Tammy Duckworth

Duckworth Celebrates Mother’s Day by Highlighting Need for Family-Friendly Policies | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: Senator Duckworth opposes the Trump Administration's policies affecting families, including lack of support for childcare and paid family leave, cuts to Medicaid and ACA subsidies, and immigration enforcement actions. She advocates for federal policies that support mothers and families.

[OAK PARK, IL] – U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) today convened local leaders, health care experts, community activists and moms to discuss the challenges moms and families are facing under the Trump Administration and hear directly from parents about the policy solutions they want to see at the local, state and federal level to better support families. Duckworth moderated a panel discussion on the impacts and importance of motherhood with Dr. Amanda Adeleye, Medical Director of CCRM Fertility’s Chicago-area center, Jenny LeFlore, Digital Creator behind Mama Fresh and Sherita Hamlin, Chicago Parent Leader of Community Organizing and Family Issues, followed by a listening session with dozens of local moms and community members on the policies they want to be implemented to benefits moms and extreme impacts of the Trump Administration on families. Duckworth, in partnership with the Collaboration for Early Childhood, discussed the challenges mothers in America face while trying to provide for their families and answered questions on how community leaders can work together to improve the quality of life for families. Photos of today’s listening session are available on the Senator’s website. “The simple act of parenting a child is challenging enough on its own, but our country—especially under the Trump Administration—has made being a parent, particularly a mom, incredibly difficult,” Duckworth said. “We don’t have support for child care, paid family leave or expanding access to IVF like Trump promised—instead we have skyrocketing costs on groceries, gas and baby gear, widespread cuts to Medicaid, ACA subsidies and SNAP benefits, and federal agents terrorizing our communities—even our daycares—and ripping families apart. It doesn’t have to be this way. We are better and stronger as a nation when we support moms and families.” Following the listening session, Duckworth continued her celebration of moms at the at the Greater Rock Missionary Baptist Church’s (G.R.M.B.C.) “Give Mother’s Their Flowers” Brunch Service in Chicago. She honored the mothers in attendance and shared more about how her journey with motherhood has guided her work in the U.S. Senate. Afterward, Duckworth attended a Mother’s Day Tea at the Primo Center for Women and Children. Primo Center is Chicago’s largest provider of shelter and services for homeless families, operating 370 shelter beds and 91 permanent supportive housing units, serving hundreds of families annually across Englewood, Austin, Hermosa and Auburn Gresham. Photos from the Greater Rock Missionary Baptist Church visit can be found on the Senator’s website.

Duckworth, Durbin, Whitehouse, Schneider Criticize Trump Administration For Proposed Weakening Of EtO Regulations | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: The lawmakers oppose the Trump Administration's proposal to weaken EPA emissions standards for ethylene oxide (EtO) from commercial sterilization facilities, arguing that EtO is a known carcinogen and that the EPA must maintain strict protections under the Clean Air Act.

