Beyer, Don RSS Articles

Beyer Statement On East Potomac Park

Sat, 17 Oct 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), who represents a Northern Virginia district in the U.S. House across the Potomac River from Washington D.C., today blasted President Trump’s announcement that he would destroy East Potomac Park to build an expensive new golf course.

Beyer recently led a site tour at East Potomac with cyclists, runners, and other local residents to raise awareness of the Trump Administration’s malfeasance there, and subsequently joined a congressional investigation of the Administration’s secretive activities at the site. Days later, a federal judge eviscerated Trump officials for their sudden demolition of hundreds of trees at the park on hours’ notice.

Beyer said:

“The Trump Administration was clearly lying about the reasons for their mass felling of trees in East Potomac last weekend. They were lying to conceal from the American people that, at a time when our country is at war and everyone is worried about the economy and high prices, the President simply doesn’t care. Trump is focused on building an upscale golf course within walking distance of the White House, on his fancy ballroom, and on his memorial arch to himself.

“The design Trump is pursuing would block off or eliminate roads and paths used by large numbers of local residents for cycling and walking, no doubt to make the area another exclusive hangout for his rich and powerful friends. He is almost certainly doing all of this at great expense on taxpayers’ dime, and if recent history is a guide, with corrupt contracting practices. What a disgrace.”

Trump Capitulates To Putin On Sanctions, As Predicted

Fri, 16 Oct 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), the Senior House Democrat on Congress’ Joint Economic Committee, member of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade, and a leading critic of the Lindsey Graham Sanctioning Russia Act prior to its passage last month, issued the following statement today after President Trump waived all sanctions on Russia under the law:

“President Trump just waived all of the sanctions on Russia provided for in the Lindsey Graham Sanctioning Russia Act, just as I and others warned he would. Trump’s latest surrender to Putin again betrays our Ukrainian partners and defies clear congressional intent of legislation designed to punish Russia for its illegal war of aggression. Trump has proven he will twist this law and abuse the powers it conferred on him, and while he has let the tariff powers lie for the moment, the law as written also empowers Trump to weaponize new trade authorities against our allies and trading partners. Congress must fix this flawed law to stop Trump from capitulating to Putin and ensure it truly supports Ukraine.”

Rep. Don Beyer, a former U.S. Ambassador, serves as Senior House Democrat on the Joint Economic Committee, chairs the New Democrat Coalition’s Trade Task Force, and serves on the House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee.

Opposition To Trump’s Vanity Arch Grows

Thu, 15 Oct 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Staunch opposition to Donald Trump’s proposed vanity arch grew sharpy in early October, as veterans, residents, and workers expressed hostility to the project, and the Northern Virginia county that surrounds the site filed suit against it.

On October 1^st, as NPR reported: “Veterans, retirees and lawmakers spoke out — against its scale, its cost, its lack of Congressional approval, its gaudiness, its intrusion on nearby Arlington National Cemetery and more.”

On October 7^th, per the Associated Press: “The union representing thousands of flight attendants said Wednesday it has safety concerns about President Donald Trump’s proposed triumphal arch that will be on final approach to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.”

On October 8^th, the Washington Post reported: “Arlington County’s local elected body sued to block construction of President Donald Trump’s planned triumphal arch on Thursday, arguing that administration officials bypassed a key review process in their push to begin work on the structure.”

Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), who represents a Northern Virginia district in the U.S. House that includes Arlington County, Arlington National Cemetery, and Ronald Reagan National Airport (DCA), today issued the following statement:

“The Administration’s pursuit of Donald Trump’s deeply disrespectful arch has broken the law repeatedly, and now people from many backgrounds are banding together to fight it. I applaud Arlington County’s legal challenge, which rightly confronts the Administration’s illegal attempts to bypass legally required processes to assess the project’s impacts on the local community. Trump wants to avoid these assessments because everyone knows what an honest study would say: this arch is a costly boondoggle that would increase traffic and decrease air safety for the local community. The latter point has also been echoed by workers on the planes that fly in and out of DCA, and the safety concerns would be multiplied many times over if the structure were used as a base for military drones. The bottom line is that Trump’s arch is morally repugnant, and as his pursuit of it gets more corrupt the opposition will continue to grow.”

Rep. Don Beyer is leading congressional efforts to block construction of Trump’s arch. His Northern Virginia district includes the Arlington National Cemetery, where his parents, grandparents, and sister are buried. He is the author of the Arlington National Cemetery Viewshed Protection Act, which would explicitly prohibit construction of the arch. He previously raised concerns about the projects impacts on traffic in the region, which the Trump Administration has yet to address. The arch has been a consistent source of anger and concern to Beyer’s constituents, who like much of the country, vociferously oppose the project.

The National Park Service’s “Assessment of Effect” on President Trump’s proposed 250-foot “triumphal arch” found that the arch would “adversely affect” dozens of nearby historic sites and monuments, including Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington Memorial Bridge, the Lincoln Memorial, the Washington Monument, the National Cathedral, George Washington Memorial Parkway, and many others. The proposal currently faces legal challenges, which allege that it violates the National Historic Preservation Act.

