See how Sean Casten's votes line up with your values.
DeepSyte scores Sean Casten's record on the issues you care about — not party, not press releases. Take the 2-minute values quiz to see your personal alignment.
Sign in and take the values quiz to see how Sean Casten's votes line up with your views.
Prediction track record
How often we called Sean Casten's passage votes correctly, from their stated positions on each bill's tagged topics. Excludes “unclear” calls and abstentions.
A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been authorized by Congress.
Based on 4 data points across public statements and recorded votes · AI analysis of public records
119-hconres-64·Consistent
To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
85/100
What they said
Apr 7, 2026
The congressman opposes the president's stated threat to destroy a civilization, characterizing it as dangerous, reckless, and potentially constituting a war crime. He calls for accountability for administration officials who act on the threat and argues the president is unfit to serve under the 25th Amendment.
Voted Yea on To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
The congressman's statement opposes the president's threat to destroy a civilization and calls for accountability and restraint in military action. The bill directs removal of U.S. Armed Forces from unauthorized hostilities in Venezuela, which aligns with the statement's concern about reckless military threats and the need for congressional authorization before military action. The YES vote is consistent with the stated position that military action must be lawful, authorized, and not driven by dangerous rhetoric.
To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
85/100
What they said
Apr 7, 2026
The congressman opposes the president's stated threat to destroy a civilization, characterizing it as dangerous, reckless, and potentially constituting a war crime. He calls for accountability for administration officials who act on the threat and argues the president is unfit to serve under the 25th Amendment.
The congressman's statement opposes the president's threat to destroy a civilization and calls for accountability and removal of unfit leadership. The bill directs removal of U.S. Armed Forces from Venezuela absent congressional authorization. Both reflect opposition to unilateral executive military action and concern about unauthorized use of force. The vote aligns with the statement's core position that military action requires proper legal and congressional authority, though the statement focuses on the president's fitness and war crimes while the bill addresses the specific mechanism of congressional authorization.
To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
85/100
What they said
Jan 28, 2026
The lawmakers warn oil companies of legal and financial risks from participating in Trump Administration arrangements to control Venezuelan oil assets, citing constitutional limits on presidential authority and potential invalidation by Congress or future administrations.
The statement warns of legal risks from Trump Administration assertions of authority over Venezuelan assets without congressional authorization, citing constitutional limits on presidential power. The concurrent resolution directly implements that concern by requiring congressional authorization before U.S. Armed Forces remain in Venezuela. The rep's yes vote aligns with the statement's core position that unilateral executive action on Venezuela lacks legal foundation and congressional approval.
To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
85/100
What they said
Jan 28, 2026
The lawmakers warn oil companies of legal and financial risks from participating in Trump Administration arrangements to control Venezuelan oil assets, citing constitutional limits on presidential authority and potential invalidation by Congress or future administrations.
Voted Yea on To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
The statement warns of legal risks from Trump Administration assertions of authority over Venezuelan assets without congressional authorization, citing constitutional limits on presidential power and IEEPA constraints. The bill directs removal of armed forces from Venezuela absent congressional authorization. Both express concern about executive overreach regarding Venezuela and emphasize congressional constitutional authority. The statement focuses on economic/contractual risks while the bill addresses military force, but both align on the core principle that unilateral executive action on Venezuela lacks proper legal foundation.
Pairs with ambiguous language and high uncertainty are withheld until more data is available. Procedural, cloture, and amendment votes are excluded — they don't cleanly signal substantive support or opposition.
Pro analysis
AI rep analysis — Pro
Get an AI-narrated read on Sean Casten's full voting record against your stated values — aligned themes, conflicts, notable votes, and what to watch for.
We haven't extracted campaign positions for Sean Casten yet. Once their campaign website or position pages are processed, this card will track what they said vs how they voted.
Crossing the aisle
Passage votes where Sean Casten broke ranks with ≥75% of Democrats. Threshold catches substantively partisan splits; unanimous-ish or close votes are excluded.
Casten, Takano, Foster, Beyer, and Obernolte Lead Bipartisan Coalition to Create the Congressional Office of Technology | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: The release announces the introduction of a bipartisan bill to re-establish a congressional technology assessment office, arguing that Congress needs independent scientific and technical expertise to address emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, fusion energy, and biotechnology.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Reps. Sean Casten (IL-06), Mark Takano (CA-39), Bill Foster (IL-11), Don Beyer (VA-8), and Jay Obernolte (CA-23) introduced the Congressional Office of Technology Improvement and Enhancement Act to restore Congress’ capacity to confront emerging issues in science and technology.
For more than twenty years, Congress had the Office of Technology Assessment, an independent, bipartisan agency set up to provide information on technology and its potential impacts. However, in 1995 the agency was defunded, stripping Congress of the ability to access unbiased scientific and technological expertise as we entered the digital age.
As emerging technologies—from artificial intelligence to fusion energy and biotechnology – rapidly reshape everyday American life, we are witnessing the consequences of defunding a vital source of scientific and technical expertise for Congress.
The need for expert advice and analysis will only continue to grow as Congress works to anticipate the effects of scientific breakthroughs and cutting-edge technology. As Congress considers drafting legislation on emerging technology, Members of Congress require access to unbiased assessments of what is on the horizon.
"Each of us who serve in Congress brings a unique perspective and expertise which informs how we serve our constituents. I am confident in my ability to evaluate energy technologies and their impact on our economy and environment, but I cannot claim the same level of expertise on cybersecurity or gene-drive technologies. How many technologies with truly revolutionary potential have we failed to fund in favor of less useful dead ends? Congressional Office of Technology Improvement and Enhancement Act will ensure we're prepared to tackle the technological challenges of the future," said Congressman Sean Casten.
“Congress cannot continue flying blind into the future. We must have an office of independent experts as we face important decisions to guide emerging technology,” said Congressman Mark Takano. “Establishing the Congressional Office of Technology will enable Members of Congress to work with experts across disciplines, receive informed and unbiased feedback on legislation, and gain detailed understandings of the issues that will impact our nation. I am proud to lead this bipartisan legislation alongside my colleagues who share my commitment to independent scientific expertise.”
