Congressional Testimony
Here's a look at documents involving congressional testimony and member statements
Congressional Testimony
Featured Stories
Jergens Inc. President Schron Testifies Before Senate Small Business & Entrepreneurship Committee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Jack Schron Jr., president of Jergens Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers":
* * *
Good afternoon. Thank you for allowing me to testify today on this very important subject, the Benefits Cliff.
My name is Jack Schron, I am president of Jergens incorporated, located in Cleveland OH. Jergens is an 84-year-old manufacturing company of which I represent the third generation of the ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Jack Schron Jr., president of Jergens Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers": * * * Good afternoon. Thank you for allowing me to testify today on this very important subject, the Benefits Cliff. My name is Jack Schron, I am president of Jergens incorporated, located in Cleveland OH. Jergens is an 84-year-old manufacturing company of which I represent the third generation of thebusiness. We manufacture workholding parts used in various industries to include aerospace, defense, entertainment and we also manufacture a precise electronic screwdriver.
The universal problem faced by most manufacturers today is the skills labor shortage.
Jergens is facing this same problem. We cannot find the trained and experienced workforce. The alternative is to hire people with low or no skills and train them. Because of the lack of a skills in the workforce, manufacturing businesses start the new teammates at a lower base salary during the training period. It is our desire at Jergens to accelerate the pay as quickly as the new teammate can learn.
This is where the benefit cliff can have an impact on the individual. As the individual learns and their pay increases through incremental steps, their public social benefits can be put in jeopardy. We can see if their health care benefits cross over because employees elect with Human Resources to change to our attractive health insurance. However, Human Resources is not aware if benefits like Snap and Child Care are impacted as an individual increases in pay unless they happen to mention it. We do know that some employees have said to HR they wanted to examine the pay increase to see how it might impact them.
Jergens encourages growth and pushes to increase pay based on skills learned so people know when joining Jergens they are entering career. We want to eliminate someone from being put in a position of electing growth and pay increases vs. social benefit it would seem that a better approach would be that as pays transitions upward that social benefits should transition downward on a similar pattern vs. a cliff. As skills are learned the pay does not go straight up it goes up in steps. For the individual it would seem benefits should follow that same step concept and not be a cliff drop off just because of a pay increase of an extra $.50 or $1.00 an hour.
In Ohio someone is actually better off being paid $15/hour and receiving their full SNAP and child care support than being paid $18/hour when the Cliff has its worst impact. This problem continues in Ohio up till $22 when earning $15/hour still yields a slightly better position.
Focusing now not on the Benefits Cliff but looking at the bigger societal picture, it would seem it better transitioning from receiving Social Benefits allowing a person to someday stand on their own. This transition means that the individual now takes pride in themselves and is engaged in their community. Whatever we can do to make this transition from dependent on Social Benefits to having a tax paying job should be encouraged.
At Jergens we have seen a similar result as we have led a program for second chance individuals to enter the manufacturing workforce following their return to society.
The self-worth the 500 people now working in manufacturing has resulted in a recidivism rate of less than 1%. There are similarities of self-worth that the individual sees when their pay going up in incremental steps is powerful. Like our changes with second chance in manufacturing so too should be change from a cliff program to transitioning social benefits and someday people will be fully able to support themselves without this benefit. The individual and their family wins, the community wins, the business community wins and society would win if Social Benefits would change from a Cliff formulary to a transitional method with this change.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sbc.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/6/4/64d548bd-001c-4a46-b725-fa1f8d4189f3/632142EE66351B9EF4ECDEFD93866D600164B0A4527BB6094617FEF778720D4A.schron-jr.-testimony.pdf
* * *
Good afternoon. Thank you for allowing me to testify today on this very important subject, the Benefits Cliff.
My name is Jack Schron, I am president of Jergens incorporated, located in Cleveland OH. Jergens is an 84-year-old manufacturing company of which I represent the third generation of the ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Jack Schron Jr., president of Jergens Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers": * * * Good afternoon. Thank you for allowing me to testify today on this very important subject, the Benefits Cliff. My name is Jack Schron, I am president of Jergens incorporated, located in Cleveland OH. Jergens is an 84-year-old manufacturing company of which I represent the third generation of thebusiness. We manufacture workholding parts used in various industries to include aerospace, defense, entertainment and we also manufacture a precise electronic screwdriver.
The universal problem faced by most manufacturers today is the skills labor shortage.
Jergens is facing this same problem. We cannot find the trained and experienced workforce. The alternative is to hire people with low or no skills and train them. Because of the lack of a skills in the workforce, manufacturing businesses start the new teammates at a lower base salary during the training period. It is our desire at Jergens to accelerate the pay as quickly as the new teammate can learn.
This is where the benefit cliff can have an impact on the individual. As the individual learns and their pay increases through incremental steps, their public social benefits can be put in jeopardy. We can see if their health care benefits cross over because employees elect with Human Resources to change to our attractive health insurance. However, Human Resources is not aware if benefits like Snap and Child Care are impacted as an individual increases in pay unless they happen to mention it. We do know that some employees have said to HR they wanted to examine the pay increase to see how it might impact them.
Jergens encourages growth and pushes to increase pay based on skills learned so people know when joining Jergens they are entering career. We want to eliminate someone from being put in a position of electing growth and pay increases vs. social benefit it would seem that a better approach would be that as pays transitions upward that social benefits should transition downward on a similar pattern vs. a cliff. As skills are learned the pay does not go straight up it goes up in steps. For the individual it would seem benefits should follow that same step concept and not be a cliff drop off just because of a pay increase of an extra $.50 or $1.00 an hour.
In Ohio someone is actually better off being paid $15/hour and receiving their full SNAP and child care support than being paid $18/hour when the Cliff has its worst impact. This problem continues in Ohio up till $22 when earning $15/hour still yields a slightly better position.
Focusing now not on the Benefits Cliff but looking at the bigger societal picture, it would seem it better transitioning from receiving Social Benefits allowing a person to someday stand on their own. This transition means that the individual now takes pride in themselves and is engaged in their community. Whatever we can do to make this transition from dependent on Social Benefits to having a tax paying job should be encouraged.
At Jergens we have seen a similar result as we have led a program for second chance individuals to enter the manufacturing workforce following their return to society.
The self-worth the 500 people now working in manufacturing has resulted in a recidivism rate of less than 1%. There are similarities of self-worth that the individual sees when their pay going up in incremental steps is powerful. Like our changes with second chance in manufacturing so too should be change from a cliff program to transitioning social benefits and someday people will be fully able to support themselves without this benefit. The individual and their family wins, the community wins, the business community wins and society would win if Social Benefits would change from a Cliff formulary to a transitional method with this change.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sbc.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/6/4/64d548bd-001c-4a46-b725-fa1f8d4189f3/632142EE66351B9EF4ECDEFD93866D600164B0A4527BB6094617FEF778720D4A.schron-jr.-testimony.pdf
U.S. Ambassador to Equatorial Guinea Nominee Brown Testifies Before Senate Foreign Relations Committee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Stanley L. Brown, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Equatorial Guinea, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing:
* * *
Chairman Hagerty, Ranking Member, and distinguished Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you as President Trump's nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Equatorial Guinea. I deeply appreciate the confidence and trust the President and Secretary of State have shown in nominating me. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Congress ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Stanley L. Brown, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Equatorial Guinea, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Chairman Hagerty, Ranking Member, and distinguished Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you as President Trump's nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Equatorial Guinea. I deeply appreciate the confidence and trust the President and Secretary of State have shown in nominating me. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Congressto advance our interests in Equatorial Guinea. I am grateful to my family - my wife who is here today and our children and their families who are watching - for their support and sacrifices including during my time in uniform. I could not be here without their unwavering support.
I am from a North Carolina family of educators, farmers, first responders, and military members who served from World War II through the Gulf War. I served first in the military and continued that service at the State Department, where I have the privilege to advance U.S. national security priorities. I spent my military career and civil service in challenging environments furthering those priorities, including counterterrorism, commercial diplomacy, and supporting the safety of U.S citizens.
U.S. energy companies have invested billions in Equatorial Guinea and, if confirmed, my priority will be to improve the investment climate and promote further opportunities for U.S. companies. I will work with the government and like-minded partners to develop Equatorial Guinea's economic potential, and I look forward to encouraging investment in the underdeveloped health and education sectors.
If confirmed, I will also work with the U.S. interagency and the government of Equatorial Guinea to enhance maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea. Mutual goals include the protection of offshore oil and gas facilities and countering piracy and illegal fishing. I will harness my foreign policy experiences to strengthen our partnership with Equatorial Guinea.
If confirmed, I will harness available tools to address corruption and will use U.S. influence to encourage the government to respect inalienable human rights and fundamental freedoms of all Equatoguineans. Combatting Trafficking in Persons also remains a significant U.S. priority.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with the talented, hardworking U.S. Mission team in Malabo to achieve our objectives of promoting U.S. trade and investments and strengthening the relationship between our governments. If confirmed, as Chief of Mission I will prioritize the safety, health, and resilience of the U.S. Embassy community under the ethos of "One Team, One Mission." Coordinating and consultations with Congress will be essential to achieving our goals.
Chairman and Ranking Member, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to your questions.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/a0462159-d189-f152-2c59-ac4b9a8f5c22/062526_Brown_Testimony_889009cb-9730-44ef-90f2-73097c009e89.pdf
* * *
Chairman Hagerty, Ranking Member, and distinguished Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you as President Trump's nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Equatorial Guinea. I deeply appreciate the confidence and trust the President and Secretary of State have shown in nominating me. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Congress ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Stanley L. Brown, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Equatorial Guinea, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Chairman Hagerty, Ranking Member, and distinguished Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before you as President Trump's nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Equatorial Guinea. I deeply appreciate the confidence and trust the President and Secretary of State have shown in nominating me. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Congressto advance our interests in Equatorial Guinea. I am grateful to my family - my wife who is here today and our children and their families who are watching - for their support and sacrifices including during my time in uniform. I could not be here without their unwavering support.
I am from a North Carolina family of educators, farmers, first responders, and military members who served from World War II through the Gulf War. I served first in the military and continued that service at the State Department, where I have the privilege to advance U.S. national security priorities. I spent my military career and civil service in challenging environments furthering those priorities, including counterterrorism, commercial diplomacy, and supporting the safety of U.S citizens.
U.S. energy companies have invested billions in Equatorial Guinea and, if confirmed, my priority will be to improve the investment climate and promote further opportunities for U.S. companies. I will work with the government and like-minded partners to develop Equatorial Guinea's economic potential, and I look forward to encouraging investment in the underdeveloped health and education sectors.
If confirmed, I will also work with the U.S. interagency and the government of Equatorial Guinea to enhance maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea. Mutual goals include the protection of offshore oil and gas facilities and countering piracy and illegal fishing. I will harness my foreign policy experiences to strengthen our partnership with Equatorial Guinea.
If confirmed, I will harness available tools to address corruption and will use U.S. influence to encourage the government to respect inalienable human rights and fundamental freedoms of all Equatoguineans. Combatting Trafficking in Persons also remains a significant U.S. priority.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with the talented, hardworking U.S. Mission team in Malabo to achieve our objectives of promoting U.S. trade and investments and strengthening the relationship between our governments. If confirmed, as Chief of Mission I will prioritize the safety, health, and resilience of the U.S. Embassy community under the ethos of "One Team, One Mission." Coordinating and consultations with Congress will be essential to achieving our goals.
Chairman and Ranking Member, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to your questions.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/a0462159-d189-f152-2c59-ac4b9a8f5c22/062526_Brown_Testimony_889009cb-9730-44ef-90f2-73097c009e89.pdf
Pediatric Oncology Outreach Programs Research Coordinator Mostert Testifies Before Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Saskia Mostert, research coordinator of global health and pediatric oncology outreach programs in Indonesia and Kenya, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research":
* * *
My name is Dr. Saskia Mostert. I worked as research coordinator of global health and pediatric oncology outreach programs in Indonesia and Kenya.
Publication
In 2024, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Saskia Mostert, research coordinator of global health and pediatric oncology outreach programs in Indonesia and Kenya, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research": * * * My name is Dr. Saskia Mostert. I worked as research coordinator of global health and pediatric oncology outreach programs in Indonesia and Kenya. Publication In 2024,our team published a study in BMJ Public Health examining all-cause mortality data across Western countries between 2020 and 2022.1 These were government-reported mortality records routinely used throughout mainstream public health research. The peer review process had taken more than nine months.
Our study showed that excess mortality remained elevated across 47 Western countries, totaling more than 3 million excess deaths. Excess mortality persisted across the overwhelming majority of countries studied, after the acute phase of the pandemic.1
We did not claim certainty regarding the causes of excess mortality. Rather, we asked attention for three major events that were non-existent before the pandemic: COVID-infection, containment measures, and COVID-vaccines. In addition, we acknowledged other overlooked factors. We urged governments and public health leaders to investigate the underlying causes and evaluate their policies.1
During the pandemic, extraordinary measures were justified in the name of protecting human life.
Public officials and media emphasized that every COVID-death mattered and every life deserved protection.1 I believed the discovery of more than 3 million excess deaths would prompt the same urgency in investigating their causes.
Instead, what followed often resembled what I could only describe as "blind fury." What could explain this massive outrage?
Psychological Manipulation and Fear Propaganda
During the pandemic, health-policies were combined with psychological tactics to influence public behavior. Governments and media implemented psychological manipulation and fear propaganda (without our awareness/consent) that increases group conformity and reduces tolerance for reason and dissenting voices:2-41
* * *
Tunnel Vision ... Focusing on single aspect of reality and disregarding the context
Emotional Messaging ... To evoke strong feelings (fear/anger) and block critical thinking
Repetition ... Constantly repeating an idea, even without evidence, can turn it into a widely held belief as it penetrates the unconscious
Visual Symbols or Slogans ... Block critical thinking/ more effectively remembered than complex ideas
Gaslighting ... Using contradictory/unpredictable/changing information and rules to create confusion/disorientation/doubts about own memory/perceptions/sanity, and enforce submission
Isolation ... Restricting social contacts limits outside perspectives/increases fear/fosters dependency/enhances manipulators' dominance/control
Worthy versus Unworthy Victims ... Distinguishing between important victims who deserve extensive attention or support, and other victims who can be ignored
Polarization ... Emphasizing differences between groups to create division ('us versus them')
Dehumanization ... Perceiving individuals or groups as fundamentally different (inferior/threatening), having less human qualities (empathy/dignity), justifying mistreatment (discrimination/cruelty/disregarding their rights) without feeling guilt/empathy
* * *
Censorship and Suppression-Tactics
Censorship and suppression-tactics have been used against doctors and scientists questioning the official COVID-narrative:/42-47
* * *
Devaluation Tactics ... Discrediting critics and criticism (using 'labelling')
Cover-Up Tactics ... Hiding censorship (using proxies/fact-checkers/shadowbanning/deplatforming)
Reinterpretation Tactics ... Favorably framing censorship ('protection of public'/'follow the science')
Official Channel Tactics ... Gives censorship appearance of legitimacy/justice, and hides political/economic conflicts of interests
Intimidation Tactics42... Using fear/threats/coercion to silence critics and others
* * *
The encountered blind and irrational fury after our publication can thus be explained by 'tunnel vision' disruption. Not only 'worthy victims' (COVID-patients), but also 'unworthy victims' (lockdown victims/vaccine-injured) were described. Polarization in society, between those who followed the official COVID narrative and those who questioned it, became visible. Despite a supportive statement from REUTERS, media outlets used their 'devaluation'-tactics and labelled the publication as "anti-vax", "conspiracy-theory," and "misinformation."48
Scientific Integrity Investigation
One affiliated hospital publicly distanced itself from the study and announced a scientific integrity investigation.49,50 Institutional responses are increasingly used as 'official channel'-tactics to discredit, intimidate, isolate and silence those raising unwelcome scientific questions.
I resigned.
Scientific integrity investigations can be evaluated according to confidentiality, transparency, presumption of innocence, and fairness principles.50 To my opinion, all these principles have been trampled on. The institutional confidential report about my co-authors was leaked to a national newspaper and resulted in a hit piece. This example speaks volumes.
To be clear: I lost my position after publishing official government mortality data and calling for further scientific investigation into persistent excess deaths.
Science cannot function when legitimate questions become professionally dangerous to ask.
When scientists fear professional destruction, the public loses access to honest scientific inquiry.
Outcome of Scientific Integrity Investigation
The institute concluded that scientific integrity was not violated in our study. No plagiarism, fabrication or falsification took place. Nevertheless, the institute persists on retraction of the paper for containing misinformation about possible causes of excess mortality.
Ironically, the text on containment measures and vaccines was much shorter in the original version of the paper. The reviewers selected by the journal had asked us to either delete the text or provide more evidence. As there is evidence available, we included it. All added references concerned peer-reviewed publications from well-known institutes indexed on PubMed.
My proposed post-publication revision that included a section on vaccine effectiveness in reducing mortality was ignored by the journal.
Right from the start, it was an unequal battle. Our call for investigation of underlying causes had to be censored and erased one way or another. The 'tunnel vision' leaves no room for 'unworthy victims.'