Beyer Joins Call with McClain Delaney, Ocasio-Cortez, Mfume, Subramanyam, and Elfreth to Pause FAA’s AI Tool at Washington-Area Airports

Fri, 09 Oct 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Congressman Don Beyer (VA-08) is leading a congressional letter with co-leads Representatives April McClain Delaney, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Kweisi Mfume, Suhas Subramanyam, and Sarah Elfreth urging the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to pause use of its new artificial intelligence-enabled air traffic management tool until the agency answers questions about safety testing, implementation, and oversight.

The letter to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford raises concerns about the September 21 deployment of the Strategic Management of Airspace, Routes, and Trajectories (SMART) tool at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Washington Dulles International Airport, and Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport.

The FAA’s rush to deploy a system that could affect the lives of millions of Americans is especially concerning for residents of this region, who are still grappling with questions about air safety following last year’s fatal crash at DCA. Before deploying its AI-enabled SMART air traffic control tool, the FAA must demonstrate, through air traffic controller feedback and independently verified testing, that this technology is safe and reliable, and it must clearly communicate those findings to the public,” said Congressman Don Beyer.

“When Maryland families board a plane, they deserve to know that every system guiding their flight has been thoroughly tested and that the people keeping them safe have the training they need,” said Congresswoman McClain Delaney. “After the devastating crash over DCA that took 67 lives, the FAA owes this region answers. I support modernizing our aviation systems, but passenger safety must come first. I’m calling on the FAA to pause this rollout, show us the safety testing, and explain who is accountable when something goes wrong.”

“Last month, the Federal Aviation Administration surprisingly launched an AI tool to help control air traffic over three major National Capital Region Airports, with plans to expand nationwide in the following 90 days. They did so without publishing a safety evaluation or sufficiently consulting air traffic controllers and safety experts. We are urging Transportation Secretary Duffy and FAA Administrator Bedford to stop the rollout until we have answers. This administration may treat Big Tech companies with impunity, but air traffic control leaves zero margin for error,” said Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

"Families across Baltimore count on BWI to get them where they’re going safely. Yet the Trump Administration recklessly rolled out an untested AI air traffic tool there without publishing a safety evaluation or adequately consulting the air traffic controllers who keep us safe. There is no room for error in our skies. I am proud to co-lead this letter calling for public transparency and answers from Secretary Duffy and Administrator Bedford on how this system was tested, who was consulted, and how it will be evaluated. Until they provide answers that ensure that this technology is safe, the FAA must pause its use," said Congressman Kweisi Mfume.

“The airspace in the DC region is incredibly complicated and demands the highest standard of safety and reliability from Air Traffic Control. We need to be extremely cautious about implementing AI tools into the systems responsible for the safety of our skies. I urge the FAA to prove that the system does not pose a risk to the public before allowing its use," said Congressman Suhas Subramanyam.

“Every day, our airports and their staff ensure tens of thousands of worldwide travelers are safe and secure – including here at the Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport in Maryland’s Third District. While we fully recognize the need to modernize our air traffic control systems, we cannot pursue modernization at the expense of public safety, especially when it comes to implementing new technologies like AI,” said Congresswoman Elfreth. “As AI safety concerns are top of mind for our neighbors, this is another instance where we cannot afford to miss the moment on regulating this technology. I also am determined to continue to work with my colleagues to ensure our hardworking air traffic controllers have every resource they need to do their jobs and ensure the safety of our passengers.”

At a time when AI safety concerns are sky high, the lawmakers warn that the FAA has not provided sufficient transparency around its decision-making process prior to deployment, nor the functioning of SMART’s underlying AI systems. Congress, and the public, deserve to know how AI systems were tested and how they will influence decisions before being deployed in safety critical systems.

The letter also raises concerns about reports that frontline aviation safety workers received only days of notice, or no notice at all, before deployment. With air traffic controllers already facing staffing pressures, the lawmakers stress that new technology must be introduced with adequate training and clear procedures for human oversight.

The lawmakers request answers in three areas:

Safety testing: What evaluations were completed before deployment, how the system performs during severe weather or outages, and whether any safety review requirements were waived during the contracting process.
Consultation and training: What input the FAA sought from airport authorities, air safety workers, and airlines; what training personnel received; and how the tool should influence decision-making.
Evaluation and accountability: How the FAA will measure performance during the initial 90-day evaluation, what standards must be met before nationwide expansion, and who is responsible if a recommendation contributes to a safety incident.

The letter calls for a pause until lawmakers can better understand the FAA’s decision-making, rollout process, and evaluation plan. The co-leads emphasize that modernizing air traffic control must prioritize safety, transparency, and the expertise of the people responsible for keeping our skies safe.

Beyer, DeGette, Matsui Statement on Illegal Impoundment of Health Research Funds

Wed, 07 Oct 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Representatives Don Beyer (VA-08), Diana DeGette (CO-01), and Doris Matsui (CA-07) released the following statement after the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a legal determination confirming the administration illegally impounded $78 million in Fiscal Year 2025 funding for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The decision comes more than a year after Reps. Beyer, DeGette, and Matsui sent the initial request for a nonpartisan legal opinion on the matter.

