Category: US Senate

Source: United States Senator for Maryland Chris Van Hollen

June 08, 2023

New SEC Complaint Against Binance Indicates Company’s Responses to Senators’ Questions About Business Practices Aren’t True

U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), both members of the Senate Banking Committee, sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland asking the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate the crypto exchanges Binance and Binance.US for potentially making a series of false statements to Congress. The Senators’ request to the DOJ comes as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a complaint against Binance for “blatant disregard of the federal securities laws and the investor and market protections these laws provide.” The allegations in the SEC’s filing indicate that Binance and Binance.US responses to the Senators’ March 2023 letters about their business practices are not true – a possible violation of federal law. 

“In short, Binance and Binance.US made two representations to Congress: that Binance and Binance.US were ‘separate entities,’ and that Binance.US ‘prioritized regulatory compliance’ and had ‘best-in-class compliance function.’ If the allegations in the SEC filing are accurate, then it would appear that neither of these claims are true,” wrote the Senators. 

On March 1, 2023, Senators Van Hollen, Warren, and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) wrote to the CEOs of Binance and Binance.US asking about the companies’ structure, operations, and practices to ensure compliance with anti-money laundering, countering financing of terrorism, and know-your-customer laws, including questions about the relationship between Binance and Binance.US and the companies’ compliance policies. The Senators are releasing Binance’s response to their questions and because Binance.US claimed its response was confidential, will share these responses with the DOJ on a confidential basis. 

The Senators note that both Binance and Binance.US claimed that they were separate entities – however, the SEC’s filing said, “(Binance CEO Changpeng) Zhao and Binance created BAM Management and BAM Trading in the United States and claimed publicly that these entities independently controlled the operation of the Binance.US Platform. Behind the scenes, however, Zhao and Binance were intimately involved in directing BAM Trading’s U.S. business operations and providing and maintaining the crypto asset services of the Binance.US Platform.” 

Binance claimed that it has “prioritized regulatory compliance” and Binance.US also claimed that “(P)rotecting our customers and providing the best possible experience has been

BAM Trading’s primary goal. These efforts are grounded in a best-in-class compliance function.” However, the SEC’s filing said, “When the Binance.US Platform launched in 2019, Binance announced that it was implementing controls to block U.S. customers from the Binance.com Platform. In reality, Binance did the opposite. Zhao directed Binance to assist certain high-value U.S. customers in circumventing those controls and to do so surreptitiously because—as Zhao himself acknowledged—Binance did not want to ‘be held accountable’ for these actions.”

“This is a serious matter. In this case, a bipartisan group of senators was seeking information on the cryptocurrency industry in order to inform an ongoing legislative process and determine whether new laws are needed to address the risks from cryptocurrencies and cryptocurrency exchanges – and it appears that Binance and Binance.US undermined this important investigation and the legislative process by providing false and misleading information to Congress. These actions by Binance and Binance.US represent a potential violation of federal law that may subject company officials to fines and imprisonment, and the Department should, in conjunction with the ongoing SEC complaint, conduct a rapid and thorough investigation of this matter,” concluded Senators Van Hollen and Warren. 

Text of Binance responses to Senators’ letter can be found here.

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

Dear Attorney General Garland:

We write to provide you with evidence indicating that the cryptocurrency exchanges Binance and Binance.US, which are now the subject of a June 5, 2023 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) complaint for “blatant disregard of the federal securities laws and the investor and market protections these laws provide,” may have also made a series of false statements to Congress when they responded to our March 1, 2023 letter about their business practices. Specifically, Binance indicated in its written response to the Senators that Binance and its U.S.-based exchange Binance.US were “separate entities,” and that Binance.US “prioritized regulatory compliance.” Binance.US made similar claims in its response. The allegations in the SEC complaint indicate that the statements made by these companies are not true.

Under federal law, any individual that “knowingly and willfully … falsifies, conceals or covers up … a material fact; … [or] makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation,” in conjunction with “any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress,” is subject to a fine or imprisonment of up to five years.

We wrote to the CEOs of Binance and Binance.US on March 1, 2023 asking a series of questions about the companies’ structure, operations, and practices to ensure compliance with anti-money laundering, countering financing of terrorism, and know-your-customer laws. Our specific questions included inquiries about “the relationship between Binance and Binance.US,” and about the companies’ compliance policies.

