U.S. Congress
Here's a look at documents from all members of the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate
Congress
Featured Stories
Carter urges American Medical Association to reverse harmful maternal health billing policy
WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Rep. Earl L. Carter, R-Georgia, issued the following news release on June 25, 2026:
* * *
Carter urges American Medical Association to reverse harmful maternal health billing policy
Rep. Earl L. "Buddy" Carter (R-GA) today sent a letter to the American Medical Association (AMA) calling on it to revoke a recent change to the way maternity services are billed that will impact health care affordability for mothers and babies.
The letter surrounds AMA replacing the bundled maternity care Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) framework with a system of individually billable ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Rep. Earl L. Carter, R-Georgia, issued the following news release on June 25, 2026: * * * Carter urges American Medical Association to reverse harmful maternal health billing policy Rep. Earl L. "Buddy" Carter (R-GA) today sent a letter to the American Medical Association (AMA) calling on it to revoke a recent change to the way maternity services are billed that will impact health care affordability for mothers and babies. The letter surrounds AMA replacing the bundled maternity care Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) framework with a system of individually billableservices beginning January 1, 2027, despite concerns regarding affordability, care coordination, administrative burden, wasteful spending, and harmful effects on value-based care.
In the letter, Rep. Carter writes, "This is not a routine coding update. It is a fundamental restructuring of how maternity care is reimbursed throughout the American healthcare system."
Rep. Carter continues, "At its core, unbundling maternity care is inflationary. For decades, policymakers, providers, health plans, employers, and patient advocates have worked to move healthcare away from fragmented fee-for-service reimbursement and toward coordinated, value-based models that reward outcomes rather than volume. The existing global maternity codes reflect those principles by encouraging comprehensive management of pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum care under a single bundled framework. I strongly urge the AMA to reconsider this misguided policy before it takes effect."
Read the full letter here (https://buddycarter.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Rep._Carter_AMA_Maternity_Care_Letter_6.23.26.pdf).
* * *
BACKGROUND
The longstanding bundled maternity care CPT framework allows reimbursement for pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum care under a coordinated global payment model. This approach promotes care coordination, simplifies billing, supports value-based care, and helps protect patients from unnecessary costs and administrative complexity.
The American Medical Association's new policy would replace that bundled framework with a fragmented system of individually billable maternity services beginning January 1, 2027. Unbundling maternity care would increase health care costs, create incentives for unnecessary visits and services, add administrative burdens for providers and health plans, and move the health care system away from coordinated, patient-centered care.
***
Original text here: https://buddycarter.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=16534
* * *
Carter urges American Medical Association to reverse harmful maternal health billing policy
Rep. Earl L. "Buddy" Carter (R-GA) today sent a letter to the American Medical Association (AMA) calling on it to revoke a recent change to the way maternity services are billed that will impact health care affordability for mothers and babies.
The letter surrounds AMA replacing the bundled maternity care Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) framework with a system of individually billable ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Rep. Earl L. Carter, R-Georgia, issued the following news release on June 25, 2026: * * * Carter urges American Medical Association to reverse harmful maternal health billing policy Rep. Earl L. "Buddy" Carter (R-GA) today sent a letter to the American Medical Association (AMA) calling on it to revoke a recent change to the way maternity services are billed that will impact health care affordability for mothers and babies. The letter surrounds AMA replacing the bundled maternity care Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) framework with a system of individually billableservices beginning January 1, 2027, despite concerns regarding affordability, care coordination, administrative burden, wasteful spending, and harmful effects on value-based care.
In the letter, Rep. Carter writes, "This is not a routine coding update. It is a fundamental restructuring of how maternity care is reimbursed throughout the American healthcare system."
Rep. Carter continues, "At its core, unbundling maternity care is inflationary. For decades, policymakers, providers, health plans, employers, and patient advocates have worked to move healthcare away from fragmented fee-for-service reimbursement and toward coordinated, value-based models that reward outcomes rather than volume. The existing global maternity codes reflect those principles by encouraging comprehensive management of pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum care under a single bundled framework. I strongly urge the AMA to reconsider this misguided policy before it takes effect."
Read the full letter here (https://buddycarter.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Rep._Carter_AMA_Maternity_Care_Letter_6.23.26.pdf).
* * *
BACKGROUND
The longstanding bundled maternity care CPT framework allows reimbursement for pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum care under a coordinated global payment model. This approach promotes care coordination, simplifies billing, supports value-based care, and helps protect patients from unnecessary costs and administrative complexity.
The American Medical Association's new policy would replace that bundled framework with a fragmented system of individually billable maternity services beginning January 1, 2027. Unbundling maternity care would increase health care costs, create incentives for unnecessary visits and services, add administrative burdens for providers and health plans, and move the health care system away from coordinated, patient-centered care.
***
Original text here: https://buddycarter.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=16534
Cantwell, Colleagues Demand USPS Abandon Proposed Rule to Carry Out President Trump's Illegal Executive Order Restricting Vote by Mail
WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, issued the following news release:
* * *
Cantwell, Colleagues Demand USPS Abandon Proposed Rule to Carry Out President Trump's Illegal Executive Order Restricting Vote by Mail
This week, Cantwell delivered a speech on the Senate floor calling out the Trump Administration's war on mail-in voting
-
U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, joined her Senate Democratic colleagues sending a letter to the United ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, issued the following news release: * * * Cantwell, Colleagues Demand USPS Abandon Proposed Rule to Carry Out President Trump's Illegal Executive Order Restricting Vote by Mail This week, Cantwell delivered a speech on the Senate floor calling out the Trump Administration's war on mail-in voting - U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, joined her Senate Democratic colleagues sending a letter to the UnitedStates Postal Service (USPS) demanding the USPS abandon attempts to restrict voting by mail called for in an unconstitutional executive order from President Trump. Yesterday, a federal court correctly held the Executive Order unconstitutional, but that litigation may continue and there is no certainty that the USPS will terminate the rulemaking.
Sen. Cantwell previously joined her colleagues in urging USPS not to carry out the executive order, which would force states to submit absentee voters' information to the Postal Service for the creation of a federal mail-in voter list. Under the order, USPS could then refuse to deliver ballots to voters who are not included on that list, giving the agency an unprecedented and illegal role in the administration of American elections. USPS did not respond to that letter and has now issued a proposed rule that would ultimately allow the Postal Service to determine whether millions of Americans can receive and cast ballots through the mail. Moreover, yesterday, Postmaster General David Steiner testified before a Senate committee that USPS will not mail ballots in states that decline to turn over their voters' information. Steiner asserted that the plan will allow the Trump Administration plan to ensure "the right ballots are going to the right people."
This morning, a federal judge blocked key portions of President Trump's executive order, emphasizing that the power to oversee elections belongs to the states. In that case - brought by the State of Washington, 22 other states, and the District of Columbia - the court said clearly, "The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections." The court's ruling also says "no law enacted by Congress delegates authority to control mail-in voting to USPS."
"We write for a second time regarding the unconstitutional and illegal attempt to transform the United States Postal Service into an election administration agency controlled by the White House and President Trump," wrote the senators. "In April, 37 senators wrote to you after President Trump issued his Executive Order directing USPS to issue a rule to establish compulsory specifications for election mail and create a master absentee voter list of millions of American voters - with the power to refuse to deliver their ballots."
They continued: "Despite these grave and serious legal deficiencies, on June 2, 2026, USPS published a proposed rule that, if finalized, would establish President Trump's control over federal elections and allow USPS to adjudicate who can and cannot vote by mail. This proposed rule risks disenfranchising millions of voters. We again insist that you follow the law, refuse to implement President Trump's Executive Order, and withdraw this presidentially-directed proposed rule."
The senators warned that the proposed rule would create a federally controlled national list of absentee voters, raising serious concerns about potential misuse and abuse. In court filings, the Administration has acknowledged that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is already in discussions with USPS about potentially comparing the list to DHS datasets. The senators raised concerns that combining USPS data with unreliable federal records could lead to eligible voters being disenfranchised, or voters and election officials being unfairly targeted for investigation.