“The GAO’s decision today confirms what we have known for over a year: Donald Trump is stealing taxpayers’ dollars that Congress set aside to improve Americans’ health. The administration’s unilateral dismantling of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s grantmaking operations is an illegal impoundment of Congressionally appropriated funds.

“Under Article I of the Constitution, the power of the purse rests strictly with Congress, not the executive branch. Trump’s administration cannot simply refuse to spend the resources we authorized for lifesaving health care research. Republicans must join Democrats in demanding that the Constitution is upheld.”

Background:

The Trump administration’s massive cuts at the Department of Health and Human Services beginning April 1, 2025, disrupted grant funding for health care research across the country, including in Colorado. AHRQ suffered particularly devastating impacts to its grants supporting more efficient, effective, and safe health care. Grantmaking at AHRQ halted: from April 1 to September 5, 2025, AHRQ did not issue a single grant. The agency would typically issue up to 73 grants during a comparable time period.

In September 2025, Representatives Beyer, DeGette, and Matsui sent a request to GAO for their legal opinion on whether disruptions of AHRQ’s grantmaking process represented illegal withholding of funds in violation of the Impoundment Control Act, which regulates the president’s ability to delay or withhold Congressionally appropriated spending. The GAO is often called the “Congressional watchdog” for its role in investigating federal government spending and performance.

Today, after a lengthy nonpartisan investigation, the GAO announced its findings that the Trump administration did illegally withhold—or impound—$78 million Congress directed to support healthcare research.

Egypt Human Rights Caucus Co-Chairs Urge Immediate Release of Detained Egyptian Journalists

Fri, 02 Oct 2026 04:00:00 GMT

U.S. Representatives Don Beyer (D-VA) and Suzan DelBene (D-WA), Co-Chairs of the Egypt Human Rights Caucus, today urged the Egyptian government to immediately and unconditionally release the six journalists affiliated with independent investigative journalism platform Matsadaash and end its escalating crackdown on independent media:

“As co-chairs of the Egypt Human Rights Caucus, we call on Egyptian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release the six journalists affiliated with the independent investigative journalism platform Matsadaash. The arrest of the outlet’s entire newsroom is a clear escalation in the government’s campaign to stifle press freedom in the country.

“Even prior to these arrests, Egypt has consistently ranked as one of the world’s most repressive regimes and has a long history of unfairly targeting independent media outlets and drastically limiting freedom of expression. Egyptian authorities regularly claim, without sufficient evidence or due process, that critics of the government are members of the Muslim Brotherhood. The recent arrests are the latest and most alarming case of this tactic on display.

“We have tried to engage constructively with the Egyptian government on our concerns about the country’s human rights situation, including its arbitrary detention of journalists and targeting of media outlets. These arrests demonstrate why Congress must strengthen its resolve, demand better from its partner, and continue to condition U.S. military aid to Egypt on demonstrable rights reforms.”

Beyer, Mfume, Landsman, Van Hollen Lead 75 Colleagues in Pressing Trump Administration to Withdraw Proposal that Would Gut Civil Rights Protections for Federal Employees

Thu, 01 Oct 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Today, Representatives Don Beyer (D-Va.), Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.), and Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) and U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) along with 75 of their colleagues, called on Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Chair Andrea Lucas to rescind their proposed rule to eliminate protections and strip federal employees of critical civil rights in discrimination complaints. While the lawmakers expressed support for implementing improvements to the existing federal-sector Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) process, they stressed that this proposed rule would make it more difficult for federal workers to challenge workplace discrimination and would weaken essential safeguards for their claims.

The lawmakers were joined in sending this letter by Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and by Representatives Gabe Amo (D-R.I.-01), Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.-03), Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.-44), Wesley Bell (D-Mo.-01), Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.-02), Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.-02), Shontel Brown (D-Ohio-11), Julia Brownley (D-Calif.-26), Nikki Budzinski (D-Ill.-13), Troy Carter (D-La.-02), Ed Case (D-Hawaii-01), Judy Chu (D-Calif.-28), Gil Cisneros (D-Calif.-31), Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.-09), Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas-30), Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.-04), Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.-10), Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.-03), Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.-06), Sarah Elfreth (D-Md.-03), Laura Friedman (D-Calif.-30), John Garamendi (D-Calif.-08), Robert Garcia (D-Calif.-42), Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas-29), Al Green (D-Texas-09), Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.-07), Val Hoyle (D-Ore.-04), Glenn Ivey (D-Md.-04), Jonathan Jackson (D-Ill.-01), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.-07), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.-04), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio-09), Robin Kelly (D-Ill.-02), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.-17), Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.-08), John Larson (D-Conn.-01), Summer Lee (D-Pa.-12), Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.-08), John Mannion (D-N.Y.-22), Lucy McBath (D-Ga.-06), April McClain Delaney (D-Md.-06), Jennifer McClellan (D-Va.-04), LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.-10), Christian Menefee (D-Texas-18), Grace Meng (D-N.Y.-06), Kevin Mullin (D-Calif.-15), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.-12), Joe Neguse (D-Colo.-02), Donald Norcross (D-N.J.-01), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.-At Large), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.-14), Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.-11), Brittany Pettersen (D-Colo.-07), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine-01), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.-02), Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.-03), Andrea Salinas (D-Ore.-06), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.-05), Hillary Scholten (D-Mich.-03), Lateefah Simon (D-Calif.-12), Adam Smith (D-Wash.-09), Greg Stanton (D-Ariz.-04), Suhas Subramanyam (D-Va.-10), Mark Takano (D-Calif.-39), Dina Titus (D-Nev.-01), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.-12), Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.-20), Juan Vargas (D-Calif.-52), James Walkinshaw (D-Va.-11), and Maxine Waters (D-Calif.-43).

