News

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee hearing titled “EPA’s RMP Rule: Failures to Protect the American People and American Manufacturing.”  "The United States has long led the world in innovation and entrepreneurship, while continuing to maintain some of the highest environmental and labor standards in the world.  “This leadership has not been the result of a top-down, government-knows-best system.  “It’s the result of free market principles, and an entrepreneurial spirit that’s uniquely American.  “Our energy resources have enabled America to reduce emissions more than any other nation.  “This is a legacy we should be proud of and build off.  “Energy and Commerce Republicans have been working hard to do just that by advancing smart policies that protect and expand American leadership for generations to come.”  BIDEN’S RADICAL AGENDA   “The Biden administration, on the other hand, has been advancing policies that threaten this legacy.  “These actions are putting America on a dangerous path, they’re driving up inflation, killing manufacturing, and handing control of our future to China.  “The EPA has been at the center of this agenda.  “At a time when more than half the nation is at elevated risk of forced blackouts, the EPA has been finalizing new power plant rules that will shut down the types of electric generation needed to keep the lights on.  “Policies like their new PM2.5 standards will jeopardize manufacturing and jobs across the country.   “There are a hundred more examples of harmful policies and regulations like these coming out of President Biden’s EPA.  “When taken together these efforts will raise prices for Americans and open the door for China to replace American production and further pollute the environment.”  EPA’S RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (RMP) RULE   “Today, the Subcommittee will explore yet another one of these harmful regulations—the EPA rule that will massively expand Risk Management Plan (RMP) program requirements. “The truth is, everyone in this room wants American factories that operate responsibly and that ensure communities across the country are safe. “We also want those same communities to thrive and for people to have access to good, reliable jobs. “Under the RMP rules, we’ve seen a significant decrease in accidents over the last two decades. "EPA’s own data suggests that there was a 70 percent reduction in annual reported incidents between 2004 and 2020, and 97 percent of RMP-regulated facilities reported no accidents at all between 2016 and 2020.  “But this new RMP rule from the Biden EPA will force American manufacturers out of business or force them to move their operations overseas.  “If the rule itself wasn’t bad enough, President Biden’s EPA limited the comment period, preventing the public and the businesses impacted from being able to weigh in.  “Today we will pull the curtains back and learn more about the risks of this new rule.”  CONSEQUENCES OF THE RMP RULE   “The Clean Air Act requires RMP rules be ‘reasonable.’  “As we will discuss today, the EPA’s new rule fails to meet that simple requirement.  “Instead, this rule will raise gas prices for people across the country—which have already increased an average of 57 cents this year.   “According to AAA, gas prices have increased $1.25 nationwide since Biden took office. In my home state of Washington, the increase has been even greater.  “This new rule will only add to the pain Americans are already feeling at the pump, as we head into the peak summer travel season.  “The costs of essential goods and services will also rise as a result of the changes to RMP.  “It will harm small and medium sized refineries, who will be forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to comply.  “These impacted refineries account for 40 percent of existing and operating U.S. refining capacity. “Water utilities, manufacturers, agricultural retailers, pulp and paper producers, cold storage warehouses all could be forced to spend significant amounts of money to comply, or face shut down. “Instead of undermining American economic success, let’s work together to build on our remarkable legacy by embracing America’s tradition of balancing economic and environmental leadership, which will help lowers costs for Americans, create jobs, and prevent us from becoming reliant on China.”

H.R. 6192 protects Americans from federal mandates that drive up costs Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) spoke on the House Floor in support of H.R. 6192 , which will stop the Biden administration’s attack on consumer freedom and preserve the affordability, availability, and quality of the household appliances Americans rely on. Her prepared remarks are below: “I would like to start by thanking the bill sponsor, Mrs. Debbie Lesko of Arizona, and the Members of the Energy and Commerce Committee for advancing this bill through regular order. “The U.S. is blessed with tremendous natural resources. We have the cleanest oil and natural gas in the world, emissions-free nuclear, hydropower, and renewables. “We also have the world’s best workforce, and an innovative spirit that has contributed to technological breakthroughs that have changed the world. “For centuries, American innovation has led to new technologies that have improved people’s lives. “From the light bulb and the home refrigerator to air conditioning, the washing machine, and the dishwasher, these inventions are ingrained in modern life, and they were not the result of aggressive government mandates or regulation—but of American ingenuity.” OUT OF CONTROL APPLIANCE MANDATES “Sadly, the Biden administration’s war on American energy is now reaching inside Americans’ homes. “Through sue-and-settle agreements with radical environmental activists, the Department of Energy has reached backroom deals to impose new regulations on dozens of appliances that Americans rely on every single day. “Last year, the Biden administration attempted to ban gas stoves. “Thankfully DOE changed course after bipartisan opposition and an overwhelming vote by Congress to reverse the ban. “These new mandates are forcing people to spend more for less reliable options. “This comes at a time when Americans are already being crushed by rising costs thanks to Bidenflation. “By continuing to double down on policies like these, the Biden administration is showing just how out of touch they are with the financial struggle the vast majority of Americans are feeling. “Americans simply can’t afford President Biden’s rush-to-green agenda." HANDS OFF OUR HOME APPLIANCES “The bill led by Mrs. Lesko seeks to protect Americans from federal mandates that result in minimal energy savings while significantly driving up costs for consumers. “It ensures that DOE is only allowed to adopt efficiency regulations on home appliances that are cost-effective, technologically feasible, and save a significant amount of energy. “This will benefit Americans across the country, and should be a bipartisan issue, which is why I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation to send a strong message to the Biden Administration.”