"Ultimately, the proposed rule seeks to create a centralized national absentee voter database with individualized barcodes connected to the voters' names under the control of the President that contains the voting information of millions of Americans," wrote the senators. "That information would be ripe for potential abuse or improper disclosure potentially imperiling the integrity of American elections."
"Accordingly, we insist that the Postal Service abandon this proposed regulation and return to its core mission of providing universal postal services to every American. The Constitution and federal law demand nothing less," they concluded.
The letter was led by U.S. Senators Gary Peters (D-MI), Alex Padilla (D-CA), and Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). Joining Sen. Cantwell in sending the letter were U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), John Fetterman (D-PA), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).
The letter can be read in full HERE (https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/06_24_2026_usps_mail_in_voting_letter.pdf).
This week, Sen. Cantwell delivered a speech on the Senate floor calling out the Trump Administration's war on mail-in voting as the latest frontier in a long history of voter disenfranchisement in the United States - especially a new rule that significantly delays the postmarking of ballots, leading to them being tossed out instead of counted. She highlighted a new rule implemented by the USPS in December under pressure from the Trump administration. The new rule changes where mail is postmarked, requiring it to be processed at a regional distribution center instead of a local post office, which can delay postmarking for up to several days.
Video of her speech this week is HERE (https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/download/floor-speech-on-voting-rights); a transcript is HERE (https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/download/floor-speech-on-voting-rights_transcript).
***
Original text here: https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cantwell-colleagues-demand-usps-abandon-proposed-rule-to-carry-out-president-trumps-illegal-executive-order-restricting-vote-by-mail
* * *
Cantwell, Colleagues Demand USPS Abandon Proposed Rule to Carry Out President Trump's Illegal Executive Order Restricting Vote by Mail
This week, Cantwell delivered a speech on the Senate floor calling out the Trump Administration's war on mail-in voting
-
U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, joined her Senate Democratic colleagues sending a letter to the United ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, issued the following news release: * * * Cantwell, Colleagues Demand USPS Abandon Proposed Rule to Carry Out President Trump's Illegal Executive Order Restricting Vote by Mail This week, Cantwell delivered a speech on the Senate floor calling out the Trump Administration's war on mail-in voting - U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, joined her Senate Democratic colleagues sending a letter to the UnitedStates Postal Service (USPS) demanding the USPS abandon attempts to restrict voting by mail called for in an unconstitutional executive order from President Trump. Yesterday, a federal court correctly held the Executive Order unconstitutional, but that litigation may continue and there is no certainty that the USPS will terminate the rulemaking.
Sen. Cantwell previously joined her colleagues in urging USPS not to carry out the executive order, which would force states to submit absentee voters' information to the Postal Service for the creation of a federal mail-in voter list. Under the order, USPS could then refuse to deliver ballots to voters who are not included on that list, giving the agency an unprecedented and illegal role in the administration of American elections. USPS did not respond to that letter and has now issued a proposed rule that would ultimately allow the Postal Service to determine whether millions of Americans can receive and cast ballots through the mail. Moreover, yesterday, Postmaster General David Steiner testified before a Senate committee that USPS will not mail ballots in states that decline to turn over their voters' information. Steiner asserted that the plan will allow the Trump Administration plan to ensure "the right ballots are going to the right people."
This morning, a federal judge blocked key portions of President Trump's executive order, emphasizing that the power to oversee elections belongs to the states. In that case - brought by the State of Washington, 22 other states, and the District of Columbia - the court said clearly, "The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections." The court's ruling also says "no law enacted by Congress delegates authority to control mail-in voting to USPS."
"We write for a second time regarding the unconstitutional and illegal attempt to transform the United States Postal Service into an election administration agency controlled by the White House and President Trump," wrote the senators. "In April, 37 senators wrote to you after President Trump issued his Executive Order directing USPS to issue a rule to establish compulsory specifications for election mail and create a master absentee voter list of millions of American voters - with the power to refuse to deliver their ballots."
They continued: "Despite these grave and serious legal deficiencies, on June 2, 2026, USPS published a proposed rule that, if finalized, would establish President Trump's control over federal elections and allow USPS to adjudicate who can and cannot vote by mail. This proposed rule risks disenfranchising millions of voters. We again insist that you follow the law, refuse to implement President Trump's Executive Order, and withdraw this presidentially-directed proposed rule."
The senators warned that the proposed rule would create a federally controlled national list of absentee voters, raising serious concerns about potential misuse and abuse. In court filings, the Administration has acknowledged that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is already in discussions with USPS about potentially comparing the list to DHS datasets. The senators raised concerns that combining USPS data with unreliable federal records could lead to eligible voters being disenfranchised, or voters and election officials being unfairly targeted for investigation.
"Ultimately, the proposed rule seeks to create a centralized national absentee voter database with individualized barcodes connected to the voters' names under the control of the President that contains the voting information of millions of Americans," wrote the senators. "That information would be ripe for potential abuse or improper disclosure potentially imperiling the integrity of American elections."
"Accordingly, we insist that the Postal Service abandon this proposed regulation and return to its core mission of providing universal postal services to every American. The Constitution and federal law demand nothing less," they concluded.
The letter was led by U.S. Senators Gary Peters (D-MI), Alex Padilla (D-CA), and Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). Joining Sen. Cantwell in sending the letter were U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Chris Coons (D-DE), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), John Fetterman (D-PA), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Angus King (I-ME), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).
The letter can be read in full HERE (https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/06_24_2026_usps_mail_in_voting_letter.pdf).
This week, Sen. Cantwell delivered a speech on the Senate floor calling out the Trump Administration's war on mail-in voting as the latest frontier in a long history of voter disenfranchisement in the United States - especially a new rule that significantly delays the postmarking of ballots, leading to them being tossed out instead of counted. She highlighted a new rule implemented by the USPS in December under pressure from the Trump administration. The new rule changes where mail is postmarked, requiring it to be processed at a regional distribution center instead of a local post office, which can delay postmarking for up to several days.
Video of her speech this week is HERE (https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/download/floor-speech-on-voting-rights); a transcript is HERE (https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/download/floor-speech-on-voting-rights_transcript).
***
Original text here: https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cantwell-colleagues-demand-usps-abandon-proposed-rule-to-carry-out-president-trumps-illegal-executive-order-restricting-vote-by-mail
As Gas Prices Remain High from Trump's War in Iran, Senator Markey Introduces Legislation to Protect Americans from High Costs at the Pump
WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Edward J. Markey, D-Massachusetts, issued the following news release:
* * *
As Gas Prices Remain High from Trump's War in Iran, Senator Markey Introduces Legislation to Protect Americans from High Costs at the Pump
Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and Environmental and Public Works Committee, today introduced the Gas Money Saved Act, legislation that would require the Department of Transportation (DOT) to examine whether it can strengthen Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards during periods ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Edward J. Markey, D-Massachusetts, issued the following news release: * * * As Gas Prices Remain High from Trump's War in Iran, Senator Markey Introduces Legislation to Protect Americans from High Costs at the Pump Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and Environmental and Public Works Committee, today introduced the Gas Money Saved Act, legislation that would require the Department of Transportation (DOT) to examine whether it can strengthen Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards during periodsof skyrocketing gas prices. The legislation would also reinstate the penalties for automakers that fail to produce fuel-efficient vehicles as options for American drivers, which were removed as part of the giveaways to corporations and the super-rich in the Republicans' Big Ugly Bill in 2025.
This legislation comes as average gas prices are still nearly $4 per gallon, after peaking at $4.50 per gallon due to Trump's illegal war in Iran. In May 2026, gas prices rose at a rate ten times higher than the rate of inflation. Even as Trump and Iran tout a memorandum of understanding to end the war, gas prices are projected to remain high and the Strait of Hormuz-a key point in the global oil supply chain-remains in conflict, harming American families who are already suffering from rising costs throughout the economy.
"Fuel economy standards help American drivers get around without breaking the bank while gas prices are high, but Trump and the Republicans gutted these standards as part of their crusade to put Big Oil above American families," said Senator Markey. "Auto innovation should give consumers better choices, not cut corners at their expense. The Gas Money Saved Act would make sure American drivers have fuel-efficient vehicle options that are cheaper to fill up and hold automakers to account-a cost-saving measure that is especially critical as the Trump Administration would rather spend billions on an illegal war than keep costs low for Americans."