The lawmakers begin, “We strongly oppose the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) proposed rule, which would revise the federal-sector equal employment opportunity complaint process. As Members representing hundreds of thousands of federal employees who serve our country every day, we are deeply concerned that this proposal would make it more difficult for those workers to challenge workplace discrimination and would weaken safeguards intended to ensure impartial review of their claims. As such, we urge the Commission to withdraw this proposal and pursue reforms that make the federal-sector EEO process both faster and fairer.”

“We agree that the existing federal-sector Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) process needs improvement. The current process is slow and understaffed, agencies often miss deadlines, and the structure requires an employing agency to investigate allegations against itself. Reforming the process should correct these shortcomings. However, unlike the proposed rule, the reforms should not eliminate protections and shift more power to the agency accused of discrimination,” they continue.

“We urge the Commission to withdraw the NPRM and engage Congress in developing a revised proposal. While speed and efficiency matter, this proposed rule could have the effect of making EEO claims slower on top of stripping federal employees of key rights. The federal government should be a model employer free of discrimination, and its civil-rights process should reflect that obligation,” the lawmakers conclude.

The full text of the letter is available here and below.

Dear Chair Lucas:

We strongly oppose the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) proposed rule, which would revise the federal-sector equal employment opportunity complaint process. As Members representing hundreds of thousands of federal employees who serve our country every day, we are deeply concerned that this proposal would make it more difficult for those workers to challenge workplace discrimination and would weaken safeguards intended to ensure impartial review of their claims. As such, we urge the Commission to withdraw this proposal and pursue reforms that make the federal-sector EEO process both faster and fairer.

We agree that the existing federal-sector Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) process needs improvement. The current process is slow and understaffed, agencies often miss deadlines, and the structure requires an employing agency to investigate allegations against itself. Reforming the process should correct these shortcomings. However, unlike the proposed rule, the reforms should not eliminate protections and shift more power to the agency accused of discrimination.

First, the proposal would replace mandatory pre-complaint counseling with direct filing and a substantially more demanding threshold. Under the current framework, a worker generally has 45 days to contact an EEO counselor, who confidentially explains the process and could possibly facilitate early resolution. Under the proposed rule, the worker instead would have 60 days to file a formal complaint to their agency that “must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.” This not only removes the process for employees to speak with an expert about the process, but it also increases the standard for which federal employees can seek relief and notifies the agency directly of the complaint. Many federal employees are unrepresented and lack access to evidence, such as internal communications, personnel records, or other information that is controlled by the agency. A plausibility screen at the outset therefore risks dismissal of potentially meritorious claims precisely because the agency holds the facts needed to prove them. In fact, EEOC’s own analysis shows that complaints can be erroneously dismissed, as shown by a 30% to 45% annual reversal rate for agency procedural dismissals from 2008-2012. These dismissals occurred even with the lower standard for seeking relief.

The 60 days to file is also shorter than the 180 days granted to legislative branch employees and the 300 days granted to most private sector employees, thus creating a system that disadvantages federal employees compared to other workers.

Second, the proposal would eliminate a federal employee's right to elect an impartial administrative judge proceeding after the agency investigation or after 180 days. Instead, the agency's final decision would become the ordinary adjudication mechanism, and an administrative judge would become available only if the EEOC’s Office of Federal Sector determines that referral is “necessary or efficient” during an appeal.

Administrative judges provide an essential independent check for federal employees concerned about conflict of interest. They take sworn testimony, resolve disputed facts and credibility issues, and assist in developing a complete evidentiary record. Under the proposal, however, an agency would investigate the complaint, decide whether the agency engaged in discrimination, and potentially conduct its own internal hearing. Concentrating these functions in the agency whose conduct is being challenged raises serious concerns about independence, investigatory bias, and conflicts of interest.

Not only is the criteria for determining whether a hearing is “necessary or efficient” vague and burdensome for employees, the proposal significantly underestimates the amount of time required to review an appeal and determine whether it should be referred to the administrative judge. Agency reports of investigations are typically several hundred to thousands of pages; however, the proposal estimate review of these reports will take one-half hour. This timeline is wholly inadequate for the Commission to comprehend that much material and make a complete, unbiased decision on whether a hearing is warranted. This appellate review of a written record is not a replacement for access to an independent hearing and investigation.

Additionally, the proposed rule places the burden on the employee to request such proceedings and explain why they are warranted. The proposal would penalize workers who do not know to request those proceedings by allowing them to be waived if the worker fails to make the proper request. Given that an employee would no longer go through pre-complaint counseling, it could be difficult for the employee to know that they need to ask for a hearing.