Yet, the persistent excess mortality remains unexplained.
Not an Isolated Case
Our case is not isolated. Books have documented the suppression of more than 80 Dutch doctors and scientists, as well as the removal of 60 professors across Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.50,51 In recent years, the number of removals for 'ideological insubordination' has increased significantly in German-speaking countries. Similar patterns emerge across institutions. After a media scandal on a dissenting professor, the university distances itself by a press release and starts disciplinary proceedings. The reason given for dismissal is scientific integrity violation, whereas the real reason appears to be dissent.50
Their stories closely resemble my own. Although scientific integrity and Hippocratic principles were not violated, receptiveness to reason disappeared and careers were damaged or destroyed.
Recently, we established a Taskforce on Academic Freedom in the Netherlands to investigate censorship, suppression, and systematic attacks on doctors and scientists questioning aspects of the official COVID-narrative.
Censorship and Academic Freedom
Censorship undermines academic freedom by discouraging legitimate scientific inquiry. It narrows the range of perspectives permitted within public debate and stimulates self-censorship among academics. The subsequent false scientific consensus can lead to dysfunctional policies.14,16,42-47,51,52
If we want to restore public trust, we must once again protect academic freedom and the right of scientists and doctors to question prevailing assumptions without fear of professional destruction.
It is time to return to Voltaire's Enlightenment commitment to academic freedom: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it."53
* * *
REFERENCES
1) Mostert S, Hoogland M, Huibers M, Kaspers G. Excess mortality across countries in the Western World since the COVID-19 pandemic: 'Our World in Data' estimates of January 2020 to December 2022. BMJ Public Health 2024;2:e000282.
2) Desmet M. The Psychology of Totalitarianism. Chelsea Green Publishing Co. Vermont, USA. First published: 2022.
3) von Langenfeld FS. Cautio Criminalis, or a Book on Witch Trials. University of Virginia Press. Charlottesville, London. USA. First published: 1631.
4) Finocchiaro MA. The Galileo Affair. A Documentary History. 1613-1633. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. USA. First published: 1989.
5) Mann DL. When Facts Become Forbidden: The Past and Present History of Scientific Censorship. JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2025;10:402-404.
6) Le Bon G. The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. IAEGCA. Lisbon, USA. First published: 1895.
7) Bonhoeffer D. Letters and Papers from Prison. Simon & Schuster. New York, USA. First published: 1951.
8) Arendt H. The Origins of Totalitarianism. Harcourt, Brace and Company. New York, USA. First published: 1951.
9) Arendt H. Eichmann in Jerusalem. A Report on the Banality of Evil. Viking Press. New York, USA. First published: 1963.
10) Schopenhauer A. The World as Will and Idea. Lector House LLP. Delhi, India. First published: 1818.
11) Plato. The Republic. Clydesdale Press. New York, USA. First published: 370-380 BC.
12) Plato. Alcibiades-I. Zhingoora Books. Zittau, Germany. First published: 390-350 BC.
13) Jung C. The Undiscovered Self. Penguin Random House LLC. Berkley New York, USA. First published: 1957.
14) Schippers MC, Ioannidis JPA, Joffe AR. Aggressive measures, rising inequalities, and mass formation during the COVID-19 crisis: An overview and proposed way forward. Front Public Health 2022;10:950965.
15) James EK, Bokemper SE, Gerber AS, Omer SB, Huber GA. Persuasive messaging to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions. Vaccine 2021;39:7158-65.
16) Deruelle F. The pharmaceutical industry is dangerous to health. Further proof with COVID-19. Surg Neurol Int 2022;13:475.
17) Event 201: Public-Private Cooperation for Pandemic Preparedness and Response. Maryland: Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security; 2019. Available from: https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/recommendations.html
18) Joffe AR. COVID-19; rethinking the lockdown groupthink. Front Public Health 2021;9:625778.
19) Dodsworth L. A state of fear: how the UK government weaponized fear during the Covid-19. Printer & Martin. London, UK. 2021. First published: 2021.
20) Young H. Poor, biased reporting of daily covid death statistics without perspective creates fear. BMJ 2021;372:n40.
21) Prentice C, Quach S, Thaichon P. Antecedents and consequences of panic buying: the case of COVID-19. Int J Consum Stud 2022;46:132-46.
22) Bor A, Jorgensen F, Petersen MB. Discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated people during the pandemic. Nature 2023;613:704-711.
23) Bylund PL, Packard MD. Separation of power and expertise: Evidence of the tyranny of experts in Sweden's COVID-19 responses. South Econ J 2021;87:1300-19.
24) Drury J, Carter H, Ntontis E, Guven ST. Public behaviour in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: understanding the role of group processes. B J Psych Open 2021;7:e11.
25) Bavel JJV, Baicker K, Boggio PS, et al. Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nat Hum Behav 2020;4:460-71.
26) Rayamajhee V, Paniagua P. Coproduction and the crafting of cognitive institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Inst Econ 2022;1-7.
27) Adler E, Hebel-Sela S, Leshem OA, Levy J, Halperin E. A social virus: intergroup dehumanization and unwillingness to aid amidst COVID-19 - Who are the main targets? Int J Intercult Relat 2022;86:109-21.
28) Rayner G. Use of fear to control behaviour in Covid Crisis was "Totalitarian," admit scientists. Members of Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour regret about 'unethical' methods. The Telegraph. 14 May 2021.
29) Reichelt J. Corona: BILD entschuldigt sich bei Kindern. Berlin. Bild, 2021. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THuHFSQcQW0
30) Vivion M, Anassour Laouan Sidi E, Betsch C, et al. Prebunking messaging to inoculate against COVID-19 vaccine misinformation: an effective strategy for public health. J Commun Healthc 2022;15:232-42.
31) Jedwab R, Khan AM, Russ J, Zaveri ED. Epidemics, pandemics, and social conflict: lessons from the past and possible scenarios for COVID-19. World Develop 2021;147:105629.
32) Kahneman D. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. New York, USA. First published: 2011.
33) Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge. The Final Edition. Yale University press. New Haven, USA. First published: 2008 34) Dai H, Saccardo S, Han MA, et al. Behavioural nudges increase COVID-19 vaccinations. Nature 2021;597:4049.
35) Lunn PD, Timmons S, Belton CA, et al. Motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: An online experiment. Soc Sci Med 2020;265:113478.
36) Sasaki S, Saito T, Ohtake F. Nudges for COVID-19 voluntary vaccination: How to explain peer information? Soc Sci Med 2022;292:114561
37) Bernays E. Propaganda. IG Publishing. New York, USA. First published: 1928.
38) Bernays E. Crystalizing Public Opinion. Dover Publications, Inc. New York, USA. First published: 1923.
39) Herman ES, Chomsky N. Manufacturing Consent. The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Vintage Books. London, UK. First published: 1988.
40) Meerloo J. The Rape of the Mind. Martino Publishing. Mansfield Centre, USA. First published: 1956.
41) Ellul J. Propaganda. The Formation of Men's Attitudes. Random House Usa Inc. New York, USA. First published: 1962.
42) Jansen SC, Martin B. The Streisand Effect and Censorship Backfire. Int J Communication 2015;9:656-671.
43) Shir-Raz Y, Elisha E, Martin B, Ronel N, Guetzkow J. Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics. Minerva 2022;1:1-27.
44) Caceres CF. Unresolved COVID Controversies: 'Normal science' and potential non-scientific influences. Glob Public Health 2022;17:622-640.
45) Elisha E, Guetzkow J, Shir-Raz Y, Ronel N. Suppressing Scientific Discourse on Vaccines? Self-perceptions of researchers and practitioners. HEC Forum 2024;36:71-89.
46) Clarke L. Covid-19:Who fact checks health and science on facebook? BMJ 2021;373:n1170.
47) Elisha E, Guetzkow J, Shir-Raz Y, Ronel N. Retraction of scientific papers: the case of vaccine research. Critical Public Health 2021.
48) REUTERS Fact Check: Study does not say COVID vaccines may have fuelled excess deaths. 13 June 2024. Available from: https://www.reuters.com
49) Het Prinses Maxima Centrum neemt afstand van publicatie Oversterfte tijdens COVID-19 pandemie. 11 June 2024. Available from: https://prinsesmaximacentrum.nl
50) Onderzoek naar publicatie Oversterfte afgerond. 26 November 2024. Available from: https://prinsesmaximacentrum.nl
51) Egner H, Uhlenwinkel A. Disrupting the University. The creation of a culture of fear and the stifling of academic freedom in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Westend. Regensburg, Germany. First published: 2025.
52) Stadermann F. De Corona Inquisitie. Medische keuzes tussen wet en geweten. Obelisk Boeken. Breda, the Netherlands. First published: 2025.
53) SG Tallentyre. The Friends of Voltaire. Smith, Elder & Co. London, UK. First published: 1906.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/Mostert-Testimony.pdf
* * *
My name is Dr. Saskia Mostert. I worked as research coordinator of global health and pediatric oncology outreach programs in Indonesia and Kenya.
Publication
In 2024, ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Saskia Mostert, research coordinator of global health and pediatric oncology outreach programs in Indonesia and Kenya, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research": * * * My name is Dr. Saskia Mostert. I worked as research coordinator of global health and pediatric oncology outreach programs in Indonesia and Kenya. Publication In 2024,our team published a study in BMJ Public Health examining all-cause mortality data across Western countries between 2020 and 2022.1 These were government-reported mortality records routinely used throughout mainstream public health research. The peer review process had taken more than nine months.
Our study showed that excess mortality remained elevated across 47 Western countries, totaling more than 3 million excess deaths. Excess mortality persisted across the overwhelming majority of countries studied, after the acute phase of the pandemic.1
We did not claim certainty regarding the causes of excess mortality. Rather, we asked attention for three major events that were non-existent before the pandemic: COVID-infection, containment measures, and COVID-vaccines. In addition, we acknowledged other overlooked factors. We urged governments and public health leaders to investigate the underlying causes and evaluate their policies.1
During the pandemic, extraordinary measures were justified in the name of protecting human life.
Public officials and media emphasized that every COVID-death mattered and every life deserved protection.1 I believed the discovery of more than 3 million excess deaths would prompt the same urgency in investigating their causes.
Instead, what followed often resembled what I could only describe as "blind fury." What could explain this massive outrage?
Psychological Manipulation and Fear Propaganda
During the pandemic, health-policies were combined with psychological tactics to influence public behavior. Governments and media implemented psychological manipulation and fear propaganda (without our awareness/consent) that increases group conformity and reduces tolerance for reason and dissenting voices:2-41
* * *
Tunnel Vision ... Focusing on single aspect of reality and disregarding the context
Emotional Messaging ... To evoke strong feelings (fear/anger) and block critical thinking
Repetition ... Constantly repeating an idea, even without evidence, can turn it into a widely held belief as it penetrates the unconscious
Visual Symbols or Slogans ... Block critical thinking/ more effectively remembered than complex ideas
Gaslighting ... Using contradictory/unpredictable/changing information and rules to create confusion/disorientation/doubts about own memory/perceptions/sanity, and enforce submission
Isolation ... Restricting social contacts limits outside perspectives/increases fear/fosters dependency/enhances manipulators' dominance/control
Worthy versus Unworthy Victims ... Distinguishing between important victims who deserve extensive attention or support, and other victims who can be ignored
Polarization ... Emphasizing differences between groups to create division ('us versus them')
Dehumanization ... Perceiving individuals or groups as fundamentally different (inferior/threatening), having less human qualities (empathy/dignity), justifying mistreatment (discrimination/cruelty/disregarding their rights) without feeling guilt/empathy
* * *
Censorship and Suppression-Tactics
Censorship and suppression-tactics have been used against doctors and scientists questioning the official COVID-narrative:/42-47
* * *
Devaluation Tactics ... Discrediting critics and criticism (using 'labelling')
Cover-Up Tactics ... Hiding censorship (using proxies/fact-checkers/shadowbanning/deplatforming)
Reinterpretation Tactics ... Favorably framing censorship ('protection of public'/'follow the science')
Official Channel Tactics ... Gives censorship appearance of legitimacy/justice, and hides political/economic conflicts of interests
Intimidation Tactics42... Using fear/threats/coercion to silence critics and others
* * *
The encountered blind and irrational fury after our publication can thus be explained by 'tunnel vision' disruption. Not only 'worthy victims' (COVID-patients), but also 'unworthy victims' (lockdown victims/vaccine-injured) were described. Polarization in society, between those who followed the official COVID narrative and those who questioned it, became visible. Despite a supportive statement from REUTERS, media outlets used their 'devaluation'-tactics and labelled the publication as "anti-vax", "conspiracy-theory," and "misinformation."48
Scientific Integrity Investigation
One affiliated hospital publicly distanced itself from the study and announced a scientific integrity investigation.49,50 Institutional responses are increasingly used as 'official channel'-tactics to discredit, intimidate, isolate and silence those raising unwelcome scientific questions.
I resigned.
Scientific integrity investigations can be evaluated according to confidentiality, transparency, presumption of innocence, and fairness principles.50 To my opinion, all these principles have been trampled on. The institutional confidential report about my co-authors was leaked to a national newspaper and resulted in a hit piece. This example speaks volumes.
To be clear: I lost my position after publishing official government mortality data and calling for further scientific investigation into persistent excess deaths.
Science cannot function when legitimate questions become professionally dangerous to ask.
When scientists fear professional destruction, the public loses access to honest scientific inquiry.
Outcome of Scientific Integrity Investigation
The institute concluded that scientific integrity was not violated in our study. No plagiarism, fabrication or falsification took place. Nevertheless, the institute persists on retraction of the paper for containing misinformation about possible causes of excess mortality.
Ironically, the text on containment measures and vaccines was much shorter in the original version of the paper. The reviewers selected by the journal had asked us to either delete the text or provide more evidence. As there is evidence available, we included it. All added references concerned peer-reviewed publications from well-known institutes indexed on PubMed.
My proposed post-publication revision that included a section on vaccine effectiveness in reducing mortality was ignored by the journal.
Right from the start, it was an unequal battle. Our call for investigation of underlying causes had to be censored and erased one way or another. The 'tunnel vision' leaves no room for 'unworthy victims.'
Yet, the persistent excess mortality remains unexplained.
Not an Isolated Case
Our case is not isolated. Books have documented the suppression of more than 80 Dutch doctors and scientists, as well as the removal of 60 professors across Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.50,51 In recent years, the number of removals for 'ideological insubordination' has increased significantly in German-speaking countries. Similar patterns emerge across institutions. After a media scandal on a dissenting professor, the university distances itself by a press release and starts disciplinary proceedings. The reason given for dismissal is scientific integrity violation, whereas the real reason appears to be dissent.50
Their stories closely resemble my own. Although scientific integrity and Hippocratic principles were not violated, receptiveness to reason disappeared and careers were damaged or destroyed.
Recently, we established a Taskforce on Academic Freedom in the Netherlands to investigate censorship, suppression, and systematic attacks on doctors and scientists questioning aspects of the official COVID-narrative.
Censorship and Academic Freedom
Censorship undermines academic freedom by discouraging legitimate scientific inquiry. It narrows the range of perspectives permitted within public debate and stimulates self-censorship among academics. The subsequent false scientific consensus can lead to dysfunctional policies.14,16,42-47,51,52
If we want to restore public trust, we must once again protect academic freedom and the right of scientists and doctors to question prevailing assumptions without fear of professional destruction.
It is time to return to Voltaire's Enlightenment commitment to academic freedom: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it."53
* * *
REFERENCES
1) Mostert S, Hoogland M, Huibers M, Kaspers G. Excess mortality across countries in the Western World since the COVID-19 pandemic: 'Our World in Data' estimates of January 2020 to December 2022. BMJ Public Health 2024;2:e000282.
2) Desmet M. The Psychology of Totalitarianism. Chelsea Green Publishing Co. Vermont, USA. First published: 2022.
3) von Langenfeld FS. Cautio Criminalis, or a Book on Witch Trials. University of Virginia Press. Charlottesville, London. USA. First published: 1631.
4) Finocchiaro MA. The Galileo Affair. A Documentary History. 1613-1633. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. USA. First published: 1989.
5) Mann DL. When Facts Become Forbidden: The Past and Present History of Scientific Censorship. JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2025;10:402-404.
6) Le Bon G. The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. IAEGCA. Lisbon, USA. First published: 1895.
7) Bonhoeffer D. Letters and Papers from Prison. Simon & Schuster. New York, USA. First published: 1951.
8) Arendt H. The Origins of Totalitarianism. Harcourt, Brace and Company. New York, USA. First published: 1951.
9) Arendt H. Eichmann in Jerusalem. A Report on the Banality of Evil. Viking Press. New York, USA. First published: 1963.
10) Schopenhauer A. The World as Will and Idea. Lector House LLP. Delhi, India. First published: 1818.
11) Plato. The Republic. Clydesdale Press. New York, USA. First published: 370-380 BC.
12) Plato. Alcibiades-I. Zhingoora Books. Zittau, Germany. First published: 390-350 BC.
13) Jung C. The Undiscovered Self. Penguin Random House LLC. Berkley New York, USA. First published: 1957.
