Welcome to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee hearing titled “From Gas to Groceries: Americans Pay the Price of the Biden-Harris Energy Agenda."  “Before we begin today, we remember all those we lost and the heroes who bravely confronted evil on 9/11. “We can never forget them or their sacrifices, so we remember what’s at stake: our values, our country, and our children’s future. “Thank you to our witnesses for appearing before the Subcommittee today. We look forward to your testimony. “Affordable, reliable energy is foundational to everything we do. “It’s key for our national security and for the prosperity of American families, businesses, and communities. “From the manufacture and production of the everyday goods we need to take care of our families, to the power necessary to keep homes warm in the winter, and cool in the summer, it all starts with energy.” HARMS OF RUSH-TO-GREEN POLICIES “Over the past two years, the Energy and Commerce Committee has led the way to expose how the Biden-Harris administration’s war on American energy is fueling the out-of-control inflation decimating the financial security of the American people. “We have examined how the administration’s radical rush-to-green agenda and regulations are threatening our national security and economic growth by restricting energy expansion, by shutting down reliable baseload power generation, and replacing it with unreliable, expensive generation, and by driving up the costs of mobility and homeownership, putting the American dream out of reach for many. “We’ve also examined how the radical Biden-Harris EPA has set new emissions standards at levels that will make it nearly impossible to permit the expansion or building of new manufacturing in most parts of the country, crushing many good-paying jobs and further drive up the cost of goods.” THE ECONOMIC PAIN HAS BEEN REAL AND IS NOT SUBSIDING “This administration’s war on American energy impacts every aspect of our lives, and hardworking Americans are facing the consequences every day from the gas pump to the grocery store. “Today, American families pay on average 30 percent more for electricity, 25 percent more for gas to heat their homes, and 56 percent more for gasoline to fuel their cars than they did in January 2021. “Right now, families are paying the largest portion of their income on food in 30 years. “I recently read about a mom living in North Carolina who said ‘Sometimes I have to choose whether I'm going to pay the light bill, or do I pay all the rent or buy food or not let my son do a sport?' “It doesn’t have to be this way, and it shouldn’t be this way. “In my home state of Washington, the average family is paying an additional $1,066 more per month on average than they did in January 2021 for the same goods and services, according to the Joint Economic Committee. “This adds up to more than $27,000 in additional spending due to inflation since the start of the Biden-Harris administration. “In California, it’s even worse. On average, households have spent $35,000 more since this administration took over. “In spite of all of this, the Biden-Harris administration has doubled down on its radical policies.” UNLEASH ENERGY, REDUCE REGULATION TO LOWER COSTS “Today we will focus on how the administration’s rush-to-green energy policies contribute to the high costs Americans face every day across the board and the resulting consequences on families and businesses. “Without taking action to promote American energy expansion, there is tremendous uncertainty for the future. “While the United States has regained its leadership in oil and gas production thanks to the pro-American energy policies of the previous administration, current restrictions led by the Biden-Harris administration on future energy production jeopardizes this success. “The administration’s increased taxes, regulations, and limits on drilling puts us on a path to not being able to meet America’s growing energy needs.” THE CHOICE GOING FORWARD “There is an important choice we must make going forward. “We can continue down the path of energy restrictions, reduced reliability, and unaffordable costs, or we can choose the path of energy dominance, security, and economic prosperity. “I believe the choice is obvious. “We must focus on advancing policies that reduce costs for American families and businesses, and that begins with unleashing American energy production. “To lower costs and make life affordable again, we must reject the Biden-Harris administration’s rush-to-green agenda and stand up for the American values of free market competition, innovation, and environmental stewardship. “That is how we will win the future.”