The plan would also shift substantial new adjudicatory and administrative responsibilities onto federal agencies at the very moment many lack the personnel and infrastructure to carry them out. The proposal would make the final agency decision the ordinary disposition for every accepted complaint, while requiring agencies to revise procedures; retrain EEO, human resources, and legal staff; update case-management systems; and satisfy expanded tracking obligations. The NPRM does not explain how agencies will absorb these demands, especially amid the Administration’s reductions in force and buyouts that have hollowed out the workforce responsible for implementation. We have already seen the strain agencies’ HR departments are under trying to keep up with routine employee requests and paperwork. In discrimination cases, administrative delays are not harmless inconveniences, but rather significant barriers that postpone meaningful review and, for employees with meritorious claims, relief and accountability. These delays are unacceptable and should not be made worse.

Additionally, the proposed elimination of administrative class complaints would severely weaken the ability of federal workers to challenge systemic discrimination. The proposed rule would permit a worker to assert a putative class claim only for exhaustion purposes and would allow related individual complaints to be processed jointly, but it would prohibit class certification, class notice, class-wide findings, and relief for absent class members. Joint processing is not a substitute for a class mechanism. Administrative class complaints can spread litigation costs, resolve common questions consistently, and provide relief where individual recoveries are too small to make separate cases realistic. Illustratively, in fiscal years 2023 and 2024, $175 million for federal workers was secured through class settlements. Abolishing the process would shift systemic disputes into more expensive federal litigation, increase burdens on the courts, and leave many workers without a practical remedy.

The rule also purportedly seeks to implement the Elijah E. Cummings Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2020; however, it does so selectively and does not address all of the law’s provisions. For example, the rule does not ensure EEO programs avoid conflicts of interest by being separated from the agency’s HR or General Counsel offices. It also does not address referrals to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) for disciplinary actions—a critical tool given OSC’s ability to act against those who perpetrate discrimination.

The Commission’s proposed changes are counter to Congressional intent. Congress has found that “[f]ederal agencies cannot be run effectively if those agencies practice or tolerate discrimination.” The Commission’s proposed changes will make it more difficult for federal employees to challenge discrimination and easier for agencies to evade accountability. While Section 717 of Title VII contemplates that federal agencies shall receive discrimination complaints, it also charges the EEOC with effective enforcement of anti-discrimination requirements, including by issuing rules that carry out its responsibility. The current rules, while imperfect, better effectuate these responsibilities by accounting for potential conflicts of interest that may arise from agencies adjudicating complaints. Indeed, by providing federal employees with the right to an impartial hearing before the EEOC, where complainants may have access to discovery and a third-party adjudicator, the current process enables federal employees to have recourse in cases where federal agencies are delaying investigations or appear to be biased in their handling of complaints.

Moreover, Congress established the federal sector administrative process to provide federal employees with a more informal and less-costly mechanism to vindicate their rights. Unfortunately, under the guise of simplification, the NPRM needlessly imposes federal court standards on complaints and eliminates employees’ ability to challenge systemic discrimination, burdening federal courts.

Further, the proposed rule would also make it more difficult for federal employees to obtain legal representation by reducing attorney’s fee awards. The proposal disfavors the use of standard fee matrices, asserts that employment discrimination cases are not complex litigation, restricts compensation for work on unsuccessful claims, and generally allows fees only for services performed after a written complaint is filed. For attorneys who must rely on fee recovery, lower or less predictable awards may make it economically impracticable to accept federal-sector EEO matters. The likely consequence is that more employees will be required to navigate an increasingly technical process without counsel.

Finally, the 30-day public comment period is insufficient for review of such complex changes and is contrary to the Commission’s purported interest in substantive feedback. Notably, the docket shows that the NPRM was withdrawn twice on August 28 before being re-posted on August 31. These technical issues likely caused confusion for stakeholders who sought to submit comments during that time period and ultimately gives stakeholders fewer than 30 days to comment.

We urge the Commission to withdraw the NPRM and engage Congress in developing a revised proposal. While speed and efficiency matter, this proposed rule could have the effect of making EEO claims slower on top of stripping federal employees of key rights. The federal government should be a model employer free of discrimination, and its civil-rights process should reflect that obligation.

Beyer, Castro, Dean, Casar, Jacobs, Escobar to Introduce Sanctions on Drivers of Settlement Expansion

Wed, 30 Sep 2026 04:00:00 GMT

On Thursday, Reps. Don Beyer (VA-08), Joaquin Castro (TX-20), Madeleine Dean (PA-04), Greg Casar (TX-35), Sara Jacobs (CA-51), and Veronica Escobar (TX-16) will introduce legislation to impose sanctions on individuals and entities building or expanding settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. H.R. 0953, the Stop the Settlements Act would stop the construction of new settlements or expansion of existing Israeli settlements and outposts in the West Bank and Gaza through the use of sanctions and a prohibition on the importation of goods made in these settlements and outposts. Stopping the construction of new settlements or expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza would protect Palestinians from dispossession of their land and help create a pathway to peace, where both Israelis and Palestinians are able to fully exercise their right to self-determination.