[CHICAGO, IL] – Today, U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), both members of the Senate Environmental Justice Caucus; U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works; and U.S. Representative Brad Schneider (D-IL-10), Co-Chair of the bipartisan Ethylene Oxide Task Force, sent a letter to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin to underscore their opposition to the Trump Administration’s decision to roll back a critical EPA rule that protected Americans from harmful exposure to ethylene oxide (EtO), a known carcinogen. In March, the Trump Administration’s EPA published its draft rule for EtO commercial sterilizers, proposing weakened emission standards for EtO for commercial sterilization facilities. Joining Duckworth, Durbin, Schneider and Whitehouse in sending the letter were U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Cory Booker (D-MD), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Raphael Warnock (D-GA). “We write to express our strong opposition to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposal to weaken emissions standards for the hazardous air pollutant ethylene oxide (EtO) from commercial sterilization facilities. EPA’s statutory mission is to protect human health and the environment,” the lawmakers began their letter. “EtO is classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and EPA identifies it as ‘carcinogenic to humans by inhalation route of exposure.’ EPA must follow the law and scientific record to ensure the highest level of protection for communities living near facilities using EtO for sterilization.” It is well-established, including through risk reviews conducted by the federal government, that EtO is a carcinogen that can raise the risk of cancer or other life-threatening health conditions for those living in communities with a sterilization plant. “EtO has been linked to cancer and considered a hazardous air pollutant under the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-549) for more than 35 years. In 2016, the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) reported the chemical to be more carcinogenic at lower concentrations than originally thought, leading EPA to officially classify EtO as a carcinogen in December 2016. In 2018, EPA’s National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) estimated that EtO significantly contributes to cancer risk of over one in one million… The scientific record is clear: EtO is a potent carcinogen and EtO emissions must be controlled to reduce the lifetime cancer risk of communities near commercial sterilizers,” the lawmakers wrote. Despite clear evidence that failing to regulate EtO emissions will endanger Americans’ health, the Trump Administration has clawed back Biden-era regulations aimed at protecting communities from exposure to carcinogens. In 2024, the Biden Administration’s EPA implemented a new rule to tighten emission limits, monitoring, and controls for commercial sterilization facilities that use EtO. The rule, which covered plants like Medline in Waukegan, Illinois, and Vantage in Gurnee, Illinois, aimed to reduce EtO emissions by 90 percent by installing effective, achievable air pollution controls and preventing toxic emissions from reaching the communities in which these facilities operate. However, the Trump Administration’s EPA moved to loosen the limits implemented through the Biden-era rule. “In 2024, EPA issued a final rule which tightened emissions limits, monitoring, and controls last updated in 2006 for nearly 90 commercial sterilization facilities that use EtO. These standards were set under various CAA section 112 authorities, including 112(d) and 112(f), the latter of which directs EPA to analyze residual risks to the public health after initial standards are set, and tighten standards accordingly. The installation of effective and achievable air pollution controls would reduce emissions by as much as 90 percent and protect communities from toxic exposure from nearby facilities. In its rulemaking, EPA provided facilities with the maximum compliance time legally permitted, and concluded, based on careful analysis, that the facilities would be able to access and install the required emissions controls ahead of the statutory deadline. Yet, the Trump Administration has now issued waivers under CAA 112(i)(4) for nearly half of all commercial sterilizer facilities, exempting them from the standards,” the lawmakers continued their letter. The lawmakers urged EPA to swiftly reverse course and reinstate the 2024 rule that offered reasonable and measurable guidelines to sterilization facilities to ensure EtO emissions are properly regulated. The lawmakers emphasized that compliance with the 2024 standards are achievable as commercial sterilizers in Illinois are meeting stricter state standards that require these companies to reduce their EtO emissions by 99.9 percent. “While EPA appears on a path to deregulate EtO despite the established carcinogenic data, we urge EPA to reverse course and set a more protective standard than the Biden Administration to address fugitive emissions from off-site warehouses and require fenceline monitoring. We know that a more protective standard is achievable: commercial sterilizers in Illinois are already meeting the State’s requirement to reduce EtO emissions by 99.9 percent, a near 10 percent improvement from the 2024 standard, and are implementing the State’s continuous emissions monitoring requirements. Further, emissions from warehouses where sterilized products also emit residual EtO before distribution also must be controlled to ensure maximum protection for surrounding communities,” the lawmakers wrote. “This administration has the opportunity go above and beyond, matching the regulations Illinois has implemented, to achieve EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment by implementing these changes to the EtO sterilizer rule. Instead of stepping forward to protect human health, EPA is choosing to neglect science at the expense of our constituents,” the lawmakers wrote. The lawmakers concluded their letter by underscoring that Americans will suffer from serious, life-threatening medical conditions if the federal government neglects to enact suitable EtO emission standards. “EtO presents a clear danger to the health of the families living in communities located near facilities using the chemical. EPA rolling back these standards will lead to easily preventable harm. EPA must abandon this proposal and instead reinstate the 2024 rule that is proven to be effective and available,” the lawmakers concluded their letter. In November 2023, Duckworth, Durbin and Schneider released a statement regarding a report released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) evaluating the public health impacts of the EtO, a cancer-causing agent, emitted from the now-closed Sterigenics medical sterilization facility in Willowbrook, Illinois. In the report, ATSDR concluded that, prior to February 15, 2019, long-term breathing of air within one mile of the Sterigenics facility is a concern for increased lifetime risk of cancer associated with EtO exposure, due to the gas’ concentration in the air during the sterilization operations at the facility. The report also found that the air within a mile of the facility no longer poses significant risk to residents as the Sterigenics facility is no longer operational. Duckworth, Durbin and Schneider have been strong advocates for addressing the unacceptable level of EtO emissions. In July 2023, the lawmakers led a letter signed by 40 Members of Congress to EPA supporting the Biden Administration’s proposed EtO sterilizer rule. Durbin, Duckworth, and Schneider have also previously introduced legislation that would require EPA to update EtO emissions standards to reflect the stricter criteria outlined in EPA’s 2016 IRIS study. Under the bill, any updates to the emissions standards would have to incorporate the maximum achievable control technology requirements to exhaust vents and apply