SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
chris wright
'Serious Damage Has Been Done': Dem Lawmakers Slam DOGE Nuclear Safety Purge
The legislators said the Trump administration's move "calls into further question DOGE's competence to carry out its self-assigned task."
Feb 20, 2025
Decrying the Trump administration's firing of hundreds of workers at the agency in charge of nuclear weapons safety, a bicameral group of Democratic U.S. lawmakers on Thursday asked Energy Secretary Chris Wright to provide assurances that members of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency cannot access classified systems or information.
"DOGE fired up to 350 staff members at the National Nuclear Security Administration. The NNSA is entrusted with safeguarding our nation's nuclear weapons, materials, and secrets," Rep. John Garamendi (Calif.) and Sens. Ed Markey (Mass.), Peter Welch (Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Jacky Rosen (Nev.), Cory Booker (N.J.), and Jeff Merkley (Ore.) wrote in a letter to Wright.
"Recklessly firing personnel without a strategic plan... is extraordinarily irresponsible and dangerous to U.S. national security."
"These terminations jeopardize the security of the U.S. nuclear stockpile, weaken our ability to detect and prevent threats to those weapons, and undermine our nonproliferation commitments," the letter asserts.
"Realizing the gravity of the mistake it had made, the Trump administration scrambled to rehire the fired employees," the Democrats noted. "Serious damage has been done. We urge you to immediately reassess these decisions, restore necessary expertise to the NNSA, and ensure that NNSA staffing decisions prioritize safety and security."
The letter continues:
The NNSA plays an essential role in maintaining the safety, security, and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear arsenal and preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. According to press reports, these firings occurred because "the officials did not seem to know this agency oversees America's nuclear weapons." The reckless decision to eliminate 350 positions, without a clear national security justification, raises serious concerns about the Department of Energy's (DOE) commitment to this core mission. DOE has struggled to rehire some of these employees "because they didn't have their new contact information." This series of events calls into further question DOGE's competence to carry out its self-assigned task.
While the lawmakers "fully support efforts to reduce our reliance on nuclear weapons, responsibly reduce the nuclear stockpile, and curb unnecessary spending on nuclear defense programs that do not enhance our security," they argued in the letter that "recklessly firing personnel without a strategic plan, particularly those with expertise in nonproliferation, security, and arms control oversight, is extraordinarily irresponsible and dangerous to U.S. national security."
The legislators are asking Wright to explain the process behind the NNSA officials' firings, the DOE's strategy for ensuring effective staffing and oversight at the agency, which workers have been rehired, and what steps are being taken to prevent unauthorized access to classified systems by DOGE members.
"There is a right way to reduce the size and scope of our nuclear arsenal—one that enhances global security, properly safeguards our weapons, and reduces nuclear risks," the letter concludes. "These terminations do none of that."
Thursday's letter follows one sent to Wright last week by Markey and Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) seeking clarification about whether any DOGE members have access to classified information about the nation's nuclear arsenal.
It also comes as global experts warn about the risk of nuclear war. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists last month moved the Doomsday Clock "from 90 seconds to 89 seconds to midnight—the closest it has ever been to catastrophe."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Deeply Concerned' Dems Want to Know If DOGE Can Access Nuclear Weapons Data
"The nation and the world need to know that U.S. nuclear secrets are robustly safeguarded," argue Sen. Ed Markey and Rep. Don Beyer.
Feb 12, 2025
A pair of Democratic U.S. lawmakers on Wednesday asked the Trump administration to clarify whether any members of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency have access to classified information about the nation's nuclear arsenal.
Responding to U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright's admission that he granted DOGE associates access to the Department of Energy, and to reporting that a 23-year-old former intern at Musk's SpaceX was allowed into DOE's IT systems without the requisite security clearances, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.)—both members of the congressional Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control Working Group—wrote to Wright to voice their concerns.
"The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), an integral part of the Department of Energy, is entrusted with protecting the nation's most sensitive nuclear weapons secrets. The nation and the world need to know that U.S. nuclear secrets are robustly safeguarded," the lawmakers wrote.
