* New York Times…
When the Trump administration canceled more than $7.5 billion in Biden-era federal grants for clean energy projects in October, it framed the move as an urgent corrective to protect taxpayer funds from waste.
But it wasn’t true.
In little-noticed court documents, federal officials acknowledged this month that they had terminated the funding “based solely” on political criteria, targeting projects in states that were represented by Democrats and had voted for Kamala Harris, the party’s presidential nominee, in the 2024 election. […]
The saga illustrates the stakes as the Trump administration is completing a set of rules that would provide the president even greater control over more than $1 trillion in annual federal grants. To critics, the new regulation would only make it easier for Mr. Trump to strike wider tranches of congressionally approved funding over political differences. […]
Federal officials offered the new details about the grant cancellations as part of an agreement with plaintiffs meant to spare the government an exhaustive, evidence-uncovering process known as discovery, the court filings said. That process could have required federal agencies to hand over more damaging records.
* From the DOE filing…
This 624-grant list included proposals to terminate awards with a recipient location and/or at least one place of performance in States that awarded their electoral votes to Kamala Harris in the 2024 election and has two Democratic-caucusing Senators, and also awards with a recipient location and/or at least one place of performance in a State that awarded its electoral votes to President Trump in the 2024 election or has at least one Republican-caucusing Senator. […]
With one exception, the 284 terminated grants had a recipient location and/or at least one place of performance in a state that awarded its electoral votes to Kamala Harris in the 2024 election and has two Democratic-caucusing Senators (“Blue State” grants). […]
DOE accepts that the inclusion of grants in the October notice tranche was based solely on the political identity of the grant recipient’s state, i.e., whether the recipient’s location and/or place of performance was in a Blue State or a non-Blue State.
Many of the canceled grants here were meant for the University of Illinois.
- JS Mill - Friday, Jul 24, 26 @ 2:42 pm:
What say you Tony McCombie and freedom caucus, candidate Bailey? Crickets I am sure.
Say what you want about Pritzker, he does not punish the areas of the state that did not vote for him. Only the unbelievably thin skinned Trump does stuff like that. And now it is on record.
- Standby - Friday, Jul 24, 26 @ 2:58 pm:
This is no different than Illinois Democrats getting pork projects in the state budget and Republicans getting none.
- Norseman - Friday, Jul 24, 26 @ 3:04 pm:
That they discriminated against blue states is not a surprise. The surprise is that it was admitted in a court filing. I can only suspect that the other side had ironclad evidence forcing the DOJ to do something rare - tell the truth.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Jul 24, 26 @ 3:06 pm:
===This is no different than ===
Um, no. If Pritzker held up grants that are included in the budget because Trump won the district and the district was represented by Republican House and Senate members, that would be the comparison.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Jul 24, 26 @ 3:07 pm:
===I can only suspect===
The answer is in the NYT story: Federal officials offered the new details about the grant cancellations as part of an agreement with plaintiffs meant to spare the government an exhaustive, evidence-uncovering process known as discovery, the court filings said. That process could have required federal agencies to hand over more damaging records.
Please read before speculating. Thanks.
- BE - Friday, Jul 24, 26 @ 3:24 pm:
UIUC had a tracker for all of the grants that had been cancelled/lost, at one point last year. I should try to look that up again.