to both area and major sources, which covers plants like Sterigenics. It would also require EPA to undergo a residual risk assessment following implementation of the new rule, which is a stringent and public-health focused review of the rule’s impacts. The lawmakers have also met with the CEO of Sotera Health, the parent company of Sterigenics; convened meetings with then-EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler on the issue; and sat down with Willowbrook residents. EtO serves a variety of industrial purposes, including as a sterilizer for 50 percent of sterile medical devices. In 2016, EPA identified EtO as a human carcinogen and included the chemical in the National Air Toxics Assessment. Subsequently, EPA identified communities that faced potentially dangerous levels of EtO emissions from 86 EtO commercial sterilizers in the U.S. A copy of today’s letter is available here and below: We write to express our strong opposition to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposal to weaken emissions standards for the hazardous air pollutant ethylene oxide (EtO) from commercial sterilization facilities. EPA’s statutory mission is to protect human health and the environment. EtO is classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and EPA identifies it as “carcinogenic to humans by inhalation route of exposure.” EPA must follow the law and scientific record to ensure the highest level of protection for communities living near facilities using EtO for sterilization. EtO is a colorless, flammable gas that poses serious risk to human health, including neurological, reproductive, developmental, and carcinogenic impacts when inhaled. EtO has been linked to cancer and considered a hazardous air pollutant under the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-549) for more than 35 years. In 2016, the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) reported the chemical to be more carcinogenic at lower concentrations than originally thought, leading EPA to officially classify EtO as a carcinogen in December 2016. In 2018, EPA’s National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) estimated that EtO significantly contributes to cancer risk of over one in one million. A 2023 study from the University of Pennsylvania found that of the 88 medical sterilizers in the U.S., 11 elevated cancer risks in neighboring communities to more than 100 in a million. In addition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) concluded in a 2023 report that EtO emissions from the now-closed Sterigenics medical sterilization facility in Willowbrook, Illinois, was a cause for concern for increased lifetime risk of cancer. Commercial sterilizers are a leading source of EtO, and nearly 14 million people and 10,000 schools and childcare facilities are within five miles of a commercial sterilizer. The scientific record is clear: EtO is a potent carcinogen and EtO emissions must be controlled to reduce the lifetime cancer risk of communities near commercial sterilizers. EPA sets standards for toxic pollutants like EtO under section 112 of the CAA. In 2024, EPA issued a final rule which tightened emissions limits, monitoring, and controls last updated in 2006 for nearly 90 commercial sterilization facilities that use EtO. These standards were set under various CAA section 112 authorities, including 112(d) and 112(f), the latter of which directs EPA to analyze residual risks to the public health after initial standards are set, and tighten standards accordingly. The installation of effective and achievable air pollution controls would reduce emissions by as much as 90 percent and protect communities from toxic exposure from nearby facilities. In its rulemaking, EPA provided facilities with the maximum compliance time legally permitted, and concluded, based on careful analysis, that the facilities would be able to access and install the required emissions controls ahead of the statutory deadline. Yet, the Trump Administration has now issued waivers under CAA 112(i)(4) for nearly half of all commercial sterilizer facilities, exempting them from the standards. Contrary to its own findings from the 2024 rulemaking, and the widespread exemptions under section 112(i)(4), EPA now claims industry cannot meet the standards set in 2024. Despite the 2024 residual risk review’s findings of negative health and environmental impacts from EtO, this EPA is determined to ignore them. Notably, in its proposal, EPA is not arguing the residual risk review results are incorrect. Instead, the agency insists that because EPA already conducted one residual health risk review on existing EtO standards, in 2006 before better science was available, a second review is not statutorily permitted under section 112(f)(2). This argument is wrong. It is well-established that absent an express prohibition, an agency may revise a prior action.[1] Here, section 112(f)(2) does not prohibit a second look when new science emerges. On the contrary, a plain reading of 112(f)(2) suggests that EPA has a mandatory duty to set residual risk standards when it determines that cancer risks are unacceptable. Congress directed that “if standards promulgated pursuant to subsection (d) and applicable to a category or subcategory of sources emitting a…known, probable or possible human carcinogen do not reduce lifetime excess cancer risks to the individual most exposed to emissions from a source in the category or subcategory to less than one in one million, the Administrator shall promulgate standards under this subsection for such source category [emphasis added].” Beyond the plain text of this specific provision, EPA’s actions here are at odds with the structure and purpose of the CAA. The fundamental purpose of the Act is to protect the public health and welfare, and section 112 addresses the most toxic and deadly pollution. It is alarming that EPA is now claiming that even when there is clear scientific evidence of air pollution causing harm to public health and the environment after an initial residual risk review, there can be no remedy. While EPA appears on a path to deregulate EtO despite the established carcinogenic data, we urge EPA to reverse course and set a more protective standard than the Biden Administration to address fugitive emissions from off-site warehouses and require fenceline monitoring. We know that a more protective standard is achievable: commercial sterilizers in Illinois are already meeting the State’s requirement to reduce EtO emissions by 99.9 percent, a near 10 percent improvement from the 2024 standard, and are implementing the State’s continuous emissions monitoring requirements. Further, emissions from warehouses where sterilized products also emit residual EtO before distribution also must be controlled to ensure maximum protection for surrounding communities. In the announcement for the 2024 EtO rule, EPA acknowledged sterilizer warehouses could be a source of EtO and monitoring of warehouses has found them to be a significant source of EtO. To further address fugitive emissions, fenceline monitoring should be required to ensure complete monitoring of EtO emissions and that the facility is in compliance and that ambient concentrations of EtO do not reach unacceptable levels, including concentrations that exceed the 2016 IRIS value. This administration has the opportunity go above and beyond, matching the regulations Illinois has implemented, to achieve EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment by implementing these changes to the EtO sterilizer rule. Instead of stepping forward to protect human health, EPA is choosing to neglect science at the expense of our constituents. EtO presents a clear danger to the health of the families living in communities located near facilities using the chemical. EPA rolling back these standards will lead to easily preventable harm. EPA must abandon this proposal and instead reinstate the 2024 rule that is proven to be effective and available. Thank you for your attention and consideration.

