News

Washington D.C. — Energy and Commerce Republicans are leading to stop the Biden-Harris administration from imposing unaffordable electric vehicle mandates that will jeopardize our auto industry and hand China the keys to our energy future. Members spoke on the House Floor in support of H.J. Res. 136, led by Rep. John James (R-MI), which passed the House with a bipartisan vote of 215-191. The legislation will end the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) unrealistic tailpipe emissions rule, which, by the EPA’s own admission, would effectively require at least two-thirds of all new cars in the United States to be electric by 2032. As Chair Rodgers said , “Over and over again, the Biden-Harris Environmental Protection Agency has doubled down on its radical rush-to-green energy agenda. The EPA’s latest tailpipe emissions rule is not really about reducing air pollution—it’s about forcing Americans to drive electric vehicles.” Don’t miss these key moments from E&C Republicans:

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), and Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) led 26 of their colleagues in filing a bicameral amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit in support of state and industry challengers to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) so-called “Good Neighbor” air rule that targets American power production and burdens states with misguided air regulations. “Acting well beyond its delegated powers under the [Clean Air Act], EPA’s Rule proposes to remake the energy sector in the affected states toward the Agency’s preferred ends. The Rule is part of the broader joint EPA-White House Strategy that oversteps the Agency’s authority by concurrently developing regulations under three separate environmental statutes. It does so not to meet any of the statutes’ individual ends but to transform the power sector. "The group of regulations—including the Rule—are designed to hurriedly rid the U.S. power sector of fossil fuels by sharply increasing the operating costs for fossil fuel-fired power plant operators, forcing the plants’ premature retirement,” the brief reads in part. BACKGROUND: The so-called “Good Neighbor” rule imposes overreaching emissions requirements on power plants, natural gas pipeline assets, and industrial plants, like steel, cement, and paper production facilities in 23 states. Other federal courts have already frozen implementation of the rule in 12 states. Despite active Supreme Court proceedings that may halt implementation of the rule nationwide, the EPA has remained committed to the illegal rule and recently proposed to add five more states to the program.  In June 2023 , Capito joined Wicker in introducing a formal challenge to the rule through a Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolution of disapproval.  In June 2023, Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) also introduced H.J.Res. 69, a formal challenge to the rule through a Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolution of disapproval.  In June 2022 , Ranking Member Capito sent a letter to EPA Administrator Michael Regan outlining serious concerns with the proposed “Good Neighbor Plan.”  Ranking Member Capito has criticized the EPA’s proposed “Good Neighbor Plan” during EPW hearings in March 2023 , July 2022 , and May 2022 , and in an op-ed .  In November 2023 , Chairs Rodgers, Duncan, and Johnson sent a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission expressing concerns with the impact of EPA’s suite of rules, including the “Good Neighbor” Rule (or Interstate Transport Rule), on the reliability of the nation’s electric grid. In addition to Capito and Wicker, senators who signed on to brief include, John Barrasso, (R-WY), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), John Boozman (R-AR), Mike Braun (R-IN), John Cornyn (R-TX), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Steve Daines (R-MT), Deb Fischer (R-NE), John Hoeven (R-ND), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Cynthia M. Lummis (R-WY), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Jim Risch (R-ID), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), and John Thune (R-SD). In addition to Rodgers, House members who signed on to the brief include, Rick Allen (R-GA), Kelly Armstrong (R-ND), Troy Balderson (R-OH), Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Larry Bucshon (R-IN), Michael Burgess (R-TX), Kat Cammack (R-FL), Earl “Buddy” Carter (R-GA), Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), John Curtis (R-UT), Jeff Duncan (R-SC), Neal Dunn (R-FL), Russ Fulcher (R-ID), Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Brett Guthrie (R-KY), Diana Harshbarger (R-TN), Richard Hudson (R-NC), John James (R-MI), John Joyce (R-PA), Bob Latta (R-OH), Debbie Lesko (R-AZ), Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA), Jay Obernolte (R-CA), Gary Palmer (R-AL), Greg Pence (R-IN), August Pfluger (R-TX), Tim Walberg (R-MI), and Randy Weber (R-TX).  Full text of the brief is available here .

