Members challenge emergency hearing and worry council could delay action on E15

Ranking Member McGovern told the committee he was trying to understand why the Rules Committee was convened "under emergency procedures" when the panel did not intend to mark up HR 13 46 or move it to the House floor immediately. McGovern asked what urgent circumstance justified an emergency hearing and said he was skeptical of procedural shortcuts that do not produce immediate action.

"When I think of emergencies, I think of national crises... I'm just trying to figure out what the emergency is exactly," McGovern said, pressing the point that the committee would not advance the bill this week or likely in the next week.

Other members and witnesses echoed concern that a promised Rural Domestic Energy Council could become a way to delay substantive change. Mister Smith, a witness, praised the council in some contexts but warned, "This council is not a substitute for action, and I refuse to let it be utilized as a delaying tactic." Representative Budzinski, who said there had been a bipartisan deal last year, expressed frustration that the council replaced a prior compromise that she considered more certain for farmers.

Committee leaders defended the hearing as an opportunity to use limited time before recess to solicit testimony and work toward a bipartisan solution; they confirmed no markup occurred at the session. Chairwoman Fox recessed the committee "subject to the call of the chair," and members left outstanding issues — including how council members will be appointed and whether the minority will formally select participants — unresolved and "not specified" at the hearing.

The exchange underscores a procedural tension: supporters want rapid relief for farmers and retailers, while some members and stakeholders want assurances that any process established will not simply postpone substantive changes.