Duckworth, Durbin Join Senate Democrats in Filing Amicus Brief to Protect Mifepristone Access, Women's Health Care and FDA Authority | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: Senators Duckworth and Durbin, joining Senate Democrats, filed an amicus brief opposing a Fifth Circuit decision that would restrict mifepristone access by reimposing in-person dispensing requirements. They argue the medication is safe and effective under FDA oversight, and that court restrictions undermine the FDA's evidence-based approval process and limit reproductive healthcare access.

[CHICAGO, IL] –  This week U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, joined more than 250 House and all Senate Democrats in filing an amicus brief to the Supreme Court urging them to overturn a Fifth Circuit decision that would upend the FDA approval process and restrict access to mifepristone. This brief follows emergency appeals from the manufacturers of mifepristone; the Supreme Court issuing a temporary stay of the decision Monday morning until next Monday, May 11; and the announcement that the Court has ordered briefing on the stay by this Thursday, May 7. The lawmakers argued that mifepristone already undergoes a rigorous FDA approval process, and the medication has repeatedly been found to be safe and effective. For a court to overturn this decision not only limits who is able to receive this vital and life-saving medication, putting lives at risk, but it also undermines the longstanding, congressionally mandated, and evidence-based decision-making process at the FDA. “For more than a quarter century, FDA has repeatedly and consistently affirmed that mifepristone is safe. Over seven million patients in the U.S. have safely used mifepristone. And as with other drugs, FDA continues to monitor the post-marketing safety data on mifepristone—data confirming that mifepristone is safe without regard to how it is dispensed,” the members wrote in their amicus brief. The lawmakers also argued that the Fifth Circuit ruling was clearly not based on the merits of the distribution method of mifepristone, or the scientific backing of the medication, but rather a desire to limit the ability of individuals to receive abortion medication. The emergency stay is necessary to ensure that Louisiana is not able to deny medically appropriate care to patients far beyond the state’s borders. “Decades after FDA’s initial approval of mifepristone and years after the in-person dispensing requirement was eliminated, the Fifth Circuit on an ‘emergency’ basis ordered FDA to re-impose this onerous nationwide restriction on all Americans. Allowing that decision to remain in place undermines the science-based statutory framework Congress commands and threatens patient access to reproductive health care,” the members continued. “As has been well publicized, many U.S. residents in states where abortion is legal live far from any reproductive health care provider. Reinstating an in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone exacerbates an already significant reproductive health crisis by limiting access to the most common method of early abortion.” The members argued that this is a clear case of judicial overreach by a lower district court. “Preserving evidence-based access to mifepristone, including when dispensed by mail or retail pharmacy, is necessary to mitigate the imminent harm facing members of the public. Women deserve access to mifepristone for reproductive health care, and all Americans deserve integrity in the congressionally mandated, evidence-based process for FDA’s drug regulatory decisions,” the members concluded. In the Senate, the amicus brief was signed by all 47 Democratic U.S. Senators. In the House, the brief was signed by 212 Democratic U.S. Representatives. The lawmakers’ amicus brief to the Supreme Court can be read in full HERE.