Decision comes at the expense of America's energy security, jobs, and economy President Biden’s LNG export “pause” is a blatant political decision to appease his radical base at the expense of American energy security and the security of our allies. As Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) said , “This is another gift to Putin.” Our European allies are desperately seeking American energy to counter Russia’s weaponization of its natural gas exports. In December 2023, more than 87 percent of U.S. LNG exports went to the European Union, United Kingdom, or Asian markets. President Biden’s LNG export pause weakens global energy security and undercuts our efforts to help Europe reduce its reliance on Russian energy.  If President Biden were serious about his rush-to-green agenda, he would unleash the production and export of clean, affordable, and reliable American LNG—which has roughly 40 percent lower lifecycle emissions than Russian LNG. American LNG has allowed us to reduce emissions more than any other nation, and we have the capacity to continue helping countries reduce their emissions even further.   Studies show that LNG exports could add upwards of $73 billion to the U.S. economy by 2040, create upwards of 453,000 American jobs, and increase U.S. held purchasing power by $30 billion. President Biden’s decision to pause LNG exports jeopardizes all of this—Congress must act to reverse this decision.   Don’t miss what Energy and Commerce Republicans are saying:

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans, led by Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, wrote to Ford President and CEO James Farley regarding a new partnership with Chinese-owned Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Limited (CATL) to build lithium iron phosphate batteries in the United States.  CLICK HERE to read FOX News's coverage: BACKGROUND :  Earlier this year, Ford announced it would invest $3.5 billion to construct a lithium iron phosphate battery plant in Marshall, Michigan.  According to Ford, its wholly-owned subsidiary will manufacture the battery cells using Chinese company CATL’s technology and services.  KEY LETTER EXCERPTS :  “While Ford has labeled this project a ‘commitment to American manufacturing’ and asserts it will create 2,500 new American jobs, we are concerned that Ford’s partnership with a Chinese company could aid China’s efforts to expand its control over United States electric vehicle supply chains and jeopardize national security by furthering dependence on China.”  […]  “Additionally, Members learned at this hearing that Chinese companies often supply their own workers to projects in Latin America and Africa, reinforcing fears that CATL will import workers for this facility rather that creating jobs for United States workers.”  […]  “We seek to learn more about whether this partnership, and others like it, will potentially exacerbate our reliance on China. Should China gain control of domestic electric vehicle production, the United States would be exposed to serious national security risks at a time of escalating geopolitical tensions.”  The Members requested information and answers to the following questions by September 18, 2023:  A copy of the complete licensing agreement between Ford and CATL, including any appendices, amendments, or addenda.  All documents and communications exchanged between Ford officers or employees and officials, appointees, employees, contractors, or consultants of the United States government referring or relating to Ford and CATL’s partnership and eligibility for tax credits and federal incentives.  Did Ford consider making a similar investment in a partnership with a non-Chinese company? If so, why did Ford ultimately decide to partner with CATL? If not, why did Ford not consider other partners?  How many CATL employees will CATL supply to the Facility?  What steps did Ford take to prevent or limit CATL’s ability to halt production unilaterally, such as at the direction of the Chinese government?  CLICK HERE to read the letter. 

Proposed Standards Will Make it Harder for Americans to Afford New Cars Washington, D.C. — 151 House Republicans, led by Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), today sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan urging him to rescind the agency’s proposed emissions standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty trucks. The EPA’s ill-conceived effort is just their latest attempt to carry out President Biden’s radical rush-to-green agenda, which will take away Americans’ choice when it comes to the kind of vehicle they drive—and arm-twist people into buying vehicles they can’t afford.   CLICK HERE to read exclusive coverage from Fox News.  Excerpts and highlights from the letter:  "We write to express deep concerns with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) proposed standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty trucks. The proposals are the latest effort by the Biden administration to commandeer America’s transportation sector and force its complete vehicle electrification under the guise of mitigating climate change.    "The light- and medium-duty vehicle proposed standards are unworkable and impractical. EPA estimates that the proposed standards would lead to electric vehicles (EVs) accounting for 67 percent of new light-duty vehicle sales and 46 percent of new medium-duty vehicle sales in the United States by model year 2032. The projected statistics are a far cry from the current EV market share of 4.5 percent, making these standards a deliberate market manipulation to prop up EVs. Furthermore, a rapid shift towards EVs would benefit only the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as China has a stranglehold on the critical minerals supply chain and manufacturing of EV batteries. For example, China currently controls 50 to 70 percent of global lithium and cobalt refining that are necessary for EV batteries.  "Additionally, EVs are not necessarily better for the environment in terms of emissions reductions.  Specifically, over its lifetime, an EV only has lower emissions than an internal combustion engine vehicle if it travels between 28,069 and 68,160 miles and remains in service for more than 10 years – circumstances which are not being realized today.   "Worst of all, the proposed standards would make life harder and even more unaffordable for Americans and their families. According to Kelley Blue Book, the average price of an EV is $65,291, which is $17,197 more than the average price of an internal combustion engine vehicle. Insurance for electric cars costs $206 per month on average, which is $44 more per month than insuring a gas-powered car. Pricing is especially important, because access to a car is tied to improved economic outcomes for low-income households. Americans should not be forced into paying an excessive amount for a car they do not want and cannot afford. Also, the lack of driving range continues to be a problem with EVs. Forcing rural America into a largely EV future is condemning these communities into isolation.    "Given that the recent EPA announcement was only a proposal, we strongly urge you to rescind this ill-considered effort . Americans want the ability to choose the vehicle that best meets their needs, that is reliable, and that they can afford -- not be forced into buying an EV." CLICK HERE to read the full letter.   NOTE: The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee held a hearing on April 19 to expose the environmental, human rights, and national security risks of the Biden Administration's rush-to-green policies. CLICK HERE to watch the hearing and read opening statements and witness testimony.  

