At a hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, a senator pressed a witness about why political appointees serve on review boards that assess federal loan programs, asking whether those reviews are professional business assessments or politically influenced.

The exchange focused on whether review boards should be composed of career staff or include political appointees. The witness acknowledged political involvement and described the current process as a "hybrid," saying political appointees have a role and that "the final sign off comes from a a a political appointee, but prior to that, the actual review committee did not have politicals." The senator pushed back, asking, "If it's a business review, why do we have political appointees on these review boards?" and later: "So why should I'm why should I believe that to be the case if there's why not let the professionals in your department... do their job, and then you can make a political decision?"

The witness told the committee, "Oh, it's it's absolutely the case," that political appointees are on such review boards and said the arrangement is "a hybrid of the 2." The witness also contrasted the review boards with the loan program office, saying, "For example, in the loan program office, there were no politicals on the review board." The witness defended the current process as "vastly more professional and vastly less political than it was, in the previous administration," a claim the senator questioned given the presence of political appointees.

The senator also referenced a large recent disbursement during the discussion, quoting the witness's characterization that "I I I don't think the careers would have shoveled out $25,000,000,000 in the last 2 days before inauguration." The committee record provided no additional documentation of that disbursement in the exchange; the statement was presented as part of the witness's explanation for political involvement.

No formal action or vote followed from this line of questioning in the transcript excerpt. Committee members continued questioning the witness on the structure of reviews and oversight; the transcript does not specify any directive to change review-board composition or next steps from this exchange.