14) Schippers MC, Ioannidis JPA, Joffe AR. Aggressive measures, rising inequalities, and mass formation during the COVID-19 crisis: An overview and proposed way forward. Front Public Health 2022;10:950965.
15) James EK, Bokemper SE, Gerber AS, Omer SB, Huber GA. Persuasive messaging to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions. Vaccine 2021;39:7158-65.
16) Deruelle F. The pharmaceutical industry is dangerous to health. Further proof with COVID-19. Surg Neurol Int 2022;13:475.
17) Event 201: Public-Private Cooperation for Pandemic Preparedness and Response. Maryland: Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security; 2019. Available from: https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/recommendations.html
18) Joffe AR. COVID-19; rethinking the lockdown groupthink. Front Public Health 2021;9:625778.
19) Dodsworth L. A state of fear: how the UK government weaponized fear during the Covid-19. Printer & Martin. London, UK. 2021. First published: 2021.
20) Young H. Poor, biased reporting of daily covid death statistics without perspective creates fear. BMJ 2021;372:n40.
21) Prentice C, Quach S, Thaichon P. Antecedents and consequences of panic buying: the case of COVID-19. Int J Consum Stud 2022;46:132-46.
22) Bor A, Jorgensen F, Petersen MB. Discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated people during the pandemic. Nature 2023;613:704-711.
23) Bylund PL, Packard MD. Separation of power and expertise: Evidence of the tyranny of experts in Sweden's COVID-19 responses. South Econ J 2021;87:1300-19.
24) Drury J, Carter H, Ntontis E, Guven ST. Public behaviour in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: understanding the role of group processes. B J Psych Open 2021;7:e11.
25) Bavel JJV, Baicker K, Boggio PS, et al. Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nat Hum Behav 2020;4:460-71.
26) Rayamajhee V, Paniagua P. Coproduction and the crafting of cognitive institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Inst Econ 2022;1-7.
27) Adler E, Hebel-Sela S, Leshem OA, Levy J, Halperin E. A social virus: intergroup dehumanization and unwillingness to aid amidst COVID-19 - Who are the main targets? Int J Intercult Relat 2022;86:109-21.
28) Rayner G. Use of fear to control behaviour in Covid Crisis was "Totalitarian," admit scientists. Members of Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour regret about 'unethical' methods. The Telegraph. 14 May 2021.
29) Reichelt J. Corona: BILD entschuldigt sich bei Kindern. Berlin. Bild, 2021. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THuHFSQcQW0
30) Vivion M, Anassour Laouan Sidi E, Betsch C, et al. Prebunking messaging to inoculate against COVID-19 vaccine misinformation: an effective strategy for public health. J Commun Healthc 2022;15:232-42.
31) Jedwab R, Khan AM, Russ J, Zaveri ED. Epidemics, pandemics, and social conflict: lessons from the past and possible scenarios for COVID-19. World Develop 2021;147:105629.
32) Kahneman D. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. New York, USA. First published: 2011.
33) Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge. The Final Edition. Yale University press. New Haven, USA. First published: 2008 34) Dai H, Saccardo S, Han MA, et al. Behavioural nudges increase COVID-19 vaccinations. Nature 2021;597:4049.
35) Lunn PD, Timmons S, Belton CA, et al. Motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: An online experiment. Soc Sci Med 2020;265:113478.
36) Sasaki S, Saito T, Ohtake F. Nudges for COVID-19 voluntary vaccination: How to explain peer information? Soc Sci Med 2022;292:114561
37) Bernays E. Propaganda. IG Publishing. New York, USA. First published: 1928.
38) Bernays E. Crystalizing Public Opinion. Dover Publications, Inc. New York, USA. First published: 1923.
39) Herman ES, Chomsky N. Manufacturing Consent. The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Vintage Books. London, UK. First published: 1988.
40) Meerloo J. The Rape of the Mind. Martino Publishing. Mansfield Centre, USA. First published: 1956.
41) Ellul J. Propaganda. The Formation of Men's Attitudes. Random House Usa Inc. New York, USA. First published: 1962.
42) Jansen SC, Martin B. The Streisand Effect and Censorship Backfire. Int J Communication 2015;9:656-671.
43) Shir-Raz Y, Elisha E, Martin B, Ronel N, Guetzkow J. Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics. Minerva 2022;1:1-27.
44) Caceres CF. Unresolved COVID Controversies: 'Normal science' and potential non-scientific influences. Glob Public Health 2022;17:622-640.
45) Elisha E, Guetzkow J, Shir-Raz Y, Ronel N. Suppressing Scientific Discourse on Vaccines? Self-perceptions of researchers and practitioners. HEC Forum 2024;36:71-89.
46) Clarke L. Covid-19:Who fact checks health and science on facebook? BMJ 2021;373:n1170.
47) Elisha E, Guetzkow J, Shir-Raz Y, Ronel N. Retraction of scientific papers: the case of vaccine research. Critical Public Health 2021.
48) REUTERS Fact Check: Study does not say COVID vaccines may have fuelled excess deaths. 13 June 2024. Available from: https://www.reuters.com
49) Het Prinses Maxima Centrum neemt afstand van publicatie Oversterfte tijdens COVID-19 pandemie. 11 June 2024. Available from: https://prinsesmaximacentrum.nl
50) Onderzoek naar publicatie Oversterfte afgerond. 26 November 2024. Available from: https://prinsesmaximacentrum.nl
51) Egner H, Uhlenwinkel A. Disrupting the University. The creation of a culture of fear and the stifling of academic freedom in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Westend. Regensburg, Germany. First published: 2025.
52) Stadermann F. De Corona Inquisitie. Medische keuzes tussen wet en geweten. Obelisk Boeken. Breda, the Netherlands. First published: 2025.
53) SG Tallentyre. The Friends of Voltaire. Smith, Elder & Co. London, UK. First published: 1906.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/Mostert-Testimony.pdf
U.S. Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor & Combat Trafficking in Persons Nominee Thornhill Testifies Before Senate Foreign Relations Committee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Barbera Thornhill, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador-at-large to monitor and combat trafficking in persons, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing:
* * *
Chairman Hagerty and distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for considering my nomination to be the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. I am honored by President Trump's nomination and grateful for Secretary Rubio's work to lead the Department's anti-trafficking efforts.
If I may, I ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Barbera Thornhill, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador-at-large to monitor and combat trafficking in persons, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Chairman Hagerty and distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for considering my nomination to be the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. I am honored by President Trump's nomination and grateful for Secretary Rubio's work to lead the Department's anti-trafficking efforts. If I may, Iwould like to introduce my family and friends with me here today. My son Hale Thornhill-Wilson and his fiancee Emma Evans, Odera Nwobi, who is like a second son to me and his wife Ally, my cousins Fred and Fabian Thornhill, Elsie and Arthur James, and my longtime colleague Evelyn Mangilet.
Let me share a little about my background. I came from a loving family in North Carolina long known for its involvement in healthcare and charitable work. My mother, a pediatrician, was one of the first women to go to Duke Medical School and my father, an ENT, invented the procedure known as "Stapedectomy", an operation that led to the Cochlear implant - a device that has helped millions of people hear again. But more than his skill as a surgeon, it was my father's commitment to treating underserved people and providing them with blessings that we so often take for granted that inspires me even now and motivates me every day.
I had the honor to live and work with Mother Teresa and the Sisters of Charity in Calcutta in 1994, lending an American heart and hands to their important work with children in orphanages, ailing homebound families, and to the destitute and dying in the hospice known as the "Home of the Pure Heart."
In the United States I worked extensively with Scouts BSA formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America that has provided leadership and mentored youths to help them climb the ladder of personal achievement and prepare them for life struggles and challenges. This program has impacted over 20,000 underprivileged adolescents, many in the foster system. I also worked with the Children's Institute in Los Angeles to help provide basic needs, early childhood education, psychological counseling, personal encouragement, and love for over 28,000 children who have been abused and have suffered many other horrible traumas. I have had the privileged of working with Lauri Burns, a survivor of child abuse, foster care, and human trafficking. She is the Founder of the Teen Project which operates residential programs for trafficking victims. She created an innovative app that connects victims with immediate rescue, treatment, and transportation.
My past community involvements have led me to the conviction that Human Trafficking is among the most brutal and reprehensible crimes where millions worldwide are used for forced labor and sex trafficking. Traffickers operate within and across borders, using everything they can to exploit weak governance, mass migration, and opaque supply chains. Confronting these crimes protects Americans by ensuring their natural rights, preventing their exploitation, and defending communities and businesses from criminal networks and unfair labor practices.
America is, and always will be, the leader in the global fight against human trafficking which desecrates the principles of freedom, justice, and opportunity that are essential to a safe, prosperous, and thriving global economy. Secretary Rubio has set forth the Department's mission to "promote peace abroad, and security and prosperity here at home." Combating human trafficking is vital to that mission.
Ever since the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 established our federal anti-trafficking framework, bipartisan commitment remains our strongest tool.
The fight continues each day as traffickers adapt and exploit new technologies and methods. The rise of online sexual victimization and forced labor schemes tied to online scams are two especially alarming trends, defrauding Americans and trapping victims in coercive schemes at home and abroad. This Administration took important steps, including signing the TAKE IT DOWN Act in May 2025 to combat online exploitation. We have sanctioned online scam operators using forced labor to steal billions from Americans. If confirmed, I will build on these efforts.
Forced labor distorts markets and allows foreign actors to abuse the global trading system at the expense of American workers and businesses. We must use every tool to combat forced labor in global supply chains and to shed light on forced labor schemes used by our adversaries.
The annual Trafficking in Persons Report is a powerful instrument for demanding accountability and pressing governments to take meaningful action or face consequences. If confirmed, I will ensure the report continues to drive impact and that it guides U.S. efforts to counter human trafficking, ensuring our resources are directed precisely to where they deliver the greatest results for the U.S. taxpayer.
Ending human trafficking requires partnership. I am committed to engaging survivors of human trafficking as partners. Their expertise shapes effective policies and provides insight into how traffickers operate.
If confirmed, I will also prioritize stronger interagency coordination, leading unified efforts to support President Trump's agenda and bring the weight of the U.S. government to bear against traffickers.
As President Trump stated, "we renew our commitment to end the evil of human trafficking...and ensure that every trafficker faces the full force of American justice." If confirmed, I will work with Congress and our partners to relentlessly bring traffickers to justice, support victims and survivors, and defend American interests.
I will work that we will be measured not by our intentions but by the lives we protect, the voices we elevate and the futures we help reclaim. Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/a0462159-d189-f152-2c59-ac4b9a8f5c22/062526_Thornhill_Testimony_ad14d2ab-1e9c-4a7b-a27d-306fb911e9bf.pdf
* * *
Chairman Hagerty and distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for considering my nomination to be the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. I am honored by President Trump's nomination and grateful for Secretary Rubio's work to lead the Department's anti-trafficking efforts.
If I may, I ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Barbera Thornhill, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador-at-large to monitor and combat trafficking in persons, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Chairman Hagerty and distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for considering my nomination to be the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. I am honored by President Trump's nomination and grateful for Secretary Rubio's work to lead the Department's anti-trafficking efforts. If I may, Iwould like to introduce my family and friends with me here today. My son Hale Thornhill-Wilson and his fiancee Emma Evans, Odera Nwobi, who is like a second son to me and his wife Ally, my cousins Fred and Fabian Thornhill, Elsie and Arthur James, and my longtime colleague Evelyn Mangilet.
Let me share a little about my background. I came from a loving family in North Carolina long known for its involvement in healthcare and charitable work. My mother, a pediatrician, was one of the first women to go to Duke Medical School and my father, an ENT, invented the procedure known as "Stapedectomy", an operation that led to the Cochlear implant - a device that has helped millions of people hear again. But more than his skill as a surgeon, it was my father's commitment to treating underserved people and providing them with blessings that we so often take for granted that inspires me even now and motivates me every day.
I had the honor to live and work with Mother Teresa and the Sisters of Charity in Calcutta in 1994, lending an American heart and hands to their important work with children in orphanages, ailing homebound families, and to the destitute and dying in the hospice known as the "Home of the Pure Heart."
In the United States I worked extensively with Scouts BSA formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America that has provided leadership and mentored youths to help them climb the ladder of personal achievement and prepare them for life struggles and challenges. This program has impacted over 20,000 underprivileged adolescents, many in the foster system. I also worked with the Children's Institute in Los Angeles to help provide basic needs, early childhood education, psychological counseling, personal encouragement, and love for over 28,000 children who have been abused and have suffered many other horrible traumas. I have had the privileged of working with Lauri Burns, a survivor of child abuse, foster care, and human trafficking. She is the Founder of the Teen Project which operates residential programs for trafficking victims. She created an innovative app that connects victims with immediate rescue, treatment, and transportation.
My past community involvements have led me to the conviction that Human Trafficking is among the most brutal and reprehensible crimes where millions worldwide are used for forced labor and sex trafficking. Traffickers operate within and across borders, using everything they can to exploit weak governance, mass migration, and opaque supply chains. Confronting these crimes protects Americans by ensuring their natural rights, preventing their exploitation, and defending communities and businesses from criminal networks and unfair labor practices.
America is, and always will be, the leader in the global fight against human trafficking which desecrates the principles of freedom, justice, and opportunity that are essential to a safe, prosperous, and thriving global economy. Secretary Rubio has set forth the Department's mission to "promote peace abroad, and security and prosperity here at home." Combating human trafficking is vital to that mission.
Ever since the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 established our federal anti-trafficking framework, bipartisan commitment remains our strongest tool.
The fight continues each day as traffickers adapt and exploit new technologies and methods. The rise of online sexual victimization and forced labor schemes tied to online scams are two especially alarming trends, defrauding Americans and trapping victims in coercive schemes at home and abroad. This Administration took important steps, including signing the TAKE IT DOWN Act in May 2025 to combat online exploitation. We have sanctioned online scam operators using forced labor to steal billions from Americans. If confirmed, I will build on these efforts.
Forced labor distorts markets and allows foreign actors to abuse the global trading system at the expense of American workers and businesses. We must use every tool to combat forced labor in global supply chains and to shed light on forced labor schemes used by our adversaries.
The annual Trafficking in Persons Report is a powerful instrument for demanding accountability and pressing governments to take meaningful action or face consequences. If confirmed, I will ensure the report continues to drive impact and that it guides U.S. efforts to counter human trafficking, ensuring our resources are directed precisely to where they deliver the greatest results for the U.S. taxpayer.
Ending human trafficking requires partnership. I am committed to engaging survivors of human trafficking as partners. Their expertise shapes effective policies and provides insight into how traffickers operate.
If confirmed, I will also prioritize stronger interagency coordination, leading unified efforts to support President Trump's agenda and bring the weight of the U.S. government to bear against traffickers.
As President Trump stated, "we renew our commitment to end the evil of human trafficking...and ensure that every trafficker faces the full force of American justice." If confirmed, I will work with Congress and our partners to relentlessly bring traffickers to justice, support victims and survivors, and defend American interests.
I will work that we will be measured not by our intentions but by the lives we protect, the voices we elevate and the futures we help reclaim. Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/a0462159-d189-f152-2c59-ac4b9a8f5c22/062526_Thornhill_Testimony_ad14d2ab-1e9c-4a7b-a27d-306fb911e9bf.pdf
U.S. Ambassador to Lithuania Nominee Noreika Testifies Before Senate Foreign Relations Committee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Keith Noreika, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Lithuania, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing:
* * *
Chairman Hagerty, Ranking Member, and Distinguished Members of the Committee, it is an honor and privilege to appear before you today. I am honored to be the nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Lithuania, and I thank President Trump and Secretary Rubio for their confidence in me.
I would like to begin by recognizing those who have made it possible for me to be ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Keith Noreika, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Lithuania, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Chairman Hagerty, Ranking Member, and Distinguished Members of the Committee, it is an honor and privilege to appear before you today. I am honored to be the nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Lithuania, and I thank President Trump and Secretary Rubio for their confidence in me. I would like to begin by recognizing those who have made it possible for me to bewhere I am. My parents Alex and Gloria who taught me the virtues of faith and hard work. My older sisters Gloriana and Maryellen, who have always taken care of me, and my wife Cristina and our three daughters, Alexa, Erika and Sophie who have joined us here today.
If confirmed, my first priority will be to ensure the security and welfare of U.S. citizens in Lithuania and the people of our Mission. I will also work to advance U.S. interests, encouraging Lithuania's engagement as a reliable NATO ally, deepening our bilateral trade and entrepreneurship ties, and combating regional threats and transnational crime.
Mr. Chairman, the United States and Lithuania celebrated 104 years of uninterrupted bilateral relations this year. The relationship has been marked by deep cooperation in the areas that matter most. Lithuania exemplifies what it means to be a committed member of NATO. Following the call by President Trump, Lithuania immediately announced commitments to exceed 5 percent of GDP on defense spending. This year it will exceed that mark and lead the Alliance in defense spending as a percentage of GDP. Lithuania invests in military capabilities - including U.S. systems - that add real capability to our collective security. It hosts U.S. and NATO forces, using national funds to improve facilities and ensure military readiness. Lithuania deploys globally on security and peace missions, even as it polices its own borders.