"For years, Congress has not been adequately prepared to engage with complex technical issues that are increasingly important to the legislation we consider. As AI-driven technology rapidly reshapes our future, it has never been more important for Members of Congress to have access to forward-looking, non-partisan technical expertise and advice. That's why I'm proud to lead the effort to revive the OTA and bring Congress into the 21st century,” said Congressman Bill Foster.
"Today Congress is confronted by complex issues ranging from cybersecurity to AI to energy and climate, and so much more — and reconstituting the Office of Technology Assessment would provide the Legislative Branch with a crucial internal source of expertise and counsel,” said Congressman Don Beyer. “Our bill would restore and update this key resource and bolster Congress' independence and knowledge in a key area for years to come."
“Effective policymaking requires a thorough understanding of the science and technology behind the issues Congress is tasked with addressing,” said Congressman Jay Obernolte. “The Congressional Office of Technology will strengthen Congress’s ability to evaluate emerging technologies by providing independent analysis, timely technical assistance, and long-term assessments of technological developments. Modernizing these resources is critical to ensuring Congress can make informed policy decisions and develop thoughtful, evidence-based legislation that addresses complex challenges without unnecessarily hindering innovation.”
“More than ever, Congress needs robust, independent science and technology policy advice it can trust,” said Daniel Schuman, Executive Director of the American Governance Institute. “Rep. Takano has long championed restoring that capability through the Office of Technology Assessment, and we agree the time has come for Congress to regain this essential expertise.”
Text of the Congressional Office of Technology Improvement and Enhancement Act can be found here.
Casten Introduces Bill to Expand Benefits of Local Transmission Lines | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Rep. Sean Casten introduced the Integrated Local, Regional, and Interregional Transmission Planning Act, which would require FERC to direct transmission planning regions to integrate local transmission facilities into regional and interregional planning in order to lower costs, improve reliability, and expand access to clean energy.
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Congressman Sean Casten (IL-06) introduced the Integrated Local, Regional, and Interregional Transmission Planning Act, legislation that will make electricity more affordable, reliable, resilient, and clean by helping to make best use of key local transmission facilities in the expansion of regional and interregional transmission capacity. Well-planned transmission broadens the pool of electricity generation resources available to customers, increasing access to less expensive electricity – which tends as well to be the cleanest energy.
“Ensuring that local transmission facilities are considered in regional and interregional transmission planning is vital in creating lower-cost new transmission capabilities,” said Rep. Sean Casten. “The current transmission planning process can be inefficiently narrow in scope. At a time when our electric grid is under tremendous stress, the Integrated Local, Regional, and Interregional Transmission Planning Act offers a fix that can make our grid more efficient, reliable, and resilient, while expanding access to affordable clean energy.”
Claire Wayner and Chaz Teplin of RMI, authors of the landmark 2024 report, “Mind the Regulatory Gap,” said, “We applaud the introduction of the Integrated Local, Regional, and Interregional Transmission Planning Act. The Act will help close the regulatory gap by incorporating local transmission projects into regional and interregional transmission planning. This will maximize benefits for ratepayers by reducing overall system costs and maximizing planning and market efficiencies.”
Talia Calnek-Sugin, Senior Energy Policy Advocate at NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), said, “Right now, transmission planning is done in a disjointed way that produces a less robust grid at a higher cost for Americans. The Integrated Local, Regional, and Interregional Transmission Planning Act would harmonize these fragmented and incomplete planning processes and deliver consumers lower electric bills, clean and affordable energy, and a more reliable power grid.”
Under the Integrated Local, Regional, and Interregional Transmission Planning Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will require transmission planning regions to integrate and improve their planning processes for interregional, regional, and certain local transmission facilities, the latter being those which could be useful, if replaced, for regional or interregional transmission.
The legislation focuses on local transmission facilities for two reasons. First, some existing local transmission lines can be upsized to provide lower-cost regional and interregional transmission, avoiding the need to build new transmission lines.
Second, local transmission projects often inhabit a "regulatory gap” – state overseers are prohibited from objecting to the projects on economic grounds even as they are given a weighty presumption of prudence at the federal level. When transmitting utilities address just their local needs without considering possible regional and interregional benefits, these local transmission investments may foreclose better regional and interregional projects.
Specifically, the Integrated Local, Regional, and Interregional Transmission Planning Act builds on FERC Order 1920 by requiring FERC to issue a regulation that would require transmission planning regions (excluding the Electric Reliability Council of Texas) to:
Integrate interregional, regional, and covered local transmission planning processes;
Advance transmission solutions that are more efficient or cost-effective in the long term to replace the need for less efficient short-term solutions;
Use scenarios of 20 years or more that include a range of factors, including State-approved integrated resource plans; Federal, Tribal, state and local requirements and policy goals; and trends in the costs of fuels, generation and electric storage;
Account for transmission outages due to extreme weather events;
Optimize the existing transmission system, including through grid-enhancing technologies;
Establish cost allocation methodologies applicable to projects selected in their transmission plans, while allowing customers to be charged only for those facilities from which they benefit; and
Develop joint plans with any neighboring Regional Transmission Organizations (RTO) and Independent System Operators (ISO).
The original cosponsors of the bill are U.S. Representatives Kathy Castor (FL-14), Mike Levin (CA-49), George Latimer (NY-16), and James McGovern (MA-02).
A summary of the legislation can be found here.
Text of the legislation can be found here.
Casten, Whitehouse Introduce Legislation to Restore EPA’s Core Mission | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Rep. Casten and Sen. Whitehouse introduced the Environmental Health Restoration Act to restore and strengthen the EPA's mission to protect public health, the environment, and the climate, in response to recent EPA repeal of power-plant greenhouse gas standards. The release criticizes the current administration's EPA deregulatory actions.
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Representative Sean Casten (IL-06) and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) introduced the Environmental Health Restoration Act, legislation to restore and strengthen the Environmental Protection Agency’s core mission to protect public health, the environment, and the climate.