Binance and Binance.US responded to that letter on March 16, 2023, providing us with a 14- page and 5-page response, respectively. We are releasing the Binance letter today in order to facilitate the U.S. Departent of Justice’s (the Department) investigation of this matter. Because Binance.US claimed that its response was confidential, we are not releasing that letter today, but will provide that to the Department on a confidential basis.

In its letter, Binance.US insisted that Binance and Binance.US were separate entities:

At the outset, we want to make clear that BAM Trading and Binance.com are distinct and independent legal entities that are operationally independent. Binance.com owns zero percent of BAM Trading, and BAM Trading is not a subsidiary—de facto or otherwise—of Binance.com. Although Mr. Zhao owns a substantial percentage of BAM Trading and sits on its board, these are separate legal entities with separate corporate structures, governed by separate articles of incorporation, with separate boards, separate leadership teams, separate employee bases and separate policies and procedures (including for compliance, finance and other control functions.)

Binance made similar claims in its response:

Binance leadership determined [in 2018] that the best path forward would be to (1) launch a separate entity for U.S. users that would register in the U.S. and only offer U.S. compliant products and (2) offboard U.S. users from Binance. Consistent with this approach, the establishment of Binance.US was announced on June 13, 2019, and the platform launched on September 24, 2019, as a compliant platform for U.S. users.

“Though both Binance.com and Binance.US are ultimately owned by [Changpeng Zhao] and [Mr. Zhao] is a board member of Binance.US. Binance.com and Binance.US are separate entities—contrary to suggestions in public reporting, Binance.US is not a subsidiary of Binance.

But according to this week’s SEC filing:

As one part of [a] plan to evade United States regulatory oversight over Zhao, Binance, and the Binance.com Platform, Zhao and Binance created BAM Management and BAM Trading in the United States and claimed publicly that these entities independently controlled the operation of the Binance.US Platform. Behind the scenes, however, Zhao and Binance were intimately involved in directing BAM Trading’s U.S. business operations and providing and maintaining the crypto asset services of the Binance.US Platform. BAM Trading employees referred to Zhao’s and Binance’s control of BAM Trading’s operations as “shackles” that often prevented BAM Trading employees from understanding and freely conducting the business of running and operating the Binance.US Platform —so much so that, by November 2020, BAM Trading’s then-CEO told Binance’s CFO that her “entire team feels like [it had] been duped into being a puppet.”

Similarly, Binance informed us in its March 16, 2023 response that it was focusing on ensuring that Binance.US was complying with U.S. laws:

Around the same time that Binance.US was launched, Binance changed its Terms of Use to prohibit U.S. users and began informing U.S. users that they were no longer permitted on the Binance platform. Binance also began to augment its KYC protocols to flag persons attempting to use U.S. documents, such as U.S. passports, as proof of identity when registering on the Binance.com platform. Over time, Binance continued to enhance its restrictions on U.S. persons, including by implementing IP and mobile carrier blocking and by working with external experts to review its geofencing capabilities. Binance’s efforts to offboard and restrict U.S. users were implemented over time and were not perfect in the early years of this effort.

Binance has prioritized regulatory compliance as it has grown: as Binance announced in its 2022 End of Year Report, “[c]omplying with existing regulations and participating in the creation of new regulatory frameworks that enable financial innovation while protecting users are Binance’s top priorities.

Binance.US made similar claims, stating that:

[P]rotecting our customers and providing the best possible experience has been BAM Trading’s primary goal. These efforts are grounded in a best-in-class compliance function designed with Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”), Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) compliance, including robust transaction monitoring and Know Your Customer/Customer Due Diligence (“KYC/CDD”) controls. … We pride ourselves on the culture of compliance we’ve built, which stems from our leadership and permeates throughout our company through comprehensive training for all relevant employees. In recent years, BAM Trading has spent substantial resources to grow its compliance team and improve its compliance program by strengthening its policies and procedures, investing in automated systems, and increasing its staff both in terms of quantity of personnel and the breadth and depth of their compliance experience.

But, according to the SEC complaint:

When the Binance.US Platform launched in 2019, Binance announced that it was implementing controls to block U.S. customers from the Binance.com Platform. In reality, Binance did the opposite. Zhao directed Binance to assist certain highvalue U.S. customers in circumventing those controls and to do so surreptitiously because—as Zhao himself acknowledged—Binance did not want to “be held accountable” for these actions. As the Binance CCO explained, “[o]n the surface we cannot be seen to have US users[,] but in reality, we should get them through other creative means.”