President Trump has been clear that NATO Allies must meet their obligations. The United States will no longer subsidize nations that refuse to pay their fair share for transatlantic security. This is a point that Lithuania understands and has, for years, pressed other European Allies on. If confirmed, I will work to ensure Lithuania continues this path, and becomes stronger, more capable, and able to contribute to its own defense. Together, we will strengthen European defense, improve the credibility of the collective security architecture, and dissuade adversaries.
Our two countries cooperate broadly on an array of issues including sharing threat information, participating in joint exercises, and providing law enforcement training. The Pennsylvania National Guard, Lithuania's state partner for more than 30 years, helps provide much of this expertise. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing our strong cooperation on these issues.
Lithuania shares U.S. concerns about China's strategic alignment with malign actors and pattern of economic coercion, especially in Europe. It is outspoken in the EU and elsewhere about Western Hemisphere issues, including human rights abuses of Cuba's regime. And Lithuania is a friend of Israel. If confirmed, I will work with the Lithuanian government to develop the peace through strength that President Trump has called for.
If confirmed, I will work to deepen U.S. trade and investment ties with Lithuania to benefit the prosperity of both our peoples. Lithuanian companies are creating jobs in the United States, and Lithuania's vibrant economy has long been an attractive destination for investment by U.S. companies. Nowhere is this truer than in the area of energy. More than 75 percent of Lithuanian liquified natural gas imports now come from the United States, and as Lithuania looks to purchase small modular nuclear reactors, there are abundant opportunities to deepen our energy relationship. Lithuania shares our view on keeping markets open with low regulation and taxes.
Mr. Chairman, the relationship between the United States and Lithuania is strong and helps secure core U.S. interests. Lithuania has played an active role in advancing our shared security and economic priorities. If confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to deepening our cooperation to confront shared challenges and promote U.S. interests.
Again, I am grateful for the opportunity to appear before you today and I welcome your questions. Thank you.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/a0462159-d189-f152-2c59-ac4b9a8f5c22/062526_Noreika_Testimony_9c88d928-5c08-4ca1-84f8-eea0e7811383.pdf
* * *
Chairman Hagerty, Ranking Member, and Distinguished Members of the Committee, it is an honor and privilege to appear before you today. I am honored to be the nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Lithuania, and I thank President Trump and Secretary Rubio for their confidence in me.
I would like to begin by recognizing those who have made it possible for me to be ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Foreign Relations Committee released the following testimony by Keith Noreika, President Trump's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Lithuania, from a June 25, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Chairman Hagerty, Ranking Member, and Distinguished Members of the Committee, it is an honor and privilege to appear before you today. I am honored to be the nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Lithuania, and I thank President Trump and Secretary Rubio for their confidence in me. I would like to begin by recognizing those who have made it possible for me to bewhere I am. My parents Alex and Gloria who taught me the virtues of faith and hard work. My older sisters Gloriana and Maryellen, who have always taken care of me, and my wife Cristina and our three daughters, Alexa, Erika and Sophie who have joined us here today.
If confirmed, my first priority will be to ensure the security and welfare of U.S. citizens in Lithuania and the people of our Mission. I will also work to advance U.S. interests, encouraging Lithuania's engagement as a reliable NATO ally, deepening our bilateral trade and entrepreneurship ties, and combating regional threats and transnational crime.
Mr. Chairman, the United States and Lithuania celebrated 104 years of uninterrupted bilateral relations this year. The relationship has been marked by deep cooperation in the areas that matter most. Lithuania exemplifies what it means to be a committed member of NATO. Following the call by President Trump, Lithuania immediately announced commitments to exceed 5 percent of GDP on defense spending. This year it will exceed that mark and lead the Alliance in defense spending as a percentage of GDP. Lithuania invests in military capabilities - including U.S. systems - that add real capability to our collective security. It hosts U.S. and NATO forces, using national funds to improve facilities and ensure military readiness. Lithuania deploys globally on security and peace missions, even as it polices its own borders.
President Trump has been clear that NATO Allies must meet their obligations. The United States will no longer subsidize nations that refuse to pay their fair share for transatlantic security. This is a point that Lithuania understands and has, for years, pressed other European Allies on. If confirmed, I will work to ensure Lithuania continues this path, and becomes stronger, more capable, and able to contribute to its own defense. Together, we will strengthen European defense, improve the credibility of the collective security architecture, and dissuade adversaries.
Our two countries cooperate broadly on an array of issues including sharing threat information, participating in joint exercises, and providing law enforcement training. The Pennsylvania National Guard, Lithuania's state partner for more than 30 years, helps provide much of this expertise. If confirmed, I look forward to continuing our strong cooperation on these issues.
Lithuania shares U.S. concerns about China's strategic alignment with malign actors and pattern of economic coercion, especially in Europe. It is outspoken in the EU and elsewhere about Western Hemisphere issues, including human rights abuses of Cuba's regime. And Lithuania is a friend of Israel. If confirmed, I will work with the Lithuanian government to develop the peace through strength that President Trump has called for.
If confirmed, I will work to deepen U.S. trade and investment ties with Lithuania to benefit the prosperity of both our peoples. Lithuanian companies are creating jobs in the United States, and Lithuania's vibrant economy has long been an attractive destination for investment by U.S. companies. Nowhere is this truer than in the area of energy. More than 75 percent of Lithuanian liquified natural gas imports now come from the United States, and as Lithuania looks to purchase small modular nuclear reactors, there are abundant opportunities to deepen our energy relationship. Lithuania shares our view on keeping markets open with low regulation and taxes.
Mr. Chairman, the relationship between the United States and Lithuania is strong and helps secure core U.S. interests. Lithuania has played an active role in advancing our shared security and economic priorities. If confirmed by the Senate, I look forward to deepening our cooperation to confront shared challenges and promote U.S. interests.
Again, I am grateful for the opportunity to appear before you today and I welcome your questions. Thank you.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/a0462159-d189-f152-2c59-ac4b9a8f5c22/062526_Noreika_Testimony_9c88d928-5c08-4ca1-84f8-eea0e7811383.pdf
Brown University Legorreta Cancer Center Director El-Deiry Testifies Before Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Subcommittee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Wafik El-Deiry, director of the Brown University Legorreta Cancer Center, and a physician-scientist and cancer researcher, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research":
* * *
My name is Wafik El-Deiry. I am a physician-scientist and cancer researcher with more than 30 years of experience studying the tumor suppressor protein p53, one of the ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Wafik El-Deiry, director of the Brown University Legorreta Cancer Center, and a physician-scientist and cancer researcher, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research": * * * My name is Wafik El-Deiry. I am a physician-scientist and cancer researcher with more than 30 years of experience studying the tumor suppressor protein p53, one of themost important cancer-related pathways in human biology.
My work has focused on how cancers develop when normal tumor suppressor mechanisms fail, including discoveries involving p53 controlled genes that became foundational in cancer biology and oncology research. I have also studied how viruses and other biologic processes can disrupt normal cellular defenses against cancer development.
When the COVID pandemic began, I wanted to help by applying our expertise in cancer biology, immunology, and approved treatments to better understand and treat COVID.
It has long been understood that certain viruses can contribute to cancer development by disrupting tumor suppressor pathways, including p53, one of the body's most important cancer-protective mechanisms.
Early in the pandemic, I became concerned that SARS-CoV-2 or components associated with it might similarly interfere with these protective cellular mechanisms, making this an important area for scientific investigation.
Early in the pandemic, I expressed uncertainty on social media about the natural origins of the COVID virus. This is when I first started to experience the repercussions of speaking out against the mainstream narrative.
What I didn't expect were the attacks on science itself.
By July 2020, my laboratory published findings showing that a class of cancer drugs known as MEK inhibitors suppressed ACE2, the receptor SARS-CoV-2 uses to infect human cells.
By April 2024, we reported findings suggesting that spike protein associated with COVID-19 infection or COVID-19 vaccination could reduce the ability of p53 to activate genes involved in cancer suppression.
Our laboratory had developed a substantial research program examining biologic factors associated with COVID-19 infection and vaccination.
Based on these findings, we emphasized that effective vaccines against viruses such as COVID should strengthen immunity against infection without interfering with the body's natural tumor-suppressor defenses.
These concerns were raised through normal scientific channels, yet the response was not open scientific engagement, but escalating attacks.
Instead of contributing to scientific dialogue, the findings triggered attacks on both the research and the researchers involved.
Much of this occurred through an online platform known as PubPeer, originally created about a decade ago to identify fraud and scientific misconduct. Unfortunately, the platform increasingly became weaponized against researchers whose findings challenged prevailing narratives.
The platform permits anonymous accusations without meaningful accountability. There is no disclosure of conflicts of interest and no statute of limitations or citizenship requirements. These attacks are public, amplified through social media, and can continue indefinitely regardless of whether wrongdoing is ever established.
This is precisely what happened to us. Although we corrected minor errors where appropriate, none altered the underlying results or conclusions of our work. Nevertheless, our publications became the subject of sustained public attacks that functioned to damage reputations and undermine scientific credibility.
Recently, I was informed that important publications from my laboratory could not be included in grant applications while unresolved allegations remained active, despite no findings of fraud or misconduct.
Despite these ongoing attacks, by July 2025, I agreed to serve on Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices' ACIP Working Group on COVID Immunizations. As an expert in cancer biology and pharmaceutical products, I conducted an extensive review of the literature on COVID19 vaccination and cancer.
By the fall of 2025, I had identified nearly 70 publications describing more than 300 reported cancer cases from 27 countries following one or more COVID mRNA vaccine injections.
Reported cancers occurred near injection sites, within the head and neck region, and elsewhere throughout the body across multiple cancer types. In some reported cases, spike protein was identified within tumor tissue.
Our findings were published in January 2026. Shortly afterward, I was contacted directly by former Japanese minister Kazuhiro Haraguchi, who reported developing diffuse large B-cell lymphoma that later metastasized to his tonsils, where biopsy findings reportedly identified spike protein.
These observations warrant serious scientific investigation.
The attacks on my publications intensified and continue to the present day despite no findings of fraud, misconduct, or wrongdoing after years of investigation.
Both our paper and the journal itself became targets of attacks through PubPeer and related online campaigns.
I remain, in effect, guilty until proven innocent.
Patients deserve informed consent. Scientists deserve the freedom to investigate legitimate scientific concerns without fear of reputational destruction, institutional retaliation, or professional ruin.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/El-Deiry-Testimony.pdf
* * *
My name is Wafik El-Deiry. I am a physician-scientist and cancer researcher with more than 30 years of experience studying the tumor suppressor protein p53, one of the ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Wafik El-Deiry, director of the Brown University Legorreta Cancer Center, and a physician-scientist and cancer researcher, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research": * * * My name is Wafik El-Deiry. I am a physician-scientist and cancer researcher with more than 30 years of experience studying the tumor suppressor protein p53, one of themost important cancer-related pathways in human biology.
My work has focused on how cancers develop when normal tumor suppressor mechanisms fail, including discoveries involving p53 controlled genes that became foundational in cancer biology and oncology research. I have also studied how viruses and other biologic processes can disrupt normal cellular defenses against cancer development.
When the COVID pandemic began, I wanted to help by applying our expertise in cancer biology, immunology, and approved treatments to better understand and treat COVID.
It has long been understood that certain viruses can contribute to cancer development by disrupting tumor suppressor pathways, including p53, one of the body's most important cancer-protective mechanisms.
Early in the pandemic, I became concerned that SARS-CoV-2 or components associated with it might similarly interfere with these protective cellular mechanisms, making this an important area for scientific investigation.
Early in the pandemic, I expressed uncertainty on social media about the natural origins of the COVID virus. This is when I first started to experience the repercussions of speaking out against the mainstream narrative.
What I didn't expect were the attacks on science itself.
By July 2020, my laboratory published findings showing that a class of cancer drugs known as MEK inhibitors suppressed ACE2, the receptor SARS-CoV-2 uses to infect human cells.
By April 2024, we reported findings suggesting that spike protein associated with COVID-19 infection or COVID-19 vaccination could reduce the ability of p53 to activate genes involved in cancer suppression.
Our laboratory had developed a substantial research program examining biologic factors associated with COVID-19 infection and vaccination.
Based on these findings, we emphasized that effective vaccines against viruses such as COVID should strengthen immunity against infection without interfering with the body's natural tumor-suppressor defenses.
These concerns were raised through normal scientific channels, yet the response was not open scientific engagement, but escalating attacks.
Instead of contributing to scientific dialogue, the findings triggered attacks on both the research and the researchers involved.
Much of this occurred through an online platform known as PubPeer, originally created about a decade ago to identify fraud and scientific misconduct. Unfortunately, the platform increasingly became weaponized against researchers whose findings challenged prevailing narratives.
The platform permits anonymous accusations without meaningful accountability. There is no disclosure of conflicts of interest and no statute of limitations or citizenship requirements. These attacks are public, amplified through social media, and can continue indefinitely regardless of whether wrongdoing is ever established.
This is precisely what happened to us. Although we corrected minor errors where appropriate, none altered the underlying results or conclusions of our work. Nevertheless, our publications became the subject of sustained public attacks that functioned to damage reputations and undermine scientific credibility.
Recently, I was informed that important publications from my laboratory could not be included in grant applications while unresolved allegations remained active, despite no findings of fraud or misconduct.
Despite these ongoing attacks, by July 2025, I agreed to serve on Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices' ACIP Working Group on COVID Immunizations. As an expert in cancer biology and pharmaceutical products, I conducted an extensive review of the literature on COVID19 vaccination and cancer.
By the fall of 2025, I had identified nearly 70 publications describing more than 300 reported cancer cases from 27 countries following one or more COVID mRNA vaccine injections.
Reported cancers occurred near injection sites, within the head and neck region, and elsewhere throughout the body across multiple cancer types. In some reported cases, spike protein was identified within tumor tissue.
Our findings were published in January 2026. Shortly afterward, I was contacted directly by former Japanese minister Kazuhiro Haraguchi, who reported developing diffuse large B-cell lymphoma that later metastasized to his tonsils, where biopsy findings reportedly identified spike protein.
These observations warrant serious scientific investigation.
The attacks on my publications intensified and continue to the present day despite no findings of fraud, misconduct, or wrongdoing after years of investigation.
Both our paper and the journal itself became targets of attacks through PubPeer and related online campaigns.
I remain, in effect, guilty until proven innocent.
Patients deserve informed consent. Scientists deserve the freedom to investigate legitimate scientific concerns without fear of reputational destruction, institutional retaliation, or professional ruin.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/El-Deiry-Testimony.pdf
American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Rachidi Testifies Before Senate Small Business & Entrepreneurship Committee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Angela Rachidi, senior fellow in poverty studies at the American Enterprise Institute, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers":
* * *
Chairman Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the Small Business Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Angela Rachidi, and I am a Senior Fellow in poverty studies at the American Enterprise Institute. I have spent much of the past 20 years ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Angela Rachidi, senior fellow in poverty studies at the American Enterprise Institute, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers": * * * Chairman Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the Small Business Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Angela Rachidi, and I am a Senior Fellow in poverty studies at the American Enterprise Institute. I have spent much of the past 20 yearsresearching U.S. safety net programs for low-income families. I worked for the New York City Department of Social Services in various positions from 2002 through 2015, ending my time as the Deputy Commissioner for policy research. Since 2015 I have continued this work for the American Enterprise Institute or AEI.
Over the past two years, I have led a working group of policy experts and researchers focused on policy solutions to benefit cliffs. I use the term benefit cliffs to broadly describe situations where even a small increase in earnings or hours worked can trigger an abrupt loss of government assistance for working families. In some cases, the loss of government assistance can completely offset new earnings, making a family possibly worse off than before. Other times, the loss may only partially offset new earnings, but in both scenarios, the loss of benefits can influence people's employment decisions. Some workers may rationally choose to work less than they otherwise would in the absence of government assistance. This harms both families by limiting their upward mobility and employers who rely on these employees.
I want to cover three key points in my testimony: First, benefit cliffs exist despite individual program rules that appear to phase benefits out as participant income rises. Second, the problem of benefit cliffs compound when families receive multiple benefits, which is the most common situation among low-income families. And Third, research shows that the potential of hitting a benefit cliff influences people's behavior, resulting in an unwillingness to accept higher-paying jobs for fear of losing benefits.
What are Benefit Cliffs?
Safety net programs in the U.S. are targeted toward those with the least income. This allows programs to provide sufficient resources to meet a low-income family's basic material needs, but also ensures public funds are used efficiently. By targeting assistance to those most in need, program rules require benefits to phase out as family income rises. This is how most of our safety net programs work.
In most programs, the maximum amount of assistance is provided for those with no income, and the benefit amount slowly decreases as income rises. Ideally, this benefit reduction is small enough that it does not affect decisions around employment, such as taking on more hours or accepting a pay raise. Furthermore, the benefits should eventually phase out to zero once a family crosses a certain income or asset line. When the maximum benefit, the reduction rate, and income exit point work in tandem, individuals are less likely to change their behavior based on the loss of government assistance.