"The Gas Money Saved Act provides a bold response to sky-high gasoline prices: no more flouting the nation's fuel economy laws," said Daniel Greene, Senior Director of Consumer Protection & Product Safety at the National Consumers League. "This vital legislation eliminates a 'get out of jail free card' allowing automakers to evade federal fuel economy standards without repercussions. The bill also directs the federal government to ensure that the maximum feasible fuel economy standards are on the books. Doing so alleviates pain at the pump, protects public health, and strengthens our nation's energy security."
"As people continue to face high gas prices, strong fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light trucks remain a proven tool in our toolbox that can reduce people's costs," said Anne Clement, Senior Legislative Representative at Earthjustice Action. "By requiring the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to review fuel economy standards during times of high gas prices and restoring penalties for automakers that fail to meet the standards, Senator Markey's bill can help save consumers money at the pump while also reducing pollution."
"Last year, Congress offered a blatant giveaway to automakers, removing all penalties for violating fuel efficiency standards that cut gas costs and help keep our air clean," said Steven Higashide, Director, Clean Transportation Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "The Trump administration further weakened fuel-economy rules, piling new costs on consumers. The Gas Money Saved Act, by reinstating and strengthening penalties, holds automakers accountable and puts teeth back into CAFE standards."
"The Sierra Club applauds Senator Markey for his leadership and commitment to clean, affordable transportation at a time of volatile gas prices and increasingly expensive gas-guzzlers. Last year, Congress handed automakers a giveaway by eliminating penalties for violating essential fuel-efficiency standards that save drivers money and reduce harmful pollution. The Trump administration only made matters worse by weakening those standards further and driving up costs for consumers during an affordability crisis. The Gas Money Saved Act helps to deliver what American families need: more efficient vehicles to save on fuel costs and breathe cleaner air," said Katherine Garcia, Director of Sierra Club's Clean Transportation for All Campaign.
CAFE standards mandate that automakers meet average fuel efficiency standards across their car and truck fleet. Throughout their history, these standards have saved drivers money at the pump, lowered our dependence on imported oil, and reduced air pollution for nearly 50 years before Trump's so-called One Big Beautiful Bill took away fines for automakers and rendered these consumer protection standards toothless. Specifically, the Gas Money Saved Act would:
* Require DOT to reevaluate CAFE standards if gas prices rise at a rate five times faster than inflation over a six-month period, and;
* Restore and increase financial penalties on automakers if their car and truck fleet does not meet fuel efficiency standards.
The Gas Money Saved Act is endorsed by National Consumers League (NCL), Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), Earthjustice Action, Sierra Club, and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
In February, Senator Markey and Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07) led 78 lawmakers in a letter to the Administration calling on it to withdraw its proposed rollback of fuel economy standards. Senator Markey has been a fuel economy champion since the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 included fuel economy language co-authored by then-Rep. Markey to push for more protective standards.
***
Original text here: https://www.markey.senate.gov/news/press-releases/as-gas-prices-remain-high-from-trumps-war-in-iran-senator-markey-introduces-legislation-to-protect-americans-from-high-costs-at-the-pump
* * *
As Gas Prices Remain High from Trump's War in Iran, Senator Markey Introduces Legislation to Protect Americans from High Costs at the Pump
Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and Environmental and Public Works Committee, today introduced the Gas Money Saved Act, legislation that would require the Department of Transportation (DOT) to examine whether it can strengthen Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards during periods ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Edward J. Markey, D-Massachusetts, issued the following news release: * * * As Gas Prices Remain High from Trump's War in Iran, Senator Markey Introduces Legislation to Protect Americans from High Costs at the Pump Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), member of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and Environmental and Public Works Committee, today introduced the Gas Money Saved Act, legislation that would require the Department of Transportation (DOT) to examine whether it can strengthen Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards during periodsof skyrocketing gas prices. The legislation would also reinstate the penalties for automakers that fail to produce fuel-efficient vehicles as options for American drivers, which were removed as part of the giveaways to corporations and the super-rich in the Republicans' Big Ugly Bill in 2025.
This legislation comes as average gas prices are still nearly $4 per gallon, after peaking at $4.50 per gallon due to Trump's illegal war in Iran. In May 2026, gas prices rose at a rate ten times higher than the rate of inflation. Even as Trump and Iran tout a memorandum of understanding to end the war, gas prices are projected to remain high and the Strait of Hormuz-a key point in the global oil supply chain-remains in conflict, harming American families who are already suffering from rising costs throughout the economy.
"Fuel economy standards help American drivers get around without breaking the bank while gas prices are high, but Trump and the Republicans gutted these standards as part of their crusade to put Big Oil above American families," said Senator Markey. "Auto innovation should give consumers better choices, not cut corners at their expense. The Gas Money Saved Act would make sure American drivers have fuel-efficient vehicle options that are cheaper to fill up and hold automakers to account-a cost-saving measure that is especially critical as the Trump Administration would rather spend billions on an illegal war than keep costs low for Americans."
"The Gas Money Saved Act provides a bold response to sky-high gasoline prices: no more flouting the nation's fuel economy laws," said Daniel Greene, Senior Director of Consumer Protection & Product Safety at the National Consumers League. "This vital legislation eliminates a 'get out of jail free card' allowing automakers to evade federal fuel economy standards without repercussions. The bill also directs the federal government to ensure that the maximum feasible fuel economy standards are on the books. Doing so alleviates pain at the pump, protects public health, and strengthens our nation's energy security."
"As people continue to face high gas prices, strong fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light trucks remain a proven tool in our toolbox that can reduce people's costs," said Anne Clement, Senior Legislative Representative at Earthjustice Action. "By requiring the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to review fuel economy standards during times of high gas prices and restoring penalties for automakers that fail to meet the standards, Senator Markey's bill can help save consumers money at the pump while also reducing pollution."
"Last year, Congress offered a blatant giveaway to automakers, removing all penalties for violating fuel efficiency standards that cut gas costs and help keep our air clean," said Steven Higashide, Director, Clean Transportation Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "The Trump administration further weakened fuel-economy rules, piling new costs on consumers. The Gas Money Saved Act, by reinstating and strengthening penalties, holds automakers accountable and puts teeth back into CAFE standards."
"The Sierra Club applauds Senator Markey for his leadership and commitment to clean, affordable transportation at a time of volatile gas prices and increasingly expensive gas-guzzlers. Last year, Congress handed automakers a giveaway by eliminating penalties for violating essential fuel-efficiency standards that save drivers money and reduce harmful pollution. The Trump administration only made matters worse by weakening those standards further and driving up costs for consumers during an affordability crisis. The Gas Money Saved Act helps to deliver what American families need: more efficient vehicles to save on fuel costs and breathe cleaner air," said Katherine Garcia, Director of Sierra Club's Clean Transportation for All Campaign.
CAFE standards mandate that automakers meet average fuel efficiency standards across their car and truck fleet. Throughout their history, these standards have saved drivers money at the pump, lowered our dependence on imported oil, and reduced air pollution for nearly 50 years before Trump's so-called One Big Beautiful Bill took away fines for automakers and rendered these consumer protection standards toothless. Specifically, the Gas Money Saved Act would:
* Require DOT to reevaluate CAFE standards if gas prices rise at a rate five times faster than inflation over a six-month period, and;
* Restore and increase financial penalties on automakers if their car and truck fleet does not meet fuel efficiency standards.
The Gas Money Saved Act is endorsed by National Consumers League (NCL), Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), Earthjustice Action, Sierra Club, and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
In February, Senator Markey and Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07) led 78 lawmakers in a letter to the Administration calling on it to withdraw its proposed rollback of fuel economy standards. Senator Markey has been a fuel economy champion since the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 included fuel economy language co-authored by then-Rep. Markey to push for more protective standards.
