Kaptur, Murray Demand Answers on Trump Administration Freezing Energy Department Investments to Lower Americans’ Energy Costs

Washington, DC – RealEstateRama – Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (OH-09), Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, and Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair and Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Ranking Member wrote a letter to the Acting Secretary of the Department of Energy demanding answers about the Trump administration withholding critical investments to lower energy costs for American families and businesses, spur innovation, and strengthen our energy security.

In the letter, Kaptur and Murray state: “We write expressing deep concerns regarding the Department of Energy’s recent unlawful actions to halt programs that are imperative to the Department’s mission of ensuring America’s security and prosperity by addressing the nation’s energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.”
“The Department’s actions to halt these programs will immediately contribute to rising energy costs for families and businesses, and they are a dereliction of the Department’s responsibility to carry out duly enacted spending laws,” Murray and Kaptur continued.  

Kaptur and Murray note that President Trump’s executive order illegally freezing Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding is creating unacceptable chaos, confusion, and harm.

In particular, they note that the order and a variety of other actions the administration has taken will hurt American families and businesses: “Stopping these programs is taking money from the pockets of Americans. For example, the Home Energy Rebates programs, funded by the IRA, has been putting money directly back in the hands of American households. The rebates help consumers save money on select home improvement projects that can lower energy bills by providing up to $14,000 per household in rebates. It is estimated that these programs will save households up to $1 billion per year on energy bills and support over 50,000 U.S. jobs. The President’s attempt to freeze the Home Energy Rebates Program means these costs will fall back on American consumers..” 

Kaptur and Murray press the Department for answers about what funding it is currently freezing and other actions it is taking to halt critical programs, and concluded: “We hope you will work with us—not against us—to lower energy costs and help create good-paying jobs, but we demand that you follow the law as intended.”

A timeline of President Trump’s actions to freeze critical federal funding is available HERE. Fact sheets detailing how presidents lack power to unilaterally override spending laws and deny enacted funding to communities through impoundment can be found HERE and HERE.
Full text of the letter is available HERE and below:

January 31, 2025

Ingrid C. Kolb

Acting Secretary

U.S. Department of Energy

1000 Independence Ave., SW

Washington, DC 20585

Acting Secretary Kolb:

We write expressing deep concerns regarding the Department of Energy’s (DOE) recent unlawful actions to halt programs that are imperative to the Department’s mission of ensuring America’s security and prosperity by addressing the nation’s energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions. The Department’s actions to halt these programs will immediately contribute to rising energy costs for families and businesses, and they are a dereliction of the Department’s responsibility to carry out duly enacted spending laws.

President Trump’s January 20, 2025, Executive Order 14154 seems to direct all agencies to immediately pause the disbursement of any funds appropriated through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) or the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The President’s Executive Order has abruptly frozen funding for an extremely broad array of investments in American communities, causing widespread chaos and confusion for American businesses and communities and threatening to raise energy costs for American families. The Trump administration’s memo freezing vast swaths of federal funds, its failed attempt to clarify the scope of the memo, and its subsequent rescission of the memo have created mass chaos and added to the confusion about what investments are currently being blocked. Today, our understanding is that much of the Departmental funding is still frozen. Moreover, the attached Department of Energy’s Secretarial Order on January 20, 2025, and the attached follow-up January 27, 2025, memorandum, paused all personnel actions; procurement announcements and actions; funding actions; release of reports, studies, congressional correspondence, and public announcements; Federal Register notices; and actions under the National Environmental Policy Act. Together, these actions halt a vast array of the Department’s essential programs—programs American families and businesses are counting on.

These actions will devastate programs that reduce energy consumption and increase affordability. Your administration will be raising energy costs for families and businesses and threatening to kill thousands of jobs. Continuing to freeze these investments—or permanently blocking them—will unravel critical progress the Department has made and cost American households and businesses dearly. Since 1980, energy efficiency technologies and improvements—made possible by programs like those currently halted by this administration—have saved Americans approximately $800 billion in energy costs.

Stopping these programs is taking money from the pockets of Americans. For example, the Home Energy Rebates programs, funded by the IRA, has been putting money directly back in the hands of American households. The rebates help consumers save money on select home improvement projects that can lower energy bills by providing up to $14,000 per household in rebates. It is estimated that these programs will save households up to $1 billion per year on energy bills and support over 50,000 U.S. jobs. The President’s attempt to freeze the Home Energy Rebates Program means these costs will fall back on American consumers.