Duckworth Joins Warren, Schumer in Pressing Head of Employment Protections Commission on Attacks on Workers Undergoing IVF | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: The senators oppose efforts by the EEOC Chair to weaken employment protections for workers undergoing IVF treatments under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, arguing that such protections are necessary to ensure workers can access fertility treatments without jeopardizing their health or employment.

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] — U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) joined U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in leading 12 of their Democratic Senate colleagues in pressing Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Chair Andrea Lucas on the Commission’s efforts to weaken a rule affirming employment protections for workers undergoing fertility treatments, including in-vitro fertilization (IVF). By law, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) requires employers to grant employees reasonable accommodations and in 2024, the EEOC set forth PWFA regulations explicitly affirming that these protections apply to workers undergoing IVF treatments. After President Trump appointed Lucas as Acting Chair, she announced the EEOC would be “reconsidering” the PWFA regulations to cut those workers out. “(Removing workers undergoing IVF from the rule would) mak(e) it more likely that employers could deny accommodations to workers undergoing fertility treatment—or force them to work in conditions that could undermine their health or their treatment’s success. We write to request that you abandon your efforts to weaken this rule,” wrote the lawmakers. Fertility treatments are intensive medical processes that have serious impacts on women’s lives. IVF involves several daily needle injections, which can cause side effects like nausea, vomiting, bloating and fatigue. The fertility procedures themselves do not allow for flexible scheduling and can require intravenous sedation. During his 2024 campaign, President Trump repeatedly claimed he was a supporter of fertility treatment, calling himself the “father of IVF” and even going as far as to promise that he would make fertilization treatments free. Yet, President Trump’s Executive Order aiming to expand access to IVF, the implementation of which the Senators describe as “weak,” “fail(s) to address the larger expense of IVF cycles.” In particular, President Trump’s attempt to get drug manufacturers to lower prices for IVF drugs only applies to a “narrow subset of drugs within the broader IVF regimen,” leaving patients on the hook for the costs of other medications used, embryo storage and embryo transfers. The Senators asked Chair Lucas to provide clarity on her attacks on workers undergoing fertility treatments by May 13, 2026. In addition to Duckworth, Warren and Schumer, the letter was co-signed by U.S. Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Tina Smith (D-MN). The full text of the Senators’ letter is available below and on the Senator’s website. We write regarding a statement you issued last year indicating that you intend to modify your agency’s rule that affirms the strong protections that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) grants workers undergoing fertility treatments. President Trump has claimed he wants to increase Americans’ access to fertility treatments—even going as far as to dub himself “the Fertilization President.” But modifying the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)’s PWFA regulations to remove individuals undergoing fertility treatments would break President Trump’s promise, making it more likely that employers could deny accommodations to workers undergoing fertility treatment—or force them to work in conditions that could undermine their health or their treatment’s success. We write to request that you abandon your efforts to weaken this rule. President Trump has repeatedly held himself out as an ardent supporter of fertility treatment, especially in vitro fertilization (IVF). On the campaign trail, President Trump said: “We’re totally in favor of IVF,” “we really are the party for IVF,” and “I’m the father of IVF.” Once in office, President Trump dubbed himself “the fertilization president.” He even claimed he would make fertilization treatments free, which he described as “tremendous goodies in the bag for women.” This has not come to pass. President Trump has set forth an Executive Order purportedly aimed at expanding access to IVF, but its implementation has been weak. In particular, President Trump’s attempt to get drug manufacturers to lower prices for IVF drugs only applies to a “narrow subset of drugs within the broader IVF regimen,” failing to address the larger expense of IVF cycles, including the costs of all the medications used, embryo storage, and embryo transfers. And his proposed fertility benefits amount to little more than a voluntary invitation to employers to offer benefits if they want to, with no requirements or incentives to do so. At the same time, President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which will kick 14.2 million people off their insurance by 203411—dashing the hopes of would-be parents who can no longer afford even the most basic of health care, let alone expensive fertility treatments. Now, his EEOC appointees are taking this betrayal a step further by undermining critical protections for workers undergoing fertility treatments. In 2022, Congress passed—and President Biden signed into law—the PWFA, which requires employers to grant their employees reasonable accommodations for “known limitations” arising from “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” In many cases, this will boil down to (in your words) “water, a place to sit, fitting attire, increased access to the bathroom, and the like.” The law directed the EEOC to issue legally binding regulations “provid[ing] examples of reasonable accommodations addressing known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” The Commission issued its final rule in 202, over your protests. The final rule, which reflects the clear meaning and intent of PWFA’s statutory text, explicitly affirms that the PWFA protects women undergoing fertility treatment. At the time, you objected to how the Commission interpreted the phrase “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” In your view, this phase should not include a worker undergoing fertility treatments, even though infertility is a medical condition related to pregnancy and childbirth. You were also hostile to the inclusion of menstruation, “hormone issues,” and even lactation as medical conditions related to pregnancy and childbirth. After you became Acting Chair, you announced your intention to rewrite the PWFA regulations to exclude these workers, indicating that you “remain[] opposed to the Commission’s construction of the phrase “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions” described in the Final Rule . . . [and] intend[] for the Commission to reconsider portions of the Final Rule.” Now that the Commission has a quorum again, you appear to be in a position to initiate the required notice-and-comment process to change the rule. Fertility treatments are intensive medical processes that have serious impacts on women’s lives. IVF involves several daily needle injections of medicines that can cause side effects like nausea, vomiting, bloating, and fatigue. To get the doses dialed in, patients must often visit their fertility clinic every 1-2 days over a two-week period for morning monitoring appointments, meaning frequent blood draws and transvaginal ultrasounds. And then there are the procedures themselves—egg retrieval and embryo transfer—one of which requires intravenous sedation and neither of which allows for flexible scheduling. The PWFA protects workers’ rights to accommodations for a wide range of medical conditions related to pregnancy—including IVF and other fertility treatments—and the EEOC’s rule affirms those protections. The current regulation explicitly protects the right of workers undergoing IVF to request reasonable accommodations like short breaks to take medication, a schedule that accommodates daily monitoring appointments and medical procedures, or even access to a chair. These are exactly the kind of “small adjustments” that would allow these workers to continue to perform their jobs during their treatments and that, as you have pointed out, “should be expected from common decency and good manners, but sadly, sometimes [are] denied.” This is why it is so important that the PWFA protects these workers—and that the relevant regulations make that clear. Yet, you have stated that you “intend[]” to remove these workers from the rule. Removing them from this rule does not change the fact that these workers are owed these protections, but it does make it more likely that employers will illegally deny women undergoing IVF their rights under PWFA. President Trump designated you Acting Chair of the EEOC on January 20, 2025, and he renominated you to serve as Chair several months later. Your plan to remove workers undergoing fertility treatments from the rule reveals that President Trump’s promise to “expand[] access” to IVF was entirely hollow. As one legal scholar put it, “[i]f a worker can’t take time off for appointments, then cheaper treatment and greater health-care options are moot.” Since you have taken over as Chair and announced your intention to change the EEOC’s rule, workers undergoing IVF or other fertility treatments—or who plan to do so—cannot be certain that they will have access to reasonable accommodations for their treatments. And you have made this situation even worse by shrouding the EEOC’s decision-making in secrecy. On January 14, 2026, you rescinded the Commission’s voting procedures, placing all decisions to call public meetings and schedule Commission votes in your sole discretion. You should not make major decisions affecting the agency and the American people behind closed doors and without input from the public. The people who will be affected by your rewriting of the regulations deserve to know more about your intentions and your process. We ask that you halt any further efforts to weaken EEOC rules that protect workers undergoing fertility treatments. And to provide the public with clarity about your intentions concerning the PWFA regulations and your consistency in enforcing the nation’s employment civil rights laws, please answer the following questions by May 13, 2026: 1. Do you intend to change the EEOC’s PWFA regulations to eliminate language explaining the PWFA’s protections for workers undergoing IVF and other fertility treatments? a. If so, please answer the following questions: i. What is your timeline for removing this language? ii. Will the comment period for the required notice-and-comment rulemaking process be of the same length as it was for the original rule (60 days)? iii. Have you considered that removing IVF protections is inconsistent with the administration’s policy, expressed in an executive order, to expand access to IVF? iv. Have you consulted the White House on your intended course of action? b. If not, please explain your change in position. 2. Do you intend to change the EEOC’s PWFA regulations to eliminate language explaining the PWFA’s protections related to menstruation, changes in hormone levels, or lactation? a. If so, please answer the following questions: i. What is your timeline for removing this language? ii. Will the comment period for the required notice-and-comment rulemaking process be of the same length as it was for the original rule (60 days)? b. If not, please explain your change in position. 3. Are you considering any other changes to the EEOC’s current PWFA regulation, and if so, what are they?

Duckworth, Ossoff Introduce Legislation to Better Support Servicemembers as They Transition Back to Civilian Life | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: Senators Duckworth and Ossoff introduced legislation to improve Department of Defense transition support for servicemembers leaving the military by designating a senior DoD official to oversee transition programs and coordinate with the VA, Labor, Education, and other agencies.

