Democrats Need To Ask Trump Nominees The Tough Questions

So we did the work ourselves and wrote some!

Confirmation hearings for Trump’s nominees begin this week, giving Senate Democrats the opportunity to expose the cronyism and corporate-backing undergirding his picks. As my colleague Hannah Story Brown wrote in this newsletter last week, the oil and gas industry got a return on their massive investment in Trump’s campaign, handpicking Chris Wright as Energy Secretary and Doug Burgum to head the Interior Department. These picks were chosen for a simple reason—they will allow corporate interests to run roughshod over the public and environment, accelerating how climate change is devastating people in undeniably tangible ways. This fact needs to be front and center of each nominee’s hearing.

Unfortunately, reporting from NOTUS indicates that some Senators will not be combative, with John Fetterman saying his “plan is to listen” and Cory Booker saying, “we’re not looking to make this partisanship or tribalism.” The problem is that Trump’s picks are partisan, chosen for their loyalty both to him and the moneyed interests they’ll ostensibly be tasked with overseeing. Now is not the time to sit back and listen. It’s time to make a big stink about how unqualified and dangerous these nominees are, and explain how that will translate to real world consequences that harm everyday people.

To that end, we at RDP have spent weeks researching these nominees and put together some tough questions that we would ask the nominees if we had the chance. Throughout the week, we’ll release multiple editions of this newsletter with questions for upcoming nominees, starting with Chris Wright, Russ Vought, and Doug Burgum. If reporters are interested in further questions and accompanying research on these and other nominees, please get in touch.

Chris Wright, nominee for Secretary of the Department of Energy, hearing on 1/15.

1. Health And Safety Record of Liberty Energy

   “While you served as CEO, Liberty Energy and its subsidiaries were regularly cited and fined by the Department of Labor and Environmental Protection Agency for health and safety violations, including: $14,502 in March 2022 for a violation in Stanton, Texas that killed an employee, $35,000 in January 2022 for repeat violations at a Henderson, Colorado facility that resulted in a worker falling over 13 feet and breaking bones, and numerous instances of exposing employees to harmful chemicals. As Energy Secretary, you would be responsible for overseeing the safety and security of our nuclear weapons and energy. How can Americans trust your ability to do so when your own company has a long, documented history of failing to maintain adequate health and safety measures?”

   “When one of your employees was killed due to a workplace safety violation, you donated $5,000 to her husband’s GoFundMe. During this last campaign cycle, you donated over $225,000 to Trump and Republican campaign efforts. Can you explain why you place so much more monetary value on a Trump presidency compared to the lives of your employees?”

2. Western Energy Alliance/Gas Stoves

   “While serving as a Director of the Western Energy Alliance, a trade association representing oil and gas interests, the organization submitted a public comment opposing the Department of Energy’s rule establishing energy efficiency standards for gas stoves. The public comment erroneously claimed the DOE’s rule was “intended to ban new gas stoves and compel a transition to electric,” rather than a common sense rule to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and save consumers money. Moreover, are you aware that approximately 13% of childhood asthma cases can be attributed to nitrogen dioxide exposure from gas stoves? Do you believe the federal government has no role in protecting our children from exposure to these hazardous airborne pollutants?”

3. Project 2025

   “In your company’s lawsuit against the Labor Department for its rulemaking efforts to allow ESG considerations in retirement fund management, you were represented by Jonathan Berry and R. Trent McCotter, two attorneys who contributed to the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. Project 2025’s section on the Department of Energy recommends that the US ‘end ineffective and counterproductive nonproliferation activities like those involving Iran and the United Nations.’ [page 372] Do you share this assessment that the US should not prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons? What experience do you have that makes you in any way qualified to have responsibility over such complex and potentially catastrophic geopolitical decisions?”

Russell Vought, nominee for Director of the Office of Management and Budget, hearing on 1/15.

1. Schedule F and Government Capacity

   “In October 2020, you helped President Trump with the executive order to instate Schedule F, the little known legal theory that turns civil servants into at-will employees. According to Agenda 47 and Project 2025, of which you’re a writer, there is a commitment to re-instituting this ‘doctrine’ which will subject around 200,000 civil servants who are policy staff to potential termination. I want you to explain what the value of schedule F is and how that would actually make the government more efficient.”

   “Studies have shown that more government capacity is the best way to increase efficiency. How would firing 200,000 people fix the government?”

2. Record of Budget Cuts Harming Low-Income Families

   “Mr. Vought, you are known for your work to institute budget cuts to programs that assist the people most in need. Some examples include:

   (a) helping assemble the Republican Study Committee's “highly unbalanced” budget to offset relief after the tragedy that was Hurricane Katrina,

   (b) drafting a budget that eliminated the Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), as well as

   (c) throwing 90,000 children out of the Head Start Program.

   If you are confirmed, can you commit to not proposing budgets that will materially harm low-income families?”

3. Record of the Center for Renewing America

   “You run the Center for Renewing America, which has advocated for the following:

   (a) fighting against the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA),

   (b) supporting voter suppression efforts, and

   (c) opposing efforts to stop the spread of COVID-19.

   You would be overseeing the budgetary priorities of many agencies whose initiatives your organization seems to flatly reject. How can we ensure that you are going to be committed to actually serving the American people rather than enacting your personal ideology?”

   “Can you talk about why you think using the Insurrection Act is an appropriate response to citizens exercising their First Amendment right to protest?”

Doug Burgum, nominee for the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, hearing on 1/16.

1. Coal Industry Handouts While Mercury Pollution Harms Children

   “As governor of North Dakota, you opposed a rule from the federal EPA requiring coal plants to reduce their air pollution, including mercury emissions. You previously signed a bill exempting coal plants in North Dakota from having to pay an estimated $100 million dollars in taxes over five years. The EPA said that its rule limiting mercury emissions would reduce fatal heart attacks, cancer, and developmental delays in children. Why do you think that the coal industry should be given handouts and allowed to make people sick?”

2. Supporting Land Seizures Via Eminent Domain for Dangerous Carbon Pipelines

   “You have been a vocal supporter of the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline, which would transport carbon dioxide across Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota, and North Dakota. The firm of your close political ally, Harold Hamm, committed to invest $250 million in the pipeline. Many landowners are opposed to the project using eminent domain to seize their land for the pipeline’s construction, but you have said eminent domain is necessary to get big projects built. Residents are also concerned about leaks from carbon pipelines, which are highly dangerous and can cause asphyxiation and lasting health issues, or even be lethal. Despite the fact that the federal government has yet to finalize safety regulations for carbon dioxide pipelines, you have been a major advocate for this project, and have advocated for weakening or repealing federal regulations. Do you think that Midwestern landowners’ concerns about having a carbon pipeline running through their backyards are unfounded?”

3. Opposition To Curbing Methane Leaks On Public Lands

   “While governor of North Dakota, your state sued the federal Interior Department opposing a rule requiring gas drillers who were drilling on federal and tribal lands to cut down on methane leaks. In a 2024 statement, you said that the rule was ‘harmful and unnecessary.’ Do you believe that the federal government should not be allowed to limit pollution and protect clean air on public lands when extractive industries have been permitted by the federal government to operate on those lands?”

Follow the Revolving Door Project’s work on whatever platform works for you! You can find us on that website formerly known as Twitter, Bluesky, Instagram, and Facebook.