In short, Binance and Binance.US made two representations to Congress: that Binance and Binance.US were “separate entities,” and that Binance.US “prioritized regulatory compliance” and had “best-in-class compliance function.” If the allegations in the SEC filing are accurate, then it would appear that neither of these claims are true.

This is a serious matter. In this case, a bipartisan group of Senators was seeking information on the cryptocurrency industry in order to inform an ongoing legislative process and determine whether new laws are needed to address the risks from cryptocurrencies and cryptocurrency exchanges – and it appears that Binance and Binance.US undermined this important investigation and the legislative process by providing false and misleading information to Congress. These actions by Binance and Binance.US represent a potential violation of federal law that may subject company officials to fines and imprisonment, and the Department should, in conjunction with the ongoing SEC complaint, conduct a rapid and thorough investigation of this matter.

Sincerely,

Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators John Boozman (R-AR), Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Roger Wicker (R-MS) partnered to lead their colleagues in introducing a formal challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “Good Neighbor Rule” through a Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolution of disapproval.

The senators are seeking to overturn the rule, which will place severe restrictions on state emissions based on a questionable methodology that assigns fault to “upwind” states like Arkansas and Mississippi for other “downwind” state emissions. The EPA’s rule comes after years of good-faith efforts from states to address the emissions concerns through individual State Implementation Plans (SIP).

“The EPA’s Good Neighbor Rule makes it impossible for Arkansas and other states to comply with its misguided regulations,” Boozman said. “We can find a practical balance between protecting air quality and preventing federal overreach. This CRA will ensure American manufacturers aren’t at a disadvantage as a result of unattainable standards.”

“The EPA’s ‘Good Neighbor Rule’ is anything but. It is a top-down set of burdensome regulations that will harm both energy production and manufacturing in Arkansas and many other states,” Cotton said.

“The EPA claims that the state of Mississippi is causing emissions problems for Dallas and Houston. This is an entirely unconvincing assertion, which will have severe consequences for development in our area,” Wicker said. “With its so-called ‘Good Neighbor’ rule, the EPA has decided to discard years of good-faith efforts by states to address emissions concerns. Overturning these plans by executive fiat is wrong and exceeds the role of the EPA. I am glad to be joined by so many like-minded colleagues in challenging this rule.”

The rule, which falls under provisions of the Clean Air Act, would impact 23 states, including Arkansas. It would require new, more stringent regulations related to nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from stationary sources. To achieve lower emission rates, the rule would establish an ozone trading season for fossil fuel plants in 22 states and establish emission limits on certain industrial sources. 

Prior to the issuance of the rule, states worked with EPA to submit an approvable SIP for the 2015 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Earlier this year, the EPA disapproved SIPs for 19 states, including Arkansas, at one time. The other states whose SIPs were disapproved include Alabama, California, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and West Virginia. Many of those states are either suing or considering litigation against EPA as they believe this is a violation of the Clean Air Act’s “cooperative federalism” structure.

Boozman has been a longtime champion of overturning this rule. In April 2023, as a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW), he stood up for The Natural State in the face of the EPA’s so-called “Good Neighbor Rule” during a committee hearing that featured witnesses from other states on the receiving end of this onerous mandate.  

Boozman, Cotton and Wicker were joined by Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Mike Braun (R-IN), John Barrasso (R-WY), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), James Risch (R-ID), Josh Hawley (R-MO), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Todd Young (R-IN), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), John Hoeven (R-ND), Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Eric Schmitt (R-MO) in support of the legislation.

U.S. Representative Michael Burgess (R-TX) is leading a similar effort in the House of Representatives.

Congress can consider these resolutions using expedited procedures under the Congressional Review Act and can pass it by a simple majority vote. 

Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey

Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell

06.08.23

“America Is Waking Up” to Our Nation’s Wildfire Problem, Says Cantwell

At Senate hearing on wildfire preparedness in smoky D.C., Cantwell warns of dangerous WA fire season, calls for faster wildfire response, partnering with Canada

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) spoke at a Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources hearing focused on wildfire preparedness and response. Sen. Cantwell noted the wildfire smoke hovering over the East Coast this week, the alarming summer wildfire forecast for the State of Washington, and the fact that fires are already burning in Washington state.

