September 17th, 2026Heinrich Eviscerates Trump Admin Official For Lying Under Oath About the Illegal, Political Cancelation of Energy Project Grants in States That Didn’t Vote for Trump in 2024

Heinrich to Fitzsimmons on his congressional testimony contradicting DOE lawyers admitting projects were canceled for political reasons: “I find your testimony completely uncredible” WASHINGTON – During a U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing to receive testimony on pending legislation, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the Committee, questioned Alex Fitzsimmons, U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Associate Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Dr. Sarah J. Ryker, Associate Director for the Geology, Energy, and Minerals Mission Area at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), on the Trump administration’s plan to sell off a part of Yosemite National Park to a private equity-owned firm, the Trump administration’s efforts to roll back efficiency standards, and the Trump administration’s illegal cancelation of energy projects grants in states that didn’t vote for President Trump in 2024. VIDEO: Ranking Member Heinrich (D-N.M.), questions Associate Deputy Secretary of Energy Alex Fitzsimmons and Associate Director for the Geology, Energy, and Minerals Mission Area at the (USGS) Dr. Sarah J. Ryker during a U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing to receive testimony on pending legislation, September 16, 2026. On the Trump Administration’s Plan to Transfer Part of Yosemite National Park to a Private Equity-Owned Property Heinrich began his line of questioning by asking about the Trump administration’s plan to sell off land in Yosemite National Park to a private equity-owned development, “Dr. Riker, the Land and Water Conservation Fund exists to acquire land for public conservation and recreational purposes. It was not authorized to facilitate private commercial development yet. The Department of the Interior is currently considering this land trade within Yosemite National Park, using funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to facilitate commercial development. Can you share with this Committee the Department's reasoning behind why they would move forward with this?” Ryker responded , “Ranking Member, thank you for the question. I do not oversee or participate in those decisions by the Department, but I'll be happy to take your question back for response by the Department.” Heinrich followed , “I would appreciate that. I would love to hear from Secretary Burgum some rationale for this. I know Burgum hasn't been in front of this committee for a number of months, but I think that both myself and the California delegation have very serious concerns about whether this is an appropriate use of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and if this is just good for Yosemite National Park. It is one of our iconic national parks, and we should think very carefully about transferring land from a national park unit like this to commercial developers.” On Energy Efficiency Standards Heinrich continued, asking the Trump administration about repealing energy efficiency standards, which undermine domestic manufacturing and support China’s manufacturing , “Mr. Fitzsimmons, one of the concerns that has been raised to us repeatedly from industry groups is that rolling back some of these efficiency rules will facilitate an advantage for Chinese manufacturers’ cheaper, more poorly made manufacturing goods. Is that something that the administration is considering? And do you have concerns about that line of reasoning?” Fitzsimmons answered , “Senator, we would say that trade issues should be addressed through trade remedies and trade policies that are in the jurisdiction of other agencies, not the Appliance Standards Program. The Appliance Standards Program is designed to increase energy efficiency and, in our view, balance consumer choice. And so, our guiding principle here is consumer choice. And if those groups are concerned about trade issues, there are other avenues to address the trade aspects.” Heinrich followed, underscoring why the Trump administration should be concerned with appliance standards that benefit our adversaries, “But if the net effect is to make a Chinese heat pump, for example, mini-split dominant in the market at the expense of American manufacturing, shouldn't that be something that the Department of Energy is also concerned with?” Fitzsimmons answered , “The net effect for us is making sure that products that consumers want to buy are not regulated out of the market, that they have the choice to choose which products they want. Trade issues, as I said, should be addressed through trade policies, not the appliance standards program.” Heinrich followed, stressing the fact that updated energy efficiency standards support American-made manufacturing and should be supported by DOE, “Well, I want to make it very clear that members of this committee think that American manufacturing is something that the Department of Energy should be thinking about each and every day.” On the Trump Administration Illegally Canceling Energy Project Grants in States That Didn’t Vote for President Trump in 2024 Heinrich continued, asking Fitzsimmons about the Trump administration canceling energy project grants in states that didn’t vote for President Trump in 2024, and whether he lied under oath about the nature of these cancelations, “Mr. Fitzsimmons, in a House Energy and Commerce hearing earlier this year, you were asked directly whether political retribution was a factor in the $8 billion of funding that DOE canceled in grant cancelations, and at that time you responded, it is certainly not a factor. Those were your words. More recently, DOE's own lawyers have now testified in court that cancelations were quote ‘based solely on the political identity of the grant recipient state.’ Do you stand by your earlier testimony? Fitzsimmons answered , “I do.” Heinrich followed , “And so, why would DOE's lawyers make that statement?” Fitzsimmons continued , “I can tell you about the process that we use. The process does not involve politics.” Heinrich interjected, blasting Fitzsimmons for the costly impact the cancelations had on New Mexico , “Well, I would just tell you that I find that not credible. New Mexico saw $135 million dollars in projects canceled, 10 different projects, and I think based on the testimony in court, the impression of the people of New Mexico is those projects were canceled because the state of New Mexico did not vote for the current president of the United States.” Fitzsimmons followed , “Do you have a question?” Heinrich asked, “Yeah, why is your testimony in contradiction of the DOE's own lawyers?” Fitzsimmons doubled down , “It is not in contradiction at all. You're conflating two different issues between the timing of announcements and the process that we use to make decisions. We make decisions based on what is technologically feasible and economically viable, based on physics and math, not on politics.” Heinrich concluded , “I find your testimony completely uncredible.” ###