The lawmakers introduced the bill just days after the Trump Administration’s EPA finalized the repeal of major greenhouse gas standards for coal- and gas-fired power plants and moved to eliminate remaining federal climate pollution requirements for the power sector.
“At a time when the Trump Administration is ignoring the climate crisis and undermining Americans’ ability to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and enjoy the outdoors, it is more important than ever to restore a commitment to science-based environmental protection at the EPA,” said Rep. Casten. “The EPA was created to protect public health and our environment. I’m proud to introduce this legislation to refocus the agency on its core mission.”
“The Trump EPA has fully abandoned its decades-long duty to protect Americans’ health and safety. Its relentless attacks on science have delivered for big political donors while poisoning our air and water and speeding up the climate crisis,” said Sen. Whitehouse. “Our bill would jumpstart the long process of restoring the science, the scientists, and the original mission guiding the EPA.”
On Wednesday, September 16th, Rep. Casten and Sen. Whitehouse hosted a press conference with Protect Our Winters and Olympic athletes to highlight the bill's importance and the need to protect the great outdoors.
“As an Olympian training in the mountains all over the world, I’ve seen less and less snow, glaciers shrinking at a not-so-glacial pace, and volatile air quality,” said Tommy Ford, three-time Olympian and World Cup Champion. “This directly affects our community’s health and economy. A stronger, more durable EPA is essential for clean air, clean water and a strong, healthy community.”
“Rolling back environmental protections has real consequences for the places and experiences that define the outdoor community,” said Ben Gubits, Vice President of Campaigns at POW. “It means dirtier air, greater climate pollution, more threats to public health and accelerating damage to our winters, waterways and public lands. The Environmental Health Restoration Act draws a clear line, the EPA must follow science, enforce the law and put people ahead of polluters. This is a positive vision for the future looking well beyond the Trump years.”
The Environmental Health Restoration Act responds to recent deregulatory actions that have weakened or delayed protections governing air pollution, water quality, greenhouse gas emissions and environmental enforcement. It would reaffirm Congress’s intent that the EPA follow science, regulate harmful pollution, and protect communities from environmental harm.
The Environmental Health Restoration Act would:
Restore key protections for pollution from power plants, vehicles, and oil and gas operations that were in effect on January 19, 2025.
Require EPA decisions to be grounded in peer-reviewed science and restore independent scientific advisory bodies.
Rebuild the agency’s civil and criminal enforcement capacity and require annual accountability reporting to Congress.
Prioritize monitoring and enforcement in communities facing disproportionate pollution burdens.
Require public-health and cumulative-impact analyses for EPA actions affecting air and water quality.
Preserve states’ ability to adopt environmental standards stronger than federal requirements.
Allow people harmed by the EPA’s failure to comply with the law to seek relief in federal court.
The legislation is endorsed by Protect Our Winters and the League of Conservation Voters.
Text of the legislation can be found here.
Casten, 17 House Democrats Scrutinize New Trump Coal Plant | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Representative Casten and 17 House Democrats oppose the Department of Energy's $18.5 million loan award for a new coal plant, citing inadequate due diligence, the applicant's lack of relevant experience and political ties, and economic concerns about coal generation.
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Representative Sean Casten (IL-06) led 17 House Democrats in a letter to Department of Energy Secretary Chris Wright scrutinizing DOE’s decision to award $18.5 million for the construction of a new coal plant to a QAnon conspiracy theorist with no relevant experience.
“We are especially concerned about the apparent lack of due diligence conducted by your Department regarding this project. The purpose of the LPO is to provide funding to energy projects that will meaningfully lower costs for all Americans, but only after rigorously evaluating the economic and technical viability of the projects and regardless of any political agenda or intention to advance a favored technology,” the lawmakers wrote. “...The last coal plant in the U.S. was constructed in 2013. Older coal-fired power plants incur higher operating and maintenance costs, making it more expensive to operate existing plants than transition to cleaner, renewable sources.”
The lawmakers also noted the award applicant's lack of experience in the energy industry. Notably, the award applicant holds political ties to the president.
“We raise these concerns in light of the applicant Alex Phillips's lack of relevant experience, his political ties to the President, and the fundamental economic unsoundness of the proposal,” the lawmakers continued. “The decision to award funds to a political ally for a utility-scale generation project represents a major step backward for the stability and affordability of our electric grid and sets a dangerous precedent for more politically influenced deals that will jeopardize progress towards building an electric grid that supports a thriving U.S. economy.”
In addition to Rep. Casten, the letter was signed by Reps. Bonamici, Quigley, Khanna, Levin, Matsui, Mullin, Deluzio, McCollum, Ansari, Jonathan Jackson, Foushee, Pingree, Ross, DeGette, Trahan, Krishnamoorthi, and Beyer.
Text of the letter can be found below. A copy of the letter can be found here.
We write to express our concerns regarding the $18.5 million loan awarded by the Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) to TerraSpark, an “eco-friendly” energy developer, for the construction of a new coal- burning plant. We are especially concerned about the apparent lack of due diligence conducted by your Department regarding this project. The purpose of the LPO is to provide funding to energy projects that will meaningfully lower costs for all Americans, but only after rigorously evaluating the economic and technical viability of the projects and regardless of any political agenda or intention to advance a favored technology.
We raise these concerns in light of the applicant Alex Phillips's lack of relevant experience, his political ties to the President, and the fundamental economic unsoundness of the proposal. The decision to award funds to a political ally for a utility-scale generation project represents a major step backward for the stability and affordability of our electric grid and sets a dangerous precedent for more politically influenced deals that will jeopardize progress towards building an electric grid that supports a thriving U.S. economy.
We write as well in the belief that the hard-working people of West Virginia do not need more false promises. The last coal plant in the U.S. was constructed in 2013. Older coal-fired power plants incur higher operating and maintenance costs, making it more expensive to operate existing plants than transition to cleaner, renewable sources. Since 2021, the cost to operate a coal plant has increased by 28%. Almost one quarter of active coal power plants are slated for retirement by 2029.