In addition to raising energy costs for American families, the President’s Executive Order is illegal. The President may not unilaterally decide to ignore the laws passed by Congress and stop funding for programs just because he disagrees with their goals. The Government Accountability Office, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (including in an opinion written by future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court William H. Rehnquist), and the Supreme Court of the United States have all disavowed the notion of some “inherent Presidential power to impound,” as some in the Administration, as well as pending Administration nominees, have tried to argue without legal or textual basis.

Not only does the Constitution vest the power of the purse with Congress and provide no power to the President to impound funds, but there have been several bedrock fiscal statutes enacted to protect Congress’ constitutional power of the purse and prevent unlawful executive overreach, including the Antideficiency Act and the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA). The ICA prohibits any action or inaction that precludes Federal funds from being obligated or spent, either temporarily or permanently, without following the strictly circumscribed requirements of that law.

Given the importance of these programs, the unlawful actions ordered by this Administration, and the dubious actions that have been undertaken by the Department, we request additional information about the Department’s implementation of Executive Order 14154, the referenced Secretarial Order, and other related actions.

Regarding Executive Order 14154, please provide answers to the following questions:

• The Executive Order discusses limitations on “disbursements.” Does this include only payments or is it broader to include obligations and other financial transactions at the Department?
• Please provide a list of obligations already incurred by DOE for which the Executive Order now prohibits liquidating legal liabilities already incurred by the Federal government.
• Does the pause on the disbursement of funds appropriated through IIJA and IRA impact formula and/or discretionary grant programs, i.e. only one or both?
• Does the aforementioned pause impact advance appropriations provided through IIJA?
• What fiscal years from IIJA does the aforementioned pause impact?
• Will DOE notify recipients, those with obligated and awarded funding, impacted by the pause? If so, how will DOE notify impacted recipients?
• Will DOE reimburse non-Federal recipients for invoices submitted for work already performed that predates the Executive Order? What about for ongoing or halted work that has not yet been invoiced? If reimbursements will not be provided in either case, please provide the legal justification for failing to meet the obligations of contracts with non-Federal recipients.
• Does the pause impact payroll disbursements for employees paid through IIJA and IRA?
• Please provide a full list of DOE programs from IIJA and IRA that are impacted by section 7 of the Executive Order, including the requirement for programs to be consistent with section 2 of the Executive Order.
• Please provide the minimum amount of time the aforementioned pause could last.

Regarding the Secretarial Order dated January 20, 2025, please provide answers to the following questions:

• Is ongoing work for operations at the National Labs, facilities, and other DOE sites permitted at this time or are these facilities under review as well? If so, how long will this review last? Will these labs, facilities, and sites be notified of the scope of the review?
• Please provide a list of obligations already incurred by DOE for which the Secretarial Order now prohibits liquidating legal liabilities already incurred by the Federal government.
• Will DOE reimburse non-Federal recipients for invoices submitted for work already performed that predates the Secretarial Order? What about for ongoing or halted work that has not yet been invoiced? If reimbursements will not be provided in either case, please provide the legal justification for failing to meet the obligations of contracts with non-Federal recipients.
• What is the status and scope of the reviews of studies, reports, and announcements?
• What is the guidance on processing internal and external reprogramming actions?
• What is the status of reviewing routine reauthorizations of existing contracts and cooperative agreements?

Additionally, please provide answers to the following questions:

• Have any federal employees been terminated since January 20, 2025? If so, how many and in which organizations?
• Have any federal employees been furloughed since January 20, 2025? If so, how many and in which organizations?
• Have any federal employees been put on administrative leave since January 20, 2025? If so, how many and in which organizations?
• Have any federal employees received notices of future required administrative leave, furloughs, or reductions in force since January 20, 2025? If so, how many and in which organizations?

We ask for your response to our questions no later than February 7, 2025.

Finally, we want to remind you of your oversight obligations under appropriations law.  Members of Congress of both parties have worked together to craft provisions instituting common-sense transparency and accountability measures. All executive branch agencies must proactively alert the Appropriations and other appropriate House and Senate Committees when apportionments are not made in required time periods, are approved only with conditions, or may hinder the prudent obligation of apportionments or the execution of a program, project, or activity. Agencies are also required to report all violations of the ICA to Congress. Finally, agencies may not prohibit or prevent any federal employee from having direct communication with any Member, committee, or subcommittee of Congress. All federal employees must be free to communicate directly with Congress, whether Congress has requested that communication or not.

We hope you will work with us—not against us—to lower energy costs and help create good-paying jobs, but we demand that you follow the law as intended.

Sincerely,

Marcy Kaptur
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development House Committee on Appropriations

Patty Murray
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Senate Committee on Appropriations

# # #