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans, led by Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Environment, Manufacturing, & Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH), and Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC), today sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan pressing the EPA to reconsider proposed regulations to the fuels market that risk disrupting the market and increasing transportation costs for Americans. WHY IT MATTERS: Americans are currently struggling to afford some of the highest energy prices in decades. President Biden’s rush-to-green policies have led to skyrocketing prices across the board—from electricity and oil to natural gas. These policies are hurting middle- and low-income families the most. Now, the EPA wants to continue prioritizing this radical agenda at the expense of Americans with this latest round of regulatory proposals that will ultimately reduce people's access to reliable, affordable transportation fuels. Excerpts and highlights below: EPA’S RUSH-TO-GREEN AGENDA: “We write regarding the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed regulatory provisions creating Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) generated from renewable electricity (eRINs) that the Agency included in the proposed rule for the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program for 2023, 2024, and 2025. “When the RFS was first created by Congress in 2005 and amended two years later in 2007, the program was designed to encourage the use of certain types of domestically produced blends of gasoline for vehicles. The RFS is intended to focus on liquid transportation fuels, and not to be used as a tool to electrify transportation. However, EPA’s proposed rule significantly changes how RINs would be addressed under the RFS program to allow for blended transportation fuel produced from renewable biomass to generate eRINs for electric vehicles (EVs). ” REDUCING FUEL AFFORDABILITY FOR AMERICANS: "EPA has missed the statutory deadline by nearly 14 years, but now it is moving forward with the rulemaking without studying the feasibility or market impacts of establishing an entirely new RIN program that would be contrary to both the RFS’ statutory language and the intent of Congress. “Our goal is to ensure that all Americans have access to affordable, available, reliable, and secure energy. The final design of the eRINs program under the RFS inserts uncertainty into the transportation fuels market. It could create new economic opportunities for parties that service the electricity distribution sector and certain renewable fuels producers, or it could create regulatory barriers that would negatively impact American companies and complicate consumer’s ability to access the fuels they need for the lives they live. ” CLICK HERE to read the full letter.

