Oversight & Investigations

WASHINGTON, D.C.  –  In case you missed it, Fox News recently featured Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, who shared his personal experience relating to the importance of ensuring patient safety remains the top priority within the nation’s organ transplant and procurement system.  In Case You Missed It:   “House Energy and Commerce Chairman Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., spoke to Fox News Digital on Tuesday about how his personal experience with organ transplantation has shaped his view of the system, which he said must ensure families are confident in it so they will not be afraid to donate much-needed organs.    “On Tuesday, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing with Dr. Raymond Lynch, the Health Resources and Services Administration’s (HRSA) chief of the organ transplant branch. Current and former leaders of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) and the Organ Procurement Organization (OPO), Network for Hope, which serves Kentucky, southwest Ohio and parts of Indiana and West Virginia, were also present.  “The investigation follows a shocking HRSA investigation that found hospitals and OPOs in Kentucky were allowing organ procurement processes to begin despite patients showing signs of life. The investigation ultimately found that, since December 2024, out of 351 cases involving patients who had been authorized for organ procurement, but the organs were ultimately not recovered, 29% showed ‘concerning features’ related to protocols and patient safety, while around 20% exhibited a ‘neurologic status’ not conducive to organ procurement. “My big concern is people will not – if they don’t have confidence in the system – won’t feel like they’ll register as an organ donor, Guthrie said between panels at Tuesday’s hearing.   “People need to have confidence in the system, or at least know the questions to ask if they’re in this end stage with their loved one, Guthrie continued. Because when you’re sitting there, and you’re getting prepped to go get your next – hopefully, chance at life – you also, as you sit there, know that there’s some other family in some other emergency room somewhere else having a different experience. And they are losing a loved one, but they’re willing – the loved one, either pre-designated or they’re willing to let their loved one live on by helping somebody else live. “Guthrie’s experience stems from his mother, who died waiting on a new liver. He recounted how she was, at one point, told they had found her a new liver, but when the surgeon went to go pick up the new organ, it was not in the adequate shape to be transplanted. “Despite assurances that she was high on the list, Guthrie’s mother never found an organ in time before declining so fast that neither the congressman nor any of his relatives could attempt a live-organ transplant procedure. The live procedure allows a living person to donate a part of their organ, which will later grow back but can help repair the damaged organ in the person receiving the partial transplant. “Guthrie said that despite the alarming evidence uncovered by HRSA’s investigation, he still intends to keep his donor status, adding we need more people to donate. Currently, around 100,000 people are waiting for an organ transplant. “While the HRSA investigation probed multiple cases, it highlighted one shocking case in particular where staff were so uncomfortable with commencing the organ procurement process as a result of visible signs of life that some refused to participate. At that point, after staff had witnessed tears rolling down the patient’s face, the process eventually stopped, but not after the patient sat in the operating room getting prepped for organ donation for around 45 minutes. “This should never have gotten to the point of them being in the operating room, Guthrie said of the case. There were a lot of indications this person was not going to die. “Guthrie added that the issue is a bipartisan one and said the work will be done when confidence in the system has been shored up.”   ###

WASHINGTON, D.C.  – This week, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce is holding two Subcommittee Hearings and one Full Committee Markup. Read more below.  SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING: The Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations is holding a hearing on ensuring the nation’s organ procurement and transplant system prioritizes patient safety.  DATE: Tuesday, July 22, 2025  TIME: 10:15 AM ET  LOCATION: 2123 Rayburn House Office Building  SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING: The Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy is holding a hearing on pipeline safety policy and will examine the reauthorization of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA) pipeline safety program.   DATE: Tuesday, July 22, 2025  TIME: 10:30 AM ET  LOCATION: 2322 Rayburn House Office Building  FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP: The House Committee on Energy and Commerce will hold a markup of two bills.   DATE: Wednesday, July 23, 2025  TIME: 10:00 AM ET  LOCATION: 2123 Rayburn House Office Building ###

WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Congressman John Joyce (PA-13), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, delivered the following opening statement at today’s hearing titled Ensuring Patient Safety: Oversight of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplant System . Subcommittee Chairman Joyce's opening statement as prepared for delivery: “Good morning, and welcome to today’s hearing entitled Ensuring Patient Safety: Oversight of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplant System. I want to begin this hearing by saying that it is an honor to serve as Chairman of this Subcommittee and I look forward to working on a bipartisan basis to shed light on many areas in need of oversight and reform. “Just last year, more than 48,000 organ transplants were performed in the United States. Many of us know someone who is an organ donor or organ recipient. They might be relatives. neighbors, friends, or coworkers. These procedures are often lifesaving and can extend an individual's life by years, if not decades. While organ transplants are a relief to so many families, there is another side of the story that is equally as important, that of the donors and their loved ones. “In September of last year, this Subcommittee held a hearing to conduct oversight of the organ transplant and procurement system, as well as implementation of the Securing the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Act, which was signed into law in September 2023. “During that hearing, certain allegations came to light, raising concerns whether practices and procedures were putting patient safety at risk. Following this hearing, the Health Resources and Services Administration, or HRSA, directed the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, or investigate this issue to better understand what transpired in one of these alleged incidents. “HRSA also conducted its own investigation. The agency compiled a report that describes practices at the organ procurement organization (OPO)—formerly known as the Kentucky Organ Donor Affiliates (KODA)—but is now known as Network for Hope. The report also details the failures by the OPO and the OPTN to adequately recognize and respond to poor patient care and quality practices. HRSA then issued a corrective action plan to the OPTN, directing them to take specific actions to address the concerns identified in the reviews. “I ask unanimous consent to enter HRSA's report, dated March 25, 2025, and HRSA's corrective action plan dated May 28, 2025, into the hearing record. Without objection so ordered. “The report provides a detailed overview of HRSA's investigation, including about what is referred to as the index case; additional cases that HRSA reviewed; actions taken by the OPTN, the OPTN contractor (UNOS), and KODA; and, finally, KODA's organ procurement in recent years. “As part of its review of the cases beyond the index case, HRSA focused on the overall medical presentation and initial and subsequent neurologic status of patients, staff interactions with patient families and primary medical teams, and evidence of robust documentation and quality assurance procedures. Lastly, the report includes an appendix consisting of OPTN's findings following the HRSA-directed review. “For every doctor, the most important tenet in the patient-physician relationship is above all, do no harm, but what happened in these cases fractured the physician-patient relationship and saw patients subjected to pain and suffering that never should have occurred. As Members of Congress, we all swore an oath to protect the Constitutional right to life afforded to all Americans. These incidents cannot be allowed to stand without strict investigation and oversight in the spirit of this Constitutional oath.   “The federal government plays a critical role in ensuring the organizations tasked with administering and overseeing our nation’s organ procurement and transplant system operate safely, effectively, and in accordance with the law. Transparency is key to improving the system and repairing public trust. This Committee has, and will continue, to follow the facts so that we can restore trust and accountability within the system.  “I want to thank the witnesses from both panels for joining us today. I look forward to hearing from each of you about the challenges facing the organ procurement and transplant system, the ways that the system can be improved, and how we can ensure the safety of all patients who elect to be organ donors.”  ###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, along with Reps. Palmer (AL-06), Carter (GA-01), Bilirakis (FL-12), and Obernolte (CA-23), penned a letter to the Executive Director of Covered California (CoveredCA), Jessica Altman, to request further information related to the potentially unauthorized transmission of sensitive personal health information involving Covered California’s website. Key Letter Excerpt: “According to public reports and agency statements, tracking technology was embedded on Covered California's website beginning in February 2024, as part of a broader digital advertising effort, and in direct contravention of the tracking platform’s user agreement, which prohibits the use of such tools on pages that collect sensitive health information. Although the tags were reportedly removed in April 2025, following external scrutiny and a vendor transition, the extended period of data exposure raises serious questions about the adequacy of safeguards that Covered California had in place. Forensic testing by investigative reporters identified the trackers in operation and confirmed that user-entered health information was being transmitted to third parties without consent. These circumstances warrant examination of Covered California’s actions under federal privacy standards.” “Ensuring the confidentiality of health information is a foundational obligation for entities operating within the health insurance ecosystem. Federal privacy protections, particularly the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), establish expectations for how covered