***
Original text here: https://www.markey.senate.gov/news/press-releases/as-gas-prices-remain-high-from-trumps-war-in-iran-senator-markey-introduces-legislation-to-protect-americans-from-high-costs-at-the-pump
Booker, Pallone, Blumenthal Lead 42 Members in Urging NOAA to Preserve Right Whale Protections While Expanding New Technologies
WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, issued the following news release:
* * *
Booker, Pallone, Blumenthal Lead 42 Members in Urging NOAA to Preserve Right Whale Protections While Expanding New Technologies
U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) led 42 of their colleagues in urging the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to maintain existing vessel speed protections for North Atlantic right whales while continuing to develop and deploy new technologies that can help reduce vessel strike risk.
"We ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, issued the following news release: * * * Booker, Pallone, Blumenthal Lead 42 Members in Urging NOAA to Preserve Right Whale Protections While Expanding New Technologies U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) led 42 of their colleagues in urging the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to maintain existing vessel speed protections for North Atlantic right whales while continuing to develop and deploy new technologies that can help reduce vessel strike risk. "Weappreciate the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) ongoing efforts to prioritize developing additional tools to reduce vessel strike risk, including exploring emerging communication, monitoring, and detection technologies, as outlined in the recent Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. We support continued investment in and testing of these innovative technologies, including public-private partnerships such as cooperative research. Expanding real-time awareness of marine mammals and navigation hazards, improving data integration, and strengthening compliance tools will be important components of a comprehensive, modern approach "to protecting North Atlantic right whales and improving mariner safety at sea," wrote the members.
Their letter comes as NOAA seeks public comment on potential changes to the North Atlantic Right Whale Vessel Speed Rule, including whether technology-based strike avoidance measures could supplement or replace existing seasonal speed restrictions.
Read the full text of the letter here (https://www.booker.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/whale_letter.pdf).
***
Original text here: https://www.booker.senate.gov/news/press/booker-pallone-blumenthal-lead-42-members-in-urging-noaa-to-preserve-right-whale-protections-while-expanding-new-technologies
* * *
Booker, Pallone, Blumenthal Lead 42 Members in Urging NOAA to Preserve Right Whale Protections While Expanding New Technologies
U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) led 42 of their colleagues in urging the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to maintain existing vessel speed protections for North Atlantic right whales while continuing to develop and deploy new technologies that can help reduce vessel strike risk.
"We ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, issued the following news release: * * * Booker, Pallone, Blumenthal Lead 42 Members in Urging NOAA to Preserve Right Whale Protections While Expanding New Technologies U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) led 42 of their colleagues in urging the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to maintain existing vessel speed protections for North Atlantic right whales while continuing to develop and deploy new technologies that can help reduce vessel strike risk. "Weappreciate the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) ongoing efforts to prioritize developing additional tools to reduce vessel strike risk, including exploring emerging communication, monitoring, and detection technologies, as outlined in the recent Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. We support continued investment in and testing of these innovative technologies, including public-private partnerships such as cooperative research. Expanding real-time awareness of marine mammals and navigation hazards, improving data integration, and strengthening compliance tools will be important components of a comprehensive, modern approach "to protecting North Atlantic right whales and improving mariner safety at sea," wrote the members.
Their letter comes as NOAA seeks public comment on potential changes to the North Atlantic Right Whale Vessel Speed Rule, including whether technology-based strike avoidance measures could supplement or replace existing seasonal speed restrictions.
Read the full text of the letter here (https://www.booker.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/whale_letter.pdf).
***
Original text here: https://www.booker.senate.gov/news/press/booker-pallone-blumenthal-lead-42-members-in-urging-noaa-to-preserve-right-whale-protections-while-expanding-new-technologies
Bennet, Lujan, Slotkin, Warnock, Booker, Fetterman Introduce Legislation to Strengthen Support for Specialty Crop Growers
WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Michael F. Bennet, D-Colorado, issued the following news release:
* * *
Bennet, Lujan, Slotkin, Warnock, Booker, Fetterman Introduce Legislation to Strengthen Support for Specialty Crop Growers
*
Denver -Colorado U.S. Senator Michael Bennet joined U.S. Senators Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) to introduce the Cultivating Horticultural Innovation in Local Economies (CHILE) Act, legislation to strengthen federal support for specialty crop growers facing economic losses ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Michael F. Bennet, D-Colorado, issued the following news release: * * * Bennet, Lujan, Slotkin, Warnock, Booker, Fetterman Introduce Legislation to Strengthen Support for Specialty Crop Growers * Denver -Colorado U.S. Senator Michael Bennet joined U.S. Senators Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) to introduce the Cultivating Horticultural Innovation in Local Economies (CHILE) Act, legislation to strengthen federal support for specialty crop growers facing economic lossesand market disruptions.
The CHILE Act builds upon language included in the House-passed Farm Bill that creates a Specialty Crop Emergency Assistance Framework. The legislation would ensure the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) uses that framework when providing direct assistance to specialty crop growers. Currently, specialty crop growers generally do not have a standardized, predictable disaster assistance framework comparable to the support available to other agricultural producers. The CHILE Act would help ensure a consistent process for providing emergency assistance to specialty crop growers during times of economic hardship and uncertainty.
"Colorado specialty crop farmers deserve a reliable and predictable disaster assistance framework, just like other agricultural producers," said Bennet. "Too often, disasters and market disruptions leave specialty crop growers facing significant economic uncertainty. The CHILE Act will help ensure growers have access to the support they need during challenging times, helping family farms remain viable and strengthening Colorado's agricultural economy."
"Specialty crop growers are critical to New Mexico's agricultural economy and to feeding communities across the nation," said Lujan. "When disasters, market disruptions, and other challenges threaten their livelihoods, growers deserve a reliable process for getting the emergency assistance they need. My CHILE Act strengthens support for specialty crop producers by ensuring USDA has and uses a reliable framework to provide timely assistance when specialty crop growers need it most."
"No one does specialty crops like Michigan. We grow everything from cherries, to asparagus, to blueberries, and all are enduring incredible instability," said Slotkin. "The CHILE Act is built around their unique needs and provides billions in direct assistance to help ensure Michigan remains one of the most agriculturally diverse states. Making the federal government work for specialty crop producers is a priority, and this bill is a good step in the right direction."
"Anyone who has ever enjoyed Georgia peaches, blueberries, pecans, or Vidalia onions knows that Georgia's specialty crop producers are so important to our state's agricultural economy and our culture," said Warnock. "The CHILE Act would provide specialty crop producers expanded access to USDA support should disaster strike. I'm proud to work with my colleagues on this legislation."
"Specialty crop farmers are being squeezed from every direction. President Trump canceled the contracts that had local farmers supply food to schools and food banks, while his reckless tariff and trade policies have driven up costs," said Booker. "Despite all of this, the USDA's 'Farmer Bridge Assistance Program' shortchanged specialty crop farmers on their fair share of support and saddled them with a burdensome application process that is ill-suited to how specialty crop farms operate. We need real investment in specialty crop farms, designed to meet farmer needs."
"Pennsylvania farmers help put food on our tables, create local jobs, and keep our agricultural economy moving. Having a framework that allows them to get the direct assistance they need is just one step in safeguarding farmers in times of economic loss," said Fetterman. "I'm proud to support this legislation that would strengthen federal support allowing these specialty crop farmers to have the funding and tools they need to help succeed today and everyday."
Specifically, the CHILE Act would:
1. Require USDA to use the Specialty Crop Emergency Assistance Framework when providing direct assistance to specialty crop growers;
2. Clarify that specialty crops include fruits and vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and nursery crops, including floriculture; and
3. Provide $5 billion in direct assistance to specialty crop producers for fiscal year 2027.
In addition to Bennet, Lujan, Slotkin, Warnock, Booker, and Fetterman, U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) cosponsored this bill.
Bennet has consistently worked to secure resources and support for Colorado's farmers and ranchers. In the ongoing 2026 Farm Bill negotiations, he is fighting for provisions that address the western water crisis, ensure USDA programs work for Colorado and the West, invest in forests and watershed health, address climate change and deploy clean energy, and fight for families and strengthen local and regional food systems.
The text of the bill is available HERE.
