Trump Halts Billions in Grants for Democratic Districts During Shutdown

Trump Halts Billions in Grants for Democratic Districts During Shutdown


Two weeks into the government shutdown, the Trump administration has frozen or canceled nearly $28 billion that had been reserved for more than 200 projects primarily located in Democratic-led cities, congressional districts and states, according to an analysis by The New York Times.

Total amount of affected funding

By congressional district of grant recipient

Each of these infrastructure projects had received federal aid, sometimes after officials spent years pleading in Washington — only to see that money halted as President Trump has looked to punish Democrats over the course of the fiscal stalemate.

The Times conducted its analysis by examining federal funding records, which include details about the city and state where each grant recipient is based. The projects include new investments in clean energy, upgrades to the electric grid and fixes to the nation’s transportation infrastructure, primarily in Democratic strongholds, such as New York and California.

Total affected funding, by congressional district

Ala.

Ariz.

Ark.

Calif.

Colo.

Del.

Fla.

Ga.

Idaho

Ill.

Ind.

Iowa

Kan.

Ky.

La.

Maine

Md.

Mass.

Mich.

Minn.

Miss.

Mo.

Mont.

Neb.

Nev.

N.H.

N.J.

N.M.

N.Y.

N.C.

N.D.

Ohio

Okla.

Ore.

Pa.

S.C.

S.D.

Tenn.

Texas

Utah

Vt.

Va.

Wash.

W.Va.

Wis.

Wyo.

Circles sized by total amount of affected grant funding

Note: Grants are grouped by the congressional district of the grant recipient. The work funded by the grant could occur in the same district, a different district, or across multiple districts and states.

In some cases, recipients had started to receive portions of the federal aid, only to become casualties in a funding battle that has no end in sight.

Mr. Trump’s aides have offered a series of explanations for the administration’s decision to pause or terminate grants, claiming in some cases that the spending would have been wasteful or in conflict with the president’s priorities. Since returning to office, Mr. Trump has been particularly aggressive in cutting federal investments to combat climate change.

But the budgetary moves coincide with the president’s public pledges to use the shutdown to slash spending favored by Democrats. He has described the federal stoppage as an “unprecedented opportunity” to make some cuts permanent.

Many Democrats said that the announcements fit a broader pattern at the White House, where Mr. Trump has claimed vast authority to reprogram the nation’s budget, even though the Constitution gives that power to Congress.

In doing so, Democratic lawmakers said the result could harm their cities and states, upending work that would have helped residents regardless of their political party.

The White House did not respond to requests for comment.

Total affected funding, by congressional district

N.Y. 10th

Dan Goldman

12 $17.84 bil.

Ill. 7th

Danny Davis

9 $2.37 bil.

Calif. 12th

Lateefah Simon

10 $1.40 bil.

Wash. 10th

Marilyn Strickland

1 $995.1 mil.

Calif. 7th

Doris Matsui

4 $655.3 mil.

Calif. 32th

Brad Sherman

1 $499.5 mil.

Minn. 4th

Betty McCollum

2 $465.9 mil.

Ill. 3rd

Delia Ramirez

14 $365.4 mil.

Colo. 2nd

Joe Neguse

15 $352.5 mil.

Mass. 2nd

James McGovern

3 $114.6 mil.

Ore. 2nd

Cliff Bentz

5 $294.3 mil.

Mass. 7th

Ayanna Pressley

9 $207.6 mil.

Mass. 5th

Katherine Clark

9 $180.3 mil.

Mo. 2nd

Ann Wagner

1 $189.2 mil.

N.Y. 20th

Paul Tonko

25 $129.3 mil.

Md. 7th

Kweisi Mfume

3 $158.9 mil.

Calif. 2nd

Jared Huffman

4 $129.1 mil.

Calif. 16th

Sam Liccardo

16 $75.2 mil.

Colo. 7th

Brittany Pettersen

13 $74.2 mil.

Calif. 17th

Ro Khanna

6 $25.9 mil.

Minn. 5th

Ilhan Omar

5 $76.5 mil.

Calif. 5th

Tom McClintock

2 $79 mil.

Ore. 1st

Suzanne Bonamici

11 $73.6 mil.

Wash. 2nd

Rick Larsen

3 $47.8 mil.

Calif. 28th

Judy Chu

5 $53 mil.

N.M. 3rd

Teresa Leger Fernandez

2 $65.4 mil.

Calif. 34th

Jimmy Gomez

3 $60.3 mil.

Colo. 1st

Diana DeGette

4 $57.6 mil.

N.M. 2nd

Gabe Vasquez

4 $56.1 mil.