“I think America is waking up, at least on the East Coast, to this problem. And we certainly have known all about it on the West Coast for some time now. And I think that it is time and opportunity for us to really break down the barriers that are prohibiting us from having a faster response, and work quickly on the faster response,” Sen. Cantwell said. “My whole state is in the forecast for this summer being in the epicenter of this … there are small fires already burning in Central Washington and a small fire in Yakima County, which grew to 150 acres last night.”

In their June 1 assessment, the National Interagency Fire Center forecasted “above normal” wildfire risk for the months of July through September for nearly the entire State of Washington. Their forecast maps are available HERE.

Typically this level of risk isn’t seen statewide, particularly in historically cooler and wetter Western Washington. However because there have been “well above normal temperatures and below normal precipitation” snowpack has rapidly declined. This has caused very dry conditions across Washington.  Past years with forecasts like this have been followed by especially destructive fire seasons.

During the hearing, Sen. Cantwell pressed Jaelith Hall-Rivera, Deputy Chief of State, Private, and Tribal Forestry, USDA Forest Service, on the need to improve coordination between the various agencies that help fight wildfires to ensure faster fire response.

“We absolutely need to break down barriers with all of our partners, states, tribes, counties, even between the federal agencies,” said Hall-Rivera. “I think we’re absolutely committed to that. And we can certainly bring some intention and focus to that in Washington state, if need be.”

Sen. Cantwell also followed up with Hall-Rivera about what the Forest Service is doing to equip wildland fire crews with technology to protect firefighter safety, noting that the Border Patrol recently provided 19,000 agents with similar equipment, despite not being required to do so.  “So if the U.S. Border Patrol can do it, why can’t we upgrade people right away with this gear?” Cantwell asked.  Sen. Cantwell has worked to secure safety and technology requirements to protect fire crews, including in the bipartisan John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act.

Hall-Rivera responded, “Senator, we are focused on getting tracking systems out. We have done a lot of pilot testing as a result of the Dingell Act and we appreciate the focus and intention on this technology. We’re going to be equipping our fire fleet with tracking devices this year.”

Sen. Cantwell also asked the expert witnesses about what more we can be doing to work with the Canadians, given that the current East Coast smoke originates in Quebec, and some of the worst smoke events in Washington state were due to raging fires in British Columbia. “I think is really time to engage with the Canadians,” said Sen. Cantwell. “We can’t just be sitting here, thinking that we have solved this problem because our continent knows no U.S./Canadian barrier.”  This afternoon, President Biden shared that he had spoken to Prime Minister Trudeau and had directed the National Interagency Fire Center to respond promptly to Canadian requests for additional firefighters and fire suppression assets such as air tankers. 

As wildfires become more frequent and intense in the West, Sen. Cantwell is working to ensure that communities have access to the resources necessary to prevent, prepare, fight and recover from major fires. She secured billions of dollars to support wildfire response and recovery in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, including $3.4 billion for wildfire risk reduction, $1.14 billion for Hazardous Fuels Reduction programs, and $500 million for Burned Area Rehabilitation Programs. In addition, she helped secure an additional $1.8 billion for the U.S. Forest Service Hazardous Fuels Reduction Program as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. At an April Senate hearing, she called on U.S. Forest Service Chief Randy Moore to hire more firefighters ahead of the 2023 wildfire season.

Last November, Sen. Cantwell helped secure emergency funding to stabilize fire-scarred land around Highway 2 near Sultan caused by the Bolt Creek Fire. In May 2022, she introduced the Fire Ready Nation Act, which would improve the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s wildfire response and forecasting.

Video of Sen. Cantwell’s remarks is available HERE, audio HERE, and a transcript HERE.

###

 

Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Sheldon Whitehouse

06.08.23

Washington, DC – U.S. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Alex Padilla (D-CA) today introduced a pair of bills aimed at reducing air pollution created by the global shipping industry.  Whitehouse introduced the International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act, new legislation aiming to decarbonize the emissions-heavy maritime shipping industry, prevent the release of criteria air pollutants in port communities, and curb climate change.  Senators Padilla and Peter Welch (D-VT) are cosponsoring the legislation. 

