Energy policy in the United States feels a bit like the song from the musical Annie Get Your Gun: Anything you can do, I can do better. Except in this instance, “better” means unnecessarily targeting specific energy sectors rather than letting them compete on their economic merits. The tit-for-tat escalation of anti-energy policies and regulations is harmful to energy consumers, energy abundance, and investment certainty for new energy supplies.  

Policymakers on both sides of the aisle have common objectives of lowering prices for hardworking families, leading the world in global competitiveness, and increasing energy supply to feed power-hungry data centers. To do that, Democrats and Republicans need to lower their weapons and refrain from engaging in continued resource battles. 

During the last four years and dating back to the campaign, President Joe Biden called for less drilling (including no new production on federal lands) and a transition away from oil and natural gas. Among many other “keep it in the ground” policies, the administration cancelled and restricted oil and gas leases on federal lands, revoked the Keystone XL Pipeline permit, and paused liquified natural gas exports. Biden’s power plant regulations would have prematurely shuttered existing plants and restricted new natural gas plants. 

While the administration certainly didn’t do the oil sector any favors, oil production still climbed to record highs under Biden. In fact, for many environmental activist organizations, the mere fact that the Biden administration allowed any oil and gas development to continue was a betrayal of the planet. 

This piece was originally published in the National Interest. You can read the full article here.

The views and opinions expressed are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of C3.