“The continued expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories illustrates the contempt Israel’s government has for international law and longstanding U.S. policy,” said Rep. Beyer. “By accelerating this campaign of violence and theft, particularly in the E1 corridor bordering East Jerusalem, the Israeli government is making clear its intent to fatally undermine the viability of a future Palestinian state. The U.S. cannot and should not accept this explicit effort of illegal territorial expansion, which would make a negotiated resolution to this intractable conflict forever out of reach. This legislation puts teeth on what has been clear U.S. policy for decades and sends a strong message that we will not tolerate the illegal settlement movement any longer.”

“Under Netanyahu’s government, settlers are engaged in a violent land grab that’s ripping Palestinians from their land,” said Congressman Castro. “The record expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank continues to be one of the greatest impediments to peace. Democrats must face this with urgency—act now or watch the prospect of Palestinian self-determination slip away forever. Congress should and can be using every tool we have available, including sanctions. The Stop the Settlements Act gives any person or company looking to take Palestinian land in the West Bank or Gaza a choice: pursue settlements or do business with the United States. The American people have seen the reality on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza, and expect their elected officials to take action. In the coming months and in the next Congress, I will push for the conditions under which security and a lasting peace is possible.”

“The continued construction of Israeli settlements and staking of new outposts in the West Bank and Gaza is a violation of international law. They’re also part of a deliberate, expressed strategy by Prime Minister Netanyahu and his allies to geographically isolate Palestinian communities, block the possibility of a contiguous state, and prevent the Palestinian people from being able to exercise their rights to self-determination,” said Rep. Dean. “Settler organizations and people who illegally push onto Palestinian land, harassing — and even killing legal residents — are actively undermining the peace process and prolonging the current violence. These settlers fund their activities in part through the sale of goods abroad, which this legislation would prohibit, while also authorizing sanctions on some of the worst offenders of international law. It is time that the United States joined our allies — such as the United Kingdom, France, and Canada — in taking action to help preserve dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people, which is essential for progress toward peace.”

“Settlement expansion displaces Palestinians, violates international law, and prevents peace for Israelis and Palestinians alike,” said Congressman Casar. “The Stop the Settlements Act would prohibit the construction and expansion of settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. Congress must work toward lasting peace in the region by ending the occupation and genocide.”

“Pushing Palestinians out of their homes and off their land in Gaza and the West Bank is one of the greatest obstacles to a lasting pathway to peace,” said Congresswoman Jacobs. “As long as the U.S. stands idly by, we’re knowingly supporting Israel’s coordinated strategy to consolidate Israeli control and prevent Palestinian statehood. We have another choice: use our tools and leverage to help make peace and security for Israelis, Palestinians, and everyone in the region a reality. That’s why I’m proud to co-lead the Stop the Settlements Act, which would require the President to sanction individuals and entities that build or expand settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. This is a reasonable and necessary step to uphold international law, protect civilians, de-escalate violence, and preserve the possibility of lasting peace, security, and stability.”

BACKGROUND:

Since December 2022, the Israeli government has approved over 100 new settlements in the West Bank, and Israeli settlers have established almost 200 additional outposts. In comparison, only six settlements were approved in the previous three decades. In recent years, senior Israeli officials have openly called for the re-establishment of settlements in Gaza.

These settlements, built on Palestinian land, are one of the biggest impediments to peace and to Palestinian self-determination.

The Stop the Settlements Act would address the unprecedented growth of settlements by sanctioning any foreign entity or individual that engages with activity for the establishment of new Israeli settlements or outposts in the West Bank or Gaza, including developing infrastructure, construction the settlement area known as E1, or facilitating Israeli civilians onto settlements. The bill would also put a ban on imports of settlements goods. This would mirror and complement efforts currently being taken by countries such as the United Kingdom, France, Canada, the Netherlands, and Spain.

If enacted, the legislation would lead to essentially a defacto settlement freeze with no new settlement construction in the West Bank, while also giving the President the authority to begin going after some of the most problematic and destabilizing settlements and outposts in the West Bank.

The Stop the Settlements Act has gained support from stakeholders with the shared goal of stopping settlement expansion and ensuring Palestinian self-determination and security for Israel:

Jeremy Ben-Ami, President, J Street: “After more than 50 years of Israel disregarding American and other international warnings to stop expanding settlements, it is time for action. We are grateful to Congressman Castro and the other cosponsors for sending a clear signal that Israeli efforts to prevent a Palestinian state will be met with material consequences.”

Margaret DeReus, Executive Director of IMEU Policy Project: “The US government has enabled Israeli settlement expansion for too long without any meaningful repercussions to the detriment of Palestinian lives, including Palestinian Americans that live in Palestine. One of the first things the Trump administration did was reverse previous sanctions, and while they continue to turn a blind eye, this bill would impose real consequences on those who support or engage in settlement expansion, in line with international law and our closest allies. This would include banning anyone from importing any goods produced in any Israeli settlement or outpost. We thank Congressman Castro for being a leader in the fight to protect basic Palestinian rights.”