Whitehouse and Padilla also introduced the Clean Shipping Act today.  The Clean Shipping Act would set a path to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from all ocean shipping companies that do business with the United States.

“We need an all-hands-on-deck approach to prevent the worst effects of climate change, so we’re introducing new legislation to encourage clean shipping, reduce the dirty fossil fuels polluting our oceans, and protect neighbors from the air pollutants plaguing port communities,” said Whitehouse.  “I’m glad to introduce this pair of bills with Senator Padilla to steer the global shipping industry away from emissions-heavy fuels and toward sustainable shipping technologies that are being developed here in America.”

“This World Ocean Day, I am proud to introduce legislation that improves our shipping industry by reducing emissions in maritime transportation and simultaneously protecting coastal communities,” said Padilla.  “California’s port communities have been forced to shoulder the brunt of shipping pollution for too long. The health of our communities and the health of our planet requires us forward thinking and ambitious—we owe it to future generations.”

Maritime shipping is the largest source of traded goods—both for the U.S. and globally.  Greenhouse gas emissions from maritime shipping account for three percent of total global emissions and are projected to increase rapidly over the coming years.  Unlike other modes of transportation (e.g., trucks, planes, etc.), marine shipping vessels rarely pay fuel taxes.  A global carbon price on maritime emissions has been proposed by the industry as a solution, but to date the International Marine Organization (IMO) has failed to implement a solution consistent with global decarbonization targets.

The International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act would impose a pollution fee on large marine vessels offloading cargo at U.S. ports, driving industry-wide decarbonization efforts and incentivizing the use and development of cleaner maritime fuels.  The bill would levy a $150 per ton fee on the carbon emissions of the fuel burned on the inbound trip, as well as fees for the nitrogen oxides ($6.30/lb.), sulfur dioxide ($18/lb.), and particle pollution (PM2.5) ($38.90/lb.) that the ships emit.  Only vessels that have 10,000 gross tonnage or more would be required to pay the fee, which would exclude most domestic shipping.  The fee on carbon emissions would sunset if the IMO implements and enforces a fee on the greenhouse gas emissions of marine shipping that is equal to or greater than the $150 per ton fee levied in the bill. 

These pollution fees are estimated to raise approximately $250 billion over 10 years, providing critical funding for decarbonization efforts in the maritime economy.  The revenues collected from the fees would go toward modernizing the Jones Act fleet with low-carbon vessels, revitalizing and electrifying U.S. shipbuilding, and addressing and reducing pollutants in America’s port communities, along our coasts, and in our oceans.

The International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act has been endorsed by the Environmental Defense Fund, Ocean Conservancy, and Pacific Environment.

“We’ve taken real steps to tackle greenhouse gas emissions in transportation, but, so far, we haven’t made as much progress in maritime shipping.  Action is badly needed and long overdue,” said Welch, a cosponsor of the International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act.  “I’m glad to join Sen. Whitehouse to introduce this bill to reduce maritime greenhouse gas emissions and help modernize America’s shipping fleet and port infrastructure.”

“Senator Whitehouse’s bill presents a real opportunity to sharply reduce harmful pollution from international shipping and promote healthy, thriving communities alongside ports.  International shipping is a significant source of climate pollution and puts the nearly 40 million Americans living within three miles of a port in harm’s way with a toxic soup of pollutants.  For too long, they have paid the price of commerce with their health.  This legislation will help clean up the air they breathe, while keeping the U.S. on the path to meet its climate goals.  It also will send a strong message for future maritime negotiations that if the international community does not act, the U.S. will step up to protect the health of its people and the climate,” said Elizabeth Gore, Senior Vice President, Political Affairs at Environmental Defense Fund.

“The shipping industry exacts huge tolls on our ocean, climate and port communities by emitting around 1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide each year.  To curb emissions and fund the clean shipping transition, it only makes sense that we should charge a comparable fee to the shipping industry for polluting our ocean and contributing to climate change,” said Delaine McCullough, Campaign Manager for Shipping Emissions at Ocean Conservancy.  “The billions of dollars these pollution fees are going to generate will bolster existing decarbonization priorities such as electrifying ports, developing alternative shipping fuels and eliminating air pollution.  We need Congress to pass the International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act so that our ocean and the climate can get what they’re owed.” 