Residents of West Virginia in particular have seen a 34% increase in utility bills from 2019 to 2024. Three of the active coal plants under Appalachian Power, accounting for 87% of West Virginia’s electricity, lost a combined $81 million in 2025. Overreliance on expensive coal generation significantly contributes to rising utility costs and lack of economic growth in the region. Meanwhile, onshore wind and utility-scale solar costs have dropped 90%. The myth that coal power energy is better or cheaper helps no one – not the energy consumer, not the taxpayer, and certainly not hard-working people ready for a future in a modern energy economy.
Additional elements of the TerraSpark proposal raise further concerns. The inclusion of a 1 gigawatt artificial intelligence (AI) data center requires significant technical and managerial expertise to ensure electricity demand can be properly met. Also, TerraSpark claims to have an unconventional approach to carbon capture that differentiates it from other coal companies on the market, a chilling assertion given the rarity of a successful power plant/carbon capture combination. It will be essential to examine this technology with rigorous scrutiny to ensure emission reduction targets are met without any harmful impacts on the surrounding community and environment.
In order to confirm that your Department conducted appropriate due diligence, we respectfully request submission of the following information by September 1, 2026:
The biographies of the principals, key project leads, and partners of TerraSpark and any contractors or subcontractors on this project, including relevant experience in building similar projects.
Any application fee collected related to TerraSpark’s proposal.
Documentation that TerraSpark is in compliance with standard prohibitions against conflicts of interest, including with regard to Mr. Alex Phillips, the longtime Trump political ally running TerraSpark.
Letters of firm or contingent project financing, with the contingencies and evidence of financial resources given in detail.
Any executed term sheets or letters of intent with offtakers, financial partners, etc.
Pro forma projections and key assumptions regarding energy costs, operating efficiencies and off-take agreements.
The anticipated debt/equity structure of the deal and likely partners, including key interest rate assumptions, whether equity partners have step-in rights, and under what contingencies these rights may be exercised.
Documentation that TerraSpark has secured the $21.5 million in private capital necessary to receive the federal funds.
The details of the insurance coverage used for this project, including wrap-up insurance, if used, the entities providing the coverage, and evidence of their financial capacity.
The details of any commitment to meet job creation targets and labor standards.
Any milestones, contingent draws or recapture provisions in the event that TerraSpark fails to deliver on any of its commitments.
Thank you for your immediate attention to this critical matter.
Casten Urges SEC Oversight of Prediction Markets | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Rep. Casten and six other House Democrats urged the SEC to issue guidance clarifying whether event contracts (prediction markets) referencing securities, securities indexes, or related financial metrics fall under SEC jurisdiction, citing risks of manipulation and insider trading.
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Representative Sean Casten (IL-06) led seven House Democrats in asking the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to clarify its jurisdiction over prediction markets that reference securities or related financial metrics.
“We recognize that event contracts tied to the performance of U.S. financial markets may present opportunities for investors and businesses to hedge their risks, protect their portfolios, and offset potential losses. However, without appropriate safeguards, these contracts can be highly susceptible to manipulation and insider trading,” the lawmakers wrote. “...Therefore, we urge the SEC to issue guidance regarding the regulatory treatment of event contracts that reference individual securities, securities indexes, or other related metrics, which will help provide much-needed clarity to investors, market participants, and the public.”
Event contracts, often referred to as “prediction markets”, are generally structured as financial derivatives that are called binary options. These contracts “derive” their value from whether the underlying event occurs and provide investors with a predetermined all-or-nothing payout. Leading prediction market platforms currently offer event contracts that are based on the stock prices of publicly traded companies, the market capitalization of major stock indexes, and metrics that are linked to a company’s SEC disclosures. These products are trading alongside other event contracts that are based on everything from the outcomes of sports games to the size of the national debt, the daily temperature in Chicago, and the winners of Love Island UK.
Under existing laws, the SEC has jurisdiction over derivatives markets related to securities, including security options and security-based swaps. In recent agency statements, the SEC specified that contracts based on the price of a public company’s stock, or directly on a stock index, may fit within existing securities frameworks. As a result, these contracts would need to be listed and traded on SEC-registered exchanges, offered by regulated broker-dealers, cleared through an established and regulated clearing organization, and subject to robust investor protections.
In addition to Rep. Casten, the letter was signed by Reps. Bill Foster, Jim Himes, Vicente Gonzalez, Brad Sherman, Ritchie Torres, Gregory Meeks, and Janelle Bynum.
Text of the letter can be found below. Text of the letter can be found here.
We write to request that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issue formal guidance to clarify whether event contracts that reference securities or related financial metrics are subject to SEC oversight.
Event contracts, commonly referred to as prediction markets, are structured as binary options that settle based on whether the underlying event occurs. Some prediction market platforms allow users to trade event contracts based directly on securities indexes such as the S&P 500, Nasdaq-100, or the Russell 2000, or the share prices of large publicly traded companies like Apple, Amazon, and Nvidia.
Certain exchanges also list event contracts tied to metrics disclosed in quarterly or annual SEC filings that may inform a company’s market value. This includes contracts that predict Google’s quarterly earnings, Coinbase’s total trading volume, how many restaurants Cava will open, or how many car deliveries Tesla will make.
We appreciate the SEC’s efforts to provide clarity on the regulatory treatment of innovative, new financial products. Notably, in its January 28, 2026 statement on tokenized securities, the SEC stated that “any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities, including any interest therein or based on the value thereof” is excluded from the definition of a “swap” and subject to the SEC’s exclusive jurisdiction. We further appreciate that the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) reference this exclusion in the June 18, 2026 joint request for comment on the definition of swaps and security-based swaps. This suggests that event contracts based on the price of a public company’s stock or directly on a stock index fit within existing securities frameworks.
Legal experts have also indicated that contracts that are tied to specific outcomes for publicly traded companies, such as earnings announcements, could be considered securities subject to the SEC’s jurisdiction. It would be prudent for the SEC to conduct the appropriate legal analysis and determine whether these contracts should be regulated as securities products.
