Blab Politics
Congressional Hearing Accuses Energy Secretary of Targeting Democratic-Led States, Citing Unlawful Project Cancellations
On June 10, 2026, the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology convened in Washington, D.C., to confront Energy Secretary Christopher Wright over a wave of clean‑energy project cancellations that critics say are driven by partisan politics. Representative Gabe Amo (D‑RI) led the charge, questioning the secretary about the Department of Energy’s recent decision to halt more than $7.5 billion in projects—including $14 million in grants for three Rhode Island organizations—and about the department’s failure to curb rising energy costs for working families.
Amo accused Wright of “gaslighting” Americans and of “hurting American families” with “platitudes, expletives, and excuses.” He asked whether the cuts were motivated by the fact that the affected states are traditionally Democratic, and whether the secretary’s insistence that President Trump’s policies will lower energy prices is a cover for selective funding. “Whether slashing clean‑energy projects in so‑called ‘Blue States’ just because they traditionally elect Democrats to claiming that Trump is fulfilling his promise to drive down energy prices,” Amo said, “Secretary Wright has gaslit Americans while doing nothing to lower the price of gas.” He added that the secretary’s “appalling disregard for driving up energy costs” was “fomenting chaos and making life unaffordable.”
The hearings followed a January 2026 federal judge ruling that the DOE’s cancellations were unlawful because they were “primarily targeted at states that did not vote for President Trump in the 2024 Presidential election.” The judge’s decision does not invalidate all DOE cuts, but it requires the department to review the legality of each one. The October 2025 cancellations cut funding for more than 300 grants, many of which supported renewable‑energy development in states that had voted for Trump in 2020. The Office of Management and Budget, under Director Russell Vought, described the cuts as the elimination of “Green New Scam funding to fuel the Left’s climate agenda.”
One of the projects threatened by the cancellations is Rhode Island’s Revolution Wind, a 65‑turbine offshore wind farm that began delivering power to the regional grid in March 2026. Amo has long championed the project, arguing that it will supply electricity to more than 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut and create jobs. He has also fought to keep the project on schedule after the Trump administration halted its development in 2025. The project’s survival is a key test of the Department of Energy’s commitment to renewable‑energy investments in states that have historically supported Democratic candidates.
Representative Amo is a co‑sponsor of several energy‑focused bills, including the Energy Bills Relief Act, the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act, and the American Energy Independence and Affordability Act. These measures aim to protect households from high energy prices, reinstate tax incentives for clean‑energy projects, and curb the profits of major oil companies. The hearing underscores the broader debate over the Department of Energy’s priorities, the role of partisan politics in federal funding decisions, and the impact of those decisions on energy affordability for American families.
The House Science Committee’s oversight hearing is part of an ongoing review of the Department of Energy’s policies. The committee will consider whether the department’s cancellation of grants and projects violates federal law and whether it has complied with its statutory obligations to support renewable‑energy development. The Department of Energy has not yet issued a formal response to the committee’s questions. The next steps will likely involve further testimony, a review of the judge’s ruling, and potential legislative action to protect clean‑energy projects from politically motivated cuts. The outcome of this process will shape the future of renewable‑energy investments in states across the country and influence the trajectory of energy‑affordability policies for the coming years.
Amo accused Wright of “gaslighting” Americans and of “hurting American families” with “platitudes, expletives, and excuses.” He asked whether the cuts were motivated by the fact that the affected states are traditionally Democratic, and whether the secretary’s insistence that President Trump’s policies will lower energy prices is a cover for selective funding. “Whether slashing clean‑energy projects in so‑called ‘Blue States’ just because they traditionally elect Democrats to claiming that Trump is fulfilling his promise to drive down energy prices,” Amo said, “Secretary Wright has gaslit Americans while doing nothing to lower the price of gas.” He added that the secretary’s “appalling disregard for driving up energy costs” was “fomenting chaos and making life unaffordable.”
The hearings followed a January 2026 federal judge ruling that the DOE’s cancellations were unlawful because they were “primarily targeted at states that did not vote for President Trump in the 2024 Presidential election.” The judge’s decision does not invalidate all DOE cuts, but it requires the department to review the legality of each one. The October 2025 cancellations cut funding for more than 300 grants, many of which supported renewable‑energy development in states that had voted for Trump in 2020. The Office of Management and Budget, under Director Russell Vought, described the cuts as the elimination of “Green New Scam funding to fuel the Left’s climate agenda.”
One of the projects threatened by the cancellations is Rhode Island’s Revolution Wind, a 65‑turbine offshore wind farm that began delivering power to the regional grid in March 2026. Amo has long championed the project, arguing that it will supply electricity to more than 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut and create jobs. He has also fought to keep the project on schedule after the Trump administration halted its development in 2025. The project’s survival is a key test of the Department of Energy’s commitment to renewable‑energy investments in states that have historically supported Democratic candidates.
Representative Amo is a co‑sponsor of several energy‑focused bills, including the Energy Bills Relief Act, the Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act, and the American Energy Independence and Affordability Act. These measures aim to protect households from high energy prices, reinstate tax incentives for clean‑energy projects, and curb the profits of major oil companies. The hearing underscores the broader debate over the Department of Energy’s priorities, the role of partisan politics in federal funding decisions, and the impact of those decisions on energy affordability for American families.
The House Science Committee’s oversight hearing is part of an ongoing review of the Department of Energy’s policies. The committee will consider whether the department’s cancellation of grants and projects violates federal law and whether it has complied with its statutory obligations to support renewable‑energy development. The Department of Energy has not yet issued a formal response to the committee’s questions. The next steps will likely involve further testimony, a review of the judge’s ruling, and potential legislative action to protect clean‑energy projects from politically motivated cuts. The outcome of this process will shape the future of renewable‑energy investments in states across the country and influence the trajectory of energy‑affordability policies for the coming years.