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee hearing titled "A Year Removed: Oversight of Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Act Implementation." “We are here because lives are on the line. “Every day, 17 people die waiting for an organ transplant. Many more suffer through years of fear and uncertainty, not knowing if they will get the life-saving care they need in time. “And surviving family members of those willing to donate their organs and tissue deserve to know that their loved one's act of selflessness is put to good use. “Nearly one year ago, the Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Act, passed Congress unanimously and was signed into law by President Biden. “I’m grateful to my colleagues, Dr. Bucshon and Rep. Kelly, for their bipartisan work in getting this Act signed into law.” THE PROBLEM “That bill sent a clear message that the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network, or OPTN, was in desperate need of reform. “As many of my colleagues—and certainly our witnesses—know, patients are waiting far too long for life-saving organ transplants.  “Tragically, some lose their lives waiting. Victims of a system that’s still struggling through a transition away from an old, broken model. “That is why it is so important that this committee remains informed about the effort to modernize the OPTN. “I’m grateful to hear from our witnesses today about their experience with the law’s implementation and to understand the remaining problems that need to be addressed. “While the leaders of the key organizations involved in this process, Health Resources and Services Administration Administrator Carole Johnson and OPTN Board President Dr. Richard Formica, were unable to testify today, the committee looks forward to receiving transparent and comprehensive updates from both moving forward.” WHY ARE WE HERE? “OPTN plays a critical role in savings lives. However, systemic inefficiencies, outdated practices, and a lack of accountability have hindered its ability to fulfill that mission. “This committee has a duty to ensure that the changes we put in place are happening. “We need to know that conflicts of interest are being eliminated throughout the OPTN, and we need to know that the OPTN is managed in a way that puts patient safety and well-being first. “We cannot allow the status quo to continue any longer. “Changing the name of the governing bodies of the OPTN but keeping the same individuals in place who failed to provide true oversight in the past is unacceptable. “Their inefficiencies and lack of accountability have cost people their lives. “The American people deserve better, and we’re here today seeking that on their behalf.” REMAINING WORK “I’m proud of the bipartisan work of this committee in passing the Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Act, but that does not mean our work is over.  “While the law is an important first step, challenges remain. Some of our witnesses today are not only advocates but also those performing organ transplantation surgeries. They are on the front lines, and it’s critical their voices are heard.   “We must ensure the promises of our bipartisan reforms do not go unfulfilled but lead to real improvements and better outcomes.    “This hearing is an opportunity to learn about what is happening, to ask tough questions to demand accountability, and to ensure that we save as many lives as possible.   “Past congressional hearings focused on the United Network for Organ Sharing as the sole contractor and manager of the OPTN. But that is not today’s hearing.    “Today is about people. It’s about patients waiting for an organ transplant—families who have lost loved ones—and the lives we can save if both Congress and HRSA get this implementation right. “I am committed to continuing to work in a bipartisan manner to modernize the OPTN, ensure transparency, hold people accountable, and ensure that every life-saving organ is used to its fullest potential.”

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s hearing titled “A Year Removed: Oversight of Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Act Implementation.” CURRENT STATE OF ORGAN PROCUREMENT AND TRANSPLANTATION “Today’s hearing is an opportunity to examine the national organ procurement system and provide oversight into the implementation of the Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Act. “The current state of organ transplantation in our country is inadequate and must be addressed. “There are over 100,000 individuals waiting for an organ transplant and about 17 people die each day waiting for one. “Notwithstanding the need for viable organs, according to one study, there are more than 28,000 viable organs that are not recovered each year. We must do better. “In 1984, the National Organ Transplant Act was signed into law that created a national framework for organ transplants. “The bill established the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, or OPTN, which created a public-private partnership that implements and oversees the organ donation and transplant system. “Currently, the sole contractor responsible for operating the OPTN is the United Network for Organ Sharing, or UNOS. They have been the sole contractor since 1986. During the past 38 years, there have been a myriad of issues plaguing this organ transplant system.” RIGOROUS ORGAN TRANSPLANT OVERSIGHT “While UNOS has provided beneficial services to organ transplant patients, there have been many examples of them operating inefficiently. “I believe this is largely due to them having a monopoly. “Also, there are questions around potential conflicts of interest. For example, partially due to certain agency regulations, some members of the UNOS board also sit on the board of the OPTN. “And let me remind you, this is the oversight organization overseeing the organ transplant system. “According to a Senate Finance Committee report, between 2010 and 2020, more than 1,100 complaints were filed by patients, families, transplant centers and others regarding the organ transplant system. “These inefficiencies are due to the lack of oversight and management of Organ Procurement Organizations, or OPOs. “OPO’s are responsible for the procurement of organs for transplantation and are overseen by UNOS. “There have been many reported cases of transportation failures, which has led to organs being unviable or having to cancel transplant procedures. “In 2018, there was a human heart left behind on a commercial plane. “Another mindboggling story was in 2020 when a kidney was accidentally thrown in the trash by an OPO staff, causing it to be unusable. “There are currently 56 OPO’s operating in the US. The current system we have in place is a patchwork of OPO’s that must rely on commercial couriers and airlines to transfer