We recognize that event contracts tied to the performance of U.S. financial markets may present opportunities for investors and businesses to hedge their risks, protect their portfolios, and offset potential losses. However, without appropriate safeguards, these contracts can be highly susceptible to manipulation and insider trading.
Under the existing regulatory framework for derivative securities, the SEC ensures that these products are offered by regulated broker-dealers, traded on SEC-registered exchanges, and cleared through a regulated clearinghouse. These rules appropriately balance investor protections, market oversight, and innovation.
You have previously indicated that prediction markets may involve “overlapping jurisdiction” and that the SEC “ha[s] enough authority” to regulate this space. Therefore, we urge the SEC to issue guidance regarding the regulatory treatment of event contracts that reference individual securities, securities indexes, or other related metrics, which will help provide much-needed clarity to investors, market participants, and the public.
Casten Introduces Bill to Increase Transparency for Proxy Voting, Support Shareholder Rights | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Rep. Casten introduced the Multi-Class Stock Company Voting Transparency Act, which would direct the SEC to require multi-class companies to disclose vote totals by share class on shareholder proposals. The release states that investors should know whether super-voting shareholders affected results.
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Representative Sean Casten (IL-06) introduced the Multi-Class Stock Company Voting Transparency Act, legislation that directs the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to improve the transparency of the voting results at multi-class companies and strengthen the quality of information available to investors.
“The Multi-Class Stock Company Voting Transparency Act would help American retirement savers, pension funds, and university endowments better understand exactly how multi-class stock structures are impacting their rights as shareholders,” said Rep. Sean Casten. “Investors deserve to know whether the board’s response to the outcome of a proposal reflects the preferences of the majority of shareholders—or whether super vote shareholders swayed the results.”
Shareholder proposals are an important mechanism for promoting good governance, corporate accountability, and transparency at public companies. The shareholder proposal process enables investors to engage in a meaningful dialogue with the companies that they own and offer their perspectives on important, financially material issues.
About 75% of publicly traded companies have shares with equal voting rights, where one share represents one vote on the shareholder proposals that are presented at a company’s annual meeting. The remaining 25% of companies sell shares with differential voting rights, which are known as multi-class or dual-class structures. For example, a company may offer Class A shares that are in line with the ‘one share, one vote’ principle to the general public. Class B shares that represent 10 votes per share may be reserved for founders, executives, and industry insiders. This provides them with significantly more voting power, and, therefore, they can significantly influence the voting outcomes of shareholder proposals.
Current SEC rules require that all public companies disclose the aggregate vote tallies for each shareholder proposal and whether each proposal passed or failed. The Multi-Class Stock Company Voting Transparency Act directs the SEC to conduct a rulemaking to require that multi-class companies also disclose the total number of votes cast for, against, or withheld on by Class A shareholders and Class B shareholders on each proposal, alongside other required disclosure information.
The legislation has been endorsed by the Council of Institutional Investors (CII).
Text of the legislation can be found here.
Casten Urges EU President von der Leyen to Maintain EU Methane Regulation Standards | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Representative Casten and four other House Democrats urge the European Commission to maintain the integrity and ambition of the EU Methane Regulation and to resist calls for delay or weakening, and offer to work with the Trump Administration on implementation.
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Representative Sean Casten led four House Democrats in urging European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to maintain the European Union Methane Regulation.
“As elected United States representatives committed to protecting our climate and maintaining strong transatlantic collaboration on environmental issues, we write to express our strong support for maintaining integrity and ambition of the European Union Methane Regulation (EUMR),” the lawmakers wrote in a letter to President von der Leyen. “...At a time when the EUMR is facing increasing pressure to be delayed or weakened by fossil fuel interests, maintaining clear, consistent rules for all suppliers is essential to strengthening Europe’s energy security, while also reducing highly potent greenhouse gas emissions.”
The European Union Methane Regulation is the EU’s first binding law focused on reducing methane emissions from oil, gas, and coal. This includes emissions from both EU-based producers and fossil fuel imports into the EU.
Rep. Casten recently returned from a Congressional delegation in Brussels and Strasbourg, where he met with Members of the European Parliament and heard first-hand about the Trump Administration’s increased efforts to derail the EUMR and demands that the U.S. be exempt from the regulation.
“Preserving the integrity of the EUMR will reinforce Europe’s leadership at a moment when climate ambition is increasingly inseparable from security, competitiveness, and geopolitical resilience,” the lawmakers concluded.
In addition to Rep. Casten, the letter was signed by Reps. Conaway, Dexter, Kamlager-Dove, and Ross, who also joined the Congressional delegation.
Text of the letter can be found below. A copy of the letter can be found here.
As elected United States representatives committed to protecting our climate and maintaining strong transatlantic collaboration on environmental issues, we write to express our strong support for maintaining integrity and ambition of the European Union Methane Regulation (EUMR). As such, we urge the European Commission to ensure timely implementation and, above all, to preserve its ambition. We offer our support to work together with the Trump Administration, the European Union, industry, and relevant experts to ensure robust implementation.
At a time when the EUMR is facing increasing pressure to be delayed or weakened by fossil fuel interests, maintaining clear, consistent rules for all suppliers is essential to strengthening Europe’s energy security, while also reducing highly potent greenhouse gas emissions. According to new analysis from Rystad Energy, there is “no credible evidence that the EUMR is contributing to current oil and gas price increases or supply pressures affecting Europe.”1 Rather, the EUMR has established the European Union as a global leader in methane mitigation, and its continued robust implementation will reinforce regulatory certainty, encourage investment in proven methane reduction technologies, and demonstrate that market-based environmental standards can advance both economic and strategic interests.
Methane is the primary constituent of natural gas. Today, and for the immediate future, natural gas will be a vital national security and economic resource for the EU. The EUMR is therefore fundamentally a waste prevention measure in that it prevents the waste of this vital resource. The International Energy Agency estimates “that nearly 100 billion cubic metres (bcm) of natural gas could be made available annually through a global effort to cut methane from oil and gas operations, with a further 100 bcm unlocked through the elimination of nonemergency flaring worldwide,”2 which is roughly twice the volume lost due to disruptions linked to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.3 Because methane is also a global warming pollutant with more than 80 times the potency of carbon dioxide, LNG can be worse for the climate than even the coal it replaces – let alone the zero-emission energy sources which must replace it in the coming years. The EUMR is therefore additionally a critical climate protection measure, beyond its energy security benefits.
