Heinrich Blasts Energy Secretary for Budget that Guts Energy Programs and Plays Politics with Independent Reviews

VIDEO: U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member on the U.S. Energy and Natural Resources Committee, questions U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright at a hearing on June 18, 2025.

WASHINGTON — During an Energy and Natural Resources committee hearing, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the Committee, pressed U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Chris Wright on the Trump Administration’s plans to gut funding for critical energy and research programs.

On Responding to Letters

Heinrich began by pressing the Secretary for a commitment to respond to his letters, “Secretary, first off, will you commit to responding to the letters that I’ve sent to your office?”

Wright responded, “Senator, the most efficient communication, of course, is to reach out. We can jump on the phone at any time. I know we've done that a few times. I'm happy to do that much more. My schedule is very tough, and I should respond and will respond to your letters.” 

Heinrich followed, “I'm sorry I should not have to spend time in these hearings on this. It’s a simple communication that I want something formally in writing on. I’m not telling you how to respond to it, I’m just asking you to do what every Secretary of Energy has always done and respond to my letters, Democrats and Republicans alike.” 

On Department of Energy’s Modeling Underlying Its Budget Proposal

Heinrich pressed Secretary Wright on whether the Department of Energy measured the impact of the Trump Administration’s DOE budget, “I don't want to get into a back and forth over different energy sources so much as just to understand, did DOE do a modeling process to determine the specific impacts of this proposed budget on both supply, energy supply and cost?”

Wright replied, “Absolutely, we have a team, in fact, that develops a model of the grid that looks at the grid by regions. And one of the comments you mentioned in your opening statement was we did issue a 202 C order to keep a coal plant in southwestern Michigan open because of small reserve margins in MISO and that plant was being retired without new capacity on the MISO grid to back it up.” 

Heinrich asked, “Did the State of Michigan agree with that analysis? Did you consult with them?” 

Wright followed up, “Well, we speak to the grid operators, the utility operator of that company, and had plenty of back and forth dialog on that. I think in general, people realize this was a good move for energy.”

Heinrich pressed, “Let's go back to the modeling that was done on this budget. Can you share that modeling with us?” 

Wright responded, “Sure.”

On Department of Energy’s Loan Program Office Advancing Geothermal Projects in New Mexico

Senator Heinrich urged Wright to commit that the Loan Program Office resume communication with energy projects in New Mexico, “Secretary, in New Mexico, we've got a couple of projects, a geothermal project, and I appreciate your enthusiasm for advanced geothermal, also a grid reliability project. They've both been in the loan program office pipeline for a very long time, and over the course of the last six months, the back and forth communication has gone away. And so I would just ask you if you would commit to sort of making sure that your loan program office re-engages with those two projects.”

Wright answered, “Yes, yes indeed, Senator.”

On Department of Energy Playing Politics with Independent Review Processes

Heinrich, “I want to ask you a little bit more about this review board process, because you described it as a business review, as professional, not political, but your own attorneys briefed my staff yesterday and said that there were political appointees on those review boards. Is that the case? Or is that not the case?”

Wright followed, “It's absolutely the case.”

Heinrich pressed, “So my understanding is that in previous administrations, these kinds of reviews have been done by career staff. If it's a business review, why do we have political appointees on these review boards?”

Wright answered, “Oh, it's, it's a hybrid of the two. I'm pretty confident it was that way before. I don't think the careers would have shoveled out $25 billion in the last two days before inauguration.”

Heinrich continued, explaining the previous structure of review boards, “For example, in the loan program office, there were no politicals on the review board. The final sign up comes from a political appointee. But prior to that the actual review committee did not have politicals. So I'm wondering, if we want to do this in a professional way, why are we putting politicals on these review boards? Why not save that for the final process and let the professionals do their job?”

Wright answered, “Senator, I'm highly confident the decision-making process now is vastly more professional and vastly less political than it was in the previous administration.”

Heinrich pointed out, “How am I supposed to evaluate that if there weren't politicals on these review boards before, and now we have politicals in the review board. So why should I believe that to be the case. Why not let the professionals in your department, you have some of the best in the entire world, do their job, and then you can make a political decision?” 

Wright responded, “Because the political appointees that are in it are people I chose. They're business leaders, they're entrepreneurs, they're on the political team we came in, but their job is to evaluate the math, the financial statements go back and forth with questions. They're playing a business role. And if you look at, and we should have a lunch, we should have a lunch, and you should see how we do things today. And I can show you how things were done before. The change in professionalism and not political, professional business evaluation, is dramatic.”

###