Energy and Commerce Republicans, led by Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), hosted a roundtable yesterday to discuss how people across the country are struggling with unaffordable energy costs caused by President Biden’s war on American energy. The panelists who participated in the roundtable discussion included: Dan Alsaker , President of Alsaker Corporation Jeff Eshelman , President and CEO, Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) David Hickman , Co-Owner and Operator of Dublin Farms, Inc. Donna Jackson , Project 21 Director of Membership Development Highlights from yesterday’s roundtable:  Chair Rodgers: “Our first event here of the 118th Congress is to focus on what has become unaffordable energy costs [in America]. We have an opportunity this congress to address what American families and businesses are facing and what they’re suffering from – some of the highest energy prices we’ve seen in decades.”  Mr. Alsaker (Panelist): “One of the things that I have to bring to your attention is that we employ about 400 people… but right now, hiring people, getting them to work, getting them affordable housing, getting them affordable energy to get to work, has lessened our staff down to about 300… and I need 400.”  Mr. Eshelman (Panelist): “Just yesterday, the Consumer Product Safety Commission came out with a report that they’re going to ban new natural gas stoves. They’re determining what kind of fuel you can use in your house, what kind of stoves you can cook with, what kind of cars you can drive. This is a personal intrusion that is happening across America into your personal lives, into your homes.”  Mr. Hickman (Panelist): “This is the most perilous time I think for American agriculture... the option farmers have today is: are they going to reduce fertilizer inputs, which will reduce yields in the long term… the world certainly doesn’t want [that] because it’s going to drive food prices even higher.”  Ms. Jackson (Panelist): “However tough high energy costs are on the middle class, it’s even worse for those who are trying to get to the middle class. The people that I represent, they are not coming to me and asking for government handouts... they’re asking for the opportunity to create their own economic freedom.” Rep. Michael Burgess, M.D. (R-TX): “Available, affordable energy, independent petroleum producers, the State of Texas, we stand ready. The difficulties are above the ground, not below the ground geologically. It’s self-inflicted.” Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH): “I had somebody come up to me not long ago in my district that told me that their monthly budget [which] was $100 a month is now $160 a month for their natural gas. They said, ‘what are we going to do to make that up? Are we just going to cut back on something else?’” Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY): “The people who are the most ardent climate change people pretend they’re for the downtrodden and so forth… [but] it limits people from moving forward if you don’t have reliable and sustainable energy.” Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA): “We need to stop thinking that we’re going to solve everything with renewables. They’re important, but we can’t do it all with renewables.” Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL): “[Permitting] is affecting my state of Florida with regard to the prices. We have a 42 percent increase over the national average.” Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH) : “After the crippling inflation of the last couple of years, the high energy prices, [and] the massive amount of rush-to-green spending, our constituents did not get a return on their investment. They got a lower standard of living, a lower quality of life.” Rep. Larry Bucshon, M.D. (R-IN): “The Biden administration’s anti-American approach has let down my constituents. For the past two years, Hoosiers in southwest and west-central Indiana have experienced high energy costs… these high costs have impacted businesses across my district, farmers, manufacturers, electricity providers, and small businesses on Main Street.” Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI): “A constituent of mine in Addison, Michigan is paying over $300 a month for propane to heat his home and $200 a month for electricity. $500 just to keep the lights on and the winter chill out.” Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA): “Georgia is the number one forestry state in the country... I’ve had so many foresters call me, and I’m not exaggerating, so many tell me ‘the price of diesel fuel is so high. I’m not going to be able to stay in business.’” Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC): “The United States’ abundance of natural gas has helped do more to lower our carbon emissions than anything else. I think an effort to bring more nuclear power online and utilize more natural gas in this country are important steps in both lowering energy costs but also lowering our carbon emissions.” Rep. Gary Palmer (R-AL): “The war in Ukraine did not create the energy crisis. It exposed it.” Rep. Neal Dunn, M.D. (R-FL): “When President Biden took office, he wasted no time targeting the American energy sector. We know what happened next. Energy prices skyrocketed and Americans are paying the price. The Biden administration is responsible for the American people paying more at the pump and in the grocery store.” Rep. John Curtis (R-UT): “The impact of preventing climate change is worse than the impact of climate change. It doesn’t need to be that way. The more we look at the natural gas world, the more we realize that some of the very keys to a cleaner planet also are the same keys to energy independence, to a strong economy, and to low energy prices.” Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ): “I’m passionate about energy issues because it’s vital to every aspect of our lives.” Rep. Greg Pence (R-IN): “ I spent part of my career as National Director of Fuel for Circle K [convenience and gas stores] so I delivered fuel where it needed to be, when it needed to be… [sometimes] for many, many miles. You can get liquid fuel somewhere, you can’t get electricity anywhere it needs to be.” Rep. John Joyce, M.D. (R-PA): “American energy production, we all recognize, is safe, it’s clean, it’s the most efficient in the world. And yet at every turn, the Biden administration is putting up roadblocks for domestic production. Our successful future for energy independence is based on clean natural gas, it is based on advanced nuclear power, it is based on utilizing the energy sources under the feet of my constituents in Central Pennsylvania.” Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-ND): “I really care that we’re increasing the cost per bushel, per acre on a wheat field... The government is the reason your bread is more expensive.”