Our recent meetings as a congressional delegation in Strasbourg and Brussels reinforced these convictions. During meetings with European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, Executive Vice-President Teresa Ribera, Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, and Members of the European Parliament responsible for energy, environment, and trade policy, we heard a remarkably consistent message: the EUMR has become a defining test of Europe’s ability to maintain ambitious climate and energy policies in the face of mounting geopolitical and commercial pressure. Across nearly every engagement, climate policy was discussed not as a standalone environmental issue, but as a matter of industrial competitiveness, energy security, economic resilience, and democratic cooperation.
We share this perspective because the EUMR represents far more than a single environmental policy. Alongside initiatives such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and the Clean Industrial Deal, it reflects a broader strategy that recognizes climate policy as industrial policy and national security policy. Together, these frameworks reward innovation, strengthen resilient supply chains, and create durable incentives for cleaner production and greater transparency across global markets.
Decisions regarding EUMR will therefore be viewed beyond methane policy itself – they will signal whether the European Union intends to maintain predictable long-term market rules that encourage investment in emissions measurement, monitoring, and reporting, as well as other low-emission innovations. Just as the CBAM is encouraging governments and industries to improve emissions performance, the EUMR is creating incentives for producers to invest in transparent practices. We believe this approach will continue to encourage technological investment and reinforce Europe’s leadership in a more secure and sustainable economy.
For these reasons, we respectfully encourage the European Commission to stay the course and are committed to working with key partners to support implementation. Preserving the integrity of the EUMR will reinforce Europe’s leadership at a moment when climate ambition is increasingly inseparable from security, competitiveness, and geopolitical resilience. We appreciate the Commission’s continued leadership and stand ready to support continued US-EU cooperation to ensure that implementation is both technically robust and strategically durable. By maintaining the EUMR’s core requirements and ambition, the European Union can continue demonstrating that a principled climate policy strengthens our shared prosperity and transatlantic partnership.
Casten, Whitesides, Levin Introduce Bill to Provide Climate Finance to Countries in the Global South While Reducing Debt | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Introduces legislation creating a debt-for-resilience program that would allow the U.S. to negotiate debt reductions with Global South countries that undertake climate resilience initiatives, and directs the U.S. to promote debt reduction and an international climate insurance program through international financial institutions.
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Reps. Sean Casten, George Whitesides, and Mike Levin introduced the Global Climate Resilience Act, legislation that would create a new debt-for-resilience program to improve the United States’ ability to provide climate finance and debt relief to countries in the Global South. This new program would enhance the United States’ ability to negotiate debt reductions with countries in the Global South that agree to undertake climate resilience initiatives. The legislation also directs the United States to use its influence with international financial institutions to promote debt reduction for nations at risk of climate damage and advocate for an international climate insurance program. Senators Peter Welch (VT) and Andy Kim (NJ) introduced the companion bill in the Senate.
“Climate change is a global crisis that demands a global response,” said Rep. Casten. “The United States has a responsibility to help lead the way towards innovative financial solutions. I’m proud to support this legislation that strengthens climate resilience, supports our own national security, and advances a safer, more secure, and more prosperous future for communities across the Global South.”
“I’ve seen the extreme financial impact that natural disasters like wildfires have on my community and state, and that problem exists at scale across the globe,” said Rep. Whitesides. “The Global Climate Resilience Act asserts U.S. leadership in combating climate change, while also addressing widespread debt by creating better pathways for countries in the Global South to invest in resilience measures for natural disasters. By making it easier for countries with developing economies to implement climate resilience initiatives, we can help facilitate a global effort to combat climate change with more nations and international organizations.”
"The science is clear: disasters are more intense, sea levels are rising, and climate change is accelerating. Combating these global challenges demands global cooperation," said Rep. Levin. "Our Global Climate Resilience Act helps the world’s most vulnerable communities protect against the worst effects of climate change. By addressing root causes of poverty, disease, and migration around the world, our bill helps keep Americans safer, healthier, and more secure."
“This House bill and its Senate companion directly respond to calls from the Global South to address two of its most pressing challenges: relieving crushing debt burdens and bolstering life-saving resilience efforts,” said Brenden Guy, Senior Director of International Climate at the Natural Resource Defense Council. “The climate crisis has eliminated 20% of the wealth of the most vulnerable countries in the world over the last two decades. And make no mistake, this is not charity: it’s a strategic investment in building global resilience that will also keep Americans safer and supply chains more secure from climate-fueled disasters that drive up prices. The bill advances much-needed solutions to build greater global resilience and prosperity that Congress should get behind.”
“One of the biggest barriers to enacting climate action on a global scale is resourcing communities that have been extracted from for generations that want to transition to the clean energy economy but have been let down by Countries failing to meet their commitments to help in this transition,” said Aaron McCall, Federal Advocacy Coordinator, California Environmental Voters. “Oil Companies then fill this gap as primary energy suppliers and continue the cycle of extracting and polluting communities. This bill promises to take a step in the right direction to help communities looking to invest in the health and sustainability of their nation, and global health as a whole.”
“If the United States wants to reclaim its leadership role in addressing the myriad global challenges of the climate crisis, we must truly lead from the front,” said Davis Bates, League of Conservation Voters’ Congressional Champions Campaign Director. “We must not simply renew our previous commitments to international agreements. We also need to support and empower countries around the world to adapt to increasingly disastrous extreme weather and build financial and structural climate resiliency for the future -- especially for countries least responsible for the pollution fueling climate change but are most impacted.”
“Countries on the frontlines of climate change, including small island states, shouldn’t have to choose between paying down debt and protecting their communities and ecosystems,” said Dan Whittle, Associate Vice President, Resilient Caribbean, Environmental Defense Fund. “The Global Climate Resilience Act points to a smarter path, linking debt relief with investments that build resilience and stability. This is the kind of climate finance the moment demands.”