“We commend Senator Whitehouse for introducing the International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act of 2023.  This legislation will hold the maritime industry financially responsible for their harmful emissions, raising billions of dollars over the next decade to help combat air pollution in working-class communities and communities of color near U.S. ports.  It will drive decarbonization efforts, prevent the release of massive amounts of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, incentivize the use of cleaner fuels and technologies by the shipping sector, and support a just transition through funding for workforce development.  With the climate emergency at hand, we urge Congress to immediately take up and pass this bill,” said Antonio Santos, Federal Climate Policy Director at Pacific Environment.

“There is an urgent need for shipping to decarbonize and we know for a fact that regulation has to be part of that equation.  This new piece of legislation cements the U.S. as a pioneer in the green transition and should help spur the much-needed production of green maritime fuels.  Maersk particularly welcomes the immediate inclusion of a lifecycle perspective for all fuels that takes all relevant greenhouse gases into consideration.  The IMO sunset clause will also send a strong signal,” said Rabab Raafat Boulos, Chief Infrastructure Officer at A.P. Moller-Maersk.

Padilla’s Clean Shipping Act of 2023 would set a path to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from all ocean shipping companies that do business with the United States.  The legislation would direct the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set progressively tighter carbon intensity standards for shipping fuel to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2040, consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Full text of the International Maritime Pollution Accountability Act is available here.  Full text of the Clean Shipping Act is available here.

Source: United States Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) introduced bipartisan legislation focused on limiting the presence of foreign-produced drones in the United States.

The Stemming The Operation of Pernicious and Illicit (STOP Illicit) Drones Act imposes certain federal funding and operating prohibitions on drones produced in China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba.

“While the New Axis of Evil is looking for every opportunity to take advantage of the United States, we cannot leave our critical technologies sector open to vulnerabilities,” said Senator Blackburn. “Just as importantly, taxpayer dollars should never fund drones manufactured in regions that are hostile toward the U.S. The STOP Illicit Drones Act helps curb the importation of drones produced by our adversaries, keeping our nation safer and encouraging manufacturing here at home.”

“Drones have the potential to transform key industries and aspects of our society – from agriculture, to emergency services, to deliveries, and so much more. As the adoption of this technology grows, we need to make sure that we are not advancing the goals of our adversaries, who wish to saturate the market with drones that pose a threat to our national security,” said Senator Warner. “I’m proud to introduce this legislation to ensure that federal resources and dollars do not go towards products that defy U.S. interests.”

The STOP Illicit Drones Act:

• Prohibits the FAA from providing federal funds to certain foreign drone companies. Any federal programs under control of the FAA—including the Aviation Research Grant Program, the Aviation Workforce Development Program, Community and Technical College Centers of Excellence in Small Unmanned Aircraft System Technology Training, or the Airport Improvement Project Program—would be unable to benefit companies domiciled in the countries listed above.

• Prohibits the FAA from procuring or operating certain foreign drone companies. The bill would also prohibit the FAA or its contractors from procuring or operating drones produced in China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba. It allows for an exemption for detection or counter-UAS testing and warfare analysis and operations. Finally, the STOP Illicit Drones Act:

• Requires the FAA to replace any such foreign drones with a U.S. or allied drone within one year.

• Requires the FAA to submit a report to Congress detailing how many FAA drones violate this section and the cost of replacing them. The report must also contain the changes the FAA has made to its procurement, operation, and contracting processes to ensure it does not violate this section going forward. 

Click here for bill text.

Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health Policy, and Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), along with 27 Senate colleagues, expressed their concerns to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Administrator Samantha Power about Uganda’s “Anti-Homosexuality Act,” which was recently signed into law.  In addition to expressing concern over the disturbing nature of this new law, the letter requests information on the impacts this law could have on U.S. foreign assistance programs, like PEPFAR.

“The ‘2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act’ represents an existential threat to LGBTQI+ individuals in Uganda,” wrote the 29 Senators in a letter to the State Department and USAID. “This law expands Uganda’s criminalization of the LGBTQI+ community by increasing the sentence for same-sex acts to life imprisonment and, disturbingly, establishes a new charge of ‘aggravated homosexuality’ which, in certain circumstances, is punishable by the death penalty. The law also seeks to criminalize the ‘promotion of homosexuality,’ which is broadly defined to include activities such as leasing any house or building to anyone who is LGBTQI+ or who may be discussing LGBTQI+ rights, distributing information on homosexuality, or providing financial support to activities that ‘encourage homosexuality or the observance or normalization of’ LGBTQI+ issues. This provision effectively silences an entire community of LGBTQI+ people and allies as the penalties for this provision include facing up to 20 years in prison.”

