing today in order to avoid difficult questions about the scope of his recusal”

Sen. Coons on Sessions’ recusal: “It is the scope of recusal that is utterly unclear”

Sen. Coons: “I have an unresolved question about whether or not that’s why the attorney general failed to appear before us today, to avoid having to answer direct questions about the scope of his recusal”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary and Appropriations Committees, today questioned Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at a Commerce, Justice, and Science (CJS) Subcommittee hearing.  Attorney General Jeff Sessions was scheduled to appear at the hearing today, but cancelled his appearance over the weekend.

“As has been discussed by several others, it is the scope of [Attorney General Sessions’] recusal that is utterly unclear both to lawyers and non-lawyers on this committee,” said Senator Coons.

“I have an unresolved question about whether or not that’s why the attorney general failed to appear before us today, to avoid having to answer direct questions about the scope of his recusal,” said Senator Coons. “I do appreciate and respect your appointment of a highly talented special counsel, there have been questions from both sides that imply strong support for his independence and his conduct, and I appreciate the care with which you are answering my questions, but I am simply going to conclude by saying, I have unanswered questions that perhaps can only be answered by the attorney general himself and it is my hope that we will have him appear before both the Judiciary Committee and the Appropriations Committee charged with overseeing for the department that he is currently directing.” 

Full video and audio available here.

Senator Coons’ opening remarks and Q&A with Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein are below:

Senator Coons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, thank you for being today. Obviously, you’re here because Attorney General Sessions abruptly canceled his commitment to appear before this committee.

It is Attorney General Sessions’ job to be here today and the fact that he has again chosen to skip this hearing is unacceptable. And the Attorney General, I believe, has chosen to skip this hearing today in order to avoid difficult questions about the scope of his recusal, questions which have already been asked of you by several senators, but I’ll attempt to explore a little more further. 

And, I do think it is important that we have a full and engaged conversation with the attorney general about the Department of Justice in front of both the Judiciary Committee and the Appropriations Subcommittee responsible for the entity he still leads. 

But, let me start briefly with some good news, if I might. Mr. Rosenstein, you’re here in part to talk about the budget of the Department of Justice. In 2014, Congress demonstrated its commitment to the Victims of Child Abuse Act by unanimously reauthorizing that in both chambers. And, the Children’s Advocacy Centers, funded by this law, conducts forensic interviews that help serve law enforcement needs and meet the needs of child victims, and I am pleased that the president’s FY18 budget request fully funds these programs. So, I thought we’d start with at least one positive thing we can talk about.

As has been discussed by several others, it is the scope of recusal that is utterly unclear both to lawyers and non-lawyers on this committee. You’re here instead of the attorney general, and you’re here as acting attorney general with regard to the special counsel, and you exercised the hire and would exercise the fire decision with regards to Special Counsel Bob Mueller. That’s because Attorney General Sessions is recused from that matter. 

On May 9, you delivered a memo to Attorney General Sessions entitled ‘Restoring Public Confidence in the FBI.’ And your memo exclusively focused on Director Comey’s conduct during the Clinton email investigation and concluded ‘the way the director handled the conclusion of that investigation was wrong’ and you ultimately stated having refused to admit his errors the director cannot be expected to implement the necessary corrective actions. Is that roughly correct? Am I citing that correctly?

Deputy AG Rosenstein: I believe it is, yes.

Senator Coons: And, on that same day, Attorney General Sessions then sent a memo to President Trump relying exclusively on your memo where the attorney general recommends that Director Comey be removed. Is that correct?

Deputy AG Rosenstein: I believe that is correct.

Senator Coons: And, during his January 10 confirmation hearing, AG Sessions stated ‘he would recuse himself from any matters involving campaigns for the president of the United States and, specifically, investigations into Secretary Clinton’s email server.’ Is that correct?

Deputy AG Rosenstein: That’s my understanding, senator.

Senator Coons: So, why did you write a memo to Attorney General Sessions exclusively discussing a matter that, as I understand it, Attorney General Sessions explicitly told us in Congress he was recused from. And why was that an appropriate basis for him to make a hire/fire recommendation to the president.

Deputy AG Rosenstein: Well, senator, I don’t think that’s a question for me to answer. I have said in my previous briefings in the Senate and the House that my memo truthfully reflects my views. I’m not in position to comment on anybody else. From my perspective, that memo is about what it’s about. I do not know what was on anybody else’s mind. I understand there are serious allegations that have been raised, and I think that it is up to Director Mueller to determine in the first instance whether any of the issues within the scope of this investigation. That’s why I haven’t commented on it. I just appointed him several weeks ago. I haven’t talked to him about the substance of the investigation since then, but I recognize the importance of these questions, and I think that Director Mueller ought to review that and make a determination of whether or not he believes it is within the scope of his investigation.