***
Original text here: https://www.bennet.senate.gov/2026/06/26/bennet-lujan-slotkin-warnock-booker-fetterman-introduce-legislation-to-strengthen-support-for-specialty-crop-growers/
* * *
Bennet, Lujan, Slotkin, Warnock, Booker, Fetterman Introduce Legislation to Strengthen Support for Specialty Crop Growers
*
Denver -Colorado U.S. Senator Michael Bennet joined U.S. Senators Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) to introduce the Cultivating Horticultural Innovation in Local Economies (CHILE) Act, legislation to strengthen federal support for specialty crop growers facing economic losses ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- Sen. Michael F. Bennet, D-Colorado, issued the following news release: * * * Bennet, Lujan, Slotkin, Warnock, Booker, Fetterman Introduce Legislation to Strengthen Support for Specialty Crop Growers * Denver -Colorado U.S. Senator Michael Bennet joined U.S. Senators Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Reverend Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) to introduce the Cultivating Horticultural Innovation in Local Economies (CHILE) Act, legislation to strengthen federal support for specialty crop growers facing economic lossesand market disruptions.
The CHILE Act builds upon language included in the House-passed Farm Bill that creates a Specialty Crop Emergency Assistance Framework. The legislation would ensure the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) uses that framework when providing direct assistance to specialty crop growers. Currently, specialty crop growers generally do not have a standardized, predictable disaster assistance framework comparable to the support available to other agricultural producers. The CHILE Act would help ensure a consistent process for providing emergency assistance to specialty crop growers during times of economic hardship and uncertainty.
"Colorado specialty crop farmers deserve a reliable and predictable disaster assistance framework, just like other agricultural producers," said Bennet. "Too often, disasters and market disruptions leave specialty crop growers facing significant economic uncertainty. The CHILE Act will help ensure growers have access to the support they need during challenging times, helping family farms remain viable and strengthening Colorado's agricultural economy."
"Specialty crop growers are critical to New Mexico's agricultural economy and to feeding communities across the nation," said Lujan. "When disasters, market disruptions, and other challenges threaten their livelihoods, growers deserve a reliable process for getting the emergency assistance they need. My CHILE Act strengthens support for specialty crop producers by ensuring USDA has and uses a reliable framework to provide timely assistance when specialty crop growers need it most."
"No one does specialty crops like Michigan. We grow everything from cherries, to asparagus, to blueberries, and all are enduring incredible instability," said Slotkin. "The CHILE Act is built around their unique needs and provides billions in direct assistance to help ensure Michigan remains one of the most agriculturally diverse states. Making the federal government work for specialty crop producers is a priority, and this bill is a good step in the right direction."
"Anyone who has ever enjoyed Georgia peaches, blueberries, pecans, or Vidalia onions knows that Georgia's specialty crop producers are so important to our state's agricultural economy and our culture," said Warnock. "The CHILE Act would provide specialty crop producers expanded access to USDA support should disaster strike. I'm proud to work with my colleagues on this legislation."
"Specialty crop farmers are being squeezed from every direction. President Trump canceled the contracts that had local farmers supply food to schools and food banks, while his reckless tariff and trade policies have driven up costs," said Booker. "Despite all of this, the USDA's 'Farmer Bridge Assistance Program' shortchanged specialty crop farmers on their fair share of support and saddled them with a burdensome application process that is ill-suited to how specialty crop farms operate. We need real investment in specialty crop farms, designed to meet farmer needs."
"Pennsylvania farmers help put food on our tables, create local jobs, and keep our agricultural economy moving. Having a framework that allows them to get the direct assistance they need is just one step in safeguarding farmers in times of economic loss," said Fetterman. "I'm proud to support this legislation that would strengthen federal support allowing these specialty crop farmers to have the funding and tools they need to help succeed today and everyday."
Specifically, the CHILE Act would:
1. Require USDA to use the Specialty Crop Emergency Assistance Framework when providing direct assistance to specialty crop growers;
2. Clarify that specialty crops include fruits and vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and nursery crops, including floriculture; and
3. Provide $5 billion in direct assistance to specialty crop producers for fiscal year 2027.
In addition to Bennet, Lujan, Slotkin, Warnock, Booker, and Fetterman, U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) cosponsored this bill.
Bennet has consistently worked to secure resources and support for Colorado's farmers and ranchers. In the ongoing 2026 Farm Bill negotiations, he is fighting for provisions that address the western water crisis, ensure USDA programs work for Colorado and the West, invest in forests and watershed health, address climate change and deploy clean energy, and fight for families and strengthen local and regional food systems.
The text of the bill is available HERE.
***
Original text here: https://www.bennet.senate.gov/2026/06/26/bennet-lujan-slotkin-warnock-booker-fetterman-introduce-legislation-to-strengthen-support-for-specialty-crop-growers/
AI Now Co-Executive Director West Testifies Before Senate Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs Committee
WASHINGTON, June 26 -- The Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee released the following testimony by AI Now Co-Executive Director Sarah Myers West from a June 11, 2026, hearing entitled "AI and the American Dream: Promoting Innovation, Affordability, and American Dominance":
* * *
Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Warren, and esteemed Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify on this important set of issues. My name is Dr. Sarah Myers West, and I along with my colleague Amba Kak lead the AI Now Institute, a policy research institute founded in 2017 to study artificial ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- The Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee released the following testimony by AI Now Co-Executive Director Sarah Myers West from a June 11, 2026, hearing entitled "AI and the American Dream: Promoting Innovation, Affordability, and American Dominance": * * * Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Warren, and esteemed Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify on this important set of issues. My name is Dr. Sarah Myers West, and I along with my colleague Amba Kak lead the AI Now Institute, a policy research institute founded in 2017 to study artificialintelligence technologies. I hold doctoral and master's degrees from the Annenberg School at the University of Southern California, where I studied the political economy of the technology industry. I previously served as a Senior Advisor on Artificial Intelligence at the Federal Trade Commission, where my role focused on the effects of AI and other automated technologies emanating across the broader economy.
There is a tremendous amount of hope articulated in the vision for AI: that it has transformative potential that could lift our economy and improve the quality of life for all of us. Equally, there's a tremendous amount of pessimism within the broader public about what this technology is actually doing in the world, and what it means for their lives and livelihoods. This divide can be attributed to the skewed market incentives that have shaped the development of AI within the corporate labs that now dominate the scene. These incentives are leading to concentrated risk in the economy that could enact tremendous amount of damage to our national and economic
security - whether or not the "AI bubble" bursts. These harms, many of which are already here, could occur especially if things go exactly as the industry intends: we are in a race to the bottom, where the American people absorb all of the downside risks; higher prices, job loss and devaluation; and economic instability.
It's important to situate this in the longer trajectory of artificial intelligence. AI is a field with an almost seventy year history; the term 'AI' has been used to refer to an array of technological capabilities over time. The field and industry driving AI development has been shaped by laws and policies that have, among other outcomes, functioned to concentrate control over the industry in the hands of a small group of Silicon Valley firms.1
I've watched as over the past decade, the impact of AI on the economy at large has largely served to harm, rather than benefit, American workers, consumers, and small businesses - increasing the surveillance and control exerted over their lives, ratcheting up inequality2 and eliminating agency and dignity in their lives.
My message to this Committee is that this does not need to define our technological future: we can put the needs of the public back at the center of the AI economy. Congress has an obligation to intervene before an economic crisis occurs, starting by alleviating the burden already felt on people's pocketbooks, exercising Congressional oversight over AI firms and stopping a bailout of the industry that is arguably already underway.
There are three core areas of concern that I urge this Committee to consider as urgent priorities for intervention:
First, the nature of AI infrastructure investment is increasingly risky and capital intensive.
Growing reliance on complex and opaque financial instruments needs stronger oversight from financial regulators and Congress before the wider economy faces deepened risk.
For years, AI infrastructure investment was largely funded by the revenues of Big Tech firms, emanating from an interest in maintaining their dominant position in the cloud infrastructure market.3 But as AI developers arrived on very large scale AI as their primary focus for development, and thus the need to build more data center infrastructures to train and run inference on these large scale AI models, the industry began to take on debt to finance the astronomical capital expenditures.4 This was a strategic choice shaped by a high degree of concentration in the market and a perceived race between the leading firms to build very powerful artificial general intelligence models. It's become a race to the bottom, one in which these firms have exhibited an extraordinary willingness to court risk that is borne not only by the firms themselves, but by the wider economy and the public.
