Heinrich Slams Trump Energy Department Budget Request and Mismanagement, Stresses Need for Affordable, Domestic Sources of Energy

Heinrich to Wright: “We cannot expect to maintain U.S. leadership in emerging technologies if we shortchange the offices, programs, and most importantly, people, needed to do so.”

WASHINGTON — In his opening statement, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member on the U.S. Energy and Natural Resources Committee, grilled the U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Chris Wright over the Trump Administration’s Fiscal Year 2026 (FY 26) budget request for the Department of Energy, which guts funding for energy programs that ensure Americans have access to affordable, domestic sources of energy and support our research and energy leadership should be shared goals.   

Heinrich also pressed the Secretary on the disconnect between his recent remarks and actions, and skirting Department responsibilities by failing to respond to Congressional oversight requests.

VIDEO: Ranking Member Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) delivers opening remarks on the Department of Energy’s Fiscal 2026 budget request before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, June 18, 2025.

“We need a true ‘all of the above’ strategy to adequately deliver our energy goals and this budget fails to deliver on that,” said Heinrich.

Heinrich continued, “This budget proposal does not support those goals, nor do the many of the current actions at the Department.”

A video of Heinrich’s opening remarks is here.

A transcript of Heinrich’s remarks as delivered is below:

Thank you, Chairman Lee. And welcome Secretary Wright.

 

Secretary Wright, we are here to discuss the FY26 Budget Request.

And while this is our first opportunity to ask you questions since your confirmation, it’s not your first time defending this budget.

Last week, you testified before the Energy and Commerce Committee, and earlier, in

May, you appeared before the House and Senate Energy and Water Development Subcommittees.

It’s clear from those hearings that there seems to be a noticeable disconnect between what you’ve stated publicly, and the actions taken under your leadership as Secretary of the Department of Energy. 

At your nomination hearing in January, I asked you if the Executive Branch has the authority, without Congress’ approval, to withhold or terminate funding for an activity Congress approved in law.

You said that you would... “follow the laws and statutes of the United States of America.”

On May 30th, $3.7 billion in awards from the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations were cancelled without any notice or without justification. 

Cancellation of these awards crosses into impoundment territory and is certainly a breach of contract.

Actions like these will severely damage our country’s ability to lead in developing and commercializing next-generation technologies, while ceding ground to our competitors.

Another way to undermine our leadership?

Demoralizing the scientists and staff at DOE, the largest federal sponsor of basic research in the physical sciences.

I know you realize this, because on February 5th, you called DOE staff “the unbelievable humans that are in the room today, that are across our National Labs, in our cleanup facilities, in our offices around the country.”

Less than a month later, however, 2,000 DOE employees, including hundreds of National Nuclear Security Administration employees responsible for safeguarding the nation’s nuclear stockpile, were fired.  

That was unacceptable.

But only after heavy criticism did the Department partially rescind the NNSA termination order and scramble to reinstate these employees.

In the coming months, the Department is reportedly set to lose thousands of additional employees to early buyouts.

As my colleague, Ranking Member Murray noted, taxpayers have spent $70 million to pay people not to work at this point.

But it seems that you may be regretting that decision.

The Washington Post reported that, “[a]cross the government, officials are rehiring federal workers who were forced out or encouraged to resign.”

You know that this is no way to run a business or an agency, and I believe that we have to do better.

And just yesterday, I heard from the National Labs that this budget would cut funding for the labs by $2.75 billion—or 11 percent compared to Fiscal Year 2024, an estimated loss of more than 7,700 jobs once fully implemented.

Our nation’s scientific and energy leadership is on the line.

And let’s talk a little bit about energy dominance.

In your confirmation hearings, you said you would "be an unabashed steward for all sources of affordable, reliable, and secure American energy and the infrastructure needed to develop, deliver and secure them.”

However, last week before the Energy and Commerce Committee, you said: "I have never been for 'all of the above,' and if I said it at one point in time, I misspoke. I'm against energy sources that make the energy system more expensive or less reliable."

I wouldn’t call that misspeaking. That’s a disconnect.

If you truly were “against energy sources that make the energy system more expensive or less reliable," I don’t believe that you would be propping up the uneconomic J.H. Campbell coal power plant in Michigan to produce expensive, inefficient power.

A new report by Energy Innovation shows that average megawatt of power generated by U.S. coal plants is 28 percent more expensive in 2024 compared to 2021.  

And that means families spent $6.2 billion more on electricity generated by coal in 2024 than they would’ve just three years ago.

As electricity demand continues to grow, we will not be able to meet the energy needs of new data centers, while keeping household bills low, if we prevent the growth of affordable clean energy resources. 

We need a true ‘all of the above’ strategy to adequately deliver our energy goals and this budget fails to deliver on that.

During your time as Secretary, you have said that: “10 percent of Americans within the last 12 months have got a utility disconnection notice” and that one of your goals was to “shrink that number to zero by making energy more abundant and affordable.”

That is a worthy mission.

And yet this budget eliminates the Weatherization Assistance program, which saves households an average of $372 a year.

You’ve often said that artificial intelligence is ‘the Manhattan Project of our time” and yet this budget proposes a 14 percent cut to the Office of Science and the 57 percent cut to ARPA-E, where our major AI R&D efforts are currently underway.

We cannot expect to maintain U.S. leadership in emerging technologies if we shortchange the offices, programs, and most importantly, people, needed to do so.  

Lastly, I want to raise DOE’s failure to respond in a timely and substantive manner to Congressional oversight requests.

I have sent 4 letters on topics ranging from staff reductions to funding freezes and project cancellations. I have received zero responses. That is unacceptable. 

You and I may disagree on many things, but the need to ensure Americans have access to affordable, domestic sources of energy and support our research and energy leadership should be shared goals.  

This budget proposal does not support those goals, nor do many of the current actions at the Department. I hope we see changes. Thank you.

 

###