organizations handle sensitive data. Recent reports and public filings raised questions about whether those expectations were met in this case, and whether existing oversight mechanisms are sufficient to detect and prevent improper disclosures.” Background: Forensic testing shows Covered California —the State of California’s official health insurance marketplace—has been sending sensitive user health data to third-party websites through several online data trackers. Prior to removal of the trackers, CoveredCA had more than 60 trackers active on its website; the average number of trackers on a government website is three. Some types of information sent to such websites include: Searches for doctors in network with specific plans/specializations Demographic information, including gender, ethnicity, and marital status Length of treatment a patent received by a provider Frequency of doctor visits If the user indicated they were blind, pregnant, a victim of domestic abuse, or used prescription medications. The State of California independently operates CoveredCA. As the state’s official ACA marketplace, CoveredCA falls under the purview of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The disclosure of information such as pregnancy or prescription drug use without proper consent—even for “marketing purposes”—may violate HIPAA. This Congress, the Committee has sent letters to 23andMe and DeepSeek over potential data privacy concerns: The Committee also held a hearing last Congress on the Change Healthcare hack, where personal health information was also jeopardized. CLICK HERE to read Fox News coverage of the letter. CLICK HERE to view the full letter. ###

WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Today, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Congressman Gus Bilirakis (FL-12), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade, and Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, sent a letter to 23andMe regarding the handling of Americans' sensitive data following the company's decision to file for bankruptcy. KEY EXCERPT: “According to 23andMe’s privacy statement, in a bankruptcy, customers’ ‘Personal Information may be accessed, sold or transferred as part of that transaction and this Privacy Statement will apply to [customer] Personal Information as transferred to the new entity.’ Additionally, a judge recently ruled 23andMe has the right to sell the sensitive medical and genetic information of its 15 million customers, which is considered to be the company’s most valuable asset. With the lack of a federal comprehensive data privacy and security law, we write to express our great concern about the safety of Americans’ most sensitive personal information.” Background: On March 23, 2025, 23andMe initiated Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, which could have ramifications for the highly sensitive information of millions of Americans. While Americans’ personal health information is protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), these protections only apply if the information is collected by a HIPAA covered entity. Generally, direct-to-consumer companies, like 23andMe, are not covered by HIPAA. Customers have reported issues accessing and deleting their data from their 23andMe accounts. The Chairmen have requested answers to the following questions: If 23andMe were to sell the personal information of its customers either as a standalone asset or as part of a broader sale of the company, what post-sale data privacy and security protections would be in place for its customers’ personal information? Please describe how the representations made in 23andMe’s privacy statement will continue to apply—and be enforced—if the personal information of 23andMe’s customers is sold to a third party. Please include in this response information about what, if anything, would hold a third-party buyer to 23andMe’s privacy statement or prevent it from subsequently using, transferring, or otherwise selling, such information in the future. Does 23andMe plan to change its privacy statement at any time prior to selling any customers’ personal information? If so, please explain the change 23andMe plans to implement and when those changes will go into effect. Does 23andMe intend to vet prospective buyers to which it may sell its customers’ personal information? If so, please detail the vetting process and whether it will include the prospective buyer’s history of implementing data security protections and compliance with sectoral, state, or any other data privacy and security laws. If not, please explain why. Please detail the categories of customer information 23andMe has, and of that what 23andMe is considering selling. Has 23andMe notified its customers of the company’s bankruptcy announcement? If so, please attach the customer notification. If not, please explain why. Has 23andMe provided its customers with a guide for how to delete, or request to delete any information currently in 23andMe’s possession? If so, please provide a copy of that guide and specify when it was provided to customers. If not, please explain why, and explain whether 23andMe will contact each of its customers and provide an opportunity to delete their personal information prior to a potential sale of the company or personal information maintained by the company. Please detail the number of requests 23andMe received from its customers to delete their personal information between when 23andMe filed for bankruptcy and the date of the response to this letter. Of those requests, please provide a breakdown of how many requests were made by customers through their 23andMe online accounts and how