However, many program rules do not align and recipients oftentimes experience an abrupt drop in benefits when a slight increase of earnings or assets pushes them across the line. The figure below shows an example from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP. The blue line shows the current program rules where benefits decrease at a reasonable rate. However, the gross and net income eligibility limits (the green and purple lines) prevent the benefit from phasing out to zero. The result is that a SNAP participant in this scenario will experience a loss of approximately $1400 per year in SNAP benefits when they cross over $45,340 per year.1 This dynamic encourages the participant to keep their income just below the income eligibility limit. SNAP is just one example; many state-led child care assistance programs and some TANF programs operate this way too. Medicaid adds to this complexity by requiring a change in coverage once income levels reach a certain limit rather than phasing out like other programs.
* * *
Figure 1: SNAP Benefits (Household Size of Three): Hypothetical vs. Current Policy
Source: Angela Rachidi and Erik Randolph, Eliminating the Benefit Cliff and Achieving Savings for Taxpayers: A Reform Proposal for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025). https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Eliminating-the-Benefit-Cliff-and-Achieving-Savings-for-Taxpayers.pdf?x97961
* * *
Importantly, some individual program phase out rates align with exit points -- meaning they phase out to zero as income rises, such as housing assistance, the EITC, and CTC. However, when families receive multiple benefits, the phaseout rates stack on top of each other and create a compounding effect that result in high effective marginal tax rates. Consider a hypothetical example: A family receives $100 in benefits each from the EITC, CTC, and SNAP for a total of $300 in benefits. Each program phases out at 20 percent for each additional dollar earned. If this household can increase earnings by $100, they will lose $20 in benefits from each of the EITC, the CTC, and SNAP for a total of $60 lost in benefits. The result is a 60 percent effective marginal tax rate, meaning that the family would only gain $40 from their $100 pay raise. Thus, we can see how this could negatively affect this family's decision to accept the higher pay. Figure 2 demonstrates this exact dynamic at play when the benefits are not coordinated across programs.
* * *
1 Angela Rachidi and Erik Randolph, Eliminating the Benefit Cliff and Achieving Savings for Taxpayers: A Reform Proposal for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025). https://www.aei.org/wpcontent/uploads/2025/01/Eliminating-the-Benefit-Cliff-and-Achieving-Savings-for-Taxpayers.pdf?x97961
* * *
Figure 2: An Example of the Stacking Effect of Hypothetical Safety Net Benefits
Source: Angela Rachidi, Matt Weidinger, Joshua Bandoch, Nic Dunn, Leslie Ford, and Erik Randolph, Stranded by the Safety Net: How to Fix the Benefit Cliff Problem (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025).
* * *
The Georgia Center for Opportunity and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, among others, have reviewed program rules in various states and simulated what happens to benefit amounts in actual scenarios when income rises.2 Figure 3, below, shows the benefit schedule for a single mother with two children in North Carolina. This figure shows that the benefit phase out does not present a problem when considering only earnings and refundable tax credits, but as soon as this single mother also receives SNAP and Medicaid -- a common occurrence--she faces a cliff as her earnings cross into $30,000 to $35,000 per year. In this scenario, she would need to increase her annual earnings from $30,000 per year to $60,000 per year to completely overcome her loss in benefits.
* * *
2 See Georgia Center for Opportunity, https://foropportunity.org/benefitcliffs/ and Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, https://www.atlantafed.org/what-we-study/workforce-development/advancing-careers-for-low-income-families/what-are-benefitscliffs.
* * *
Figure 3: Safety-Net Benefits Based on North Carolina Policies: A Single Mother with Two Children
* * *
The situations I have described are not simply an academic exercise. The misalignment of program rules affect behavior and discourage safety net program participants from increasing their work effort and income. At a time when many businesses across the country are struggling to find workers, these dynamics also create a drag on local economies.
Survey and focus group research confirm these behavioral influences. For example, researchers for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services conducted a survey of low-wage workers in 2024. They found that when workers were presented with a scenario that included a high effective marginal tax rate, they reported being less likely to take a higher-paying job. Specifically, more than one-third of respondents said that they would not accept a higher-paying job if they faced a 69 percent marginal tax rate - that is, if they lost 69 percent of their additional earnings to benefit losses they would turn down a pay raise.3 The Sutherland Institute in Utah conducted a representative
survey of Utah residents in 2024 and found similar results: Nearly 60 percent of past safety net program participants somewhat or strongly agreed that they were concerned that earning extra income would result in a loss of benefits that would make them overall worse off.4 This sentiment translated into behavior changes. According to the survey, nearly 30 percent of past program participants said they had previously decided not to look for a new job, raise, or promotion because they believed it would make their family financially worse off.5
Conclusion
The safety net for low-income families should offer a path out of poverty toward opportunity. But as I have argued, our federal safety net policies instead contain benefit cliffs that discourage more work and higher pay, a problem that compounds when families receive multiple benefits.
Furthermore, these problematic design features negatively affect employment--related behavior, harming individual workers and the employers who rely on them.
The benefit cliff workgroup I led, proposed several administrative and legislative reforms to address benefit cliffs.6 Table 1 summarizes the recommendations from our report. Specifically, we proposed administrative reforms to individual programs by states and federal agencies: States should use the discretion they have to alter individual program rules, and federal agencies should allow states to utilize administrative waivers to address cliffs. Additionally, we proposed several legislative reforms for Congress: First, Congress should legislate individual program changes to better align benefit rules, such as in SNAP, and second, Congress should legislate additional flexibility at the state level to allow cross-program reforms. Notably, Senator Husted (R-OH) of Ohio has introduced the Upward Mobility Act, which would allow states to pilot test the consolidation of federal programs designed to address benefit cliffs.7 Finally, we proposed several comprehensive legislative reforms to the safety net, such as consolidating programs and standardizing program rules. These reforms would address benefit cliffs, as well as other longstanding problems with the overall safety net for low-income families in the U.S.
Low-income working individuals deserve a safety net that helps them escape poverty, rather than one that traps them in government dependency and stagnation. Employers across the country also deserve a flexible labor market free from government disincentives to work. To achieve these ideals, our safety net programs need reform to eliminate benefit cliffs.
Thank you and I look forward to answering your questions.
* * *
3 Spitzer, Ariella, Jesse Chandler, Bernadette Hicks, and Daniel Thal (2024). Understanding Economic Risk for Low Income Families: Economic Security, Program Benefits, and Decisions about Work. OPRE Report #2024-324, Washington, DC; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; and Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
4 Nic Dunn, "Strengthening the American Dream: Addressing benefits cliffs to empower safety net participants to pursue work and opportunity", Sutherland Institute Report, November 9 2024, https://sutherlandinstitute.org/strengthening-the-american-dream/.
5 Ibid.
6 Angela Rachidi, Matt Weidinger, Joshua Bandoch, Nic Dunn, Leslie Ford, and Erik Randolph, Stranded by the Safety Net: How to Fix the Benefit Cliff Problem (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025).
7 See legislative text for the Upward Mobility Act, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senatebill/3583/text.
* * *
Table 1. Immediate and Comprehensive Reforms to Address Benefit Cliffs
Immediate Reforms
Individual Program Administrative Reforms ... States have some existing administrative authority to reduce benefit cliffs in individual programs. They often can make administrative decisions, such as frequency of benefit reauthorizations that can make benefit cliffs better or worse. They also have existing authority to request waivers of federal rules, which can be used to lessen benefit cliffs. We outline several key steps states can take to use their existing administrative authority to offer immediate relief to families at risk of a benefit cliff.
Individual Program Legislative Reforms ... Where states do not have existing administrative flexibility, Congress should legislate changes to individual program rules to lessen benefit cliffs. We offer one example for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), recommending that Congress statutorily change SNAP's benefit level, deductions, and eligibility limit to address benefit cliffs. This can serve as a model for other program reforms.
Cross-Program Administrative Reforms ... While individual program reforms are important, benefit cliffs are worse when households receive multiple benefits. We outline how federal agencies, through existing waiver authorities, can guide states on soliciting federal approval for demonstration projects aimed at reducing cross-program benefit cliffs. We also identify ways federal agencies can revise rules and regulations to make it easier for states to address crossprogram benefit cliffs, such as coordinating how states claim costs across programs.
Cross-Program Legislative Reforms ... Where existing waiver authority falls short, Congress should legislate a "superwaiver," which would allow states to consolidate and coordinate multiple safety-net programs while maintaining federal accountability for results. This would allow states to innovate and test processes for consolidating programs to improve delivery and efficiency. The results would help inform comprehensive reforms.
Comprehensive Reforms
Consolidate Programs and Reduce Redundancy ... Congress should legislatively combine safety-net programs and coordinate administrative functions in several key areas. This would improve efficiency, eliminate overlapping services, and yield long-term taxpayer savings. We recommend that Congress establish select committees to oversee this approach and use "superwaiver" demonstration projects to inform this effort.
Standardize Eligibility Rules and Benefit Phaseouts Across Programs ... Congress should standardize eligibility rules across programs. This would involve aligning benefit levels and taper rates and creating program exit thresholds across programs so that families experience a consistent, predictable phaseout of government assistance.
Streamline Delivery Systems Across Programs ... Congress should also streamline administrative systems by giving all states the ability to adopt the "One Door" approach that Utah uses under specialized authority from the federal government. A One Door approach creates a more efficient and effective system by allowing participants to seamlessly access benefits and connect to employment and job training. It helps address benefit cliffs by better coordinating benefits and informing participants of program rules and regulations.
Source: Angela Rachidi, Matt Weidinger, Joshua Bandoch, Nic Dunn, Leslie Ford, and Erik Randolph, Stranded by the Safety Net: How to Fix the Benefit Cliff Problem (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025).
* * *
Original text and figures here: https://www.sbc.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/6/d/6d40c3d5-c76a-4463-ab2e-75547e8e5da2/1863FA71E96DF01A29B9F9E2C0192DC6DB2EDE2FB5BA72E3B2DB58D81642A4E6.rachidi-testimony.pdf
* * *
Chairman Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the Small Business Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Angela Rachidi, and I am a Senior Fellow in poverty studies at the American Enterprise Institute. I have spent much of the past 20 years ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Angela Rachidi, senior fellow in poverty studies at the American Enterprise Institute, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers": * * * Chairman Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the Small Business Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Angela Rachidi, and I am a Senior Fellow in poverty studies at the American Enterprise Institute. I have spent much of the past 20 yearsresearching U.S. safety net programs for low-income families. I worked for the New York City Department of Social Services in various positions from 2002 through 2015, ending my time as the Deputy Commissioner for policy research. Since 2015 I have continued this work for the American Enterprise Institute or AEI.
Over the past two years, I have led a working group of policy experts and researchers focused on policy solutions to benefit cliffs. I use the term benefit cliffs to broadly describe situations where even a small increase in earnings or hours worked can trigger an abrupt loss of government assistance for working families. In some cases, the loss of government assistance can completely offset new earnings, making a family possibly worse off than before. Other times, the loss may only partially offset new earnings, but in both scenarios, the loss of benefits can influence people's employment decisions. Some workers may rationally choose to work less than they otherwise would in the absence of government assistance. This harms both families by limiting their upward mobility and employers who rely on these employees.
I want to cover three key points in my testimony: First, benefit cliffs exist despite individual program rules that appear to phase benefits out as participant income rises. Second, the problem of benefit cliffs compound when families receive multiple benefits, which is the most common situation among low-income families. And Third, research shows that the potential of hitting a benefit cliff influences people's behavior, resulting in an unwillingness to accept higher-paying jobs for fear of losing benefits.
What are Benefit Cliffs?
Safety net programs in the U.S. are targeted toward those with the least income. This allows programs to provide sufficient resources to meet a low-income family's basic material needs, but also ensures public funds are used efficiently. By targeting assistance to those most in need, program rules require benefits to phase out as family income rises. This is how most of our safety net programs work.
In most programs, the maximum amount of assistance is provided for those with no income, and the benefit amount slowly decreases as income rises. Ideally, this benefit reduction is small enough that it does not affect decisions around employment, such as taking on more hours or accepting a pay raise. Furthermore, the benefits should eventually phase out to zero once a family crosses a certain income or asset line. When the maximum benefit, the reduction rate, and income exit point work in tandem, individuals are less likely to change their behavior based on the loss of government assistance.
However, many program rules do not align and recipients oftentimes experience an abrupt drop in benefits when a slight increase of earnings or assets pushes them across the line. The figure below shows an example from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP. The blue line shows the current program rules where benefits decrease at a reasonable rate. However, the gross and net income eligibility limits (the green and purple lines) prevent the benefit from phasing out to zero. The result is that a SNAP participant in this scenario will experience a loss of approximately $1400 per year in SNAP benefits when they cross over $45,340 per year.1 This dynamic encourages the participant to keep their income just below the income eligibility limit. SNAP is just one example; many state-led child care assistance programs and some TANF programs operate this way too. Medicaid adds to this complexity by requiring a change in coverage once income levels reach a certain limit rather than phasing out like other programs.
* * *
Figure 1: SNAP Benefits (Household Size of Three): Hypothetical vs. Current Policy
Source: Angela Rachidi and Erik Randolph, Eliminating the Benefit Cliff and Achieving Savings for Taxpayers: A Reform Proposal for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025). https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Eliminating-the-Benefit-Cliff-and-Achieving-Savings-for-Taxpayers.pdf?x97961
* * *
Importantly, some individual program phase out rates align with exit points -- meaning they phase out to zero as income rises, such as housing assistance, the EITC, and CTC. However, when families receive multiple benefits, the phaseout rates stack on top of each other and create a compounding effect that result in high effective marginal tax rates. Consider a hypothetical example: A family receives $100 in benefits each from the EITC, CTC, and SNAP for a total of $300 in benefits. Each program phases out at 20 percent for each additional dollar earned. If this household can increase earnings by $100, they will lose $20 in benefits from each of the EITC, the CTC, and SNAP for a total of $60 lost in benefits. The result is a 60 percent effective marginal tax rate, meaning that the family would only gain $40 from their $100 pay raise. Thus, we can see how this could negatively affect this family's decision to accept the higher pay. Figure 2 demonstrates this exact dynamic at play when the benefits are not coordinated across programs.
* * *
1 Angela Rachidi and Erik Randolph, Eliminating the Benefit Cliff and Achieving Savings for Taxpayers: A Reform Proposal for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025). https://www.aei.org/wpcontent/uploads/2025/01/Eliminating-the-Benefit-Cliff-and-Achieving-Savings-for-Taxpayers.pdf?x97961
* * *
Figure 2: An Example of the Stacking Effect of Hypothetical Safety Net Benefits
Source: Angela Rachidi, Matt Weidinger, Joshua Bandoch, Nic Dunn, Leslie Ford, and Erik Randolph, Stranded by the Safety Net: How to Fix the Benefit Cliff Problem (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025).
* * *
The Georgia Center for Opportunity and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, among others, have reviewed program rules in various states and simulated what happens to benefit amounts in actual scenarios when income rises.2 Figure 3, below, shows the benefit schedule for a single mother with two children in North Carolina. This figure shows that the benefit phase out does not present a problem when considering only earnings and refundable tax credits, but as soon as this single mother also receives SNAP and Medicaid -- a common occurrence--she faces a cliff as her earnings cross into $30,000 to $35,000 per year. In this scenario, she would need to increase her annual earnings from $30,000 per year to $60,000 per year to completely overcome her loss in benefits.
* * *
2 See Georgia Center for Opportunity, https://foropportunity.org/benefitcliffs/ and Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, https://www.atlantafed.org/what-we-study/workforce-development/advancing-careers-for-low-income-families/what-are-benefitscliffs.
* * *
Figure 3: Safety-Net Benefits Based on North Carolina Policies: A Single Mother with Two Children
* * *
The situations I have described are not simply an academic exercise. The misalignment of program rules affect behavior and discourage safety net program participants from increasing their work effort and income. At a time when many businesses across the country are struggling to find workers, these dynamics also create a drag on local economies.
Survey and focus group research confirm these behavioral influences. For example, researchers for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services conducted a survey of low-wage workers in 2024. They found that when workers were presented with a scenario that included a high effective marginal tax rate, they reported being less likely to take a higher-paying job. Specifically, more than one-third of respondents said that they would not accept a higher-paying job if they faced a 69 percent marginal tax rate - that is, if they lost 69 percent of their additional earnings to benefit losses they would turn down a pay raise.3 The Sutherland Institute in Utah conducted a representative
survey of Utah residents in 2024 and found similar results: Nearly 60 percent of past safety net program participants somewhat or strongly agreed that they were concerned that earning extra income would result in a loss of benefits that would make them overall worse off.4 This sentiment translated into behavior changes. According to the survey, nearly 30 percent of past program participants said they had previously decided not to look for a new job, raise, or promotion because they believed it would make their family financially worse off.5
Conclusion
The safety net for low-income families should offer a path out of poverty toward opportunity. But as I have argued, our federal safety net policies instead contain benefit cliffs that discourage more work and higher pay, a problem that compounds when families receive multiple benefits.