The justification AI firms offer is that the pursuit of artificial general intelligence will enable solutions to entrenched social problems ranging from curing cancer5 to solving the problem of climate change.6 Setting aside that the industry proffers privatized, AI-shaped solutions to these challenges, the primary constraint they assert is the infrastructure needed to bring AGI into being. This ignores, however, that as the pace of AI expenditures reaches new heights, capital is being pulled away from other potentially productive sectors of the economy, with the turn to credit within the AI sector potentially producing a 'crowding out' effect for other forms of investment and research.7 This could have broad-based impact: capital-intensive industries like manufacturing would feel this pressure acutely at a moment where these industries are already contending with the impact of tariffs.8 Small businesses are already downshifting their plans for capital expenditures.9 Moreover, the flood of capital to AI may undermine the horizon for future innovation as the market places a singular bet on AI.
To paint a picture of just how substantial these expenditures have grown: In the first quarter of 2026, Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft reported spending $130.65 billion in capital expenditures for data centers--71 percent higher than what they spent during the same quarter of 2025./10 These four companies anticipate spending approximately $700 billion this year.11 Morgan Stanley analysts project that combined, Big Tech companies will spend nearly $3 trillion through 2028, but only generate half of that amount in cash.12
To finance this buildout, tech companies are taking on an increased amount of debt: in 2025, big tech firms issued $121 billion in new debt,13 but this number is anticipated to balloon in the years to come: Morgan Stanley is estimating debt issuance will top $500 billion this year.14 Some of this debt is structured through standard corporate bonds. But a growing share is being supplied by increasingly complex, risky, and opaque financial arrangements. Private equity firms are key conduits for the vast amounts of capital going into data centers. In 2025, private equity investment into data center transactions/deals reached $45 billion.15 Private credit firms also make up a growing share of the supply of debt for data center financing.16 This May, the Financial Stability Board warned private credit carries particular vulnerabilities for the broader economy, notably due to a lack of transparency and willingness to engage with borrowers that have lower credit quality and higher leverage.17 Many data center financing arrangements rely on distinct legal entities known as special-purpose vehicles (SPVs) to fund and execute deals. These deals are "off-balance sheet," meaning that the deal--and any debt the SPV has raised--is not listed on Big Tech firms' balance sheets, thus masking a clear picture of a company's true financial health, let alone the risk to the financial system as a whole.18
Over the last year we've seen the emergence of circular spending deals, where AI companies invest in and buy from one another--creating skewed market incentives and distorting decision-making.19
Increasingly these deals hinge on the projected future revenues of just a handful of AI developers, and if those fail to transpire to the tune needed to justify capital expenditures, the house of cards could come falling down.
When only a handful of buyers account for such a large share of the overall market, circular spending deals can drive cascading negative effects in a future market downturn.20 For example, OpenAI is on the hook for over a trillion in deals with other AI firms and chipmakers,21 including a $300 billion deal with Oracle for its compute infrastructure,22 $250 billion with Microsoft for its Azure infrastructure (which includes Microsoft's 26% return ownership share of OpenAI);23 $38 billion to rent access to Amazon Web Services servers, (a deal which could expand under a revised structure),24 $22 billion with CoreWeave for use of its data centers,25 a deal with Google Cloud,26 a "strategic partnership" to deploy 10 gigawatts of AI data centers with Nvidia (in return for Nvidia's $100 billion investment into OpenAI),27 a multi-billion dollar chip deal with AMD (a deal that enables OpenAI to take a 10% ownership stake in AMD),28 and a partnership with Broadcom to develop and deploy chips that OpenAI would design.29 This compounding set of bets assumes that OpenAI's revenue will substantiate its asserted demand, ignoring that if it fails to do so, it will also fail to fulfill its contractual obligations to these companies, many of which also have similar arrangements with each other. This scenario is prompting an increasing number of investors to turn to credit default swaps to hedge the downside risks associated with AI investments, a move that echoes the use of CDS to hedge against the risks of mortgage-backed securities in the lead-up to the housing crisis.30
The revenue needed for the industry to break even is becoming astronomical: a widely cited study from Bain estimates that $2 trillion in new revenue is needed by 2030 to fund the current AI scaling trend.31 Today, while revenues are quickly growing for AI firms, these are under conditions in which the cost of AI models is already subsidized. However, early indicators suggest there are concerns among major customers that they are not seeing sufficient return on investment to justify the amount they are spending even under current subsidies. And it's far from clear that a rising tide would lift all boats; a recent report from Bridgewater Associates found that a material part of the estimated GDP boost from AI would come from the profits of Nvidia and other chipmakers who capture the value without recycling it back into the broader economy.32
Last month, after burning through its entire 2026 AI budget in only four months, Uber's COO asserted the costs of AI were getting harder to justify because they were not translating into useful customer features.33 And Uber is not alone: a June 2026 Bain study found that nearly 40% of companies said their cost reductions from AI were significantly less than expected.34 More troubling, 44% of companies based their next wave of AI investments on previous rounds of savings--savings that have consistently come in below expectations.35 As the study put it, "self-funding the next wave from past returns sounds like discipline. In reality, it is a circular bet with a structural leak."36 Scaling revenue may be further challenged by delays in data center construction: recent reporting in the Financial Times found that 40% of data centers planned for 2026 are delayed, further increasing financial risk at the level of individual firm bets.37 The effects of an AI bubble would be acutely felt by the American people.
An AI bubble burst could wipe out over $20 trillion in American household wealth, three trillion more than the financial crisis.38 This is because the economy at large is already significantly exposed to AI risk across several vectors, ranging from stock market exposure to access to credit to job loss.39
For the roughly 60% of Americans who now hold stock, the fate of the Magnificent Seven stocks, which make up about a third of the market, will be felt more acutely than in prior financial crises.40 These market effects show up in index funds, in people's retirement portfolios, and their pensions. A recent Department of Labor proposal to open up 401ks to private equity, private credit and crypto assets would deepen this exposure and act, as AFR's Oscar Valdes Viera wrote, "a regulatory bailout hiding in plain sight and it would be a transfer of wealth from workers' retirement accounts to backstop funds and structures that are under pressure and hungry for new capital for their poorly performing assets."41
The deflation of stock portfolios can fuel a vicious cycle by affecting consumer spending, with effects felt across the broader economy, and it wouldn't take much to trigger it: even a modest decline in stock prices have produced an outsized drag on consumption: a hypothetical AI-driven selloff that erases $1 trillion in market value could translate into roughly $35 billion in reduced consumer spending, a significant shock to the broader economy.42
Banks are exposed to private credit and other nonbank financial institutions in ways that are largely opaque, and that combination of opacity and exposure to risk could pose particular dangers. Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman recently warned that the withdrawal of private credit funding sources could pose a channel for the transmission of risk in the financial system.43
But the impact doesn't stop there: a major source of capital for private credit firms comes from working people. Private credit companies deploy capital that comes from 401(k) accounts, life insurance plans, and pensions; they've made a casino of American workers' financial security.
For example, both New York and Pennsylvania's state pension plans are invested in Blue Owl's $7 billion digital infrastructure fund, which in turn has loaned out money to finance data centers for Meta in Richland Parish, Louisiana.44
If Meta fails to post revenues that justify its planned $125 billion in spending for 2026--a move that led to a 6% decline in its stock attributed to investor anxiety45--the effects will be felt across the country.
We don't have to wait for a financial collapse to see these effects of AI play out across the economy.
Everyday Americans are already struggling with an environment of generalized inflation, in which the cost of essential goods and services is rising much faster than income levels.46 A growing consensus suggests that AI is a contributing factor, driving up prices.47 At least part of this story is directly tied to AI in the utilities sector, where wholesale electricity prices for households near data centers have increased by as much as 267% over the last five years.48 Working class Americans are particularly exposed to an AI-driven market downturn, because the effects they're already feeling could be deepened even further if wealthier Americans reduce their consumption. And there are indicators that the anticipation of AI's effects on the lives and livelihoods of white collar workers is already influencing a consumer demand, due to a fear of job loss and generalized environment of higher prices.49 This could be compounded by incentives for firms to attribute AI as the justification for layoffs, or for paying workers less, because it enables them to narrate retrenchment as a product of technological investment. In 2025, we already saw 55,000 layoffs attributed to AI, which amounts to about 5% of job losses that year.50
Importantly, many of these factors will remain true even in a scenario where there is no bubble burst: the vision for success in AI hinges on the significant displacement and devaluation of jobs across the economy, and because in real time people are making decisions based on future projections of what AI will look like, rather than what it is today.