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans are examining the role of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations behind increasing risks of dangerous blackouts, which jeopardizes Americans’ safety and security. Americans are suffering enough from record high and unaffordable costs created by President Biden’s energy crisis. They deserve and need every assurance their air conditioning will come on this summer and heat will come on in the winter to keep their families safe. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and other grid authorities say these blackouts are likely this summer and warn of increasing risks in the future. These threats come as the Biden administration continues its rush-to-green agenda to shut down American fossil energy and leave the nation dependent upon intermittent and unreliable sources that strain the electrical grid. In the letter from the members to EPA Administrator Michael Regan, the members demand to know how the EPA’s regulatory actions are affecting America’s both immediate and long-term grid reliability. In particular, they question the Biden administration’s radical “EGU Strategy” in its climate agenda and how that will affect America’s energy reliability. This oversight letter follows letters sent to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Department of Energy (DOE) on June 6, 2022, where the members called on the agencies to “assure reliability in the bulk power system and the affordable, reliable delivery of electricity.” EXCERPT FROM LETTER TO EPA: “We believe the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should also account for its plans and actions to help us assess factors behind both the immediate and the long-term risks to electric reliability across the nation. “In recent months, you announced a suite of EPA actions to target fossil fueled electric generating units, an ‘EGU Strategy,’ to drive the Biden Administrations climate agenda. This ‘EGU strategy’ includes many major new regulations now under development or proposed – the Interstate Transport Rule, Regional Haze, Risk and Technology Review for the Mercury Air Toxics Rule, a new set of greenhouse gas performance standards, effluent limitations, and a legacy coal combustion residue rule—all of which directly affect power plants that are essential for reliable electric operations. “We are concerned that EPA actions threaten to accelerate fossil generation retirements, at the very same time electric system operators report growing shortfalls in such baseload capacity will accelerate blackout risks.” The members make several requests of Administrator Regan, including the following: Describe what specific actions you are taking or are prepared to take to address energy or electricity emergencies this summer in the bulk power system. List all waivers or other emergency actions you are considering or have taken over the past two years in connection with electricity reliability. List all regulatory actions you are considering or have taken over the past two years to alleviate electricity reliability risks. List and provide a description of all interactions with the Department of Energy concerning potential and proposed rulemakings and enforcement activity that may affect the reliable delivery of electricity. List and provide a description of all interactions with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission concerning potential and proposed rulemakings and enforcement activity that may affect the reliable delivery of electricity. List and provide a description of all interactions with states concerning potential and proposed rulemakings and enforcement activity that may affect the reliable delivery of electricity. List and provide a description of all interactions with the Independent System Operators, and states concerning potential and proposed rulemakings and enforcement activity that may affect the reliable delivery of electricity. In developing its reported “EGU Strategy” to “marry a range of authorities” to regulate the power sector, has EPA evaluated the cumulative impact of the strategy in accelerating plant closures? If so, please provide us with these assessments. How will the June 30 Supreme Court decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency affect your “EGU Strategy” to regulate sources in the power sector? Regarding the proposed Transport Rule [Federal Implementation Plan], what specific statutory provisions authorize EPA to impose a federal plan that effectively overrides the electric power sector planning authorities in 26 states? CLICK HERE to read the letter to Administrator Regan. CLICK HERE to read Fox News' exclusive report on the letter.

Washington, D.C. — This week, the top Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA-05), and the top Republican on the House Financial Services Committee, Patrick McHenry (NC-10), led a letter to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Gary Gensler regarding the SEC’s proposal to require extensive climate change-related disclosures from public companies. The letter urges Chair Gensler to rescind the proposal immediately and focus on the SEC’s statutory tripartite mission, rather than a far-left social agenda that is shutting down American energy, raising energy costs on families, and making President Biden’s inflation crisis worse. Republican Leaders McMorris Rodgers and McHenry were joined by 129 of their House Republican colleagues. Read the letter to SEC Chair Gensler here or below: “Dear Chair Gensler, “We write regarding the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) proposed new rules requiring publicly traded companies to disclose extensive climate-related data and additional ‘climate risks.’ The proposed rules exceed the SEC's statutory authority and fundamentally misappropriate the SEC's rulemaking authority. Congress did not establish the SEC to set climate policy nor to be the final arbiter of businesses' strategies to combat climate change, which is what these rules will do. We call on the SEC to rescind the proposed rules immediately. “As you know, the ‘SEC's long-standing tripartite mission to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation’ has been the foundation of its work. Congress passed the Securities and Exchange Acts of 1933 and 1934 ('33 and '34 Acts) to implement a disclosure-based regime that facilitates – not participates or dictates outcomes – in the investment decision-making process. Over the last 80 plus years, the SEC has implemented this statutory directive through a principle-based approach to rulemaking. This approach relies on companies to determine what is material to investors, not the SEC. “This principles-based disclosure regime enables companies to choose how best to comply and thrive under those polices. Investors decide whether they want to back those strategies. The proposed climate rules shift the SEC' s rulemaking authority, taking a novel, activist approach to climate policy. This far exceeds the SEC's authority, jurisdiction, and expertise. As a result, it will deservedly draw legal challenges. It also puts our time-tested approach to capital allocation, as well as the agency's independence and credibility, at risk. “We call on you to rescind these proposed climate rules and to respect the statutory limitations Congress placed on the SEC in the '33 and '34 Acts. It is Congress' job to set our environmental policy, not the job of unelected regulators. The SEC should focus on its core mission-protecting investors; maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and facilitating capital formation rather than a far-left social agenda.”