Furthermore, these problematic design features negatively affect employment--related behavior, harming individual workers and the employers who rely on them.
The benefit cliff workgroup I led, proposed several administrative and legislative reforms to address benefit cliffs.6 Table 1 summarizes the recommendations from our report. Specifically, we proposed administrative reforms to individual programs by states and federal agencies: States should use the discretion they have to alter individual program rules, and federal agencies should allow states to utilize administrative waivers to address cliffs. Additionally, we proposed several legislative reforms for Congress: First, Congress should legislate individual program changes to better align benefit rules, such as in SNAP, and second, Congress should legislate additional flexibility at the state level to allow cross-program reforms. Notably, Senator Husted (R-OH) of Ohio has introduced the Upward Mobility Act, which would allow states to pilot test the consolidation of federal programs designed to address benefit cliffs.7 Finally, we proposed several comprehensive legislative reforms to the safety net, such as consolidating programs and standardizing program rules. These reforms would address benefit cliffs, as well as other longstanding problems with the overall safety net for low-income families in the U.S.
Low-income working individuals deserve a safety net that helps them escape poverty, rather than one that traps them in government dependency and stagnation. Employers across the country also deserve a flexible labor market free from government disincentives to work. To achieve these ideals, our safety net programs need reform to eliminate benefit cliffs.
Thank you and I look forward to answering your questions.
* * *
3 Spitzer, Ariella, Jesse Chandler, Bernadette Hicks, and Daniel Thal (2024). Understanding Economic Risk for Low Income Families: Economic Security, Program Benefits, and Decisions about Work. OPRE Report #2024-324, Washington, DC; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; and Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
4 Nic Dunn, "Strengthening the American Dream: Addressing benefits cliffs to empower safety net participants to pursue work and opportunity", Sutherland Institute Report, November 9 2024, https://sutherlandinstitute.org/strengthening-the-american-dream/.
5 Ibid.
6 Angela Rachidi, Matt Weidinger, Joshua Bandoch, Nic Dunn, Leslie Ford, and Erik Randolph, Stranded by the Safety Net: How to Fix the Benefit Cliff Problem (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025).
7 See legislative text for the Upward Mobility Act, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senatebill/3583/text.
* * *
Table 1. Immediate and Comprehensive Reforms to Address Benefit Cliffs
Immediate Reforms
Individual Program Administrative Reforms ... States have some existing administrative authority to reduce benefit cliffs in individual programs. They often can make administrative decisions, such as frequency of benefit reauthorizations that can make benefit cliffs better or worse. They also have existing authority to request waivers of federal rules, which can be used to lessen benefit cliffs. We outline several key steps states can take to use their existing administrative authority to offer immediate relief to families at risk of a benefit cliff.
Individual Program Legislative Reforms ... Where states do not have existing administrative flexibility, Congress should legislate changes to individual program rules to lessen benefit cliffs. We offer one example for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), recommending that Congress statutorily change SNAP's benefit level, deductions, and eligibility limit to address benefit cliffs. This can serve as a model for other program reforms.
Cross-Program Administrative Reforms ... While individual program reforms are important, benefit cliffs are worse when households receive multiple benefits. We outline how federal agencies, through existing waiver authorities, can guide states on soliciting federal approval for demonstration projects aimed at reducing cross-program benefit cliffs. We also identify ways federal agencies can revise rules and regulations to make it easier for states to address crossprogram benefit cliffs, such as coordinating how states claim costs across programs.
Cross-Program Legislative Reforms ... Where existing waiver authority falls short, Congress should legislate a "superwaiver," which would allow states to consolidate and coordinate multiple safety-net programs while maintaining federal accountability for results. This would allow states to innovate and test processes for consolidating programs to improve delivery and efficiency. The results would help inform comprehensive reforms.
Comprehensive Reforms
Consolidate Programs and Reduce Redundancy ... Congress should legislatively combine safety-net programs and coordinate administrative functions in several key areas. This would improve efficiency, eliminate overlapping services, and yield long-term taxpayer savings. We recommend that Congress establish select committees to oversee this approach and use "superwaiver" demonstration projects to inform this effort.
Standardize Eligibility Rules and Benefit Phaseouts Across Programs ... Congress should standardize eligibility rules across programs. This would involve aligning benefit levels and taper rates and creating program exit thresholds across programs so that families experience a consistent, predictable phaseout of government assistance.
Streamline Delivery Systems Across Programs ... Congress should also streamline administrative systems by giving all states the ability to adopt the "One Door" approach that Utah uses under specialized authority from the federal government. A One Door approach creates a more efficient and effective system by allowing participants to seamlessly access benefits and connect to employment and job training. It helps address benefit cliffs by better coordinating benefits and informing participants of program rules and regulations.
Source: Angela Rachidi, Matt Weidinger, Joshua Bandoch, Nic Dunn, Leslie Ford, and Erik Randolph, Stranded by the Safety Net: How to Fix the Benefit Cliff Problem (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 2025).
* * *
Original text and figures here: https://www.sbc.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/6/d/6d40c3d5-c76a-4463-ab2e-75547e8e5da2/1863FA71E96DF01A29B9F9E2C0192DC6DB2EDE2FB5BA72E3B2DB58D81642A4E6.rachidi-testimony.pdf
Center on Budget & Policy Priorities Senior Fellow Gwyn Testifies Before Senate Small Business & Entrepreneurship Committee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Nick Gwyn, senior fellow for government affairs at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers":
* * *
Thank you, Chair Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the committee. My name is Nick Gwyn, and I am a Senior Fellow for Government Affairs at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).
CBPP is a nonpartisan research and policy institute that advances ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Nick Gwyn, senior fellow for government affairs at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers": * * * Thank you, Chair Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the committee. My name is Nick Gwyn, and I am a Senior Fellow for Government Affairs at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). CBPP is a nonpartisan research and policy institute that advancesfederal and state policies to help build a nation where everyone has the resources they need to thrive and share in the nation's prosperity.
Ensuring that individuals and families receiving means-tested public benefits can increase their earnings without abruptly losing large amounts of critical assistance is an important goal and deserves broad support. Many basic needs programs already promote this objective by phasing out benefits slowly as earnings increase, rather than terminating substantial assistance based on small changes in earnings.
For example, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefit formula disregards 20 percent of participants' earned income when calculating their benefits. And, benefits phase out gradually as countable income rises, declining by 24 to 36 cents per additional dollar of earnings. As a result, the vast majority of SNAP workers see an increase in their total income when their earnings increase.
However, families can encounter benefit cliffs in some programs, given inadequate program resources.
Child care assistance is one example. In large part because its funding is capped, only about 17 percent of children age 5 and under who are federally eligible receive child care assistance./1
In general, addressing program benefit cliffs requires additional resources to provide a longer, slower down-ramp in benefits, rather than an abrupt drop, as earnings rise. To create a slower phase-out without additional resources means cutting benefits for working families whose earnings are lower than the families hitting a cliff. Among other things, this could mean that workers gaining a toehold in a job wouldn't get the help they need to make ends meet.
In short, to ease benefit cliffs without increasing poverty requires investing in additional help for working families. This is a good investment -- it would help families afford the basics and avoid instability in housing and child care, which can not only harm children and families but also make it harder to maintain a job. But we should not pretend that we can ease benefit cliffs without either providing more resources or accepting more hardship and poverty.
First, Do No Harm
Any effort to improve how program benefits phase down as earnings increase should start with a commitment to avoid policy changes that worsen benefit cliffs.
For example, some have suggested eliminating states' long-standing flexibility to raise SNAP income and asset limits somewhat so that households with a small earnings gain (or a modest rise in savings) don't lose substantial SNAP benefits. Forty-six states have adopted this policy, known as broad-based categorical eligibility (BBCE). (See Figure 1.) [See figure in the link at bottom]. It is particularly valuable for working families who face housing or child care expenses that consume a sizeable share of their income.
Eliminating BBCE would create steep benefit cliffs for a large number of working families, many of whom would lose SNAP entirely. Indeed, CBPP estimates that eliminating BBCE would take away food benefits from 6 million people, most of them in working families (as well as many people who are elderly or have a disability).2
Also, Congress has made benefit cliffs worse for many working people by letting the premium tax credit (PTC) enhancements for marketplace health coverage expire at the end of 2025. While those enhancements were in place, someone who got a raise and no longer qualified for Medicaid could instead qualify for an Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace plan with a $0 premium and very low cost-sharing as their income rose. Now, if a single individual's earnings rise from $21,600 (138 percent of the federal poverty level, Medicaid's income limit in states that have adopted the ACA Medicaid expansion) to $21,800 (139 percent of poverty), they go from receiving Medicaid with premium costs of $0 per year to needing to pay $770 for an ACA silver-level plan.
Block Grants Are Less Accountable, Responsive, and Sustainable
Some proposals presented as efforts to address benefit cliffs would shift funding for multiple programs to a single, flexible block grant. The Upward Mobility Act, for example, would provide up to five states with block-grant funding for ten programs for five years.
The fundamental problem with block grants is they are less accountable, less responsive, and less sustainable over time than entitlement programs like Medicaid and SNAP, or even discretionary programs with specific purposes like rental assistance.
Block-granting often leads to less transparency and responsibility for achieving core program goals.
Converting programs like SNAP and housing assistance into a block grant would eliminate key protections that ensure people get the benefits for which they are eligible. These protections include specific requirements like establishing fair eligibility processes and providing benefits on a timely basis, as well as broader safeguards related to the allocation and use of program funding.
While giving states flexibility to innovate can be valuable, block grants permit, and sometimes even encourage, states to use that flexibility to redirect funding away from the core purposes for which it was approved. For example, states spend less than one-fourth of their Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block-grant funds on basic cash assistance for families with children, a decline of 68 percent from the program's first year./3
Provisions in TANF, like work requirements, time limits and other features, have discouraged states from providing basic assistance to families, while the TANF block grant's extreme flexibility has prompted many states to use it to fill budget holes across a wide spectrum of social service areas.
Block grants also do not grow when the need for assistance increases during recessions or under other circumstances. This contrasts starkly with entitlement programs such as SNAP, which expand immediately and automatically to address rising need and then shrink as the economy recovers. This feature is critically important during recessions. It not only directly helps families who lose jobs or income but also moderates the severity and duration of the recession by lessening the drop in consumer purchasing power, thereby helping the economy as a whole.
Further, because block grants are often used in diffuse ways, it is difficult to assess their impact, making them more vulnerable to shrinking over time./4 Block grants have often experienced steep funding cuts in real terms, as Figure 2 shows [see figure in the link at bottom]. For example, TANF has lost about half of its real value, while job services grants have lost two-thirds and the Social Services Block Grant has lost 80 percent. This dramatic erosion in funding means less assistance is going to people in need.
More fundamentally, collapsing funding streams into a block grant but not providing any new resources buys into the false notion that there is a cost-free way to expand assistance for working families with somewhat higher incomes without increasing poverty and hardship among families with even lower incomes. If Congress wants to address benefit cliffs, the answer is not to create block grants that lack sufficient funding to accomplish their stated purpose and then blame states when they either don't reduce benefit cliffs or do so at the expense of lower-income families.
Reconciliation Law, Expiration of PTC Enhancements Already Causing Widespread Harm
As this committee considers the impact of people losing benefits due to earnings gains, it is important to recognize that millions of people are now losing essential food and health assistance because of the massive cuts in last year's budget reconciliation legislation (H.R. 1) and Congress's failure to extend the PTC enhancements. As noted above, those enhancements were key to reducing the benefit cliff that occurs when an individual's income rises and they lose Medicaid coverage.
As a result of H.R. 1's SNAP cuts, some 3.5 million people lost help buying groceries from July 2025 through February./5
It appears that close to half of those losing benefits are children, based on data from states that publicly report SNAP caseload data for children.6
This dramatic drop cannot be explained by a rapid improvement in people's economic well-being or reduced need for help affording food. Nationally, unemployment has remained steady, real wages declined year-over-year in April, and food insecurity remained high in 2025. Also, grocery costs are rising and could be headed even higher due to the war with Iran, given the impacts of oil and gas prices on fertilizer and transportation costs./7
The sharp decline in the number of SNAP participants is almost surely driven by initial implementation of the new SNAP cuts and other fallout from H.R. 1./8
On health care, up to 15 million people will become uninsured by 2034 because of H.R. 1's enormous cuts to Medicaid, its changes to the ACA marketplace, its failure to extend the PTC enhancements, and other harmful ACA marketplace rule changes, according to the Congressional Budget Office./9
The premiums people pay for ACA marketplace coverage more than doubled in 2026, on average, leading more than 1 million people to drop this coverage./10
Damage to the ACA marketplaces should be of particular concern to this committee, given that about half of the adults under age 65 enrolled in the marketplace are employed by a small business with fewer than 25 workers or are self-employed entrepreneurs or small business owners, according to KFF./11
Conclusion
Most federal benefit programs attempt to reduce potential steep benefit declines when earnings increase. Further efforts to minimize benefit cliffs for working families could be beneficial but must not come at the cost of undermining the very programs these families depend on to help them meet their basic needs, especially as the costs of food, fuel, housing, and health care continue to rise.
* * *
Footnotes:
1 First Five Years Fund, "2026 Child Care & Development Block Grant (CCDBG) in the United States," https://www.ffyf.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/FFYF_2026_CCDBG-National.pdf.
2 Dottie Rosenbaum et al., "SNAP's 'Broad-Based Categorical Eligibility' Supports Working Families, Older Adults, and Those Saving for the Future," CBPP, updated March 17, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/foodassistance/snaps-broad-based-categorical-eligibility-supports-working-families-and-0.
3 Diana Azevedo-McCaffrey, Aditi Shrivastava, and Maria Manansala, "Investing TANF Dollars in Basic Assistance Is Vital for Families to Meet Needs," CBPP, updated January 15, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/incomesecurity/investing-tanf-dollars-in-basic-assistance-is-vital-for-families-to-meet.
4 Richard Kogan et al., "History Shows That Block-Granting Low-Income Programs Leads to Large Funding Declines Over Time," CBPP, July 29, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/history-shows-that-blockgranting-low-income-programs-leads-to-large.
5 Dottie Rosenbaum et al., "SNAP Tracker: People Are Losing Food Assistance as the Republican Megabill Is Implemented," CBPP, updated May 29, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/snap-trackerpeople-are-losing-food-assistance-as-the-republican-megabill.
6 Luis Nunez, "Sharp Drop in Number of Children Receiving SNAP Food Assistance Under New Federal Law," CBPP, May 27, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/sharp-drop-in-number-of-children-receiving-snap-food-assistanceunder-new-federal-law.
7 Ibid.
8 CBPP, "By the Numbers: Harmful Republican Megabill Takes Food Assistance Away From Millions of People," updated August 14, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/by-the-numbers-harmful-republicanmegabill-takes-food-assistance-away-from.
9 CBPP, "By the Numbers: Harmful Republican Megabill Will Take Health Coverage Away From Millions of People and Raise Families' Costs," updated August 27, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/by-the-numbers-harmfulrepublican-megabill-will-take-health-coverage-away-from .
10 Jennifer Sullivan and Elizabeth Zhang, "Higher Marketplace Premiums Take a Toll on Enrollment and on Marketplace Enrollees," CBPP, May 18, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/higher-marketplace-premiums-take-a-tollon-enrollment-and-on-marketplace-enrollees.
11 Matt McGough et al., "About Half of Adults with ACA Marketplace Coverage are Small Business Owners, Employees, or Self-Employed," KFF, September 10, 2025, https://www.kff.org/affordable-care-act/about-half-of-adults-withaca-marketplace-coverage-are-small-business-owners-employees-or-self-employed/.
* * *
Original text and figures here: https://www.sbc.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2/2/22eabf36-5ab5-4f85-8208-54decc5aef4b/31A51C68DFEC1643035F5C103ED2CD7FCAB0AD61DE9961C140C0C3B0BF0F323E.gwyn-testimony.pdf
* * *
Thank you, Chair Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the committee. My name is Nick Gwyn, and I am a Senior Fellow for Government Affairs at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).
CBPP is a nonpartisan research and policy institute that advances ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee released the following testimony by Nick Gwyn, senior fellow for government affairs at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Examining the Burden of Federal Benefits Cliffs on Small Businesses and Workers": * * * Thank you, Chair Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the committee. My name is Nick Gwyn, and I am a Senior Fellow for Government Affairs at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). CBPP is a nonpartisan research and policy institute that advancesfederal and state policies to help build a nation where everyone has the resources they need to thrive and share in the nation's prosperity.
Ensuring that individuals and families receiving means-tested public benefits can increase their earnings without abruptly losing large amounts of critical assistance is an important goal and deserves broad support. Many basic needs programs already promote this objective by phasing out benefits slowly as earnings increase, rather than terminating substantial assistance based on small changes in earnings.
For example, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefit formula disregards 20 percent of participants' earned income when calculating their benefits. And, benefits phase out gradually as countable income rises, declining by 24 to 36 cents per additional dollar of earnings. As a result, the vast majority of SNAP workers see an increase in their total income when their earnings increase.
However, families can encounter benefit cliffs in some programs, given inadequate program resources.
