House Commerce Oversight Republicans Criticize IIJA, Chips and Science Act Spending
House Commerce Oversight Subcommittee Republican and Democratic members took widely divergent views Wednesday of Commerce Department implementation of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act-funded broadband programs and money from the 2022 Chips and Science Act. Subpanel Chairman Morgan Griffith, R-Va., made clear the hearing was only the initial stage in their plans. Griffith and other Oversight Republicans repeatedly criticized President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats for signing off on IIJA and the Chips law, saying both meant unrestrained spending and don’t have enough checks to prevent waste, fraud and abuse. Democrats conversely trumpeted the measures as crucial to helping Americans amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
“We’ve heard a lot about these so-called ‘historic’ investments … that the administration plans to advance with hard-earned taxpayer dollars,” House Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash. “We have many questions surrounding this massive spending spree that is making life unaffordable in America. For example, how will agencies stand up dozens of new programs in a short period of time? Do program offices, especially brand-new ones, possess the necessary expertise and oversight mechanisms to make responsible investments in new projects? How can American taxpayers learn more about how federal agencies are really spending their hard-earned tax money?”
“While couched as measures to upgrade American infrastructure or boost international competitiveness, in reality, these packages threw money at Democratic priorities and handed federal agencies unprecedented amounts of funding to disperse to pet projects,” Griffith said. “While this is all extremely disturbing, this unrestrained spending must end.” He hoped testimony from Commerce Inspector General Peggy Gustafson (see 2303280071) and other witnesses will “help guide” the panel’s “oversight efforts by highlighting important risk factors for mismanagement of federal funds and sharing lessons learned from their previous work.”
House Commerce Oversight ranking member Kathy Castor, D-Fla., and Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., strongly defended IIJA and the Chips law. “These landmark achievements will make tangible progress on some of our greatest challenges,” Castor said. “We all should be rooting for their success and the agency experts administering them. I regret that is not the tone from the majority.” Instead of “helping our neighbors and all Americans benefit, some on the other side of the aisle seem to be hoping for the first minor misstep in order to declare these initiatives a failure,” she said.
“I understand that most of our Republican House colleagues voted against these landmark laws,” including IIJA’s $65 billion for “expanding broadband access to rural communities,” Castor said. “They voted against initiatives that will make the U.S. more competitive and less dependent on Chinese and other foreign manufacturers.” DeGette emphasized the need for a more bipartisan oversight approach that will ensure that “every dollar … is well spent.” She later urged Commerce Republicans to hold more targeted hearings that will allow a more nuanced look at the spending in IIJA and other statutes than the “vague” Wednesday panel.
Reps. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., and Raul Ruiz, D-Calif., both focused on NTIA’s $48 billion pot of IIJA connectivity money. Cammack questioned whether Commerce’s Office of Inspector General sees any potential problems in doing oversight of the $42.5 billion broadband, equity, access and deployment program given it involves awarding states block grants that the department won’t have “direct control” over once distributed. OIG believes “our responsibility does not end at the block grant,” Gustafson said: “We have communicated to the department” that “we want to be part of the outreach that is happening” with state and local entities and “we will do our level best” to ensure that those governments spend the money as intended.
Ruiz focused on how OIG will evaluate that the IIJA broadband money “is distributed equitably.” He’s “glad that Congress passed these crucial measures,” but said “proper oversight” is necessary to ensure an end to the digital divide. Broadband access is now crucial, so not improving access “will only exacerbate disparities,” Ruiz said:
House Innovation Subcommittee ranking member Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., and Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., both eyed the Chips and Science Act’s funding to bolster the U.S. semiconductor manufacturing industry. It’s “exactly what I think that we need” to increase chip production outside of China and the Commerce OIG “is going to play a vital role in making sure that we oversee” it properly, Schakowsky said. Guthrie eyed how the department will be able to ensure the funding actually goes to domestic manufacturers and to prevent Chinese companies from circumventing those restrictions by partnering with U.S. entities. The statute “made it very clear that there are guardrails in place,” but it will matter whether Commerce conducts effective oversight, Gustafson said.