The Senators also expressed concerns about the bill’s potential impact on U.S. global health programs.

“We are also deeply concerned that the provisions of the law regarding the promotion of homosexuality will undermine the gains that have been made toward HIV treatment and prevention in the country. Uganda has one of the highest HIV/AIDS infection rates in the world and has been a major recipient of assistance through PEPFAR. According to a 2023 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) report, since PEPFAR scaled-up their programming in Uganda in the early 2000s, the program has helped prevent almost 600,000 HIV-related deaths, as well as nearly 500,000 new HIV infections. Although HIV/AIDS affects many communities in Uganda, gay, bisexual, other men who have sex with men, and transgender women experience higher rates of HIV infection, with access to health care services curtailed by already existing criminalization statutes in the country. PEPFAR programs cannot be successful in meeting their goals without working closely with the Ugandan LGBTQI+ community and other key population partners to ensure access to safe, comprehensive, and welcoming services—as PEPFAR has done for two decades,” continued the Senators. 

Senators Booker and Baldwin requested that the State Department and USAID answer several questions regarding PEPFAR, tools at the Administration’s disposal to protect the LGBTQI+ community and human rights defenders, and accountability for human rights abusers. The Senators also cautioned of potential ripple effects, including the introduction of similar legislation across the region and around the world. 

“The United States has a responsibility to advocate for the human rights of vulnerable communities around the world—including LGBTQI+ individuals. No one deserves to live in fear of persecution or death because of who they are or who they love. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter,” concluded the Senators. 

The letter is cosigned by U.S. Senators Ed Markey (D-MA), John Fetterman (D-PA), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Chris Coons (D-DE), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), and Sherrod Brown (D-OH).  

“Uganda’s draconian Anti-Homosexuality Act is a horrific display of bigotry that will have wide-reaching effects across the entire region,” said David Stacy, the Vice President of Government Affairs at the Human Rights Campaign. “We are grateful to Senators Booker and Baldwin and their colleagues for their leadership condemning this legislation as we are unfortunately already seeing its harms on LGBTQ+ Ugandans, with hateful attacks on the LGBTQ+ community increasing in response to the law. We applaud the Biden Administration’s quick response opposing the bill thus far, and join in calling on the Administration to take immediate further action to hold the Government of Uganda accountable for this unjust law.”

The full text of the letter can be found here. 

Source: United States Senator for Connecticut – Chris Murphy

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke at a U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing exploring the causes of the youth mental health crisis and potential solutions.

Murphy highlighted recent investments to address the mental health crisis, including more than $15 billion from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA): “I’m so proud of this Congress, and many on this committee for passing the BSCA. And I’m glad to get an update today on how that money is being impactful to help our kids. It’s part of a trend. We’re spending more money today on mental health than ever before. We’ve gone from about $155 billion in 2010 to $238 billion in 2020. And it’s still not enough.”

On getting at the roots of this mental health crisis, including the urgency of addressing social media’s role: “I think this hearing is so important, because I think we’ve come to the conclusion that unless you get at the root causes of unhappiness and isolation and loneliness, there is almost no amount of money that can make up for that inattention. I wanted to continue this conversation about social media, in part, because I think it’s the most immediate public policy concern that this Congress can tackle, and because I think there’s easy agreement between Republicans and Democrats, but not because I think it’s the whole story. I think, frankly, we probably spend more time than we should talking about this narrow but very important problem that our kids are facing. But I think we can do something about it, so let’s not lose the opportunity.”

In a question to Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, Murphy asked how Congress should tackle this issue: “As you look at the sort of cornucopia of policy options that Congress is looking at here, what direction would you point us in to best protect our kids? What are the tactics that the social media companies are using that are most disturbing to you?”

In April, Murphy along with U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), and Katie Britt (R-Ala.) introduced new legislation to help protect children from the harmful impacts of social media. The Protecting Kids on Social Media Act would set a minimum age of 13 to use social media apps and would require parental consent for 13 through 17 year-olds.  The bill would also prevent social media companies from feeding content using algorithms to users under the age of 18.