N.M. 1st

Melanie Stansbury

3 $52.3 mil.

Minn. 8th

Pete Stauber

1 $49.8 mil.

Calif. 6th

Ami Bera

1 $50 mil.

Wash. 3rd

Marie Gluesenkamp Perez

1 $46 mil.

Calif. 47th

Dave Min

3 $41.7 mil.

Calif. 19th

Jimmy Panetta

3 $30.8 mil.

Mass. 3rd

Lori Trahan

3 $39.7 mil.

Calif. 15th

Kevin Mullin

5 $31.6 mil.

Colo. 8th

Gabe Evans

2 $32.9 mil.

Ill. 13th

Nikki Budzinski

7 $27.6 mil.

Mich. 6th

Debbie Dingell

1 $30.7 mil.

Ore. 3rd

Maxine Dexter

2 $15 mil.

Hawaii 1st

Ed Case

5 $24.5 mil.

N.Y. 23th

Nicholas Langworthy

2 $27.4 mil.

N.Y. 17th

Michael Lawler

2 $26.2 mil.

Conn. 5th

Jahana Hayes

3 $20.1 mil.

Mass. 6th

Seth Moulton

3 $17.5 mil.

N.Y. 16th

George Latimer

1 $20.4 mil.

Minn. 7th

Michelle Fischbach

1 $19.6 mil.

Calif. 25th

Raul Ruiz

1 $18.4 mil.

Calif. 4th

Mike Thompson

2 $16.6 mil.

Del.

Sarah McBride

3 $15.3 mil.

Mass. 9th

Bill Keating

3 $6.4 mil.

Conn. 1st

John Larson

4 $8.2 mil.

N.Y. 19th

Josh Riley

5 $10.4 mil.

Md. 4th

Glenn Ivey

4 $11 mil.

R.I. 1st

Gabe Amo

2 $11.5 mil.

N.Y. 3rd

Thomas Suozzi

1 $11.2 mil.

Calif. 49th

Mike Levin

2 $10.5 mil.

Mass. 8th

Stephen Lynch

2 $8.8 mil.

Calif. 42th

Robert Garcia

1 $9.7 mil.

Wash. 5th

Michael Baumgartner

4 $8 mil.

Md. 3rd

Sarah Elfreth

4 $6.8 mil.

Conn. 2nd

Joe Courtney

3 $7.8 mil.

Calif. 50th

Scott Peters

1 $6.3 mil.

S.C. 4th

William Timmons

1 $1.7 mil.

Calif. 43th

Maxine Waters

1 $6.3 mil.

Calif. 39th

Mark Takano

1 $6 mil.

Wash. 7th

Pramila Jayapal

1 $2.9 mil.

Vt.

Becca Balint

2 $2.8 mil.

N.Y. 22th

John Mannion

1 $5 mil.

Calif. 37th

Sydney Kamlager-Dove

1 $3.4 mil.

N.H. 1st

Chris Pappas

1 $4.7 mil.

N.Y. 25th

Joseph Morelle

1 $4.8 mil.

Conn. 3rd

Rosa DeLauro

1 $4.4 mil.

Md. 1st

Andy Harris

1 $4.5 mil.

N.J. 6th

Frank Pallone

2 $4.7 mil.

Calif. 14th

Eric Swalwell

2 $3 mil.

Calif. 9th

Josh Harder

2 $4.2 mil.

N.Y. 12th

Jerrold Nadler

2 $3.8 mil.

Ill. 16th

Darin LaHood

1 $2.9 mil.

Conn. 4th

Jim Himes

1 $3 mil.

Ill. 10th

Bradley Schneider

1 $2.9 mil.

Ill. 5th

Mike Quigley

1 $2.7 mil.

Calif. 20th

Vince Fong

1 $2.1 mil.

Calif. 36th

Ted Lieu

2 $2.4 mil.

Md. 5th

Steny Hoyer

1 $2.5 mil.

Ill. 9th

Janice Schakowsky

1 $2.5 mil.

Ore. 4th

Valerie Hoyle

1 $1.7 mil.

R.I. 2nd

Seth Magaziner

1 $1.9 mil.

Calif. 10th

Mark DeSaulnier

1 $2.1 mil.

N.Y. 26th

Timothy Kennedy

1 $1.8 mil.

Ill. 17th

Eric Sorensen

1 $1.8 mil.

Calif. 24th

Salud Carbajal

1 $1.3 mil.

Calif. 11th

Nancy Pelosi

1 $1.9 mil.

N.J. 12th

Bonnie Watson Coleman

1 $2 mil.

