News

WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Yesterday, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, along with Congressman Bob Latta (OH-05), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy, penned a letter to Secretary Jennifer Granholm questioning the Department of Energy’s involvement in the Biden-Harris Administration’s decision to prevent new offshore oil and gas production, leading to higher prices for consumers and harming U.S. energy security. KEY LETTER EXCERPT: “Closing off swaths of U.S. offshore areas to energy production, as the Biden-Harris Administration reportedly intends to do, will lead to higher energy prices for American families, the loss of American jobs, and greatly diminish our country’s energy security. As the Secretary of Energy, you have an obligation to weigh in on this matter and insist on a full review of the energy security and economic impacts before any decisions are finalized. “The United States stands at an energy crossroads, facing mounting global security threats and soaring demand for power. Instead of leading the world in energy production, we’ve allowed misguided “green” policies to hamstring our potential. It’s time to unleash American energy dominance again—the federal government must become an ally, not an obstacle, to our nation’s energy security. We look forward to your prompt response to this request, no later than January 10, 2025.” Read the story  here . BACKGROUND: This morning, the Biden Administration announced that more than 625 million square miles of coastline would be off-limits for energy production. Republican Members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce have continuously called on the Biden-Harris Administration to end its attack on American energy production before leaving office on January 20th. The letter requests an explanation of the DOE’s involvement in the decision and whether the White House or the Department of Interior consulted with the DOE about the plans to close off access to offshore resources. Any decision to shut down access to significant American energy resources impacts U.S. energy policy and should be reviewed by the DOE. The Biden Administration’s energy policies have continued to create major harm to America’s energy production and workforce. A unilateral ban on energy production in large swaths of the U.S. coastline will have lasting impacts on American energy production and security.

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 .

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH), and Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Jeff Duncan (R-SC) wrote to the heads of the Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Department of Commerce laying out expectations for intergovernmental cooperation regarding oversight. As Chair Rodgers said in the full committee markup of Energy and Commerce’s Authorization and Oversight Plan for the 118th Congress, “We have a responsibility to conduct oversight to get answers on behalf of those we serve and to ensure accountability so the government is responsive to the American people.” The members outline the below seven principles for each agency or department to comply with Congressional requests and provide answers the American people deserve. 1. For all requests or questions, please reproduce the requests or questions presented in a written letter with the department or agency response. 2. In the spirit of comity and inter-branch accommodation, your department or agency should endeavor to cooperate as much as possible with committee oversight requests. If your department or agency has determined it will not voluntarily cooperate with the requests, please provide electronic written notice within two business days specifying which requests you are declining to cooperate with and the stated reasons for voluntary noncooperation. 3. Your department or agency should make a determination on whether certain requests cannot be fulfilled as presented. Provide electronic written notice within one business week of receipt of the request about such determinations, stating the reasons why. If there is an alternative approach that could address the Committee’s request, then such an alternative approach should be suggested in the interests of comity and inter-branch accommodation. 4. If the department or agency needs clarification about a Committee request, your staff should make good faith efforts to contact Committee staff for assistance as soon as possible. 5. We expect your department or agency to provide a written response to our oversight requests within two weeks of receipt of the letter. If the department or agency needs additional time to respond to Committee requests, your staff should make good faith efforts to contact Committee staff for assistance as soon as possible. 6. If your department or agency has determined that certain requested documents cannot be produced pursuant to a privilege or other legal basis, your department or agency should submit an index of the withheld documents and the privilege asserted within two business weeks of receipt of the request letter. 7. If your department has determined that a requested witness cannot be made available pursuant to a privilege or other legal basis, your department or agency should submit in writing an explanation of the privilege or other legal basis asserted within two business weeks of receipt of the request letter. CLICK HERE to view the letter to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm. CLICK HERE to view the letter to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra. CLICK HERE to view the letter to EPA Administrator Michael Regan. CLICK HERE to view the letter to Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), and Subcommittee Leaders sent letters to the Departments of Commerce, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the Environmental Protection Agency requesting briefings to address concerns about how the U.S. government is identifying and mitigating potential compromises to its network security.  Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Republican Leader Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Subcommittee Chairwoman Diana DeGette (D-CO), Communications and Technology Subcommittee Republican Leader Bob Latta (R-OH), Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle (D-PA), Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee Republican Leader Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Subcommittee Chairwoman Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Energy Subcommittee Republican Leader Fred Upton (R-MI), Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Rush (D-IL), Environment and Climate Change Republican Leader David McKinley (R-WV), Subcommittee Chairman Paul Tonko (D-NY), Health Subcommittee Republican Leader Brett Guthrie (R-KY), and Subcommittee Chairwoman Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA) also joined in sending the letters to the federal agencies.  Excerpts and highlights from the letter to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm:  “Secretary Granholm:   “We write to request a briefing from your department related to the recent open-source software vulnerability—Apache Log4j. The ubiquitous nature of this vulnerability and the hundreds of thousands of known exploits since its disclosure raise concerns about how the U.S. government is identifying and mitigating potential compromises to its network security.”   […]   “On December 11, 2021, CISA Director Jen Easterly stated that ‘this vulnerability, which is being widely exploited by a growing set of threat actors, presents an urgent challenge to network defenders given its broad use.’ She later added, ‘[t]o be clear, this vulnerability poses a severe risk. We will only minimize potential impacts through collaborative efforts between government and the private sector.’”   […]   “Over the past several years, the Committee has done extensive work on cyber threats, including hearings and investigations examining the information-security programs and controls over key computer systems and networks at multiple agencies under the Committee’s jurisdiction.  Because the Log4j vulnerability is widespread and can affect enterprise applications, embedded systems, and their sub-components, the Committee is seeking to gain a comprehensive understanding of the scope of the vulnerability and actions being taken to mitigate its effects. The risk to federal network security is especially concerning because nation-state threat actors have attempted to exploit this Log4j vulnerability.   “Accordingly, we request a staff briefing to discuss your department’s response to the Log4j vulnerability by August 10, 2022, including the following questions:  When did your department first learn of the Log4j vulnerability?  When did your department first learn of the Log4j vulnerability?  What specific actions has your department taken in response to CISA’s guidance in December 2021 and subsequent directive on April 8, 2022, regarding the Log4j vulnerability?   What tools does your department employ to detect all instances of the Log4j vulnerability on your networks? What is your department’s schedule for identifying the Log4j vulnerability?  Does your department employ software that utilizes Apache Log4j? If so, how many software products employed by the department include the Log4j vulnerability?   Has your department been impacted by a compromise or exploitation of the Log4j vulnerability? If so, when was your department first compromised, when did you detect the compromise, what was the extent of the compromise, and how did the department address the compromise?   What incident alert thresholds does your department have for potential compromises generally, and what are your requirements for escalating and reporting anomalies?  Does your department have a specific plan to identify and remediate, on an ongoing basis, software that it uses to ensure the department is not currently using software vulnerable to a cyber threat?”  CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Department of Commerce.   CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Department of Energy.   CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Department of Health and Human Services.   CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Environmental Protection Agency.   CLICK HERE to read the letter to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration. 