many were made via customer service calls because customers were unable to successfully delete their information through their online accounts. Of those requests, please detail the number of fulfilled requests. Will 23andMe offer for sale any information in which a customer has requested the deletion of such information? If so, does 23andMe’s privacy policy consider selling information a legitimate purpose for retaining information past a customer's request to delete their information? Will 23andMe deidentify its customers’ personal information prior to selling it or the company? If so, please detail which information will be deidentified. If not, please explain why the company is electing not to deidentify information. CLICK HERE to read the full letter. CLICK HERE to read the story from CNBC. ###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Last week, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, and Congressman Morgan Griffith (VA-09), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, wrote letters to eight Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) grant recipients. In Case You Missed It: “SCOOP: Biden-era grant program described as ‘gold bar’ scheme by Trump EPA administrator under scrutiny” Fox News Alec Schemmel April 11, 2025 Republicans in Congress are launching a probe into a Biden-era green energy grant program that sent billions in funding to climate groups tied to Democrats and former President Joe Biden’s allies. GOP leaders on the House Energy and Commerce Committee sent letters to the eight nonprofits awarded grants from the $20 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), seeking answers to ensure the Biden Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) followed proper ethics and conflict of interest protocols in distributing the funds. In February, the Trump administration’s EPA announced it would take steps to get the money back, citing concerns over a lack of oversight related to how the money was being disbursed. In the announcement, new EPA administrator Lee Zeldin cited comments from a former Biden EPA political appointee, who described disbursements made through GGRF as akin to “tossing gold bars off the Titanic,” because Biden officials were allegedly trying to get money out the door before Trump took over. It was also revealed that $2 billion from GGRF went to a Stacy Abrams-linked group, Power Forward Communities, which had not been established until after the Biden administration announced the GGRF application process. Meanwhile, during Power Forward’s first few months of operations – prior to receiving the funding – the group reported just $100 in revenue. Climate United, another group that received the most money from the GGRF, roughly $7 billion, currently staffs a former Biden climate advisor who worked during the last two years of the former president’s term. The same group is also run by a CEO with ties to the Obama administration and a board member who was among those invited to Biden’s signing ceremony for his multitrillion-dollar infrastructure bill in 2021.  Several GGRF grant recipients have ties to Democrats and Biden advisors, and some were reportedly founded shortly before or after the Biden administration announced the program. Meanwhile, these groups, according to Zeldin, had sole discretion on how to use the funds. House Energy and Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., alongside fellow committee members Reps. Gary Palmer of Alabama and Morgan Griffith of Virginia, both Republicans, said in a joint statement that their investigation into the GGRF recipients will be “key” to understanding whether these funds were allocated “fairly and impartially to qualified applicants,” while also helping to determine the manner in which the money has been used. “The Committee has had concerns about the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund program since its creation—including concerns about the program’s unusual structure, a potential lack of due diligence in selecting award recipients, and the recipients’ ability to manage the large influx of federal dollars they received from the EPA,” the lawmakers said in their statement. “A recent Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee hearing that examined these concerns coupled with the speed with which money was pushed out the door by the Biden Administration’s EPA heightened the Committee’s concerns and raised additional questions about certain Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund recipients.”  Several of the groups that were recipients of GGRF money sued the Trump administration in March over its attempts to rake back the funds.  Subsequently, Obama-appointed Judge Tanya Chutkan issued a temporary restraining order preventing the EPA from freezing $14 billion in GGRF funds awarded to three of the climate groups.  Background: The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) authorized the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to create and implement a $27 billion GGRF program. Of this appropriation, $20 billion was awarded to just eight grant recipients; with $14 billion awarded to three grant recipients under the National Clean Investment Fund (NCIF) program and $6 billion awarded to five grant recipients under the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator (CCIA) program.   Letters:  National Clean Investment Fund Program Recipients Coalition for Green Capital Climate United Fund Power Forward Communities   Clean Communities Investment Accelerator Program Recipients Justice Climate Fund Opportunity Finance Network Inclusiv Native CDFI Network Appalachian Community Capital ###