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] — Combat Veteran and U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) introduced legislation to help ensure our servicemembers have the quality support they deserve as they transition from the Armed Forces back into civilian life. The Senators’ Servicemember Civilian Transition Support Act would designate a senior official at the Department of Defense (DoD) to oversee all of DoD’s transition programs and services—which is where a Veterans’ transition journey begins before the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) takes over. “As our servicemembers hang up their uniform, they deserve comprehensive support in helping them transition back into civilian life,” said Duckworth. “Too often, DoD’s transition programs fall short of the standard our Veterans deserve before they are handed off to the VA. Our commonsense bill would make necessary improvements and streamline coordination within DoD of these critical services. It’s the least we can do to help our heroes when they return home.” “Our servicemembers make tremendous sacrifices to keep our families safe. We owe it to them to ensure they are well-equipped and supported as they transition back to civilian life,” Sen. Ossoff said. “My new legislation with Senator Duckworth will help servicemembers access resources they’ve earned and help make their transition smoother for themselves and their families.” This DoD official would also work in close coordination with the Secretaries of Veterans Affairs, Labor and Education as well as state and local governments and nongovernmental organizations to improve transition programs and support services. The Servicemember Civilian Transition Support Act is endorsed by the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Fleet Reserve Association, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Military Officers Association of America, Veterans Education Success, Vietnam Veterans of America and With Honor Action. Duckworth, a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, is a fierce advocate for Veterans and has worked to increase their access to resources and programs aimed at helping them start and grow their careers when transitioning back to civilian life. Last month, she led a bipartisan push alongside U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-NM) and Jim Banks (R-IN) to increase Veterans’ yearly books and supply stipend to $1,500 to keep up with inflation. The Senators’ Veteran Education Assistance Adjustment Act would also increase the supply stipend for Veterans enrolled in apprenticeships and pursuing careers in the trades. In March, Duckworth joined U.S. Senators Tim Sheehy (R-MT), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Kevin Cramer (R-ND) in leading a bipartisan push to increase access to Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits for Veterans pursuing apprenticeships. The Senators’ Reducing Arbitrary Barriers to Apprenticeship Act would allow Post-9/11 GI Bill beneficiaries pursuing On-the-Job Training (OJT) or Apprenticeship (APP) programs to have access to the full monthly housing allowance (MHA) amount without a semiannual reduction and without a monthly work hour requirement. The full text of the legislation is available on Senator Duckworth’s website.

Duckworth Joins Durbin, Kelly in Push to Increase Access to Broadband Service for Americans | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: Senator Duckworth supports legislation to increase awareness and enrollment in the FCC's Lifeline program, which provides monthly subsidies to help low-income households afford broadband and telephone service.

[WASHINGTON D.C.] –U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth joined U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) and U.S. Representative Robin Kelly (D-IL-02) in demanding increased access to broadband service for low-income urban and rural Americans. The Promoting Access to Broadband Act would help states increase awareness and enrollment in the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Lifeline program, which provides a monthly subsidy to help low-income households pay for their broadband and telephone service. Specifically, the legislation would establish a competitive grant program through the FCC that would allow states to inform eligible recipients of the Lifeline program. “With the cost of living skyrocketing for families, making broadband access more affordable and reliable for rural Americans is critical,” Duckworth said. “Reliable internet access is crucial for public health, the success of small businesses, educating our children and improving quality of life. I’m proud to join Senator Durbin and Congresswoman Kelly in introducing this legislation to help families better access and bring awareness to the Lifeline program.” “Access to affordable and reliable internet is no longer a luxury but a necessity. Americans rely on broadband connection to complete school assignments, see their medical professionals, and talk to their loved ones, but for many families, the cost of internet access is just too high,” said Durbin. “The Promoting Access to Broadband Act would increase awareness and enrollment in the FCC’s Lifeline program, giving more Americans access to the internet.” “Families are facing higher costs for gas, groceries, rent, and basic necessities. The Lifeline program can alleviate some of the burden and cover internet costs for families,” said Kelly. “I’m proud to introduce this bill with Senator Durbin to help families cut through the red tape and increase enrollment in the Lifeline program. My district covers urban, suburban, and rural areas, and they all deserve to have access to the internet, which is a necessity in this day and age.” In addition to Duckworth, Durbin and Kelly, the Promoting Access to Broadband Act is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-CA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ed Markey (D-MA) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN). In 2021, the federal government took bold, bipartisan action to invest in our nation’s broadband infrastructure through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021. Yet, with the expiration of the Affordable Connectivity Program and delays in investment, there is still much progress to be made in connecting families to broadband. According to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, as many as 25 million Americans lack access to broadband. A 2023 survey from Consumer Reports found that 27 percent of broadband users found it difficult to afford their monthly internet costs. Further, participation in the Lifeline program remains extremely low nationwide. The Universal Service Administrative Company estimates the number of eligible households participating in Lifeline nationwide is just 22 percent, and only 14 percent in Illinois. The Promoting Access to Broadband Act would: To be eligible for these programs, an individual must have an income at or below 135 percent of the federal poverty guidelines for the Lifeline program. Enrollees also are eligible if they qualify for a needs-based program, such as Medicaid or SNAP, or receive Supplemental Security Income, federal public housing assistance or Veterans Pension and Survivors Benefits. The bill has earned endorsements from National Digital Inclusion Alliance, Public Knowledge, Third Way and ACLU. Full text of the bill is available on the Senator’s website.

Duckworth Grills Hegseth, Caine Over Lack of Strategy in Trump’s Illegal, Spiraling War of Choice | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: Senator Duckworth opposes the Trump administration's military action in Iran, characterizing it as an unjustified war of choice that lacks strategic planning, has resulted in military casualties, and diverts resources from Indo-Pacific readiness. She advocates for passage of a War Powers Resolution to cease hostilities.