Just last year, the Global South was devastated by floods and cyclones in South and Southeast Asia, hurricanes in the Caribbean, extreme heat waves in Middle East and Northern Africa, and rising sea levels which are beginning to submerge small Pacific Islands countries. While some nations have the resources necessary to adapt to the effects of climate change, countries with developing economies often lack resources to meet challenges of a warming world. For many countries in the Global South, this creates a vicious cycle where funds from economic growth service debt from a climate event instead of building resilience.
Collective international action to reduce carbon emissions and build resilience are crucial to combatting the growing impacts of climate change. At the recent United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COPs), global leaders recognized the need to provide climate financing to countries in the Global South. The United States must take further action to help at-risk countries reduce their debt.
New Casten Bill Strengthens Accountability for Adults Who Provide Harmful Access to Firearms to Children | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Introduces the Juvenile Firearms Safety Act, which would establish federal prohibitions and penalties for adults who provide children with access to firearms later used in a crime, self-harm, or injury or death, and would enhance state Child Access Prevention laws.
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Representative Sean Casten (D-IL-06) introduced the Juvenile Firearms Safety Act, legislation to establish federal prohibitions and penalties for adults who enable children to access firearms that are later used in a crime, to self-harm, or to cause injury or death.
The bill also identifies relevant factors that may be considered in determining whether an adult knew or had reason to know of the risk, including information related to the juvenile’s mental health, prior acts of violence, or suicidal ideation.
“Unfortunately, current federal law leaves significant gaps in accountability when adults allow children and teenagers to access firearms,” said Rep. Sean Casten. “This bill aims to keep firearms out of the hands of children who intend to use the weapon to harm themselves or others, and to hold adults who provide access to firearms to kids accountable in the eyes of the law.”
The Juvenile Firearms Safety Act enhances existing Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws at the state level, which are intended to prevent dangerous weapons from reaching the hands of children. CAP laws allow adults who deliberately or negligently let juveniles have access to a firearm to be held legally liable. These laws have been adopted in 26 states. They are associated with reduced firearm suicides and self-injuries, lower rates of firearm-related homicides, and reductions in unintentional injury or death among youth.
Under the Juvenile Firearms Safety Act, adults could be subject to fines or imprisonment of up to one year, with enhanced penalties of up to ten years if the firearm is used in a crime or results in injury or death. The bill also protects responsible gun owners through safe harbor provisions and safe firearm activities by juveniles with permission from a parent or guardian.
Specifically, the bill makes it unlawful for an adult to knowingly:
Provide a firearm to a juvenile while knowing or having reasonable cause to believe the juvenile intends to use it to commit harm or in the commission of a crime.
Store or keep any firearm under their control when they know or reasonably should know that a juvenile is likely to gain unauthorized access, and the juvenile obtains the firearm and uses it in a crime or causes injury or death.
Text of the legislation can be found here.
This Juvenile Firearms Safety Act is endorsed by Brady and Giffords.
Casten, Salazar Introduce Bill to Protect Seniors from Crypto ATM Scams | U.S. Congressman Sean Casten
Position: Representatives Casten and Salazar introduced the bipartisan Stop Crypto ATM Scams Act to strengthen consumer protections, require crypto ATM operators to comply with anti-money laundering and anti-fraud measures, and hold scammers accountable. The release states that crypto ATMs enable irreversible transfers that are exploited to defraud seniors and vulnerable Americans.
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Representatives Sean Casten (D-IL-06) and María Elvira Salazar (R-FL-27) introduced the Stop Crypto ATM Scams Act, bipartisan legislation to provide strong protections for potential fraud victims, require that crypto ATM companies comply with robust anti-money laundering and anti-fraud measures, and help ensure that sophisticated scammers targeting seniors and other vulnerable Americans are held accountable.
“My constituents have lost devastating sums of money to crypto-enabled fraud. Local banks and credit unions in my community are doing everything within their limited authority to stop these scams before they happen,” said Rep. Sean Casten. “Crypto ATMs offer criminals a quick and easy way to prey on seniors and steal their hard-earned money. Congress can address these abuses by requiring enhanced consumer protections, mandating clear scam warnings and robust disclosures, and applying the same anti-money laundering rules and fraud prevention measures that other crypto firms, banks, and credit unions must comply with. This bill builds on strong action taken at the state level, including in Illinois, to crack down on crypto ATM scams.”
“In South Florida, I have seen firsthand the devastating impact financial scams can have on seniors and their families. America’s seniors spent a lifetime working, saving, and planning for retirement. They should not have to worry about criminals using new technologies to steal what they worked so hard to build,” said Rep. Salazar. “The Stop Crypto ATM Scams Act will strengthen safeguards against fraud, give law enforcement the tools they need to fight back, and provide consumers with clearer warnings and stronger protections before they become victims. We have a responsibility to protect our seniors and hold those who prey on them accountable.”
More than 30,000 crypto ATMs are operating nationwide, located in places like gas stations, convenience stores, and shopping malls. These machines can be used to convert dollars into digital assets and enable immediate, pseudo-anonymous, and irreversible transfers, making them an attractive tool for illicit actors seeking to defraud unsuspecting Americans.
These scams may begin with a message from someone claiming to be from a legitimate source, such as a federal agency, law enforcement, or a well-known company, or scammers may establish contact via social media and build trust with the victim over time. Eventually, scammers will convince the victim that immediate action is needed to resolve a supposed issue, avoid financial penalties or legal troubles, or help with a “financial emergency” before directing victims to withdraw funds from their bank or credit union, deposit cash into a crypto ATM, and transfer digital assets to the criminal’s anonymous digital wallet. According to law enforcement, stolen money from these scams often ends up in foreign countries that are less likely to cooperate with U.S. investigations, making it more difficult for law enforcement to recover these funds.
