News

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, led a hearing titled Examining Ways to Enhance Our Critical Mineral Supply Chains . “Producing critical minerals here at home is essential for our economic and national security. We cannot allow the supply chains for critical minerals used in products like AI chips, cell phones, missiles, and fighter jets to be controlled by China, particularly the processing and refining phases of the supply chains,” said Chairman Palmer. “In today’s hearing, our witnesses were clear that Congress must take steps to build an environment enticing for domestic investment—including streamlining the permitting process—to help ensure that critical minerals can be mined, processed, and refined domestically.”  Watch the full hearing here .   Below are key excerpts from today’s hearing: Congressman Troy Balderson (OH-12): “The US has the second longest timeline for a mine to be approved, and we’ve heard anecdotes of projects waiting decades for approval to break ground or begin operations. Why is it that approvals of projects in the U.S., whether it be a mine or a processing, refining, or recycling facility for critical minerals take so long in the U.S?” Mr. Herrgott: “One of the main reasons is lack of coordination amongst the various agencies that are involved in the permitting process. Most mining projects will require a variety of permits. We’ve had member companies that have had mines that require over 90 permits.” Congressman Dan Crenshaw (TX-02): “Critical Minerals are the backbone of a modern economy and a modern military, from semiconductors to advanced weapons systems. Today, the U.S. imports between 50 percent and 82 percent of the critical minerals we need. So where are they coming from? It’s been mentioned plenty of times here – they’re coming from China. That’s not good. Our national security, our national industrial base, our economic future is dependent on supply chains we don’t control and from regimes we cannot trust. And why? Well, mostly because our laws and regulations have made it virtually impossible to open up new mines in this country, and even, even when we do mine, we still have to ship the raw materials overseas just to get them refined because we’ve offshored our processing capabilities.” Congressman Randy Weber (TX-14): “The U.S. once led the world in producing and refining rare earth elements but ceded that position to China in the 1980s. Today, China controls roughly 90 percent of global rare earth processing and has already demonstrated a willingness to restrict exports and thus, as one of you mentioned, affect the market. This leaves the U.S. dangerously exposed. If China were to halt exports entirely, think of that scenario. Where would we turn to secure the materials vital to our energy infrastructure and national security?” Ms. Hunter: “So, a total export ban would be devastating to the U.S. economy. We would need to rely on domestic sources if we can get them online, and then have them be processed into the final products that need to be qualified by manufacturers, and turn to allies as much as possible, countries with which we share national security priorities.” ###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, announced a hearing titled Examining Ways to Enhance Our Critical Mineral Supply Chains . “Critical minerals are essential to America’s energy independence and our national security. By securing reliable and resilient supply chains for critical minerals, we are strengthening our global competitiveness, boosting domestic production and manufacturing, and reducing our reliance on foreign adversaries,” said Chairmen Guthrie and Palmer. “This hearing will provide us an opportunity to examine vulnerabilities within our current supply chains and explore ways to mitigate those risks.” Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing titled Examining Ways to Enhance Our Critical Mineral Supply Chains WHAT : Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing on critical mineral supply chains. DATE : Wednesday, May 21, 2025 TIME: 10:00 AM ET LOCATION : 2123 Rayburn House Office Building This notice is at the direction of the Chairman. The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be livestreamed online at energycommerce.house.gov . If you have any questions concerning this hearing, please contact Calvin Huggins at Calvin.Huggins1@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Kaley Stidham at Kaley.Stidham@mail.house.gov . ###