Senator Coons: I appreciate that answer. It is distinct from an answer I got from you previously in another answer, so I want to make sure I understand you. Well, and I’ll proceed carefully and let’s see if we can get to an answer that’s appropriate in a public setting. Is it not your argument that the attorney general made a recommendation to hire or fire the FBI director because that is outside his recusal? The scope of his recusal doesn’t affect his ability to manage the department. 

Deputy AG Rosenstein: I do have a personal opinion about that, senator, I just don’t think it’s appropriate for me to be expressing my personal opinion about that. I hope I haven’t said anything inconsistent with what I’ve said elsewhere. And please let me know if I have, but yeah I do not want to comment on the recusal. I think the attorney general made the decision recused, I wasn’t there at the time as you know. And the decision had already been made before I arrived about what matters would be appropriate for the attorney general to handle. When I stepped in, I continued consistent with what had been done by the career professionals in the department, and I believe that I have faithfully within the department honored that recusal with regards to matters pending in the Department of Justice. But, I just don’t want to comment on what may have been in anyone’s mind or offering an opinion about that, because it’s not for me to make those decisions.

Senator Coons: Well, it is exactly I think why Senator Schatz asked a whole series of questions about the scope of recusal because I am a lawyer, Senator Schatz may not be, he asked better questions than I did, but I also am having real difficulty understanding the scope of the recusal, it’s contours in definition, and I have an unresolved question about whether or not that’s why the attorney general failed to appear before us today, to avoid having to answer direct questions about the scope of his recusal. I do appreciate and respect your appointment of a highly talented special counsel, there have been questions from both sides that imply strong support for his independence and his conduct, and I appreciate the care with which you are answering my questions, but I am simply going to conclude by saying, I have unanswered questions that perhaps can only be answered by the attorney general himself and it is my hope that we will have him appear before both the Judiciary Committee and the Appropriations Committee charged with overseeing for the department that he is currently directing. Thank you. 

###

Sen. Coons’ statement on travel ban ruling

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today released the following statement in response to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision to reject President Trump’s travel ban.

“I’m encouraged that yet another attempt by President Trump to implement a travel ban has been rejected. Let’s be clear: the President’s proposed travel ban is not only discriminatory and counterproductive, it’s also in direct violation of the principles embedded in our Constitution. The administration has not produced any analysis or justification for why the ban is necessary even though they argued that the ban was essential for 90 days so such a review could occur.  Now, courts are consistently coming to the same conclusion that this ban is unlawful.  It is discriminatory and would only make our nation less safe.” 

###

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons on GOP health care bill: “There have been no hearings. There’s been no public discussion about it.”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, joined CNN New Day to discuss Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the status of the Republican health care bill.

“There have been no hearings. There’s been no public discussion about it,”said Senator Coons. “And by some news reports over the weekend, we may be days or even weeks away from the Republicans moving directly to the floor a significant bill that would affect tens of millions, even hundreds of millions of Americans—give big tax cuts, cut back on health care, defund Planned Parenthood without a single public hearing. That’s also wrong.”

“All the Democrats in the Senate sent a letter to the Republican Caucus saying we recognize there are flaws and challenges with the Affordable Care Act. Stop your efforts to repeal all of the Affordable Care Act on a partisan basis and please work across the aisle with us,” said Senator Coons. “We can find a way to move forward and to get a better health care system for all Americans. The response has been a whole series of closed-door meetings with virtually no outreach to Democrats by the Republican leadership.”

Full audio and video available here.

Excerpts from the interview: 

Senator Coons on Sessions’ testimony: The attorney general comes in front of both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee that’s responsible for judiciary every single year. That is part of our regular oversight responsibilities. I think the attorney general should make his appearance this year. 

More on Sessions: Yes. He has declined for months to appear in front of the Judiciary Committee. As of this weekend, he is now seeking to testify in front of Intel as you suggested in the opening. That may well be because he is trying to have his testimony be shielded from the American people. I don’t think that’s appropriate. I don’t think on an issue as important as whether or not the attorney general is acting outside the scope of his recusal, whether he misled our committee, the Judiciary Committee, about a third meeting with the Russian ambassador—that shouldn’t be held in secret. The other thing that shouldn’t be going on in secret is the process by which the Republicans are crafting a repeal of Obamacare. There have been no hearings. There’s been no public discussion about it. And by some news reports over the weekend, we may be days or even weeks away from the Republicans moving directly to the floor a significant bill that would affect tens of millions, even hundreds of millions of Americans—give big tax cuts, cut back on health care, defund Planned Parenthood without a single public hearing. That’s also wrong. 