the organ. “If we can track our Amazon order for socks every step of the way, we should be able to track something as valuable as human organs. “The lack of accountability must be addressed to create a more stable and reliable system. “There are other failures that show there needs to be an overhaul of how the organ transplant system operates.” MODERNIZING THE ORGAN TRANSPLANT SYSTEM “That is what spurred H.R. 2544, the Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Act , led by Energy and Commerce members Dr. Bucshon and Mrs. Kelly, that was signed into law in 2023 and was unanimously passed by this committee and both the House and Senate. “This bill allows for multiple entities to bid for certain contracts for functions such as logistics and health IT within the organ transplant network. “This allows for companies with expertise in certain areas to competitively bid for contracts and end UNOS’ monopoly over the organ transplant process. “The bill also ensures accountability by having separate boards within the transplant system. “Within Health and Human Services is the Health Resources and Services Administration, or HRSA, which houses the entire organ transplant system. They will now have the authority to modernize the organ transplant system. “It is Congress’ job to ensure that HRSA successfully implements this law so that the previous failures do not happen. “Proper implementation is vital to saving lives. “On top of modernizing the organ transplant system, HHS and Congress must be open to approving new and innovative solutions to help address the organ shortage we are facing. “For example, in my district alone we have a company that develops genetically modified organs from pigs that can be transplanted into humans. “And Virginia Tech has partnered with a doctor in my district to develop an innovative technology that can resuscitate and keep organs viable for longer periods of time from trauma patients. “I am hopeful that we are moving in the right direction to help mitigate the failures of our current organ transplant system, but more must be done. “Congress will be watching to ensure this new law is implemented effectively and we do not face the same mistakes again.”

Washington, D.C. — In a new letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans are pressing for answers regarding Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) awards. The letter to Administrator Regan, signed by Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), and Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Earl L. "Buddy" Carter (R-GA), requests an unredacted copy of all GGRF award agreements that have been finalized.  It follows up on an Oversight Subcommittee hearing from earlier this year, where Mr. Zealan Hoover, Senior Advisor to the Administrator, assured Committee Members that the award agreements that EPA entered into with recipients to receive GGRF program awards would address the concerns raised.   LETTER TEXT BELOW:   Dear Administrator Regan,  We write to you as part of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s (the Committee) continued oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). As you know, Committee Members have many questions regarding this first-of-its-kind, $27 billion program, including those discussed at a January 30, 2024, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing on the GGRF, with Mr. Zealan Hoover, Senior Advisor to the Administrator, testifying on behalf of the EPA. In numerous instances, Mr. Hoover assured Members that the award agreements that EPA would enter into with recipients that the EPA selected to receive GGRF program awards would address the concerns they raised.   For example, in response to a question from Committee Chair Rodgers about what conflicts of interest policies would govern funding recipients responsible for further distributing this money, Mr. Hoover responded that “they will be subject to all of the terms and conditions of their financial assistance agreement.” After Representative Guthrie pressed for more information on whether organizations with foreign ties could receive GGRF funding, Mr. Hoover stated that “one of the terms and conditions in each of the award agreements is going to be a prohibition against entering into any form of contractual relationship with a foreign entity of concern.” Mr. Hoover also replied to Representative Lesko, “[e]ach grantee is applying with a rigorous investment plan, proposed project pipeline, and timeline for a wide array of necessary activities covering their investment work, their governance, their organizational structure. All of that will be enshrined in our terms and conditions of the grant agreement.”   Members also submitted follow-up questions for the record after the hearing. Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chair Griffith requested more detail about performance audits, and the EPA responded, in part, “[w]e expect that the terms and conditions of GGRF grants, as provided in 2 C.F.R. § 200.208, will authorize the project officer to closely monitor recipient performance and compliance with grant requirements.” Additionally, in response to Chair Griffith’s inquiry on how the EPA could evaluate the past performance of applicants that included new organizations or coalitions, the EPA stated that it required applicants to submit risk management plans, and that awardees would have to comply with specific terms and conditions in their award agreements. In response to a question on Build America, Buy America Act (BABA) compliance, the EPA stated that it was “including terms and conditions in the award agreements to reinforce that all grants are subject to [BABA] by statute,” and that “EPA will hold selected applicants accountable to BABA requirements through the terms and conditions of the award agreements.” Finally, the EPA also responded to a question from Representative Crenshaw, saying that “EPA will include a term and condition in all award agreements to protect against federal funds flowing to entities with certain connections to the People’s Republic of China.”  In short, the EPA repeatedly sought to reassure the Committee that its award agreements with selected recipients would address the issues of concern and potential risks. The Committee seeks additional detail on how these award agreements will address the issues of concern and potential risks.    As such, please provide a complete and unredacted copy of the award agreement, including all of the attachments, appendices, and any amendments, that the EPA executes with each funding recipient under the GGRF. By no later than August 29, 2024, please provide a copy of all award agreements that have been finalized as of the date of this letter, and please provide a copy of all remaining agreements as soon as they are finalized. 