For this reason, Congress shouldn't wait until an economic crisis is at hand to take steps to manage AI's destabilizing effect on the economy. These effects take multiple forms: a perpetual transfer of wealth from the public to AI firms, resource misallocation that may depress the economy, devaluation and dislocation in the job market, and rising prices that serve to depress consumer demand.
Congress must stop the bailout of the AI sector already underway.
As a first step, Congress should use its oversight authority to investigate the significant measures recently taken by the federal government to derisk the portfolio of AI firms.51
In November of 2025, OpenAI CFO Sarah Friar called for a government backstop for AI investment--a taxpayer funded guarantee that would allow companies like hers to continue their unprecedented spending on data centers and other AI investments.52 She was met with vocal backlash and CEO Sam Altman distanced himself from the assertion. But, in many ways, these firms are quietly getting what they asked for.53
The subsidies that AI firms have received are extraordinary, ranging from federal backing of a $1 billion loan to bring the Three Mile Island nuclear plant back online to power Microsoft's A.I. data centers,54 to offering up $1 billion in AI funding through the Big Beautiful Bill,55 to allocating federal lands for data center construction,56 outlining new 'private public partnerships' at national laboratories that house treasure troves of genomic data that can be leveraged for commercial use,57 to its Export AI initiative, which leverages the apparatus of the federal government in support of deal-brokering on behalf of AI firms.58
Looking at the evidence, a bailout of the AI sector has arguably already begun, before Congress has meaningfully acted to protect the public and the economy from the risks introduced by the industry. The public is already aware of the risks that they're being asked to assume, and this is fueling the generalized antipathy they're expressing toward AI. If the end goal is to promote American innovation and to build an economy that works for everyone, Congress must act. It can start by focusing on measures that alleviate the economic burdens already being felt by the public, shedding light on AI industry financing structures through use of its oversight authorities, and most importantly, by committing to stop the bailout before it deepens any further.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/west_testimony_6-11-26.pdf
* * *
Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Warren, and esteemed Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify on this important set of issues. My name is Dr. Sarah Myers West, and I along with my colleague Amba Kak lead the AI Now Institute, a policy research institute founded in 2017 to study artificial ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 26 -- The Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee released the following testimony by AI Now Co-Executive Director Sarah Myers West from a June 11, 2026, hearing entitled "AI and the American Dream: Promoting Innovation, Affordability, and American Dominance": * * * Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Warren, and esteemed Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify on this important set of issues. My name is Dr. Sarah Myers West, and I along with my colleague Amba Kak lead the AI Now Institute, a policy research institute founded in 2017 to study artificialintelligence technologies. I hold doctoral and master's degrees from the Annenberg School at the University of Southern California, where I studied the political economy of the technology industry. I previously served as a Senior Advisor on Artificial Intelligence at the Federal Trade Commission, where my role focused on the effects of AI and other automated technologies emanating across the broader economy.
There is a tremendous amount of hope articulated in the vision for AI: that it has transformative potential that could lift our economy and improve the quality of life for all of us. Equally, there's a tremendous amount of pessimism within the broader public about what this technology is actually doing in the world, and what it means for their lives and livelihoods. This divide can be attributed to the skewed market incentives that have shaped the development of AI within the corporate labs that now dominate the scene. These incentives are leading to concentrated risk in the economy that could enact tremendous amount of damage to our national and economic
security - whether or not the "AI bubble" bursts. These harms, many of which are already here, could occur especially if things go exactly as the industry intends: we are in a race to the bottom, where the American people absorb all of the downside risks; higher prices, job loss and devaluation; and economic instability.
It's important to situate this in the longer trajectory of artificial intelligence. AI is a field with an almost seventy year history; the term 'AI' has been used to refer to an array of technological capabilities over time. The field and industry driving AI development has been shaped by laws and policies that have, among other outcomes, functioned to concentrate control over the industry in the hands of a small group of Silicon Valley firms.1
I've watched as over the past decade, the impact of AI on the economy at large has largely served to harm, rather than benefit, American workers, consumers, and small businesses - increasing the surveillance and control exerted over their lives, ratcheting up inequality2 and eliminating agency and dignity in their lives.
My message to this Committee is that this does not need to define our technological future: we can put the needs of the public back at the center of the AI economy. Congress has an obligation to intervene before an economic crisis occurs, starting by alleviating the burden already felt on people's pocketbooks, exercising Congressional oversight over AI firms and stopping a bailout of the industry that is arguably already underway.
There are three core areas of concern that I urge this Committee to consider as urgent priorities for intervention:
First, the nature of AI infrastructure investment is increasingly risky and capital intensive.
Growing reliance on complex and opaque financial instruments needs stronger oversight from financial regulators and Congress before the wider economy faces deepened risk.
For years, AI infrastructure investment was largely funded by the revenues of Big Tech firms, emanating from an interest in maintaining their dominant position in the cloud infrastructure market.3 But as AI developers arrived on very large scale AI as their primary focus for development, and thus the need to build more data center infrastructures to train and run inference on these large scale AI models, the industry began to take on debt to finance the astronomical capital expenditures.4 This was a strategic choice shaped by a high degree of concentration in the market and a perceived race between the leading firms to build very powerful artificial general intelligence models. It's become a race to the bottom, one in which these firms have exhibited an extraordinary willingness to court risk that is borne not only by the firms themselves, but by the wider economy and the public.
The justification AI firms offer is that the pursuit of artificial general intelligence will enable solutions to entrenched social problems ranging from curing cancer5 to solving the problem of climate change.6 Setting aside that the industry proffers privatized, AI-shaped solutions to these challenges, the primary constraint they assert is the infrastructure needed to bring AGI into being. This ignores, however, that as the pace of AI expenditures reaches new heights, capital is being pulled away from other potentially productive sectors of the economy, with the turn to credit within the AI sector potentially producing a 'crowding out' effect for other forms of investment and research.7 This could have broad-based impact: capital-intensive industries like manufacturing would feel this pressure acutely at a moment where these industries are already contending with the impact of tariffs.8 Small businesses are already downshifting their plans for capital expenditures.9 Moreover, the flood of capital to AI may undermine the horizon for future innovation as the market places a singular bet on AI.
To paint a picture of just how substantial these expenditures have grown: In the first quarter of 2026, Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft reported spending $130.65 billion in capital expenditures for data centers--71 percent higher than what they spent during the same quarter of 2025./10 These four companies anticipate spending approximately $700 billion this year.11 Morgan Stanley analysts project that combined, Big Tech companies will spend nearly $3 trillion through 2028, but only generate half of that amount in cash.12
To finance this buildout, tech companies are taking on an increased amount of debt: in 2025, big tech firms issued $121 billion in new debt,13 but this number is anticipated to balloon in the years to come: Morgan Stanley is estimating debt issuance will top $500 billion this year.14 Some of this debt is structured through standard corporate bonds. But a growing share is being supplied by increasingly complex, risky, and opaque financial arrangements. Private equity firms are key conduits for the vast amounts of capital going into data centers. In 2025, private equity investment into data center transactions/deals reached $45 billion.15 Private credit firms also make up a growing share of the supply of debt for data center financing.16 This May, the Financial Stability Board warned private credit carries particular vulnerabilities for the broader economy, notably due to a lack of transparency and willingness to engage with borrowers that have lower credit quality and higher leverage.17 Many data center financing arrangements rely on distinct legal entities known as special-purpose vehicles (SPVs) to fund and execute deals. These deals are "off-balance sheet," meaning that the deal--and any debt the SPV has raised--is not listed on Big Tech firms' balance sheets, thus masking a clear picture of a company's true financial health, let alone the risk to the financial system as a whole.18
Over the last year we've seen the emergence of circular spending deals, where AI companies invest in and buy from one another--creating skewed market incentives and distorting decision-making.19
Increasingly these deals hinge on the projected future revenues of just a handful of AI developers, and if those fail to transpire to the tune needed to justify capital expenditures, the house of cards could come falling down.
