Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grant Oversight topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Republicans and Democrats press DOE on October grant cancellations and GAO findings
Summary
Lawmakers on the House Science Committee pressed Secretary Chris Wright over the department's October 2025 portfolio review and the subsequent cancellation of hundreds of awards; members cited GAO's inability to assess DOE's documentation and asked whether funding would be restored.
Members of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology pressed Secretary Chris Wright for detailed documentation and justification for the October 2025 cancellations of more than 300 DOE awards. Ranking Member Miss Lorren and several other lawmakers described the terminations as politically motivated and cited court findings and GAO reviews that raised questions about the department's processes.
Key points raised by members: - GAO's findings: Members cited a GAO finding that DOE had not provided sufficient information for GAO to determine whether an anti-deficiency act violation occurred; that statute (Title 31, section 1350) carries civil and criminal penalties if funds were expended improperly. - Geographic pattern concerns: Lawmakers pointed to a pattern, alleging many terminated awards were concentrated in certain states. Members said documentation has not been provided to Congress or GAO to explain selection criteria. - Litigation and court decisions: Representatives noted litigation from several terminated awardees that resulted in court findings adverse to DOE in some cases.
Secretary Wright's responses and framing: Wright disputed the charge that political considerations determined the terminations. He said DOE would engage with GAO and OMB on outstanding questions and that the department is willing to walk staff and members through its processes. When asked for the names of political appointees who participated in the portfolio review, he declined to provide them in open session.
What the committee asked DOE to provide: Members requested documentation that GAO and the committee identified as missing: clear criteria and records for the portfolio review decisions, the names/roles of reviewers (at least to committee leadership in a secure or classified setting if necessary), and any analysis supporting terminations. Several members said they would pursue the matter further through oversight tools if DOE did not produce documents.
Why it matters: Congressional appropriations and oversight depend on transparency about how federal research dollars are awarded and, if rescinded, whether that process complied with law and statutory intent. The committee indicated it may seek additional records and could use follow-up hearings or subpoenas if necessary.
Next steps and follow-up: Committee staff will accept written follow-up questions and requested documents; the record remains open for 10 days. Members said they expect DOE to provide the documentation GAO sought so GAO can complete its assessment.