Child care assistance is one example. In large part because its funding is capped, only about 17 percent of children age 5 and under who are federally eligible receive child care assistance./1
In general, addressing program benefit cliffs requires additional resources to provide a longer, slower down-ramp in benefits, rather than an abrupt drop, as earnings rise. To create a slower phase-out without additional resources means cutting benefits for working families whose earnings are lower than the families hitting a cliff. Among other things, this could mean that workers gaining a toehold in a job wouldn't get the help they need to make ends meet.
In short, to ease benefit cliffs without increasing poverty requires investing in additional help for working families. This is a good investment -- it would help families afford the basics and avoid instability in housing and child care, which can not only harm children and families but also make it harder to maintain a job. But we should not pretend that we can ease benefit cliffs without either providing more resources or accepting more hardship and poverty.
First, Do No Harm
Any effort to improve how program benefits phase down as earnings increase should start with a commitment to avoid policy changes that worsen benefit cliffs.
For example, some have suggested eliminating states' long-standing flexibility to raise SNAP income and asset limits somewhat so that households with a small earnings gain (or a modest rise in savings) don't lose substantial SNAP benefits. Forty-six states have adopted this policy, known as broad-based categorical eligibility (BBCE). (See Figure 1.) [See figure in the link at bottom]. It is particularly valuable for working families who face housing or child care expenses that consume a sizeable share of their income.
Eliminating BBCE would create steep benefit cliffs for a large number of working families, many of whom would lose SNAP entirely. Indeed, CBPP estimates that eliminating BBCE would take away food benefits from 6 million people, most of them in working families (as well as many people who are elderly or have a disability).2
Also, Congress has made benefit cliffs worse for many working people by letting the premium tax credit (PTC) enhancements for marketplace health coverage expire at the end of 2025. While those enhancements were in place, someone who got a raise and no longer qualified for Medicaid could instead qualify for an Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace plan with a $0 premium and very low cost-sharing as their income rose. Now, if a single individual's earnings rise from $21,600 (138 percent of the federal poverty level, Medicaid's income limit in states that have adopted the ACA Medicaid expansion) to $21,800 (139 percent of poverty), they go from receiving Medicaid with premium costs of $0 per year to needing to pay $770 for an ACA silver-level plan.
Block Grants Are Less Accountable, Responsive, and Sustainable
Some proposals presented as efforts to address benefit cliffs would shift funding for multiple programs to a single, flexible block grant. The Upward Mobility Act, for example, would provide up to five states with block-grant funding for ten programs for five years.
The fundamental problem with block grants is they are less accountable, less responsive, and less sustainable over time than entitlement programs like Medicaid and SNAP, or even discretionary programs with specific purposes like rental assistance.
Block-granting often leads to less transparency and responsibility for achieving core program goals.
Converting programs like SNAP and housing assistance into a block grant would eliminate key protections that ensure people get the benefits for which they are eligible. These protections include specific requirements like establishing fair eligibility processes and providing benefits on a timely basis, as well as broader safeguards related to the allocation and use of program funding.
While giving states flexibility to innovate can be valuable, block grants permit, and sometimes even encourage, states to use that flexibility to redirect funding away from the core purposes for which it was approved. For example, states spend less than one-fourth of their Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block-grant funds on basic cash assistance for families with children, a decline of 68 percent from the program's first year./3
Provisions in TANF, like work requirements, time limits and other features, have discouraged states from providing basic assistance to families, while the TANF block grant's extreme flexibility has prompted many states to use it to fill budget holes across a wide spectrum of social service areas.
Block grants also do not grow when the need for assistance increases during recessions or under other circumstances. This contrasts starkly with entitlement programs such as SNAP, which expand immediately and automatically to address rising need and then shrink as the economy recovers. This feature is critically important during recessions. It not only directly helps families who lose jobs or income but also moderates the severity and duration of the recession by lessening the drop in consumer purchasing power, thereby helping the economy as a whole.
Further, because block grants are often used in diffuse ways, it is difficult to assess their impact, making them more vulnerable to shrinking over time./4 Block grants have often experienced steep funding cuts in real terms, as Figure 2 shows [see figure in the link at bottom]. For example, TANF has lost about half of its real value, while job services grants have lost two-thirds and the Social Services Block Grant has lost 80 percent. This dramatic erosion in funding means less assistance is going to people in need.
More fundamentally, collapsing funding streams into a block grant but not providing any new resources buys into the false notion that there is a cost-free way to expand assistance for working families with somewhat higher incomes without increasing poverty and hardship among families with even lower incomes. If Congress wants to address benefit cliffs, the answer is not to create block grants that lack sufficient funding to accomplish their stated purpose and then blame states when they either don't reduce benefit cliffs or do so at the expense of lower-income families.
Reconciliation Law, Expiration of PTC Enhancements Already Causing Widespread Harm
As this committee considers the impact of people losing benefits due to earnings gains, it is important to recognize that millions of people are now losing essential food and health assistance because of the massive cuts in last year's budget reconciliation legislation (H.R. 1) and Congress's failure to extend the PTC enhancements. As noted above, those enhancements were key to reducing the benefit cliff that occurs when an individual's income rises and they lose Medicaid coverage.
As a result of H.R. 1's SNAP cuts, some 3.5 million people lost help buying groceries from July 2025 through February./5
It appears that close to half of those losing benefits are children, based on data from states that publicly report SNAP caseload data for children.6
This dramatic drop cannot be explained by a rapid improvement in people's economic well-being or reduced need for help affording food. Nationally, unemployment has remained steady, real wages declined year-over-year in April, and food insecurity remained high in 2025. Also, grocery costs are rising and could be headed even higher due to the war with Iran, given the impacts of oil and gas prices on fertilizer and transportation costs./7
The sharp decline in the number of SNAP participants is almost surely driven by initial implementation of the new SNAP cuts and other fallout from H.R. 1./8
On health care, up to 15 million people will become uninsured by 2034 because of H.R. 1's enormous cuts to Medicaid, its changes to the ACA marketplace, its failure to extend the PTC enhancements, and other harmful ACA marketplace rule changes, according to the Congressional Budget Office./9
The premiums people pay for ACA marketplace coverage more than doubled in 2026, on average, leading more than 1 million people to drop this coverage./10
Damage to the ACA marketplaces should be of particular concern to this committee, given that about half of the adults under age 65 enrolled in the marketplace are employed by a small business with fewer than 25 workers or are self-employed entrepreneurs or small business owners, according to KFF./11
Conclusion
Most federal benefit programs attempt to reduce potential steep benefit declines when earnings increase. Further efforts to minimize benefit cliffs for working families could be beneficial but must not come at the cost of undermining the very programs these families depend on to help them meet their basic needs, especially as the costs of food, fuel, housing, and health care continue to rise.
* * *
Footnotes:
1 First Five Years Fund, "2026 Child Care & Development Block Grant (CCDBG) in the United States," https://www.ffyf.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/FFYF_2026_CCDBG-National.pdf.
2 Dottie Rosenbaum et al., "SNAP's 'Broad-Based Categorical Eligibility' Supports Working Families, Older Adults, and Those Saving for the Future," CBPP, updated March 17, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/foodassistance/snaps-broad-based-categorical-eligibility-supports-working-families-and-0.
3 Diana Azevedo-McCaffrey, Aditi Shrivastava, and Maria Manansala, "Investing TANF Dollars in Basic Assistance Is Vital for Families to Meet Needs," CBPP, updated January 15, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/incomesecurity/investing-tanf-dollars-in-basic-assistance-is-vital-for-families-to-meet.
4 Richard Kogan et al., "History Shows That Block-Granting Low-Income Programs Leads to Large Funding Declines Over Time," CBPP, July 29, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/history-shows-that-blockgranting-low-income-programs-leads-to-large.
5 Dottie Rosenbaum et al., "SNAP Tracker: People Are Losing Food Assistance as the Republican Megabill Is Implemented," CBPP, updated May 29, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/snap-trackerpeople-are-losing-food-assistance-as-the-republican-megabill.
6 Luis Nunez, "Sharp Drop in Number of Children Receiving SNAP Food Assistance Under New Federal Law," CBPP, May 27, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/sharp-drop-in-number-of-children-receiving-snap-food-assistanceunder-new-federal-law.
7 Ibid.
8 CBPP, "By the Numbers: Harmful Republican Megabill Takes Food Assistance Away From Millions of People," updated August 14, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/by-the-numbers-harmful-republicanmegabill-takes-food-assistance-away-from.
9 CBPP, "By the Numbers: Harmful Republican Megabill Will Take Health Coverage Away From Millions of People and Raise Families' Costs," updated August 27, 2025, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/by-the-numbers-harmfulrepublican-megabill-will-take-health-coverage-away-from .
10 Jennifer Sullivan and Elizabeth Zhang, "Higher Marketplace Premiums Take a Toll on Enrollment and on Marketplace Enrollees," CBPP, May 18, 2026, https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/higher-marketplace-premiums-take-a-tollon-enrollment-and-on-marketplace-enrollees.
11 Matt McGough et al., "About Half of Adults with ACA Marketplace Coverage are Small Business Owners, Employees, or Self-Employed," KFF, September 10, 2025, https://www.kff.org/affordable-care-act/about-half-of-adults-withaca-marketplace-coverage-are-small-business-owners-employees-or-self-employed/.
* * *
Original text and figures here: https://www.sbc.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2/2/22eabf36-5ab5-4f85-8208-54decc5aef4b/31A51C68DFEC1643035F5C103ED2CD7FCAB0AD61DE9961C140C0C3B0BF0F323E.gwyn-testimony.pdf
Cervivor Founder Felder Testifies Before Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee
WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Cervivor founder Tamika Felder from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research":
* * *
My name is Tamika Felder, a twenty-five-year survivor of cervical cancer. I stand before you today to speak to the safety and importance of vaccines for all people, to honor those we have lost to cervical cancer, and to advocate for the open and accurate sharing ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Cervivor founder Tamika Felder from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research": * * * My name is Tamika Felder, a twenty-five-year survivor of cervical cancer. I stand before you today to speak to the safety and importance of vaccines for all people, to honor those we have lost to cervical cancer, and to advocate for the open and accurate sharingof scientific information so that families and communities can protect themselves and future generations.
I was diagnosed in 2001 at the age of 25 while working as a TV Producer in Washington, DC. The disease forced me to confront the fragility of health, and I endured chemotherapy and radiation therapy, which ultimately led to the loss of my fertility. Today, as a survivor and a patient advocate, I have dedicated my work to education, empowerment, and ensuring that every person has access to accurate medical information, trusted health care, and life-saving prevention tools. I also firmly believe that the HPV vaccine, which would have offered protection against the HPV types most commonly associated with cervical cancer, could have changed the trajectory of my life.
The human cost of cervical cancer remains a preventable disease for most people when prevention and screening are accessible and effectively utilized. Too many lives are cut short by this disease. I want to recognize, honor, and mourn the individuals whose lives were lost to cervical cancer, including Teolita Rickenbacker, Erica Fraizer Stum, and Becky Wallace.
Each of these women was more than a diagnosis; they were mothers, sisters, friends, and contributors to their communities.
Their stories remind us why prevention, vaccination where appropriate, and continued research are essential to save others from needless suffering and loss.
While other countries are nearing cervical cancer elimination, the United States is still behind, despite having all the tools needed for elimination.
Vaccines approved for use in the United States undergo rigorous, multi-phase testing for safety and efficacy before they are licensed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and monitored continuously after approval by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and other post-marketing surveillance systems.
The overwhelming majority of vaccines have favorable safety profiles, and the benefits--reduction of infectious disease, prevention of severe illness and death, and protection of vulnerable populations--greatly outweigh the risks of rare adverse events.
Health authorities, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Physicians, and the World Health Organization, repeatedly reaffirm that vaccines are one of the most effective tools in safeguarding public health. When safety signals are detected, they are investigated promptly with rigorous methods. Recommendations can change or be refined as science advances, but the core evidence base consistently supports vaccines as safe and necessary for individual and community protection.
Vaccines are not just about one disease; they are about a standard approach to preventing contagious and deadly illnesses.
The safety frameworks apply to vaccines across the board: routine immunizations for children, adults, and special populations; cancer-prevention vaccines like the HPV vaccine; influenza vaccines; and vaccines for other preventable diseases.
The HPV vaccine, in particular, has an important, specific track record. It has been available for approximately two decades (the vaccine was introduced in the mid-2000s). Accumulated data from hundreds of millions of doses administered globally show that the vaccine is highly effective at reducing infection with HPV types responsible for the vast majority of cervical cancers and other HPV-related cancers. The safety profile of the HPV vaccine has remained reassuring across diverse populations and age groups, with serious adverse events being exceedingly rare and generally unrelated to the vaccine when carefully evaluated.
It is crucial to highlight that vaccination does not remove the need for screening. Regular cervical cancer screening (e.g., Pap tests and HPV testing) remains essential, as early detection saves lives and reduces the likelihood of cancer progression, even as vaccination reduces risk.
Science provides the best-available evidence about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Relying on rigorous research, transparent reporting, and peer-reviewed findings is essential to protect public health. In an era of rapid information exchange, we must commit to sharing factual, science-based information.
Misinformation and fear-mongering about vaccines undermine trust, delay or prevent vaccination, and leave people vulnerable to preventable disease. Public health communication should be clear, compassionate, and inclusive. It should acknowledge concerns, provide transparent explanations of benefits and risks, and connect people with trusted healthcare providers who can answer questions and offer individualized guidance.
Survivors and patients must be at the center of conversations about vaccines and cancer prevention. We bring lived experience with disease, treatment, and survivorship--perspective that matters when designing education, outreach, and clinical guidance.
Policies should ensure equitable access to vaccines, screening, and prevention services, including culturally competent education, language access, and accessible care for people with disabilities.
Schools, workplaces, and community organizations should have clear resources to share accurate information, address questions, and direct individuals to trusted healthcare providers.
As a cervical cancer survivor and advocate, I have seen both the devastating toll of cancer and the profound promise of prevention.
Vaccines, including the HPV vaccine, are powerful tools that, when used alongside screening and treatment, significantly reduce the burden of cancer and save lives. We must continue to share science-based information openly, support rigorous safety monitoring, and ensure that every person has the opportunity to protect themselves and their families. The stories of Teolita Rickenbacker, Erica Fraizer Stum, Becky Wallace, and countless others remind us why this work matters: prevention saves lives, and accurate information saves lives.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am grateful for your consideration of policies that protect communities today and for generations to come.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/Felder-Testimony.pdf
* * *
My name is Tamika Felder, a twenty-five-year survivor of cervical cancer. I stand before you today to speak to the safety and importance of vaccines for all people, to honor those we have lost to cervical cancer, and to advocate for the open and accurate sharing ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, July 1 -- The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released the following testimony by Cervivor founder Tamika Felder from a June 3, 2026, hearing entitled "Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications and Research": * * * My name is Tamika Felder, a twenty-five-year survivor of cervical cancer. I stand before you today to speak to the safety and importance of vaccines for all people, to honor those we have lost to cervical cancer, and to advocate for the open and accurate sharingof scientific information so that families and communities can protect themselves and future generations.
I was diagnosed in 2001 at the age of 25 while working as a TV Producer in Washington, DC. The disease forced me to confront the fragility of health, and I endured chemotherapy and radiation therapy, which ultimately led to the loss of my fertility. Today, as a survivor and a patient advocate, I have dedicated my work to education, empowerment, and ensuring that every person has access to accurate medical information, trusted health care, and life-saving prevention tools. I also firmly believe that the HPV vaccine, which would have offered protection against the HPV types most commonly associated with cervical cancer, could have changed the trajectory of my life.
The human cost of cervical cancer remains a preventable disease for most people when prevention and screening are accessible and effectively utilized. Too many lives are cut short by this disease. I want to recognize, honor, and mourn the individuals whose lives were lost to cervical cancer, including Teolita Rickenbacker, Erica Fraizer Stum, and Becky Wallace.
Each of these women was more than a diagnosis; they were mothers, sisters, friends, and contributors to their communities.
Their stories remind us why prevention, vaccination where appropriate, and continued research are essential to save others from needless suffering and loss.
While other countries are nearing cervical cancer elimination, the United States is still behind, despite having all the tools needed for elimination.
Vaccines approved for use in the United States undergo rigorous, multi-phase testing for safety and efficacy before they are licensed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and monitored continuously after approval by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and other post-marketing surveillance systems.
The overwhelming majority of vaccines have favorable safety profiles, and the benefits--reduction of infectious disease, prevention of severe illness and death, and protection of vulnerable populations--greatly outweigh the risks of rare adverse events.
Health authorities, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Physicians, and the World Health Organization, repeatedly reaffirm that vaccines are one of the most effective tools in safeguarding public health. When safety signals are detected, they are investigated promptly with rigorous methods. Recommendations can change or be refined as science advances, but the core evidence base consistently supports vaccines as safe and necessary for individual and community protection.
Vaccines are not just about one disease; they are about a standard approach to preventing contagious and deadly illnesses.