Hadar Susskind, President and CEO, New Jewish Narrative: “This bill fills a crucial void. The Trump administration has failed to take action that would stop the Israeli government from executing its reckless agenda of land grabs and annexation. Now Congress has the opportunity to step up and close that gap. This is what real American leadership looks like.”

This bill is also endorsed by American Committee for Middle East Rights; A New Policy; Center for International Policy; Friends Committee on National Legislation; Refugees International; Win Without War.

Co-sponsors of the bill include: Mary Gay Scanlon (PA-05), Jared Huffman (CA-02), Derek Tran (CA-45), Becca Balint (VT-AL), Jill Tokuda (HI-02), Nydia Velázquez (NY-07), Troy Carter (LA-02), Paul Tonko (NY-20), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (CA-37), Jim McGovern (MA-02), Mark Pocan (WI-02), Lloyd Doggett (TX-37), Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Chellie Pingree (ME-01), Sean Casten (IL-06), Emily Randall (WA-06), Andrea Salinas (OR-06), Maxwell Frost (FL-10), Stephen Lynch (MA-08), Mark DeSaulnier (CA-10), Ro Khanna (CA-17), Val Hoyle (OR-04), Adelita Grijalva (AZ-07), Kristen McDonald Rivet (MI-08), Melanie Stansbury (NM-01), Chris Deluzio (PA-17), Salud Carbajal (CA-24), Rosa DeLauro (CT-03), Analilia Mejia (NJ-11), Lateefah Simon (CA-12), Bennie Thompson (MS-02), and Mark Takano (CA-39).

Read the full bill text and one-pager here and here.

Bipartisan Claiming Age Clarity Act Heads to President’s Desk

Wed, 30 Sep 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Reps. Don Beyer (VA-08) and Lloyd Smucker (PA-11) announced that their bipartisan Claiming Age Clarity Act, H.R. 5284, has passed the Senate and is headed to the President’s desk for signature.

The lawmakers introduced the legislation to help Americans better understand how the timing of their decision to claim Social Security affects their monthly retirement benefit. The bill previously passed the House of Representatives.

“Passage of this bill is a victory for seniors and older workers, who will now be able to make more informed decisions about their retirement benefits,” said Rep. Don Beyer. “The need for clarity on these issues gets more salient every year as Americans live longer and financial choices become more complex. I thank Rep. Smucker for his leadership on this legislation, and all those who supported the Claiming Age Clarity Act.”

“Americans who have worked their entire lives and earned Social Security benefits deserve clear, straightforward information as they make important decisions about their retirement,” said Rep. Lloyd Smucker. “The Claiming Age Clarity Act replaces confusing government terminology with language that better explains how the age at which someone claims Social Security affects their monthly benefit. I’m grateful that Republicans and Democrats came together to advance this commonsense reform, and I look forward to seeing it signed into law.”

The Claiming Age Clarity Act would modernize terminology used by the Social Security Administration to better reflect how claiming age affects an individual’s monthly benefit:

“Early Eligibility Age” would become “Minimum Benefit Age” — age 62, the earliest age at which an individual can begin receiving retirement benefits, with permanently lower monthly benefits than those received at standard benefit age.
“Full Retirement Age” and “Normal Retirement Age” would become “Standard Benefit Age” — generally age 66 or 67, depending on an individual’s birth year.
“Delayed Retirement Age” would become “Maximum Benefit Age” — age 70, the latest age someone can begin receiving benefits. Electing to delay receiving benefits by a year increases an individual's benefits, up to a maximum of 24% more than the standard benefit.

The bipartisan legislation is supported by AARP, Bipartisan Policy Center Action, and AMAC Action.

Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Chris Coons (D-DE), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Tim Kaine (D-VA) introduced companion legislation in the Senate.

DHS Silence On ICE Agents Threatening Law-Abiding Citizen With Gun Speaks Volumes

Fri, 25 Sep 2026 04:00:00 GMT

Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) today blasted the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for refusing to answer questions about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents who threatened an unarmed, law-abiding U.S. citizen with a gun last month.

Beyer led Democratic leaders raising questions about the incident, in which masked ICE agents pointed a gun at Carolina Molina, a Northern Virginia mother and licensed professional counselor, after trapping her vehicle on the street following a verbal exchange on August 10^th. While the Justice Department sent a short, generic letter that said “the information you have provided may be shared, as appropriate, with others in the Department for their review,” the Department of Homeland Security has failed to respond to the inquiry in any way.

“ICE agents pointed a gun at Carolina Molina for no good reason, they were caught on video lying about it, and now DHS is refusing to answer any questions about what happened. Their silence speaks volumes. Northern Virginians will see this as yet another instance of masked thugs with guns making their community less safe because the Trump Administration is not holding anyone accountable,” said Beyer. “Today law-abiding people with legal status are beaten up, grabbed without warrants, thrown into vans, and disappeared without process of law or legal recourse under the Constitution. Citizens who ask questions or exercise their rights to free speech are harassed, threatened, or even killed. This is the environment of fear the Trump Administration has created with intention and purpose, driven by demands for deportation quotas and content for sick, twisted videos. The American people have had enough of this authoritarian lawlessness.”