N.Y. 13th

Adriano Espaillat

1 $1.2 mil.

N.Y. 9th

Yvette Clarke

1 $1.1 mil.

N.Y. 6th

Grace Meng

1 $1.5 mil.

Ga. 5th

Nikema Williams

1 $1.1 mil.

Ill. 11th

Bill Foster

1 $1.1 mil.

Calif. 22th

David Valadao

1 $1 mil.

New delays in transportation aid

So far, the administration has targeted essentially two broad tranches of federal aid. First, the White House has held up billions of dollars in previously approved transportation funding for New York and Chicago.

In New York, the administration stopped the delivery of about $18 billion in pledged investments for two major projects: the Second Avenue subway, which traverses the east side of Manhattan, and the Hudson River tunnel, which serves as the primary rail route through New York City and along the northeast corridor. Funding for the tunnel, in particular, came only after years of wrangling, as New York officials and their counterparts in New Jersey looked to repair a roughly 115-year-old passage from damage wrought by Hurricane Sandy while improving rail capacity.

In Chicago, the Trump administration said it paused about $2.1 billion in money pledged for the city’s own transit upgrades, including an extension of its rail system into the South Side. Groundbreaking was expected to begin in 2026 after years of work to shore up federal funding for the expansion.

In both cases, the White House said it was pausing the delivery of federal dollars so that it could review the cities’ contracting policies. The administration sought to determine if leaders had made construction-related decisions on the basis of race, diversity or inclusion.

The moves came at a moment when the president was at war with key leaders from those states. Mr. Trump has frequently attacked Representative Hakeem Jeffries and Senator Chuck Schumer, two New York Democrats who lead their party in the House and Senate, for refusing to bow to his demands on spending. The Transportation Department claimed that the two men were to blame for the slowdown in aid, since the agency could not complete its review quickly during the shutdown.

Separately, federal officials have repeatedly tried to withhold security and counterterrorism funding from New York, though the state won back some of the money.

Mr. Trump has similarly gone after Chicago and its Democratic mayor, Brandon Johnson, along with the Democratic governor of Illinois, JB Pritzker, saying this month that both should be jailed.

Deep cuts to energy funding

The Trump administration also moved to terminate another tranche of money outright. Two days into the shutdown, it announced it would end roughly $7.6 billion in previously approved grants for 223 energy-related projects in 16 states, 14 of which are led by Democrats. Those cuts were later expanded.

The cancellations were the latest attempt by Mr. Trump and his top aides to revoke climate- and infrastructure-related funding adopted under President Joseph R. Biden Jr., a series of actions that have been challenged in court. The Energy Department said that it made its decision because the projects were “not economically viable” or did not advance Mr. Trump’s energy policy agenda.

Many of the projects are located in Democratic-led congressional districts, prompting lawmakers to question in recent days if there might be political motivations behind the administration’s actions.

The cuts targeted a vast range of projects, including efforts to prevent power outages and modernize energy grids — a bipartisan goal — as well as investments in newer energy sources, like hydrogen. The Trump administration revoked its plan to provide up to $1.2 billion for the Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems, known as ARCHES, which aimed to help develop a clean-burning power source for heavy-duty trucks, port operators and other major drivers of harmful emissions.

The Biden administration announced the award in 2023, nearly two years after Democrats and Republicans adopted a bipartisan package to improve the nation’s infrastructure.

More cuts to come

As the shutdown enters its third week, Mr. Trump and his aides have threatened additional cuts. The president in recent days has described the closure as an opportunity “handed to us on a silver platter” to lay off federal workers, slash federal agencies and reduce other funding, perhaps in permanent ways.

One potential target is Portland, Ore. Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, signaled this month that the Trump administration could block some unspecified federal aid to the city, which is led by a Democrat, because of ongoing protests of the president’s immigration crackdown.

Methodology

To analyze the impact of cancelled and paused grants, The Times began by compiling a list of affected grants. The list was then cross-referenced against data from USAspending.gov, where detailed information about each grant was collected. The figures shown on the page reflect the total amount of known funding that has not yet been outlaid.

To determine the impact by congressional district, each grant was grouped into the district where the grantee is located. In some cases, the work being funded by the grant may not occur in the same district, or could occur across multiple districts and states. The exact monetary allocation across those work sites is not known. Grants where the recipient could not be matched to a congressional district are not shown.

For some large projects, government data only shows currently allocated funds, instead of the entire cost of the project. In cases where this is known, the grant data was supplemented by additional reporting to better reflect the amount of affected funding.



Source link

Compare listings

Compare