"It is, therefore, dangerously unacceptable that Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency—including individuals lacking adequate security clearances—has been granted access to DOE's information technology (IT) system despite legitimate security concerns inside the agency," they added.
Elon Musk and DOGE are getting access to the department that controls nuclear material for bombs. If we were alarmed at his access to systems for Medicare payments, we should be horrified by their access to nuclear payloads. I will be demanding answers. www.reuters.com/world/us/thr...
[image or embed]
— Senator Ed Markey (@markey.senate.gov) February 9, 2025 at 2:17 PM
"There is no justification for relaxing basic security procedures when it comes to our nuclear stockpile, but recent actions reflect a brazen disregard for DOE security policies," Markey and Beyer argued. "DOE must ensure that all personnel with access to classified information and systems surrounding our nation's nuclear arsenal follow the highest security standards."
The letter continues:
Recently, you were quoted as saying that three individuals involved with DOGE are at DOE and "have access to look around, talk to people, and give us some good feedback on how things are going." And, according to media reports, a 23-year-old former SpaceX intern, who does not have the appropriate security clearances needed to access DOE's IT system, received access over the objections of members of its general counsel and chief information offices. This incursion into some of the nation's most sensitive files is the latest in a series of Trump administration moves to plant unqualified Musk and DOGE staffers throughout the federal government, some of whom have records of leaking sensitive information and potentially wreaking havoc with vital information systems.
"As members of the congressional Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control Working Group, we are deeply concerned by this disregard of DOE security protocols and the potential impacts on our nuclear security," Markey and Beyer wrote.
The lawmakers asked Wright to answer the following questions by Friday:
- What is the process for granting, reviewing, and revoking security clearances for DOGE staffers at DOE?
- Have any DOGE staffers been given access to NNSA classified nuclear weapons information?
- Under what authority and justification was each instance of classified access granted to DOGE staffers?
- Are DOGE staffers required to undergo training on the handling of classified information?
- What security measures are in place to ensure DOGE staffers do not improperly access or inappropriately share sensitive nuclear secrets?
- Have any DOGE staffers with access to classified information had significant outside financial interests, foreign contacts, or other affiliations that could pose security concerns?
- Are NNSA employees included in the administration's buyout offer for federal employees?
- If so, and if senior NNSA employees leave the organization, how do you plan to maintain the security and secrecy of nuclear weapons and related information?
Appearing on
CNBC Friday, Wright dismissed "rumors" that DOGE members are "seeing our nuclear secrets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
No Chris Wright, Destroying the Planet Won’t Solve Energy Poverty
Trump’s new energy secretary would like you to believe that “Zero Energy Poverty” and Net Zero emissions by 2050 are incompatible goals, but this could not be further from the truth.
Feb 06, 2025
Chris Wright, who was recently confirmed as the new secretary of energy, has been famous for years as one of the more unapologetic proponents of fossil fuels. In 1992, Wright founded Pinnacle Technologies, an early leader in the hydraulic fracking business, and later made his fortune as the CEO of Liberty Energy, one of the largest oilfield service firms in North America. In 2023, he made headlines for a series of inflammatory statements disputing the science of climate change.
Now Wright has taken a different tack on climate—less outrageous, but no less dangerous. At his Senate confirmation hearing last week, Wright claimed that he didn’t deny the existence of anthropogenic climate change; he only denied that climate change warranted any reductions in fossil fuel production. To make his case, Wright spoke in abstractions about “tradeoffs” and “complicated dialogue.”
Then came the doozy: Poor countries like Kenya suffered from sparse access to propane fuel, Wright said, and only fracking could deliver the low prices to make up for those shortfalls.
Wright claims to be working on behalf of the global poor, but if he were, he might heed their repeated calls for emission reductions in the United States and other wealthy countries.