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA) delivered the following opening remarks at today’s subcommittee hearing titled “EPA’s RMP Rule: Failures to Protect the American People and American Manufacturing.”  EPA’S REGULATORY BLITZ   “The RMP rule will affect producers of critical materials necessary for an innovative and prosperous American economy.  “These include chemical manufacturers, petroleum refiners, drinking water and wastewater treatment professionals, agricultural chemical distributors, and other sectors which both make and provide a reliable supply of items necessary for improving lives, enhancing safety, and providing an affordable cost of living. “Unfortunately, this RMP rule appears to be another cog in EPA’s regulatory blitz; perpetuating inflation while making it harder to produce the materials and provide services Americans rely on. “Managing risk is a necessary practice for doing business in heavy industrial sectors. Owners and operators invest millions of dollars into their facilities to ensure they operate safely and at maximum efficiency with proper controls. “They have no interest — legally or financially — in becoming the face of industrial malpractice. “Despite this inherent incentive, the Biden EPA, fueled by its ideological allies’ quest for command and control, has flipped RMP on its head.” UNDERMINING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING “In taking this step, the Biden EPA is disregarding the purpose of the statute and pursuing a 'zero-risk' program. “Owners and operators of industrial facilities already operate under a General Duty Clause in both the Clean Air Act and under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. “These provisions work to prevent and mitigate the consequences of accidents, as well as to furnish a workplace free from recognized hazards which may cause or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm. “In addition, the Clean Air Act clearly states, 'the administrator shall promulgate reasonable regulations and appropriate guidance to provide, to the greatest extent practicable, for the prevention and detection of accidental releases of regulated substances.’ “The recent RMP rule, though, goes far beyond what is reasonable and practicable for owners and operators of covered facilities.  “It is not reasonable for facilities to be required to disclose confidential information to anyone living, working, or spending an undefined, 'significant' amount of time within a 6-mile radius of a covered facility.  “In fact, it is a serious risk to our country’s security.  “These facilities handle hazardous materials which can be exploited by those seeking to harm Americans.  “Nor is it reasonable or practicable for certain chemical facilities and refineries to, in place of better training, be forced to prioritize installing new physical controls or measures on their facilities every five years or justify why they will not do so. And, being too expensive is not a justification.  “Under this new RMP rule, owners and operators of these facilities must prove their safety innocence to an EPA inspector every five years, regardless of the inspector’s technical proficiency regarding plant operations.”  UNREALISTIC NEW RULES “Risk management is a serious issue, we have a duty to ensure our constituents are protected from negligence and environmental hazards. “However, the pursuit of zero-risk is not reasonable, nor is it practicable. “Risk surrounds us every day. We drive cars to work, cross streets to get where we need to go, and take pharmaceuticals that may have potential side effects.  “Yet we responsibly manage these risks and reap the benefits of the opportunity they provide.  “The same goes for industrial production, we must responsibly manage risks to reap the benefits of the materials they provide. “Today, we will explore the RMP rule to learn how it could impair the ability of American businesses to compete in the global marketplace and provide items we all benefit from. “We also will hear from witnesses who are experts in the legal grounding of RMP, the field of risk management, and the hurdles businesses face when complying with burdensome regulations.”

On the House Floor: H.R. 6192 to reform the Energy Policy Conservation Act The Biden administration is waging war on American energy, and this war is making its way into Americans’ homes. President Biden and Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Granholm are sacrificing peoples’ ability to purchase affordable and reliable products for their homes in their pursuit of a radical rush-to-green agenda. Housing prices and utility bills are already too high for Americans, but that isn’t stopping the administration from continuing to impose burdensome regulations. Since taking office, the Biden administration has been attacking common and popular household appliances in the name of “energy efficiency.” In fact, last year the Biden administration proposed a ban on gas stoves as part of its war against fossil fuels. More recently, the DOE has announced plans to regulate washers, dryers, dishwashers, refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, and more, which is forcing people to spend more for less reliable options. Even worse, these new regulations fail to accomplish their stated goals as they will NOT save a significant amount of energy and are NOT cost-effective. For example, the DOE’s own analysis finds that efficiency mandates on dishwashers could increase the upfront cost by 28% and it could take consumers 12 years to payback the increased costs on a product that may only last 7-12 years.    This comes at a time when Americans are already being crushed by rising costs thanks to Bidenflation. By continuing to double down on policies like these, the Biden administration is showing just how out of touch they are with the financial struggles the vast majority of Americans are feeling. In contrast, House Republicans are leading to protect Americans from federal mandates that result in minimal energy savings while significantly driving up costs. Today, the House will consider H.R. 6192, the Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act , led by Congresswoman Debbie Lesko (R-AZ), to preserve the affordability, availability, and quality of the household appliances Americans rely on every day. Here’s why H.R. 6192 is important: Enacted in 1975, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) provides specific criteria the DOE must follow in order to propose a new appliance efficiency standard. The DOE may only propose a new standard if it results in a significant conservation of energy, is technologically feasible, and economically justified. The Biden administration has consistently ignored these critical consumer protections by proposing and finalizing standards that violate the statute. H.R. 6192 would prevent this abuse by: Eliminating unnecessary and duplicative rulemaking requirements  Authorizing the Secretary of Energy to amend or revoke a standard if it increases costs for consumers, does not result in significant energy or water savings, is not technologically feasible, or results in the unavailability of product  Protecting affordability by requiring the DOE to consider the cost to low-income households and the full-life cycle cost of appliances when determining if the new standard is economically justified  Establishing minimum thresholds for energy or water savings that must be achieved before imposing new standards  Prohibiting the Secretary of Energy from banning products based on what type of fuel that product uses (no natural gas bans)  Bottomline:  At a time when the American people are struggling under the crushing weight of Bidenflation, the last thing they need is more government mandates that drive up costs and fail to achieve their stated mission.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY) announced a hearing titled "Check Up: Examining FDA Regulation of Drugs, Biologics, and Devices." “America remains the leader in developing cutting edge biomedical innovation. Countries around the globe look to the FDA for guidance on facilitating safe and effective treatments and medical devices,” said Chairs Rodgers and Guthrie. “Given the increased funding provided in the most recent user fee reauthorization, it’s important that we engage regularly with key FDA officials to better understand what’s working well at the FDA and what challenges persist. Continuing to rebuild public trust in government health agencies is critical and will require more transparency from agencies like the FDA.”  Subcommittee on Health hearing titled "Check Up: Examining FDA Regulation of Drugs, Biologics, and Devices."   WHAT : A hearing to discuss the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) regulation of drugs, biologics, and devices.  DATE : Wednesday, May 22, 2024 TIME : 10:30 AM ET LOCATION : 2322 Rayburn House Office Building WITNESSES : Patrizia Cavazzoni, M.D ., Director, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Food and Drug Administration   Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D. , Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration   Jeffrey Shuren, M.D., J.D. , Director, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), Food and Drug Administration   This notice is at the direction of the Chair. The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be live streamed online at https://energycommerce.house.gov/ . If you have any questions concerning the hearing, please contact Emma Schultheis with the Committee staff at Emma.Schultheis@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Christopher Krepich at Christopher.Krepich@mail.house.gov .

Washington D.C. — The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology has postponed its hearing with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that was previously scheduled for May 7, 2024. WHAT: A subcommittee hearing to consider the FCC’s budget and hold the Biden administration accountable on behalf of the American people. STATUS: Postponed to a later date. This notice is at the direction of the Chair. The hearings will be open to the public and press and will be live streamed online at https://energycommerce.house.gov/ . If you have any questions concerning the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology hearings, please contact Noah Jackson at Noah.Jackson@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Sean Kelly at Sean.Kelly@mail.house.gov .