Last month, Beyer issued a warning to Northern Virginians about increased ICE violence and warrantless detentions. One of the cases he cited, involving extensive injuries to Arlingtonian Jose Mejia Hernandez, is now under investigation by the Arlington County Police Department.

Rep. Beyer Hosts Global Entry Enrollment Event

Sat, 17 May 2025 14:30:00 GMT

I’m hosting a Global Entry Enrollment Event for applicants who have been conditionally approved to complete the interview portion on Saturday, May 17 at the Ellen Coolidge Burke Branch Library in Alexandria. The event will run from 10:30 AM until 3:40 PM.

All conditionally approved Global Entry applicants can schedule this event from their Trusted Traveler Program (TTP) account, using the location “Alexandria (IAD GE/Ellen Coolidge Burke Branch Library)”.

Ninth Annual Women's Conference: The Ripple Effects of Resilience

Thu, 15 Jan 2026 23:30:00 GMT

After postponing my Annual Women’s Conference due to the government shutdown in October, I’m pleased to share that we have confirmed a new date and look forward to gathering with you.

Please join me as I host my Ninth Annual Women's Conference: The Ripple Effects of Resilience on Thursday, January 15 at George Mason University’s new Fuse building at Mason Square. This event is free to the public but capacity is limited, so attendees are encouraged to register online here.

This year's event will bring together women leaders to share stories of perseverance, strength, and resilience in the face of the challenges confronting our country and community in these unprecedented times.

The discussion will feature Brooke Sydnor Curran, founder of Move2Learn; Lisa Jacobs, Executive Director of the Alexandria Tutoring Consortium; and Elizabeth Jones Valderrama, Executive Director of Offender Aid and Restoration (OAR). The discussion will be moderated by Nyree Wright, Executive Vice President of Crisis & Risk Communications at Edelman. I will also present this year's Clara Mortenson Beyer Women and Children First Award.

Congressman Beyer Hosts Constituent Services Event For Former And Current Federal Workers And Contractors

Sat, 20 Sep 2025 13:00:00 GMT

Please join me for a constituent services event for former and current federal workers and contractors on Saturday, September 20 from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Paragon Theaters in Falls Church.

This event, held in partnership with City of Falls Church Mayor Letty Hardi and the wellfed Team (former federal employees), will provide practical financial guidance alongside community and wellness support. Experts will lead a Financial Triage Workshop, sharing clear strategies for budgeting, expense tracking, and planning at every career stage, with time for Q&A.

There will also be space for connection and mental well-being, recognizing that resilience is built through both financial clarity and a supportive community. Refreshments and lunch will also be provided.

Please click here to RSVP.

POSTPONED: Ninth Annual Women's Conference: The Ripple Effects of Resilience

Mon, 06 Oct 2025 04:00:00 GMT

Please join me as I host my Ninth Annual Women's Conference: The Ripple Effects of Resilience on Monday, October 6 at George Mason University’s new Fuse building at Mason Square. This event is free to the public but capacity is limited, so attendees are encouraged to register online here.

Alexandria Town Hall with NAACP

Sat, 28 Jun 2025 18:00:00 GMT

The NAACP Virginia District 8 proudly announces an engaging Town Hall Meeting scheduled for Saturday, June 28, 2025, from 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. at Roberts Memorial United Methodist Church, located at 606 S Washington Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. This vital community conversation will feature distinguished guest speakers including Congressman Don Beyer, Alexandria City Councilman John Taylor Chapman, Arlington County Board Member Julius "JD" Spain, Jr., and Virginia Delegate Marcus B. Simon.

October No Kings Rally

Sat, 18 Oct 2025 18:30:00 GMT

No Kings rally in Market Square, Alexandria, featuring Mayor Gaskins, Olivia Troye, and other local leaders.

No Kings: Alexandria

Sat, 14 Jun 2025 19:00:00 GMT

No Kings rally at Market Square in Old Town, Saturday, June 14th.

Rep. Beyer's Telephone Town Hall

Wed, 04 Jun 2025 22:00:00 GMT

I'm hosting my next telephone town hall tomorrow night, Wednesday, June 4 at 6:00 p.m. to discuss the latest in Congress, the federal government, and Northern Virginia. To participate, sign up here: https://beyer.house.gov/forms/form/?ID=89

Rep. Beyer Holds Telephone Town Hall As Shutdown Looms

Mon, 29 Sep 2025 21:30:00 GMT

I'm holding a telephone town hall on Monday 9/29 at 5:30pm. I will discuss the impending lapse in federal appropriations and possibility of a shutdown, and take questions on the latest in Congress, Northern Virginia and more.

To participate, you can sign up here: https://beyer.house.gov/forms/form/?ID=90

Protect Our Medicaid Panel

Mon, 02 Jun 2025 17:30:00 GMT

U.S. Rep. Don Beyer (VA-08), Virginia House of Delegates Majority Leader Charniele Herring, Chair of the Virginia House of Delegates’ Health and Human Services Committee Mark Sickles, and state Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria), join a coalition of Virginia home care workers, doctors, and reproductive freedom advocates for a panel discussion to raise the alarm about how threatened Medicaid cuts would impact Northern Virginians.