A full transcript of Murphy’s exchange with Surgeon General Vivek Murthy:

MURPHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this very important hearing. I’m so proud of this Congress, and many on this committee for passing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. And I’m glad to get an update today on how that money is being impactful to help our kids. It’s part of a trend. We’re spending more money today on mental health than ever before. We’ve gone from about $155 billion in 2010 to $238 billion in 2020. And it’s still not enough.

“But I think this hearing is so important, because I think we’ve come to the conclusion that unless you get at the root causes of unhappiness and isolation and loneliness, there is almost no amount of money that can make up for that inattention.

“So, Dr. Murthy, I wanted to continue this conversation about social media. In part, because I think it’s the most immediate public policy concern that this Congress can tackle, and because I think there’s easy agreement between Republicans and Democrats, but not because I think it’s the whole story. I think, frankly, we probably spend more time than we should talking about this narrow but very important problem that our kids are facing. But I think we can do something about it, so let’s not lose the opportunity.

“I know the administration hasn’t endorsed any specific policy proposals, but just give us your take on which direction we should head. So Senator Schatz and Cotton and Britt and I have a piece of legislation that says you got to do age verification and make sure that you can’t get on before you’re 13, you can’t use algorithm boosting on younger kids, and parents have to have a say. Other legislation says you should have a standard that applies to social media companies so that they’re only putting healthy content online.

“As you look at the sort of cornucopia of policy options that Congress is looking at here, what direction would you point us in to best protect our kids? What are the tactics that the social media companies are using that are most disturbing to you? And I’ll just give you maybe the statistic that is most worrying to me. There’s a recent study that shows within two minutes of establishing a TikTok account, a teenager can be fed information, glorifying suicide. Within four minutes of establishing a TikTok account, a teenager can be sent content celebrating eating disorders. That’s how quickly really damaging, really dangerous content can get to kids who are in crisis, who are in trouble. And it just compels us in this Congress to do something about it. So give us a little bit of advice.”

MURTHY: “Well, thanks, Senator. And I just want to also appreciate your leadership on the issue of loneliness and isolation. It’s been an honor to work together with you on addressing this. And I agree with you that there are multiple drivers of the mental health crisis, social media is one of them. And I agree, it’s an important one for us to address a few.

“A few things I would say in terms of avenues to focus on, recognizing that social media has been around for almost two decades. During that time there has been a lot of evolution in the platforms, a lot of different ways in which it is affecting our kids’ lives. And so there’s actually a lot to do here if we truly want to make them safe.

“I think one certainly is around enforcement concerning age. Many platforms established 13 as the age at which kids can use social media, by the way that is not based on health grounds, the age of 13, and although many people think it is.  But 40% of kids eight through 12 are on social media. So whatever rules the platforms have in place are very poorly enforced.

“I think the second area where it is we need to protect the privacy, data privacy of kids. Kids at this point do not have sufficient control over their data, and neither do their parents. This data is often used to direct ads to them and other content is driven by the algorithms. We need to give kids and parents control over that data.

“The third is actually around data transparency. Companies are not fully disclosing the data they have about the health impacts of their platforms to kids, to parents, to researchers, and to the public at large. This is what researchers tell us all the time. And without that transparency, we don’t even know the full extent of the problem in which kids are most affected and so it’s hard to target interventions.

“But finally, I would say when it comes to safety standards, this is a place where I do think we can build models off of other products where we’ve established safety standards whether it’s for cars, car seats, medication, baby formula, whatever you want to consider as a parallel. But the bottom line is we need to have standards that push companies to assure us and to be able to demonstrate through data that they are not exposing our kids to harmful content, that they are not in fact allowing kids to be bullied and harassed online, particularly by strangers, and also that they’re not promoting the use of features that lead to excessive use. We know that kids are vulnerable stage here of development, and they’re still pretty least susceptible to some of these features. We can’t have companies taking advantage of those. “

“So these are some areas that I think are essential for us. And I would be happy to work with you and other members of this committee, as you develop legislation around this because I think this can’t come soon enough.”

MURPHY: “I appreciate our partnership. I appreciate your guidance to this committee. The only thing we cannot afford to do is to stand pat. There’s a consensus here that we can find with your help.”

###

Source: United States Senator for Illinois Tammy Duckworth

---

---

Source: United States Senator for Alaska Lisa Murkowski

---