Washington, D.C. — Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, and Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (D-OH-09), Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to issue a legal decision on whether President Trump’s Department of Energy (DOE) violated key appropriations laws in shifting hundreds of millions of dollars provided for research and development of clean energy sources in the full-year continuing resolution (CR) President Trump signed into law in March and steering those funds to energy sources it favors.
Specifically, Murray and Kaptur requested that GAO look into whether DOE’s spending decisions in fiscal year 2025 violate the Purpose Statute, which dictates that appropriations only be used for the purposes for which the appropriations were provided unless otherwise provided for by law, and the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits federal agencies from spending funds in advance of or in excess of an appropriation made by Congress.
According to recent analysis and internal reporting, the Department of Energy’s spending decision will likely result in the layoffs of more than 3,000 national lab scientists and staff—and will prevent over 50 university awards, over 30 industry awards, over 20 non-profit awards, and several local government awards from being issued.
In making the request, Senator Murray and Congresswoman Kaptur said in a statement:
“In shifting these funds, President Trump is not only defying the law—he is raising working families’ energy bills and undermining America’s energy independence. Shortchanging these energy sources of the future hands an advantage to our global rivals while jacking up Americans’ energy costs. This decision is hurting our national labs, starving our universities of resources to conduct cutting-edge research, and undercutting businesses, local governments, and communities across the country. We are asking GAO to look into whether this decision violates key appropriations laws, and we again call on the Department of Energy to restore the funding levels that were signed into law by President Trump himself.”
In their letter, Murray and Kaptur write: “We are writing to request that GAO issue a legal decision regarding the Department Energy’s (DOE) use of funds in fiscal year (FY) 2025. Specifically, we would like GAO to address whether DOE’s use of funds in several accounts complies with the Purpose Statute and the Antideficiency Act. …. We are concerned that DOE’s actions may not comply with either statute.”
In fiscal year 2024, Congress provided $137 million for the Department of Energy to support wind energy initiatives and provided $318 million to support solar energy. The fiscal year 2025 full-year CR that House Republicans wrote and President Trump signed into law continued these fiscal year 2024 funding levels. But in a spend plan made public earlier this month, the Trump administration revealed it is steering hundreds of millions of dollars designated by Congress to support wind and solar energy to other, favored industries—jeopardizing critical progress and ceding ground on key energy solutions of the future—among other harmful cuts. Instead of funding wind energy initiatives at $137 million, the administration is funding them at $29.8 million (a 78% cut), and instead of funding solar initiatives at $318 million, it is funding them at $41.9 million (an 87% cut).
The full letter is available HERE and below:
Dear Mr. Dodaro:
We are writing to request that GAO issue a legal decision regarding the Department Energy’s (DOE) use of funds in fiscal year (FY) 2025. Specifically, we would like GAO to address whether DOE’s use of funds in several accounts complies with the Purpose Statute and the Antideficiency Act.
For FY 2024, Congress appropriated funds to DOE with direction that the funds be spent in accordance with a table in the explanatory statement accompanying the appropriations act, making the amounts in the table legally binding on DOE. The continuing resolution for FY 2025 maintained this requirement for most DOE appropriations.
DOE’s budget justification for FY 2026 includes a table which shows the FY 2024 and 2025 “enacted” funding levels for various DOE accounts, with subaccounts that correspond to the subaccounts in the FY 2024 explanatory statement. However, the amounts in the “FY 2025 Enacted” column of DOE’s table do not match the amounts Congress provided in the FY 2024 explanatory statement. Specifically, DOE’s table contains deviations in subaccount allocations for the following accounts: “Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,” “Nuclear Energy,” “Fossil Energy,” “Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning,” “Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup,” and “Science.” This suggests that DOE’s FY 2025 spending may not be aligned with the congressionally approved spending levels set out in the FY 2024 explanatory statement.
The Purpose Statute provides that “Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law.” GAO decisions apply the Purpose Statute through a three-part framework: (1) the obligation must bear a reasonable and logical relationship to the appropriation; (2) the obligation must not be prohibited by other law; and (3) the obligation must not be otherwise provided for. Where Congress has directed the expenditure of funds for a particular purpose, the agency may not use the funds for some other purpose, absent statutory authority to do so. Furthermore, the Antideficiency Act prohibits the obligation of funds in excess of available appropriations. GAO decisions describe a nexus between Purpose Statute violations and the Antideficiency Act. We are concerned that DOE’s actions may not comply with either statute.
Therefore, we request that GAO provide a legal decision determining whether DOE’s FY 2025 spending in the identified accounts is in accordance with the FY 2024 explanatory statement, as continued by the full year continuing resolution for FY 2025, and whether DOE has violated the Purpose Statute and the Antideficiency Act.
Sincerely,
###