Committee Leaders request GAO review CMS Part D premium stabilization program Lawmakers are calling on the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review the Medicare Part D Premium Stabilization Demonstration recently announced by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), noting its dubious legality and the danger it poses to health care affordability for seniors. The effort comes as part of a letter to GAO from House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Mike Crapo (R-ID), and House Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-MO).  Through new taxpayer-financed policy adjustments, the demonstration seemingly intends to deflate seniors’ premiums that are otherwise slated to increase dramatically following the counterintuitive, haphazardly-written Inflation Reduction Act’s drug price provisions. However, the agency has not produced any budgetary analysis and appears to lack a clear statutory basis or credible research goals for the proposal. Rodgers, Crapo, and Smith request GAO review the demonstration’s legality under section 402 of the Social Security Amendments of 1967; what budgetary analysis CMS undertook in developing the demonstration; and the estimated budgetary impact of the demonstration. From the letter: “We write to request that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) conduct an expedited review of the Part D Premium Stabilization Demonstration, as announced by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) on July 29, 2024. In response to the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) problematic design features and rushed legislative process, the proposed demonstration employs arbitrary policy levers to achieve short-term objectives. The initiative lacks any budgetary analysis, clear statutory basis, or credible research goals. The integrity of the Medicare program and the taxpayer dollars that finance its benefits demand more than partisan aspirations to justify extra-statutory, eleventh-hour policy changes." [. . .] “[T]he policies advanced through the recently announced demonstration would simply shift costs from plan sponsors and enrollees to taxpayers, obscuring the law’s impacts without addressing their underlying drivers. Moreover, consideration of these types of programmatic changes should fall within the purview of the legislative branch. Instead, however, this agency action seeks to sidestep Congress, waiving statutory directives under the guise of a ‘demonstration project,’ with no meaningful research aims, budgetary assessments, or empirical rigor.” CLICK HERE to read the full letter.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Subcommittee Chair Jeff Duncan (R-SC), and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA) yesterday sent a letter to Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Jennifer Granholm urging the Department of Energy to prioritize the onshoring of our critical mineral supply chains following the Chinese Communist Party’s July 1 declaration that rare earth metals were the “property of the state.” CLICK HERE to read exclusive coverage by E&E News. KEY QUOTE “Critical minerals are essential to America’s economy and to America’s capacity to manufacture goods and high-tech devices. Many critical minerals are essential to the energy sector, as they are needed to manufacture solar panels, batteries, and electrical equipment. As the DOE is aware, the CCP announced limitations on gallium, germanium, natural and synthetic graphite last October. These critical minerals are vital for our defense and energy technologies and are listed as critical and at high risk of supply disruption. On November 21, 2023, the Committee on Energy and Commerce sent a letter raising security concerns over the CCP limiting exports of gallium, germanium, natural graphite, and synthetic graphite. Your response to that letter failed to address these concerns and lacked basic information to help Members of Congress assess the risks of America’s increasing dependence on CCP controlled minerals.” [...] “The administration should prioritize the onshoring of domestic mining and processing industry for these critical minerals and materials. The answer to a lack of mining and processing is not to extend credits to companies using minerals from a major geopolitical adversary that relies on child labor and exploitation.” Chairs Rodgers, Duncan, and Carter asked Secretary Granholm to answer the following questions by August 13, 2024: Are you concerned by reports that the Chinese government has declared rare earth metals property of the government of China? What actions will the DOE take in response to the Chinese government’s announcement? Please describe any actions DOE has taken to prioritize onshoring domestic mining and processing of synthetic and natural graphite. Please describe any actions DOE has taken to prioritize onshoring domestic mining and processing of gallium and germanium. How will DOE work to expedite projects to ensure a secure and stable supply chain of these critical minerals and materials given these recent announcements? What actions will DOE take to mitigate potential domestic supply shortages of these minerals? Were you consulted about the Treasury Department’s decision to extend the graphite exemption through 2027? Did you advise or recommend that the White House extend the graphite exemption through 2027? Please explain. CLICK HERE to read the letter to Secretary Granholm. CLICK HERE to read the November 21, 2023, letter to Secretary Granholm raising concerns over the CCP’s decision to limit exports of gallium, germanium, natural graphite, and synthetic graphite.