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] – Combat Veteran and U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) today pressed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Chairman to the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine on the Administration’s horrific lack of strategy and continued recklessness in Donald Trump’s unjustified war of choice in Iran that has resulted in higher costs, left 14 servicemembers dead and hundreds more wounded. During the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) hearing, Duckworth grilled Hegseth and Caine for creating and bungling the crisis of Iran’s entirely predictable closure of the Strait of Hormuz—which has raised the average price of a gallon of gas for American families by more than a dollar. Video of the Senator’s full remarks can be found on her YouTube. “I have no doubt that competent planners in the Pentagon raised their concerns about a quagmire in the Strait to leadership—the question is why their leadership did not pay attention to this sound advice,” said Duckworth. “Hubris is not strategy. In war, it can cost lives. Even if the Strait re-opens, this Administration has created a new, less safe world by bungling this crisis. Iran has now learned they can charge $1 million per ship, creating a new funding line for their malicious activity against Americans for decades to come.” The Senator also highlighted that this Administration’s incompetent strategic planning affects our military’s readiness for any other crises or conflicts, especially in the Indo-Pacific. “There are very real ways that a crisis in any one of dozens of flashpoints in the Pacific could be devastating for our servicemembers, Americans in the region and our economy—and yet, this Administration keeps diminishing DoD’s abilities to prepare for them,” continued Duckworth. “As many as one-third of the assets in the Middle East right now are originally meant to be in the Pacific. This war of choice is draining our military resources, and we need leaders who will ensure our warfighters only fight when they have to—not because of one man’s whims and a lack of bravery among the ‘yes men’ he surrounds himself with.” Duckworth has been an outspoken critic of Trump’s illegal, needless war in Iran since it began. She is one of the Senate Six—the original group of Senators who have been forcing votes on War Powers Resolutions that would cease hostilities in Iran, which Republicans have shamefully blocked now seven times. Ahead of the Senate’s vote on her own War Powers resolution two weeks ago, Duckworth gave impassioned remarks drawing on her personal experience serving in our nation’s last war of choice in the Middle East, imploring Republicans to remember their oaths and vote to help rein in this unhinged President—which they did not.

At 60-Day Mark of Iran War, Senate Republicans Block Attempt by Duckworth, Schiff, Colleagues to End Trump’s Illegal Iran War | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: Senate Democrats, led by Duckworth and Schiff, oppose President Trump's military action in Iran as unauthorized under the War Powers Act and call for its immediate cessation through a War Powers Resolution. Republicans blocked the resolution.

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] – Today, Senate Republicans?voted to block?a War Powers Resolution aimed at ending President Trump’s illegal war in Iran offered by U.S. Senators Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). Voting down Schiff’s War Powers Resolution marked the sixth time Republicans blocked Democrats’ efforts to end Donald Trump’s costly, illegal war. “While Trump’s war of choice against Iran has been illegal since day one, Republicans have cowered behind their fake 60-day deadline to avoid doing their jobs—and it’s infuriating that, even as their self-imposed deadline approaches, today they once again abandoned their oaths and Constitutional responsibility,” said Duckworth. “For the sixth time now, my Republican colleagues instead chose to continue enabling this unhinged President as his unjustified war continues to cost taxpayers and our servicemembers. Trump has already burned a minimum of $25 billion in taxpayer money—likely far more—on a war the American people don’t want and that sent gas and grocery prices soaring, left 14 servicemembers dead and hundreds more wounded. Our nation is not better off, safer or more secure, but Republicans continue proving they could not care less.” “Even if you accept the premise that Trump’s war in Iran was responding to an imminent threat, which I certainly don’t, under the War Powers Act he has no authority to continue this war past 60 days,” said Schiff. “Today, I forced a vote to assert the War Powers Act, and end the war. While we had some bipartisan support for my resolution, it was not enough to pass. And so the war will drag on in violation of the law and constitution.” “For 60 days, prices on everything from gas to groceries have soared,” said Schumer. “For 60 days, Trump has endangered the lives of our brave servicemembers. And for 60 days, Republicans have greenlit it all. And even now – on the day that Republicans admit is a turning point in Congressional authority over military hostilities – Senate Republicans refuse to stand up to Trump and his illegal war. Senate Democrats will never stop fighting for the safety and prosperity of our country, and Republicans must join us.” “Some of my Republican colleagues have said that Congress should authorize military action after 60 days, yet they voted today against our Iran War Powers Resolution,” said Kaine. “My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are not only abdicating their most solemn constitutional responsibility to decide whether to send our nation’s sons and daughters into war, but they are also backtracking on what they’ve told their own constituents who have zero interest in a costly and unnecessary war with no end in sight. We must end this war as soon as possible so we can turn our focus to domestic priorities like health care, housing, and education.” “President Trump’s war of choice in Iran has taken the lives of 13 servicemembers, cost American taxpayers upwards of $25 billion, and is jacking up the cost of energy, fuel, and fertilizer for Wisconsin families and farmers,” said Baldwin. “The American people do not support this war that has accomplished very little to keep us safe. It’s our duty to stand up for our constituents, rein in this President, and stop this illegal war that the American people did not choose.” “As we head into the summer and the price of everything for American consumers gets higher and higher – their summer travel, their plane tickets, their clothing, their groceries – there is only one person to blame: Donald Trump,” said Murphy. “And there is only one party to blame: the Republican Party, which could choose to join us and vote for one of these resolutions to end the war, to allow us to get back to a point where prices are coming down instead of spiraling upward. This is a choice that our Senate Republican colleagues make every week to vote for continuing this war and for continuing this disastrous price escalation on ordinary Americans.” “Each week, Democrats have come to the floor to demand hearings, transparency, and basic accountability,” said Booker. “We have continued to force debate and votes in an effort to end this costly war. And each week, my Republican colleagues have refused to use their votes to provide checks and balances on this Administration in order to put the American people, who did not ask for this war, first. This reckless, unauthorized, and unconstitutional war places service members and diplomats abroad at continued risk, threatens our national security, and drives up costs for families already struggling to make ends meet across our nation. While American families continue to pay the price, Secretary Hegseth remains unable or refuses to communicate any coherent plan, timeline, or strategy. Instead, despite already spending nearly $2 billion a day on this war, he is requesting even more funding while leaving Congress in the dark. So here we are again, for a sixth time demanding that this body remember its Constitutional duties. The Constitution grants Congress—and Congress alone—the authority to declare war and authorize the use of military force, and it has done neither. Democrats will continue to fight to end this war and ensure Congress fulfills its responsibility.” Schiff’s War Powers Resolution was also co-led by U.S. Senators Andy Kim?(D-NJ),?Jeff?Merkley (D-OR),?Chris?Van Hollen?(D-MD)?and?Kirsten?Gillibrand?(D-NY). This is the sixth time Democrats have forced a vote to end Trump’s illegal war, and Republicans have instead voted to rubberstamp it:

Duckworth, Durbin Announce More Than $22 Million for Port Infrastructure Improvements | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

[WASHINGTON, DC] – U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) today announced a total of $22,470,985 in federal funding for port infrastructure development projects for the Kaskaskia Regional Port District and Seneca Regional Port District. This funding is provided through the Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP), a Maritime Administration discretionary grant that supports projects improving the safety, efficiency and reliability of goods moving through ports and related freight infrastructure. “Our ports play a critical role in maintaining Illinois’s status as a major commerce hub,” said Duckworth. “I’m proud to see this federal funding support a key element of our state’s infrastructure. I will continue to work alongside Senator Durbin to ensure our state receives the infrastructure funding it needs to support the safe and efficient movement of goods.” “Today’s funding is a major investment in Illinois’ future,” said Durbin. “Ensuring our ports move goods reliably, safely, and efficiently will support our local and regional economies. Senator Duckworth and I will continue supporting federal funds that improve and expand Illinois’ infrastructure.” Recipients of funding through the Maritime Administration’s Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP) include:

Duckworth, Hoeven Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Strengthen Protections for Passenger Rail Crewmembers | U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois

Position: Senators Duckworth and Hoeven introduced bipartisan legislation to establish federal criminal penalties for assaulting or intimidating passenger rail crew members, mirroring existing protections for airline flight crews.

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] – U.S. Senators Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and John Hoeven (R-ND) introduced the bipartisan Passenger Rail Crew Protection Act to enhance public safety by ensuring passenger rail crew members are provided the legal protections that have been afforded to flight crew members and attendants for decades. Specifically, just as it is a federal crime to interfere with flight crews, the bipartisan Duckworth-Hoeven bill would prohibit interfering with intercity and passenger rail crew members by establishing a uniform criminal prohibition against assaulting or intimidating engineers, conductors, onboard personnel, employees performing safety-sensitive functions and other personnel responsible for operations, functions or customer service at a rail station. “No one in America should experience what my constituent Michael Case endured when he was shot and critically injured simply for performing his job as an Amtrak conductor,” said Senator Duckworth. “Congress rightfully recognized decades ago that flight crew members deserved uniform legal protections against assault and intimidation, and it’s past time we grant our passenger rail crew members with the same legal protections that apply to flight crews.” “Anyone who assaults a crew member or interferes with travel, whether by rail or in the air, should be held to the same standard,” said Senator Hoeven. “This bipartisan legislation will provide the same protections for rail crews that currently exist for airline crew to ensure that’s the case. In addition to crewmember safety, this effort will also better ensure the safety of those traveling by rail.” The full text of the bill can be found on Senator Duckworth’s website. A broad range of passenger rail stakeholders endorsed the bipartisan Duckworth-Hoeven Passenger Rail Crew Protection Act: SMART Union, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD), Transport Workers Union of America, AFL-CIO (TWU), Transportation Communications Union/IAM (TCU), the American Association of Railroads (AAR), UNITE HERE and the American Public Transportation Association. “There’s no justification for abusing, threatening or assaulting onboard service workers just doing their job,” said John Feltz, Transport Workers Union Railroad Division Director. “No one should have to worry as they head to work that they might wind up in the emergency room or worse. This bill rightly extends federal protection to this vital workforce and should be adopted without delay.” “Our members have long sought the same protections afforded airline personnel: that assaulting or intimidating a crew member should and must be a federal offense," said Greg Kocialski, TCU National Secretary Treasurer and 30-year Amtrak employee. "We’re confident this legislation will force people to think twice before assaulting passenger rail employees. On behalf of over 10,000 customer-facing passenger rail employees, we are proud to endorse the bipartisan Passenger Rail Crew Protection Act (PRCPA) and we thank Senators Duckworth and Hoeven for supporting the safety and dignity of our members.” “No worker should ever go to work wondering if today is the day that someone might try to hurt them," said Jared Cassity, SMART Transportation Division National Safety and Legislative Director. "Yet, just like in the airline industry, rail workers face that unfortunate reality every single day, which is why our members, the onboard conductors and assistant conductors, have long fought for parity with airline crew protections. Today, thanks to Senators Hoeven and Duckworth, we take a giant step forward to achieving that goal with the introduction of the bipartisan Passenger Rail Crew Protection Act, which makes it a federal offense to interfere with the duties of onboard train crews and station personnel.” "As America's largest transportation labor federation, we applaud Senators Duckworth and Hoeven for authoring legislation to help keep passenger and commuter rail workers safe on the job," said Greg Regan, President of the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO. "Passenger and commuter rail trains routinely move through multiple jurisdictions, and these workers deserve the same protections from assaults afforded to flight crew." Duckworth was originally inspired to author and introduce this bipartisan bill in 2018 after her constituent, Mr. Michael Case, was critically injured in a shooting while performing his duties as an Amtrak conductor. As a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation (CST), Duckworth has long advocated that every American should receive the dignity and respect they deserve while traveling. Duckworth authored the ASAP Act provisions in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which provide $1.75 billion over a five year period to help build ramps, install elevators and make other improvements to help ensure our nation’s transit systems are actually, finally usable for those with disabilities.