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 ###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – This 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. “The Committee has had concerns about the GGRF program—including the program’s unusual structure and a potential lack of due diligence in selecting award recipients. A recent Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee hearing examined these issues and the speed with which money was pushed out the door by the Biden Administration’s EPA, which raised additional questions about certain GGRF recipients.” said Chairmen Guthrie, Palmer, and Griffith. “ This investigation is key to evaluating whether these funds were awarded fairly and impartially to qualified applicants and determining how the federal funds are being used.” 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 Read the story here . ###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Yesterday, Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, led a hearing titled Aging Technology, Emerging Threats: Examining Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities in Legacy Medical Devices .  “The health care sector is one of 16 critical infrastructure sectors in the U.S. and has become a significant target for cyberattacks. To ensure our hospitals are secure and patients safely receive the treatment they need, we must reduce the vulnerabilities found in legacy medical devices,” said Chairman Palmer. “Yesterday’s hearing helped us better understand the risks of these devices and how to navigate them.”   Watch the full hearing here .  Below are key excerpts from yesterday’s hearing :  Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06): “Are there updated estimates on how many legacy medical devices are currently in-use across the U.S. health care system?” Mr. Decker: “The problem is actually sort of unknown, as far as how many devices exist, especially when we start talking about the concept of what is legacy versus what is non-legacy devices… We can estimate how many devices we think exist. So, if you look inside any typical hospital, you have for any bed 8-15 some devices connected to it. There are stats that show there’s about 913,000 beds in the United States, so extrapolating that, you get to about easily 10,000,000 devices that exist.”   Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02): “We’re talking about backdoor medical devices and what that means in the discovery and what vulnerabilities that has and how it’s concerning. So, Mr. Decker and Ms. Jump, how often do we find this type of thing?” Mr. Decker: “Within medical devices, specifically, it’s unknown. You know, there was that report that came out about the Contec Chinese device and in your opening comments, you mentioned there’s two potential opportunities for that to occur. We know that certain nation-state adversaries are prepositioning themselves into critical infrastructure and other critical infrastructure have been targeted for this, so it’s certainly within the realm of possibility that that’s occurring within health care.” Ms. Jump: “I would say that, as a risk management expert, I think that with the increased enforcement of risk management efforts, penetration testing, and threat modeling that FDA has placed on manufacturers, not only for new devices, but also for any devices going in for a significant change of modification, (so older devices do still go through this process) - that manufacturers are being forced to actually look critically at their devices across the whole spectrum - the entire threat landscape of that device. Therefore, I think that we are going to find more and more of these. Certainly, with my clients, we do threat modeling. We do penetration testing. We help those manufacturers find those issues before they become problems and start causing issues within the health care industry.”   Congressman Rus Fulcher (ID-01): “Mr. Garcia, during your verbal testimony, you made a statement that surprised me a little bit and it was that the medical device security in the medical industry, if I understood you correctly, was the most targeted for cyberattacks. Did I get that right?” Mr. Garcia: “The entire health care ecosystem, not just medical devices.” Mr. Fulcher: “Okay, so why health care? I mean, we hear about the banking, right? And power grids. What is it about the health care industry that creates that target?” Mr. Garcia: “Yeah, I came from financial services before this and, at that time 15 years ago, banking was the biggest target because that’s where the money is. But then they started outspending the criminals. The problem with health care is, first off, it is a widely distributed, multifaceted ecosystem that has a lot of touch points, a lot of vulnerabilities. Secondly, there is less money to spend against cyber threats. And thirdly, it’s easy money. When you have a ransomware attack, if you are a hacker and you ransom a hospital, you are forcing the decision on the hospital: should I pay the ransom and continue to treat patients or should I not and run the risk of not treating patients and/or going out of business. That’s why.”   ###

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, announced a hearing titled Aging Technology, Emerging Threats: Examining Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities in Legacy Medical Devices .  “Medical devices are critically important and broadly used to diagnose, monitor, and treat patients throughout health care delivery systems. Some medical devices, however, contain cybersecurity vulnerabilities. It is imperative we defend against cyber threats to protect patients and safeguard our national security,” said Chairmen Guthrie and Palmer. “This hearing will provide us with an opportunity to examine concerns regarding vulnerabilities in legacy medical devices, their impact on patient safety and health operations, and strategies to enhance cyber resilience.”    Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing titled Aging Technology, Emerging Threats: Examining Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities in Legacy Medical Devices     WHAT : Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing on cybersecurity vulnerabilities in legacy medical devices. DATE : Tuesday, April 1, 2025 TIME : 10:30 AM ET LOCATION : 2322 Rayburn House Office Building This notice is at the direction of the Chairman. The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be livestreamed online at energycommerce.house.gov . If you have any questions concerning this hearing, please contact Emma Schultheis at Emma.Schultheis@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Kaley Stidham at Kaley.Stidham@mail.house.gov .   ###

WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, delivered the following opening statement at today’s hearing titled  Examining The Biden Administration’s Energy And Environment Spending Push . Subcommittee Chairman Palmer's opening statement as prepared for delivery: “Welcome to the first hearing of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the 119th Congress. I want to start by saying that it is an honor to serve as the Chairman of this Subcommittee. Congress has an important oversight responsibility that includes making sure our laws are working as intended and that the federal government is using taxpayer dollars responsibly. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on this important endeavor.    “Today’s hearing is entitled 'Examining the Biden Administration’s Energy and Environment Spending Push.' Moments ago I noted the importance of ensuring that the federal government is being a good steward of taxpayer dollars. This is critical, particularly in the context of the extraordinary surge in spending and the explosion of new and expanded programs at the Department of Energy (or DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (or EPA), largely authorized and funded by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (or IIJA) and the Inflation Reduction Act (or IRA). The two laws provided supplemental appropriations of $97 billion and $101.5 billion to DOE and EPA, respectively.  “As this Subcommittee examined last Congress, spending large amounts of funding, particularly in short timeframes carries tremendous risk. For example, in a November 2024 report, the DOE Office of the Inspector General (OIG) noted that the IIJA, IRA, and 2023 Omnibus Appropriations law increased the DOE Loan Program Office’s authority to nearly half a trillion dollars. This is more than 23 times that of the program’s portfolio balance as of November 2021, when the IIJA was signed into law.  “The situation only became more alarming as the Biden administration raced to finalize loans and spend down available grant funding in its final months. All three watchdog organizations here today, the EPA OIG, DOE OIG, and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), have reported on past shortcomings within these agencies and risk factors for waste, fraud, and abuse. These risks increased under past infusions of funding as agencies rushed to move large amounts of funding in a short amount of time.  “Unfortunately, history seems to be repeating itself, but we have a chance to try to minimize the damage. I want to emphasize that we are not insinuating that all applicants and recipients are guilty of wrongdoing. Rather, the sheer pace and volume with which this funding was awarded raises questions, and it is worth a pause to evaluate whether the appropriate due diligence was done to ensure taxpayer dollars went to eligible parties and the funds are being used appropriately.  “I thank our witnesses for being here and sharing their expertise to guide and inform the Committee’s efforts to identify potential misuse of federal funds and ensure that appropriate measures are taken moving forward to prevent future misuse of funds. This hearing is only one step of many to ensure that wasteful spending is curbed, and we hope to continue our collaboration with the OIGs, GAO, and the current administration to address this issue.  “I now recognize the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, Ms. Clarke, for her opening statement.” ###

WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Today, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations, announced the first hearing of the 119th Congress for the Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations titled  Examining the Biden Administration’s Energy and Environment Spending Push .  “In its final months, the Biden-Harris Administration handed out billions of dollars in energy and environment grants and loans at an unprecedented pace, exacerbating concerns that appropriate vetting and due diligence reviews may not have occurred for some of these awards,”  said Chairmen Guthrie and Palmer.   “This hearing will provide an opportunity for the Committee to examine this surge in spending and help identify potential misuse of federal funds.”    Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing titled  Examining the Biden Administration’s Energy and Environment Spending Push .  WHAT: Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing examining Biden-Harris Administration energy and environment spending. DATE: Wednesday, February 26, 2025     TIME: 10:30 AM ET  LOCATION: 2322 Rayburn House Office Building  This notice is at the direction of the Chairman. The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be livestreamed online at energycommerce.house.gov . If you have any questions concerning this hearing, please contact Calvin Huggins at Calvin.Huggins1@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Zach Bannon at Zach.Bannon@mail.house.gov .  ###

WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Today, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, announced the Committee’s Subcommittee Chief Counsels for the 119th Congress: Subcommittee on Communications and Technology  Chief Counsel - Kate Harper Kate O’Connor Harper will serve as Chief Counsel for the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, where she has served for the past 5 years. Kate previously served as the Chief of Staff for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, where she worked on legislative and communications policy focused on spectrum and broadband issues. She also worked in NTIA’s Office of Congressional Affairs and engaged with Congress, state government officials, and other federal agencies to advance the Administration’s legislative initiatives on broadband and 5G. Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Chief Counsel - Giulia Leganski Giulia Leganski will serve as Chief Counsel for the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade. Prior to this role, Giulia served as a Professional Staff Member for the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, handling issues related to Big Tech, Section 230, Artificial Intelligence, cybersecurity, media, and public safety. Previously, Giulia worked as a Professional Staff Member for the House Small Business Committee, as Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs at the U.S. Department of State, and in the White House Office of Legislative Affairs.  Subcommittee on Energy  Chief Counsel - Mary K. Martin Mary K. Martin will serve as Chief Counsel for the Subcommittee on Energy. Prior to her years at Energy and Commerce, Mary previously served as policy counsel and committee executive to the Environment, Technology & Regulatory Affairs Division at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Before joining the Chamber, Mary spent 10 years as an attorney in private practice litigating complex commercial disputes, including environmental contamination, toxic tort, breach of contract, and insurance coverage matters. Most recently, Mary served as Of Counsel at Steptoe & Johnson LLP in Washington, D.C.  Subcommittee on Environment  Chief Counsel - Jake Tyner  Jake Tyner will serve as Chief Counsel for the Subcommittee on Environment. Jake has extensive Capitol Hill experience, most recently serving as General Counsel for Senator Dan Sullivan. In this role, Jake led the Senator’s efforts on issues related to energy, then environment, natural resources, and permitting and regulatory reform. Prior to joining Senator Sullivan’s office, Jake worked for Congressman David McKinley of West Virginia, the ranking member on the Environment & Climate Change Subcommittee in the U.S. House of Representatives and at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Subcommittee on Health Chief Counsel - Jay Gulshen Jay Gulshen will serve as Chief Counsel for the Subcommittee on Health. Jay most recently served as a Senior Health Advisor for the Committee on Energy and Commerce, working on Medicare Part B and Part D. Prior to returning to Energy and Commerce, Jay worked for the Committee on Ways and Means, advising on Medicare Parts A and B, served as the Health Policy Advisor for Congressman Buddy Carter, and as a Legislative Associate for the Energy and Commerce’s Health Subcommittee. Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations  Chief Counsel - Brittany Havens Brittany Havens will serve as Chief Counsel for the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. Prior to this role, Brittany served as a Senior Oversight Counsel on the Committee on Ways and Means Oversight Subcommittee working on a variety of issues, including oversight of federal agencies and programs; oversight of the tax-exempt sector; and legislation related to matters of tax administration. Prior to that, Brittany served in various roles for the Committee on Energy and Commerce between 2012 - 2022, most recently as a Professional Staff Member, conducting oversight on a wide range of topics within the Committee’s jurisdiction. The House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee staff will work under the direction of Staff Director Megan Jackson, Deputy Staff Director Sophie Khanahmadi, and Chief Counsel Joel Miller.