More on Sessions: That’s a good first step. That is a good way for the same senators who ask questions of former FBI Director Comey to be able to ask follow-up questions of Attorney General Sessions. I agree with Senator Feinstein. The Judiciary Committee has the oversight responsibility for the Department of Justice. It is the Judiciary Committee that has more former prosecutors and more lawyers on it, more folks familiar with what happens in the Justice Department than any other committee in the Senate. 

Senator Coons on Comey’s testimony: I think he has laid out the core elements of an obstruction of justice charge. It is a difficult case to make. I think a lot more investigation would have to be done. If you just took FBI Director Jim Comey’s testimony on its face, he certainly spoke to intent and motivation and to substantive action by the president to try to impede an ongoing federal investigation when he directed FBI Director Comey to drop the investigation into former National Security Advisor Flynn. 

Senator Coons on whether there is a bipartisan effort to fix the Affordable Care Act: None. All the Democrats in the Senate sent a letter to the Republican Caucus saying we recognize there are flaws and challenges with the Affordable Care Act. Stop your efforts to repeal all of the Affordable Care Act on a partisan basis and please work across the aisle with us. We can find a way to move forward and to get a better health care system for all Americans. The response has been a whole series of closed-door meetings with virtually no outreach to Democrats by the Republican leadership. 

Senator Coons on whether Republicans will release their health care plan in the coming weeks: They are certainly trying. They have a shrinking window. They’re going to use a vehicle to do this called reconciliation that allows them to do it by just 51 votes, 50 votes plus the vice president. In order to do that, they are pursuing a path that would be Republican-only. They are finding it very hard to get to 50 votes in the Republican Caucus in the Senate because some of the far right wants to completely repeal the Affordable Care Act. The things that fund it and the consumer protection provisions and the ways it has helped 24 million Americans get access to health care and improved the quality of the health care that more than 150 million Americans have. But, then there are folks who are moderate Republicans who want to save or extend the Medicaid expansion that their states have benefitted so much from. They have big internal divisions. Mitch McConnell, the Republican majority leader is pushing hard to get this done before the August recess. We’re hearing rumors they are making progress. But, we have very little insight to what the provisions are of the bill. When the Democrats passed the Affordable Care Act back in 2009, I wasn’t in the Senate, but there were hearings after hearings after hearings over a year before they came to the fact that they were going to have to pass the bill without Republicans. The bill had Republican amendments taken up and voted on in committee hearings before it ultimately became law. That’s a very different process than the closed-door process that the Republicans are following now. 

###

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons grills Sec. Ben Carson on Trump’s proposed budget cuts, impacts to Delaware

Trump, Carson are proposing significant cuts to Housing and Urban Development (HUD), particularly Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs)

Sen. Coons: “I could spend the rest of the afternoon giving you concrete and specific examples of how CDBG and HOME have been used in my home country, and across the country.”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, yesterday questioned HUD Secretary Ben Carson on the department’s proposed budget cuts and their impacts on Delaware and the United States.

“In your testimony you say the CDBG program hasn’t demonstrated a measurable impact on communities. It seems to me, I could spend the rest of the afternoon giving you concrete and specific examples of how CDBG and HOME have been used in my home county, in my state, and across the country,” said Senator Coons.

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

Senator Coons’ statement, as delivered, is below:

Mr. Secretary, I cannot convey how deep my disappointment is with HUD’s budget proposal this year.

As someone who spent 10 years in county government first as a County Council president and then as County Executive, I have personal hands on experience in the impact that programs like CDBG and HOME funding can have to help severely disabled, disadvantaged, vulnerable populations all over the country. Senior citizens, those with disabilities, veterans seeking housing. 

I’m really stunned at how broadly the deep cuts proposed in this budget would affect vulnerable populations in this country. 

I know firsthand how CDBG and HOME works and I’ve seen its impact. I was struck that you suggested somewhat casually that, although well-intentioned at its outset, CDBG has been used for things like flowers alongside highways or spay and neuter clinics when, on HUD’s own website, the 2016 performance report on CDBG says that it created 18,000 jobs, supported 50,000 single family rehab projects, and served 200,000 seniors.

Yet, in your testimony you say the CDBG program hasn’t demonstrated a measurable impact on communities. It seems to me, I could spend the rest of the afternoon giving you concrete and specific examples of how CDBG and HOME have been used in my home county, in my state, and across the country, and on HUD’s own website, it has been demonstrated to have an impact that advances HUD’s core mission.

What’s the problem? Where is this tension between your testimony that there’s a lack of measurable impact and my personal experience and HUD’s documented experience that it’s had a significant, constructive, and positive impact across this country? 

###