According to the FBI, Americans lost more than $333 million to crypto ATM scams in 2025, representing a 33% increase from 2024. The figures are likely understated and only represent losses reported to authorities. Many victims of fraud, including older victims, never report the fraud because they feel ashamed or pressured to keep silent. A 2024 FBI report found that among cases in which the victim’s age was known, individuals aged 60 and older accounted for 86% of all losses due to crypto ATM scams.
Text of the legislation can be found here.
A one-page summary of the legislation can be found here.
A section-by-section summary can be found here.
If you think you may be the victim of a scam, contact your local police department to file a report. If you think you may be the victim of an online or internet-enabled crime, report it to the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), ic3.gov, as soon as possible. These reports are used for investigative and intelligence efforts and can help support the recovery of lost funds.
Applies Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Requirements to Crypto ATM Operators: This bill requires that operators implement a written AML program, conduct strict customer due diligence, report fraudulent activity to U.S. regulators, and regularly update a list of all kiosk locations. In 2019, the Treasury Department issued guidance clarifying that crypto ATM operators must register and adhere to the same AML rules that apply to banks. However, there are high rates of non-compliance: According to a 2021 investigation, more than one-third of crypto ATM companies operating in New Jersey had failed to register at the federal level.
Imposes Daily Transaction Limits for Customers: This bill imposes a $2,000 daily transaction limit for new customers, which applies over a 14-day period following their first transaction. In addition, over the 14-day period, new customers cannot deposit more than $10,000 in total. This bill also imposes a $7,500 daily limit for existing customers. There are countless stories of victims losing their entire life savings to crypto ATM scams. For example, one woman in Ohio met a new “friend” online and sent them funds to help take care of their “family”, losing more than $660,000, including funds from her Roth IRA.
Requires Anti-Fraud Measures and Scam Warnings: This bill requires operators to provide scam warnings and red flags to look out for before a customer enters into a transaction, which will be informed by annual fraud alerts issued jointly by the Treasury Department, FBI, and FTC. Crypto ATM scams can take various forms: scammers may impersonate a government official or a representative from a victim’s bank or utility company, and convince them urgent payment is needed to avoid financial penalties or legal troubles; or scammers may contact a victim via social media or a dating app, build a connection and trust over time, before requesting money for an “emergency” or hyping up an “investment opportunity”, and directing a victim to send funds via a crypto ATM machine.
Ensures Key Customer Protections and Tools for Law Enforcement: The bill requires that detailed disclosures are provided before a customer enters into a transaction, which shall be informed by guidance issued jointly by the Treasury Department, CFPB, and FTC. It also requires written or electronic transaction receipts with specific information that helps with law enforcement investigations. Crypto ATM operators will also be required to provide live customer service and a dedicated phone number for law enforcement inquiries.
Addresses High Charges to Customers: This bill requires that operators clearly disclose charges collected from the customer, including by providing a reference to the current market price of the cryptocurrency as it is trading on a regulated exchange. It also requires that operators refund the charges collected on fraudulent transactions in a timely manner. Crypto ATM operators have been found to mark up the price of cryptocurrency. For example, one operator reportedly sold Bitcoin to a customer at a rate that was 24% higher than the price at which Bitcoin was actually trading.
Balances State and Federal Regulation: The bill establishes a federal standard for future state and local limits on transaction volumes, while preserving states’ authority to impose any additional requirements necessary to protect consumers, including but not limited to requiring full refunds for defrauded customers, imposing limits on charges, or outright banning operations within their borders.
Source: GDELT 2.0 GKG, filtered to a curated list of national outlets. Inclusion is not endorsement; opinion pieces and reported news are mixed.
Recent stock activity
Periodic transaction reports filed under the STOCK Act — disclosed by the rep, sourced from public filings.
No disclosed trades on record.
Source: open-data mirrors of the Senate eFD and House Clerk financial-disclosure systems. Disclosure within 30 days of trade is required by law (45 for spouse/dependent trades).
Top PAC donors · 2026 cycle
Political action committees that gave the most to this rep's principal campaign committee this cycle. PAC giving is direct organizational support — industry, ideological, or leadership.
1.THE COUNCIL OF INSURANCE AGENTS & BROKERS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEEFinance3 contributionsInsurance-industry PAC representing agents and brokers — backs candidates supporting favorable regulatory and tax treatment of insurance distribution and sales.AI$10,000
2.NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION PAC3 contributions$10,000
3.MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (MORPAC)2 contributions$10,000
4.CME GROUP INC. PAC2 contributions$10,000
5.BMO FINANCIAL CORP GOOD GOVERNANCE FUND: FEDERAL (BMO PAC)2 contributions$10,000
6.AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE2 contributions$10,000
7.UBS AMERICAS INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (UBS PAC)Finance3 contributionsFinancial-services PAC for UBS Americas — backs candidates and policies supporting banking, investment, and capital-markets regulation.AI$10,000
8.ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY PAC3 contributions$10,000
10.MACHINISTS NON PARTISAN POLITICAL LEAGUE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS & AEROSPACE WORKERSLabor2 contributionsTrade-union PAC of the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers — backs candidates supporting union organizing, prevailing wages, and aerospace manufacturing jobs.AI$10,000
Source: OpenFEC (api.open.fec.gov) Schedule A receipts where contributor type is “committee.” Aggregated by contributing committee. Self-transfers from joint-fundraising / victory committees are excluded.
Top individual contributors · 2026 cycle
Itemized individual contributions over $200 to this rep's campaign committee, aggregated by donor employer. PAC giving is shown above; this section is people, not organizations.
1.CME GROUP$11,600
2.INTERCAPITAL PARTNERS LLC$7,100
3.NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY$7,050
4.EVERCORE$7,000
5.AMG$7,000
6.DUPAGE MEDICAL GROUP$7,000
7.KIRKLAND & ELLIS$7,000
8.COILCRAFT INC.$7,000
9.WANXIANG AMERIC CORPORATION$7,000
10.CAPITAL GROUP.$7,000
Source: OpenFEC Schedule A receipts where contributor type is “individual,” aggregated by the donor's self-reported employer. This is a geographic / industry correlation, not a corporate endorsement.