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chair Bob Latta (R-OH) announced a hearing titled “Perspectives from the Fields: The State of Rural Broadband in America.”  “Fast, reliable internet has become a vital part of people’s every day lives. From education and accessing health care to cutting edge agriculture technology that is helping feed the world, more and more of these activities are utilizing the internet, making connectivity foundational to success. It continues to be our mission to ensure that every community across the country can access broadband, especially in rural areas,” said Chairs Rodgers and Latta. “We are looking forward to hearing from community leaders in Bakersfield, California, about how we can secure meaningful connectivity for every American and close the digital divide.” Communications and Technology Subcommittee hearing titled “Perspectives from the Fields: The State of Rural Broadband in America.”   WHAT: A subcommittee hearing to discuss rural broadband in America. DATE: Friday, May 10, 2024 TIME: 10:00 AM PT (1:00 PM ET) LOCATION: 1001 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301 This notice is at the direction of the Chair. The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be live streamed online at https://energycommerce.house.gov/ . If you have any questions concerning the hearing, please contact Noah Jackson at Noah.Jackson@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Sean Kelly at Sean.Kelly@mail.house.gov . 

Americans deserve to have their sensitive health information protected. Energy and Commerce Republicans have been actively working since the February 21st cyberattack on Change Healthcare to understand how it happened, how it can be prevented in the future, and how to help Americans continue to access care.  THE PROBLEM Change Healthcare is one of the largest health payment processing companies in the world. It acts as a clearing house for 15 billion medical claims each year—accounting for nearly 40 percent of all claims. The cyberattack that occurred in February knocked Change Healthcare—a subsidiary of the behemoth global health company UnitedHealth—offline, which created a backlog of unpaid claims. This has left doctors’ offices and hospitals with serious cashflow problems—threatening patients’ access to care. It has since come to light that millions of Americans may have had their sensitive health information leaked onto the dark web, despite UnitedHealth paying a ransom to the cyber attackers. E&C ACTION From the outset, Members on Energy and Commerce have been working with the administration and Change Healthcare to help providers—particularly smaller and rural practices—maneuver through the new, complicated process of getting reimbursed, so they could keep their doors open and focus on caring for patients. Energy and Commerce Republicans were briefed by the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Change Healthcare in the weeks following the attack. Following the briefings, bipartisan Energy and Commerce leaders wrote to UnitedHealth seeking answers about the attack. The Subcommittee on Health convened a hearing on May 17th to explore cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the health care sector and discuss possible solutions to address them. This week, the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee called UnitedHealth CEO Sir Andrew Witty to explain to the American people what happened in the lead up to and during the attack, how the company is responding, and how it plans to prevent such an attack from happening again. WHAT WE LEARNED 1. The attack occurred because UnitedHealth wasn’t using multifactor authentication [MFA], which is an industry standard practice, to secure one of their most critical systems.  Mr. Witty:   We're continuing to investigate as to exactly why MFA was not on that particular service. It clearly was not. I can tell you I'm as frustrated as you are about having discovered that and as we've gone back and figured out how this situation occurred.    Change Healthcare came into the organization toward the end of 2022 after the timing of the declarations you just described.    Change Healthcare was a relatively older company with older technologies, which we had been working to upgrade since the acquisition. For some reason, which we continue to investigate, this particular server did not have MFA on it.   2. It’s estimated that a third of Americans had their sensitive health information leaked to the dark web as a result of the attack.  Oversight Subcommittee Chair Morgan Griffith: "Substantial proportion of the American population." What does that mean? How much are we talking? 20 percent? We talking 50 percent? We're talking 70? Tell us.   Mt. Witty:   Chairman, we continue to investigate the amount of data involved here. We do think it's going to be substantial. Because we haven't completed the process, I'm hesitant to be overly precise on that and and be wrong in the future. I wouldn't like to mislead anybody in that regard.   Chair Griffith:   Well, and I wouldn't want you to mislead us either. But when you say "substantially," at least give me some kind of a range. You can be on the bottom to high. I don't mind giving you a range. Are we talking 20 to 50?   Mr. Witty:   I think maybe a third or somewhere of that level.   3. This might not be the end of the leaks. Despite UnitedHealth paying a ransom to the criminals, it cannot guarantee that more of Americans’ sensitive information will not be leaked.  Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers:   How were the hackers communicating with UnitedHealth to get the ransom? Did you communicate ever directly with the hackers?   Mt. Witty:   I did not. No. Chair Rodgers:   How much did you pay in ransom? And how was it paid it? In dollars? Bitcoin or other cryptocurrency?   Mr. Witty:   $22 million in Bitcoin.  Chair Rodgers:   What was the date that you paid the ransom?   