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.”

Were They Influenced by Putin’s Dark Money to Shut Down American Energy? Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans sent a letter to three environmental groups with financial ties to a San Francisco-based environmental NGO called the Sea Change Foundation as a next step in the investigation of foreign influence over U.S.-based environmental NGOs. According to reports, it’s been alleged that Vladimir Putin has used Sea Change to funnel money into U.S. based environmental advocacy efforts designed to shut down and undermine American energy production. The letters ask the League of Conservation Voters, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Sierra Club: To identify the total amount of funding they received from Sea Change since 2006. To identify the specific efforts the funding was designed to support. To disclose if they are aware of concerns that Sea Change may be a conduit for Russian funding. If they currently or ever have received funds from the Russian government or anyone connected with the Russian government. If they have taken any action at the request of the Russian government or anyone connected with the Russian government. Due to the recent bilateral pact between Russia and China on defeating sanctions, if they have received funds from the Chinese Communist Party or taken any action on their behalf. All three of these groups were identified as top recipients of Sea Change grants since 2006. Read excerpts and find full letters to all three groups below. LETTER EXCERPT: “It has been alleged that Putin is using a San Francisco-based eNGO, the Sea Change Foundation (Sea Change), to funnel money into U.S.-based environmental advocacy efforts designed to undermine American energy production. According to a 2014 report, Sea Change receives contributions from a ‘Bermuda-based company called Klein Ltd.’ which is used ‘for funneling Russian government money to American environmental groups in order to undermine U.S. natural gas and oil production to Russia’s benefit.’ Notably, reports suggest that your organization is one of the top e-NGO recipients of Sea Change grants since 2006.” The Energy and Commerce Republican members request the three organizations respond by March 25, 2022 to a series of questions regarding their ties to the Russian and Chinese governments and their funding. CLICK HERE to read the letter to the League of Conservation Voters. CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Natural Resources Defense Council. CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Sierra Club. CLICK HERE to read what E&C Republicans sent to four groups over possible ties to the Chinese Communist Party.