Wright has been quietly developing this specious argument for years: that addressing energy poverty, especially in the Global South, requires untrammeled fossil fuel production, no matter the damage to the planet. In Liberty Energy’s 2024 annual report, Bettering Human Lives, Wright laid out his case for hydrocarbon extraction. “Only a billion people today enjoy the full benefits of a highly energized lifestyle,” Wright wrote, while “7 billion striv[e] to achieve the lifestyles of the more fortunate 1 billion.” Without access to reliable natural gas, “over 2 billion people still cook their daily meals and heat their homes with traditional fuels, [including] wood, dung, agricultural waste, or charcoal,” putting them at risk of acute respiratory disease from air pollution. The only remedy, according to Wright, is more fossil fuels like gas.
This weaponization of global energy poverty is so insidious because it takes a legitimate issue—inadequate access to reliable energy for billions of people around the world—and turns it into a neat talking point for the destruction of the planet. Energy insecurity is a real challenge for the Global South, with over 3 billion people estimated to suffer from energy poverty of some kind. But so is climate change, which the World Bank projects will push up to 135 million people into poverty by 2030, and which is already fueling extreme weather, conflict, and migration, from Micronesia to the Sahel.
Wright would like you to believe that “Zero Energy Poverty” and Net Zero emissions by 2050 are incompatible goals. According to Wright, “solar, wind, and batteries… will not, and cannot replace most of the energy services and raw materials provided by hydrocarbons.”
But this could not be further from the truth.
In a 2021 report, the Rockefeller Foundation report found that renewable energy could end energy poverty worldwide at a cost of just $130 billion a year, less than a sixth of what the United States currently spends on defense each year. Moreover, the report found that such a transformation would create 25 million jobs across Africa and Asia, more than 30 times the number of jobs created by a comparable investment in fossil fuels.
Wright’s case for hydrocarbons is based on a bad faith conflation of existing realities with possible futures. In Bettering Human Lives, Wright claims that electricity currently “delivers only 20% of total primary energy consumption” in order to challenge clean energy’s viability as a substitute for hydrocarbons. But as Wright himself knows, a central feature of the green transition will be the electrification of everything, from transportation to home heating to heavy industry. Present shares of energy usage for electricity do not provide an accurate picture of future consumption patterns .
In the case of the Global South, where energy poverty is most acute, the key will be the implementation and scaling of distributed renewable energy (DRE) systems. Unlike traditional grids, which often carry power over vast distances, DREs generate electricity from clean energy sources close to home. With the cost of batteries and solar PV both falling over 90% in the past decade, these systems are more affordable than ever. The Roosevelt Foundation sees DREs driving the clean energy transition across Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, with mini-grids providing power for a dizzying array of technologies: “solar lanterns, ice-making factories used by fishing communities, milk chillers and irrigation pumps for farmers, refrigerators and life-saving medical equipment in clinics and hospitals, and more.”
Some elements of the climate movement have pushed a degrowth agenda that fails to reckon with the energy needs of many countries in the Global South. Calls for developing nations to abruptly cut off coal consumption, for example, ring hollow if they are not accompanied by meaningful assistance to pay for more expensive alternatives. But for the most part, the climate movement has recognized the inequities in historical development and emissions patterns, and placed the burden squarely on the Global North to drive the decarbonization process.
Wright claims to be working on behalf of the global poor, but if he were, he might heed their repeated calls for emission reductions in the United States and other wealthy countries. For years now, developing countries have been asking the nations most responsible for the climate crisis to decarbonize fastest, in order to buy time for poorer countries to catch up. They have also called for additional climate finance to assist with mitigation and adaptation efforts. At COP29 in November, rich countries pledged $300 billion a year in climate finance by 2035, but research suggests developing nations need closer to $1 trillion a year to protect their most vulnerable populations. If Wright were sincere in his concern for the plight of the global energy poor, he would support these initiatives.
Of course, he will do no such thing. Wright’s patron in the White House has already made the new administration’s policy clear. On his first day back in office, President Donald Trump pulled out of the Paris climate accords—and froze all foreign aid for 100 days. Now Trump appears to have shuttered USAID entirely. To those observing from abroad, Wright’s bad faith appeals to global poverty must appear as one more indignity from an administration inclined to offer little else.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular