Some Congressional Democrats Flirt with Reality on Energy Policy

For decades, Democrats have been masters of the double standard, demonizing oil, gas, and coal in speeches while fueling their daily lives with the very same resources. They fly private jets to climate conferences, ride motorcades of SUVs to rallies, and depend on petroleum-based plastics, fertilizers, and pharmaceuticals as much as every other American. Yet in the same breath, they scold oil companies, accuse producers of destroying the planet, and assure the public that “green” energy will somehow replace fossil fuels. It won’t.

Now, after years of energy denial, cracks are finally beginning to show. Some Democrats are rediscovering a long-forgotten truth: the United States needs an “all of the above” approach. According to E&E news, figures like Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) have publicly admitted what voters already know: wind and solar cannot power America alone. They are weather-dependent, land-intensive, and nowhere near capable of providing the scale of power required to run a modern economy of more than 330 million people. Natural gas, oil, and nuclear must remain central in the energy conversation if the lights are going to stay on and costs are going to stay down.

Still, the hypocrisy remains staggering. The Biden administration boasted about record renewable investments while presiding over record U.S. oil and gas production, the very industry many Democrats claim they oppose. Progressives like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) remain dogmatically against pipelines and gas infrastructure, ignoring the reality that without them, families and businesses face higher costs and greater dependence on foreign imports. Meanwhile, the Democratic caucus remains bitterly divided over nuclear, which is the cleanest, safest, and most reliable form of large-scale power known to man, but because it conflicts with left wing environmental dogma, it’s hung up in dark corners of Democratic think tanks.

California offers a textbook case of this contradiction. State leaders routinely decry in-state oil production, pushing regulations that shutter wells and delay permits, all the while importing foreign crude on tankers from South America, the Middle East, and even indirectly from Russia. Because of refinery shortfalls created by these policies, California families now pay some of the highest gasoline prices in the nation. So many Sacramento politicians campaign against oil producers while benefiting from tanker ships burning bunker fuel to bring the foreign oil here from across the globe; an arrangement that is worse for the climate and for national security than drilling it right here in California.

Republicans and moderate Democrats, by contrast, have long stood for energy abundance in every form, embracing oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and renewables without apology. Their message is consistent, that America should use every resource available to remain energy secure, affordable, and globally competitive.

Progressive Democrats now face a choice. They can either continue preaching the fantasy that wind turbines and solar panels alone will run an advanced economy, or they can embrace the reality that oil, gas, and nuclear are indispensable. Voters should give credit to the Democrats willing to admit the truth and call out those still clinging to rhetoric while benefiting from the very fuels they disparage.