The safety frameworks apply to vaccines across the board: routine immunizations for children, adults, and special populations; cancer-prevention vaccines like the HPV vaccine; influenza vaccines; and vaccines for other preventable diseases.
The HPV vaccine, in particular, has an important, specific track record. It has been available for approximately two decades (the vaccine was introduced in the mid-2000s). Accumulated data from hundreds of millions of doses administered globally show that the vaccine is highly effective at reducing infection with HPV types responsible for the vast majority of cervical cancers and other HPV-related cancers. The safety profile of the HPV vaccine has remained reassuring across diverse populations and age groups, with serious adverse events being exceedingly rare and generally unrelated to the vaccine when carefully evaluated.
It is crucial to highlight that vaccination does not remove the need for screening. Regular cervical cancer screening (e.g., Pap tests and HPV testing) remains essential, as early detection saves lives and reduces the likelihood of cancer progression, even as vaccination reduces risk.
Science provides the best-available evidence about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Relying on rigorous research, transparent reporting, and peer-reviewed findings is essential to protect public health. In an era of rapid information exchange, we must commit to sharing factual, science-based information.
Misinformation and fear-mongering about vaccines undermine trust, delay or prevent vaccination, and leave people vulnerable to preventable disease. Public health communication should be clear, compassionate, and inclusive. It should acknowledge concerns, provide transparent explanations of benefits and risks, and connect people with trusted healthcare providers who can answer questions and offer individualized guidance.
Survivors and patients must be at the center of conversations about vaccines and cancer prevention. We bring lived experience with disease, treatment, and survivorship--perspective that matters when designing education, outreach, and clinical guidance.
Policies should ensure equitable access to vaccines, screening, and prevention services, including culturally competent education, language access, and accessible care for people with disabilities.
Schools, workplaces, and community organizations should have clear resources to share accurate information, address questions, and direct individuals to trusted healthcare providers.
As a cervical cancer survivor and advocate, I have seen both the devastating toll of cancer and the profound promise of prevention.
Vaccines, including the HPV vaccine, are powerful tools that, when used alongside screening and treatment, significantly reduce the burden of cancer and save lives. We must continue to share science-based information openly, support rigorous safety monitoring, and ensure that every person has the opportunity to protect themselves and their families. The stories of Teolita Rickenbacker, Erica Fraizer Stum, Becky Wallace, and countless others remind us why this work matters: prevention saves lives, and accurate information saves lives.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am grateful for your consideration of policies that protect communities today and for generations to come.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/Felder-Testimony.pdf
CPSC Commissioner Nominee Lorenze Testifies Before Senate Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee
WASHINGTON, June 30 -- The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee released the following testimony by Brien Lorenze, President Trump's nominee for a seat on the Consumer Product Safety Commission, from a June 24, 2026, confirmation hearing:
* * *
Good morning, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished members of this Committee. I am honored and humbled by President Trump's nomination to serve as a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Before going forward, I would like to recognize my wife, Catherine who is my strongest supporter and is the love ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 30 -- The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee released the following testimony by Brien Lorenze, President Trump's nominee for a seat on the Consumer Product Safety Commission, from a June 24, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Good morning, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished members of this Committee. I am honored and humbled by President Trump's nomination to serve as a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Before going forward, I would like to recognize my wife, Catherine who is my strongest supporter and is the loveof my life. Our children - Chloe, George and Eloise -- are our greatest pride and joy. I count myself very blessed.
My experience in public service has prepared me to serve as a Commissioner. As the current Executive Director, I have gained a deep understanding of the agency's mission, statutory responsibilities, and the challenges of protecting consumers in a complex and rapidly evolving marketplace.
The mission of CPSC is critically important because consumer product safety affects every American, every day. Effective consumer protection prevents injuries and saves lives while strengthening public confidence in the products consumers use and supports a fair and predictable marketplace for responsible businesses.
Since I joined CPSC, under the leadership of Acting Chairman Peter Feldman and through the hard work of CPSC's men and women:
* The average number of monthly recalls is up 73%.
* The average number of monthly unilateral warnings is up 159%.
* The average number of monthly products screened at ports of entry is up 20%.
* The average number of monthly takedowns is up 208%.
If confirmed, I hope to build on these successes. Throughout my career, I have led organizations responsible for managing risk, improving performance, and making evidence-based decisions. As a Commissioner, I would use that experience to help ensure the agency remains an effective, accountable, and trusted consumer protection organization that delivers measurable impact within the limits of its statutory authority.
If confirmed, I would focus on three priorities that are central to advancing CPSC's mission.
First, I would prioritize addressing hidden and complex product hazards that consumers cannot reasonably identify or avoid on their own. Many of the most serious risks stem from design flaws, manufacturing defects, or other hazards that require specialized expertise to detect.
Second, I would focus on strengthening CPSC's use of data, analytics, and technology to identify hazards earlier, improve enforcement, and target resources. Advanced analytics will move the agency from a reactive approach to one that prevents injuries before they occur.
Third, I would focus on ensuring CPSC keeps pace with innovation and emerging product risks. New technologies, advanced materials, connected devices, and energy-storage systems offer significant benefits but can also create new safety challenges.
The Commission's mission is simple but profoundly important: protecting Americans from unreasonable risks of injury. If confirmed, I will work every day to ensure CPSC carries out that mission with integrity, sound science, and a relentless focus on results. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/meetings/2861aba8-07cb-5eff-fd2e-2eb0859349a6/CPSC-Brien-Lorenze-Opening-Statement_45747931-345d-43c6-949c-ff39ebac7911-2.pdf
* * *
Good morning, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished members of this Committee. I am honored and humbled by President Trump's nomination to serve as a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Before going forward, I would like to recognize my wife, Catherine who is my strongest supporter and is the love ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 30 -- The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee released the following testimony by Brien Lorenze, President Trump's nominee for a seat on the Consumer Product Safety Commission, from a June 24, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Good morning, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished members of this Committee. I am honored and humbled by President Trump's nomination to serve as a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Before going forward, I would like to recognize my wife, Catherine who is my strongest supporter and is the loveof my life. Our children - Chloe, George and Eloise -- are our greatest pride and joy. I count myself very blessed.
My experience in public service has prepared me to serve as a Commissioner. As the current Executive Director, I have gained a deep understanding of the agency's mission, statutory responsibilities, and the challenges of protecting consumers in a complex and rapidly evolving marketplace.
The mission of CPSC is critically important because consumer product safety affects every American, every day. Effective consumer protection prevents injuries and saves lives while strengthening public confidence in the products consumers use and supports a fair and predictable marketplace for responsible businesses.
Since I joined CPSC, under the leadership of Acting Chairman Peter Feldman and through the hard work of CPSC's men and women:
* The average number of monthly recalls is up 73%.
* The average number of monthly unilateral warnings is up 159%.
* The average number of monthly products screened at ports of entry is up 20%.
* The average number of monthly takedowns is up 208%.
If confirmed, I hope to build on these successes. Throughout my career, I have led organizations responsible for managing risk, improving performance, and making evidence-based decisions. As a Commissioner, I would use that experience to help ensure the agency remains an effective, accountable, and trusted consumer protection organization that delivers measurable impact within the limits of its statutory authority.
If confirmed, I would focus on three priorities that are central to advancing CPSC's mission.
First, I would prioritize addressing hidden and complex product hazards that consumers cannot reasonably identify or avoid on their own. Many of the most serious risks stem from design flaws, manufacturing defects, or other hazards that require specialized expertise to detect.
Second, I would focus on strengthening CPSC's use of data, analytics, and technology to identify hazards earlier, improve enforcement, and target resources. Advanced analytics will move the agency from a reactive approach to one that prevents injuries before they occur.
Third, I would focus on ensuring CPSC keeps pace with innovation and emerging product risks. New technologies, advanced materials, connected devices, and energy-storage systems offer significant benefits but can also create new safety challenges.
The Commission's mission is simple but profoundly important: protecting Americans from unreasonable risks of injury. If confirmed, I will work every day to ensure CPSC carries out that mission with integrity, sound science, and a relentless focus on results. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/meetings/2861aba8-07cb-5eff-fd2e-2eb0859349a6/CPSC-Brien-Lorenze-Opening-Statement_45747931-345d-43c6-949c-ff39ebac7911-2.pdf
Assistant Secretary of Interior for Fish & Wildlife Nominee Lilly Testifies Before Senate Environment & Public Works Committee
WASHINGTON, June 30 -- The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee released the following testimony by Kevin J. Lilly, President Trump's nominee to be assistant secretary of the Interior for fish and wildlife and parks, from a June 24, 2026, confirmation hearing:
* * *
Good morning, Chairman Capito, Ranking Member Whitehouse, and Members of the Committee. I am both honored and humbled that President Trump has nominated me, and for Secretary Burgum's trust in me, to serve as Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks at the Department of the Interior.
I am grateful for the unwavering ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 30 -- The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee released the following testimony by Kevin J. Lilly, President Trump's nominee to be assistant secretary of the Interior for fish and wildlife and parks, from a June 24, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Good morning, Chairman Capito, Ranking Member Whitehouse, and Members of the Committee. I am both honored and humbled that President Trump has nominated me, and for Secretary Burgum's trust in me, to serve as Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks at the Department of the Interior. I am grateful for the unwaveringsupport of my wife, Lesley. Throughout our many years together, her faith and resilience have always been my north star. I am also proud to be the father of two Eagle Scouts and of a remarkable daughter who has made us doting grandparents. Their commitment to service, leadership, and family has inspired me as much as I have tried to inspire them. Much of my life has been devoted to encouraging young people to grow in character and confidence -- whether through my work as an Assistant Scout Master or as a youth baseball and softball coach. These experiences reinforced my belief in mentorship, responsibility, and community.
Our family's love of hunting, fishing, and camping has carried me across some of the most beautiful and diverse landscapes in our nation. Experiencing these places firsthand has deepened my appreciation for the public lands entrusted to us and strengthened my desire to expand access to them so that more Americans can share in the same sense of wonder, peace, and connection to the land. My faith has always guided my respect for creation, grounding my belief that natural resources are gifts to be cared for with humility and gratitude.
The values that guide me today were shaped early in life. Growing up in federal housing as the youngest of five taught me resilience, gratitude, and the importance of hard work. My maternal grandparents immigrated from Sicily in search of opportunity. My grandfather, poor and uneducated, found work as a street cleaner in New York City. My father, whose Irish ancestors immigrated to Boston, served in World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and as a Police Officer. My older brother served honorably in Vietnam before losing his life to the long-term effects of Agent Orange exposure. These experiences gave me a deep understanding of hardship, strengthened my empathy for others, and instilled in me a profound respect for the strength families and communities can provide.
These foundations have shaped my approach to service throughout my life -- first as a commissioned U.S. Army Cavalry Officer and Tank Commander, then as a Texas state police commissioner, and now in my work at the Department of the Interior. Over the past year, serving as a steward of America's natural resources has been more than a professional opportunity; it has been a calling. My faith, rooted in care, responsibility, and respect for creation, aligns naturally with work that protects public lands and wildlife. I carry into this mission a sense of purpose rooted in humility and gratitude. I am also grateful for the dedicated career men and women who serve faithfully in the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service. I am inspired each day by their public service.
I am grateful for the opportunity to work with our tribal, state, local, and external partners, as well as our gateway communities, and the hundreds of friends groups. This is a collaborative effort to serve the American people and conserve our public lands.
As Assistant Secretary, my focus will be straightforward: keeping our national parks open, safe, and properly staffed for the families who visit them; supporting the men and women of the Fish and Wildlife Service in their work to recover species and sustain healthy habitat; and confronting the deferred-maintenance backlog that affects both visitor safety and the condition of these treasured places. I will work hand in hand with our state, tribal, and local partners -- and with the gateway communities whose livelihoods depend on these lands -- to advance both conservation and access.
In closing, I want to share a moment that defines this vision. After this year's Artemis II mission -- the first time Americans flew around the Moon in more than fifty years -- the mission's commander, by his own account not a religious man, described being so overwhelmed by what he experienced that, back aboard the recovery ship, he broke down in tears at the simple sight of a chaplain's cross. Recently while at Yosemite National Park, I awoke to see the sun cresting above Half Dome and I was also overwhelmed with that sense of awe and grace. It is that moment that I hope each American can in some way experience, that our nation's children can find comfort not in the virtual world, but the creator's world. Our national parks and wildlife refuges are the salvation of the American soul.
I commit to you and the Committee, I will remain an unwavering steward of the precious resources under my watch while ensuring Americans can enjoy public lands safely, responsibly, and fully -- today and for generations to come.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today, and I am happy to answer any of your questions.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2/c/2cf43377-0f72-49cb-bafc-93b5f0d9a697/608F79B56166BE097BCAF91B9CA43C6C782F169BFFCDAD91FF02E2DE4DDC117C.06-24-2026-lilly-testimony.pdf
* * *
Good morning, Chairman Capito, Ranking Member Whitehouse, and Members of the Committee. I am both honored and humbled that President Trump has nominated me, and for Secretary Burgum's trust in me, to serve as Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks at the Department of the Interior.
I am grateful for the unwavering ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, June 30 -- The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee released the following testimony by Kevin J. Lilly, President Trump's nominee to be assistant secretary of the Interior for fish and wildlife and parks, from a June 24, 2026, confirmation hearing: * * * Good morning, Chairman Capito, Ranking Member Whitehouse, and Members of the Committee. I am both honored and humbled that President Trump has nominated me, and for Secretary Burgum's trust in me, to serve as Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks at the Department of the Interior. I am grateful for the unwaveringsupport of my wife, Lesley. Throughout our many years together, her faith and resilience have always been my north star. I am also proud to be the father of two Eagle Scouts and of a remarkable daughter who has made us doting grandparents. Their commitment to service, leadership, and family has inspired me as much as I have tried to inspire them. Much of my life has been devoted to encouraging young people to grow in character and confidence -- whether through my work as an Assistant Scout Master or as a youth baseball and softball coach. These experiences reinforced my belief in mentorship, responsibility, and community.
Our family's love of hunting, fishing, and camping has carried me across some of the most beautiful and diverse landscapes in our nation. Experiencing these places firsthand has deepened my appreciation for the public lands entrusted to us and strengthened my desire to expand access to them so that more Americans can share in the same sense of wonder, peace, and connection to the land. My faith has always guided my respect for creation, grounding my belief that natural resources are gifts to be cared for with humility and gratitude.
The values that guide me today were shaped early in life. Growing up in federal housing as the youngest of five taught me resilience, gratitude, and the importance of hard work. My maternal grandparents immigrated from Sicily in search of opportunity. My grandfather, poor and uneducated, found work as a street cleaner in New York City. My father, whose Irish ancestors immigrated to Boston, served in World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and as a Police Officer. My older brother served honorably in Vietnam before losing his life to the long-term effects of Agent Orange exposure. These experiences gave me a deep understanding of hardship, strengthened my empathy for others, and instilled in me a profound respect for the strength families and communities can provide.
These foundations have shaped my approach to service throughout my life -- first as a commissioned U.S. Army Cavalry Officer and Tank Commander, then as a Texas state police commissioner, and now in my work at the Department of the Interior. Over the past year, serving as a steward of America's natural resources has been more than a professional opportunity; it has been a calling. My faith, rooted in care, responsibility, and respect for creation, aligns naturally with work that protects public lands and wildlife. I carry into this mission a sense of purpose rooted in humility and gratitude. I am also grateful for the dedicated career men and women who serve faithfully in the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service. I am inspired each day by their public service.
I am grateful for the opportunity to work with our tribal, state, local, and external partners, as well as our gateway communities, and the hundreds of friends groups. This is a collaborative effort to serve the American people and conserve our public lands.
As Assistant Secretary, my focus will be straightforward: keeping our national parks open, safe, and properly staffed for the families who visit them; supporting the men and women of the Fish and Wildlife Service in their work to recover species and sustain healthy habitat; and confronting the deferred-maintenance backlog that affects both visitor safety and the condition of these treasured places. I will work hand in hand with our state, tribal, and local partners -- and with the gateway communities whose livelihoods depend on these lands -- to advance both conservation and access.
In closing, I want to share a moment that defines this vision. After this year's Artemis II mission -- the first time Americans flew around the Moon in more than fifty years -- the mission's commander, by his own account not a religious man, described being so overwhelmed by what he experienced that, back aboard the recovery ship, he broke down in tears at the simple sight of a chaplain's cross. Recently while at Yosemite National Park, I awoke to see the sun cresting above Half Dome and I was also overwhelmed with that sense of awe and grace. It is that moment that I hope each American can in some way experience, that our nation's children can find comfort not in the virtual world, but the creator's world. Our national parks and wildlife refuges are the salvation of the American soul.
I commit to you and the Committee, I will remain an unwavering steward of the precious resources under my watch while ensuring Americans can enjoy public lands safely, responsibly, and fully -- today and for generations to come.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today, and I am happy to answer any of your questions.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/2/c/2cf43377-0f72-49cb-bafc-93b5f0d9a697/608F79B56166BE097BCAF91B9CA43C6C782F169BFFCDAD91FF02E2DE4DDC117C.06-24-2026-lilly-testimony.pdf