Mr. Witty:   I'm sorry. I don't have that to mind. But I can certainly get back to you with that.   Chair Rodgers:   Can you affirmatively say that the hackers you paid did not make copies of protected or personal data and then, at a later date, uphold it onto the internet or the dark web.   Mr. Witty:   I cannot affirmatively say that. No. 4. UnitedHealth has resources to help individuals and providers.  Dr. Burgess:   Is there a generally available website or telephone number that a practice can call right now, if they're continuing to have a problem?  Mr. Witty: Yes. And thank you very much for the question. So [ https://support.changehealthcare.com/ ] is the best website for anybody to access, whether it being a provider or an individual.    But, also I would very much like to note the 1-800 number that's available for individuals to call if they have any questions at all about data or anything like that.    So, it's 1 (866) 262-5342. That service line is available and makes available very quickly is a very simple process. If anybody wants things like credit protection, identity theft protection, those services are all available to be enrolled on just through a simple phone call.   CLICK HERE to watch the full hearing. Check out some of the news coverage from the hearing: UnitedHealth’s handling of the situation will probably be “a case study in crisis mismanagement for decades to come,” said Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.  Witty fielded heated questions from Senators on the House Energy and Commerce Committee about the company's failure to prevent the breach and contain its fallout.  Pressed for details on the data compromised, Witty said "maybe a third" of Americans' protected health information and personally identifiable information was stolen.  Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee asked Witty why the nation's largest health care insurer did not have the basic cybersecurity safeguard in place before the attack. "Change Healthcare was a relatively older company with older technologies, which we had been working to upgrade since the acquisition," Witty said. "But for some reason, which we continue to investigate, this particular server did not have MFA on it."  Rep. Gary Palmer (R., Ala.), in an afternoon hearing held by the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, pressed Witty on how many government employees with security clearance were included in the breach. That kind of theft would be a national-security risk, he said.  Still, Rep. Earl L. “Buddy” Carter, R-Ga., railed against the company’s use of vertical integration, in which it has acquired physician practices, pharmacy benefit managers and other players in the health care system. “Let me assure you that I’m going to continue to work to bust this up,” Carter said.“This vertical integration that exists in health care in general has got to end.”  Several members also took the opportunity to chide United Healthcare’s use of prior authorization, which Witty said resumed for its Medicare Advantage plans April 15.   The company should “carefully review how that prior authorization” has affected patient outcomes, said Rep. John Joyce, R-Pa. 

It’s National Small Business Week! Small businesses are the engine of our economy—leading the way in American innovation and ingenuity. In fact, small businesses are responsible for 70 percent of American jobs. To win the future and lead the global economy, we must advance policies to help America’s small businesses be successful. One way to do this is with a national data privacy and security standard, like the bipartisan American Privacy Rights Act .  Right now, growing small businesses and startups are forced to navigate a patchwork of state data privacy laws. 16 states have privacy laws that regulate the commercial collection and use of people’s data.  Ensuring compliance with multiple state laws can be costly and time consuming — forcing companies to divert valuable resources that could be used to improve or grow their business. It’s estimated that, without a national data privacy standard, U.S. small businesses could pay upwards of $20-23 billion annually trying to comply with a patchwork of state laws. Startups and small businesses simply cannot afford to comply with 50 different versions of rules. That’s why we’re leading on the American Privacy Rights Act to create a clear and consistent data privacy standard across all 50 states. Our bipartisan draft legislation strikes the right balance by giving Americans more control over where their personal information goes and who can sell it, while making sure small businesses and entrepreneurs are able to continue thriving and innovating in the U.S. 137 of the world’s 194 countries have national privacy laws. The United States does not. If we wait any longer, the larger the patchwork of state laws will grow and hurt American businesses, deter companies from operating and innovating in America, and undermine our ability to influence global standards to benefit the U.S. The American Privacy Rights Act ensures businesses have one clear set of rules to operate under— so a business will have the same standards in California as it does in Washington or Virginia. To further support small businesses and entrepreneurs, the American Privacy Rights Act exempts those that do not sell their customer’s data for profit, those with an annual revenue of $40 million or less, and those that do not collect, process, retain, or transfer the data of 200,000 customers or fewer from the requirements of the bill. The American Privacy Rights Act is focused on the business of data, not Main Street business. It’s past time for the United States to have one uniform, comprehensive data privacy standard that empowers small businesses to grow and thrive. Congress has been searching for a solution on this issue for decades, and now we have it with the American Privacy Rights Act .