When only a handful of buyers account for such a large share of the overall market, circular spending deals can drive cascading negative effects in a future market downturn.20 For example, OpenAI is on the hook for over a trillion in deals with other AI firms and chipmakers,21 including a $300 billion deal with Oracle for its compute infrastructure,22 $250 billion with Microsoft for its Azure infrastructure (which includes Microsoft's 26% return ownership share of OpenAI);23 $38 billion to rent access to Amazon Web Services servers, (a deal which could expand under a revised structure),24 $22 billion with CoreWeave for use of its data centers,25 a deal with Google Cloud,26 a "strategic partnership" to deploy 10 gigawatts of AI data centers with Nvidia (in return for Nvidia's $100 billion investment into OpenAI),27 a multi-billion dollar chip deal with AMD (a deal that enables OpenAI to take a 10% ownership stake in AMD),28 and a partnership with Broadcom to develop and deploy chips that OpenAI would design.29 This compounding set of bets assumes that OpenAI's revenue will substantiate its asserted demand, ignoring that if it fails to do so, it will also fail to fulfill its contractual obligations to these companies, many of which also have similar arrangements with each other. This scenario is prompting an increasing number of investors to turn to credit default swaps to hedge the downside risks associated with AI investments, a move that echoes the use of CDS to hedge against the risks of mortgage-backed securities in the lead-up to the housing crisis.30
The revenue needed for the industry to break even is becoming astronomical: a widely cited study from Bain estimates that $2 trillion in new revenue is needed by 2030 to fund the current AI scaling trend.31 Today, while revenues are quickly growing for AI firms, these are under conditions in which the cost of AI models is already subsidized. However, early indicators suggest there are concerns among major customers that they are not seeing sufficient return on investment to justify the amount they are spending even under current subsidies. And it's far from clear that a rising tide would lift all boats; a recent report from Bridgewater Associates found that a material part of the estimated GDP boost from AI would come from the profits of Nvidia and other chipmakers who capture the value without recycling it back into the broader economy.32
Last month, after burning through its entire 2026 AI budget in only four months, Uber's COO asserted the costs of AI were getting harder to justify because they were not translating into useful customer features.33 And Uber is not alone: a June 2026 Bain study found that nearly 40% of companies said their cost reductions from AI were significantly less than expected.34 More troubling, 44% of companies based their next wave of AI investments on previous rounds of savings--savings that have consistently come in below expectations.35 As the study put it, "self-funding the next wave from past returns sounds like discipline. In reality, it is a circular bet with a structural leak."36 Scaling revenue may be further challenged by delays in data center construction: recent reporting in the Financial Times found that 40% of data centers planned for 2026 are delayed, further increasing financial risk at the level of individual firm bets.37 The effects of an AI bubble would be acutely felt by the American people.
An AI bubble burst could wipe out over $20 trillion in American household wealth, three trillion more than the financial crisis.38 This is because the economy at large is already significantly exposed to AI risk across several vectors, ranging from stock market exposure to access to credit to job loss.39
For the roughly 60% of Americans who now hold stock, the fate of the Magnificent Seven stocks, which make up about a third of the market, will be felt more acutely than in prior financial crises.40 These market effects show up in index funds, in people's retirement portfolios, and their pensions. A recent Department of Labor proposal to open up 401ks to private equity, private credit and crypto assets would deepen this exposure and act, as AFR's Oscar Valdes Viera wrote, "a regulatory bailout hiding in plain sight and it would be a transfer of wealth from workers' retirement accounts to backstop funds and structures that are under pressure and hungry for new capital for their poorly performing assets."41
The deflation of stock portfolios can fuel a vicious cycle by affecting consumer spending, with effects felt across the broader economy, and it wouldn't take much to trigger it: even a modest decline in stock prices have produced an outsized drag on consumption: a hypothetical AI-driven selloff that erases $1 trillion in market value could translate into roughly $35 billion in reduced consumer spending, a significant shock to the broader economy.42
Banks are exposed to private credit and other nonbank financial institutions in ways that are largely opaque, and that combination of opacity and exposure to risk could pose particular dangers. Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman recently warned that the withdrawal of private credit funding sources could pose a channel for the transmission of risk in the financial system.43
But the impact doesn't stop there: a major source of capital for private credit firms comes from working people. Private credit companies deploy capital that comes from 401(k) accounts, life insurance plans, and pensions; they've made a casino of American workers' financial security.
For example, both New York and Pennsylvania's state pension plans are invested in Blue Owl's $7 billion digital infrastructure fund, which in turn has loaned out money to finance data centers for Meta in Richland Parish, Louisiana.44
If Meta fails to post revenues that justify its planned $125 billion in spending for 2026--a move that led to a 6% decline in its stock attributed to investor anxiety45--the effects will be felt across the country.
We don't have to wait for a financial collapse to see these effects of AI play out across the economy.
Everyday Americans are already struggling with an environment of generalized inflation, in which the cost of essential goods and services is rising much faster than income levels.46 A growing consensus suggests that AI is a contributing factor, driving up prices.47 At least part of this story is directly tied to AI in the utilities sector, where wholesale electricity prices for households near data centers have increased by as much as 267% over the last five years.48 Working class Americans are particularly exposed to an AI-driven market downturn, because the effects they're already feeling could be deepened even further if wealthier Americans reduce their consumption. And there are indicators that the anticipation of AI's effects on the lives and livelihoods of white collar workers is already influencing a consumer demand, due to a fear of job loss and generalized environment of higher prices.49 This could be compounded by incentives for firms to attribute AI as the justification for layoffs, or for paying workers less, because it enables them to narrate retrenchment as a product of technological investment. In 2025, we already saw 55,000 layoffs attributed to AI, which amounts to about 5% of job losses that year.50
Importantly, many of these factors will remain true even in a scenario where there is no bubble burst: the vision for success in AI hinges on the significant displacement and devaluation of jobs across the economy, and because in real time people are making decisions based on future projections of what AI will look like, rather than what it is today.
For this reason, Congress shouldn't wait until an economic crisis is at hand to take steps to manage AI's destabilizing effect on the economy. These effects take multiple forms: a perpetual transfer of wealth from the public to AI firms, resource misallocation that may depress the economy, devaluation and dislocation in the job market, and rising prices that serve to depress consumer demand.
Congress must stop the bailout of the AI sector already underway.
As a first step, Congress should use its oversight authority to investigate the significant measures recently taken by the federal government to derisk the portfolio of AI firms.51
In November of 2025, OpenAI CFO Sarah Friar called for a government backstop for AI investment--a taxpayer funded guarantee that would allow companies like hers to continue their unprecedented spending on data centers and other AI investments.52 She was met with vocal backlash and CEO Sam Altman distanced himself from the assertion. But, in many ways, these firms are quietly getting what they asked for.53
The subsidies that AI firms have received are extraordinary, ranging from federal backing of a $1 billion loan to bring the Three Mile Island nuclear plant back online to power Microsoft's A.I. data centers,54 to offering up $1 billion in AI funding through the Big Beautiful Bill,55 to allocating federal lands for data center construction,56 outlining new 'private public partnerships' at national laboratories that house treasure troves of genomic data that can be leveraged for commercial use,57 to its Export AI initiative, which leverages the apparatus of the federal government in support of deal-brokering on behalf of AI firms.58
Looking at the evidence, a bailout of the AI sector has arguably already begun, before Congress has meaningfully acted to protect the public and the economy from the risks introduced by the industry. The public is already aware of the risks that they're being asked to assume, and this is fueling the generalized antipathy they're expressing toward AI. If the end goal is to promote American innovation and to build an economy that works for everyone, Congress must act. It can start by focusing on measures that alleviate the economic burdens already being felt by the public, shedding light on AI industry financing structures through use of its oversight authorities, and most importantly, by committing to stop the bailout before it deepens any further.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/west_testimony_6-11-26.pdf