The GOP can’t blame Biden forever for pain at the pump



A few months in Manhattan have made me part of the city’s bubble. I pay $3 for the subway, worry about rent and groceries, and rarely think about the cost of filling a gas tank. Then I went home to South Jersey and saw the price posted outside a station. I had almost forgotten what the rest of the country pays to get around.

New York City makes that easy. Apartment renters and subway riders experience housing, transportation, and energy policy differently from families who drive to work, take their children to school, and run errands by car. Nine in 10 Americans say they drive at least sometimes. They cannot simply stop paying attention to the price of gasoline.

The election is November 3, and voters won't grade fuel prices on a curve just because the occupant of the White House has changed.

As of October 14, the national average for regular gas stood at $4.33 a gallon. California topped $6, and several other states exceeded $5. New Jersey, where I grew up, averaged about $4.29 a gallon. Even where prices are lower, a family's weekly fill-ups eat into money needed elsewhere.

For years, Republicans hammered President Biden over gas prices. Motorists slapped “I Did That” stickers bearing his face on pumps. Looking at that station in South Jersey, I realized Republicans now face a similar reckoning. The election is November 3, and voters won't grade fuel prices on a curve just because the occupant of the White House has changed.

The administration has moved to ease energy rules. For example, the EPA has repealed vehicle greenhouse gas standards. But regulations alone cannot explain the price at the pump. The conflict around the Strait of Hormuz has disrupted oil markets, and years of delayed infrastructure projects have constrained domestic capacity. A proposed diesel export ban would create its own problems rather than solve the underlying shortage.

Yet the White House has offered little comfort to motorists. Trump called higher gasoline costs a “very inexpensive price” to pay for what the United States had done in Iran. Energy Secretary Chris Wright pointed to the end of the summer driving season and weaker demand as reasons to expect prices to fall. Seasonal demand may ease, but families still need to drive in October. They need relief, not reassurance that summer is over.

Gas prices cannot be waved away until the next news cycle. They present a real political problem for Republican incumbents in November. Democrats bear responsibility for decades of energy restrictions that have hindered pipelines and domestic production, but Republicans now govern in Washington. Voters have every right to demand results from them.

RELATED: Democrats may ride a blue wave on a red script

Id-work/Getty Images

Democrats have made public transit, walkable cities, and climate policy central to their energy vision. Republicans have sold a different promise: Families should have the freedom and means to live in safe communities, raise children, and drive the pickup truck or minivan that fits their lives. Expensive gasoline makes that promise harder to keep.

From my Manhattan apartment, gasoline prices can look remote. For parents in Pennsylvania, Ohio, or Michigan, driving is neither a luxury nor a political statement. They cannot skip the trip to work or the school pickup because the pump reads $5. A city dweller may be able to substitute a subway ride. Most suburban families cannot.

The administration can point to two possible long-term gains. Trump has promoted a long-planned Alaska gas pipeline, although financing and other details remain unresolved. And four senators from both parties have introduced permitting reform intended to speed construction of energy infrastructure. Those are potentially useful moves, not substitutes for lower prices today. Nor should a natural gas project be confused with an immediate fix for gasoline.

RELATED: Democrats can’t erase the price shock of the Biden years

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call Inc./Getty Images

The administration has made progress rolling back regulations and encouraging domestic production. Yet Americans still face the costs of delayed projects, inadequate infrastructure, and international instability. The president cannot control every oil shipment or every price sign. He can explain what the government is doing to expand supply, make projects easier to build, and reduce costs over time.

Republicans have spent years arguing against climate mandates and forced dependence on electric vehicles. Opposition alone will not persuade a family paying more to get to work. The affirmative case is straightforward: Americans should decide how to heat their homes, power their businesses, and travel, while government clears obstacles to producing abundant, affordable energy.

I had to leave Manhattan to remember what a gallon of gas costs. Millions of Americans do not have that luxury. They see the cost every time they pull into a station. Republicans who want their votes in November had better see it, too.

The Gulf is America’s energy shock absorber



The war with Iran has exposed the value of energy abundance. When a major shipping route goes down, domestic supply and reliable infrastructure buy a country room to maneuver.

Before the conflict, roughly one-fifth of global petroleum liquids moved through the Strait of Hormuz. Its disruption became the largest oil-supply shock on record. The shock has been severe, but the United States entered it from a position few countries enjoy: record domestic production and a mature system of pipelines, refineries, ports, storage facilities, and export terminals.

The lesson from the Iran conflict is straightforward. Energy security requires abundant and diverse domestic supply, reliable supply chains, and infrastructure that can absorb a shock.

U.S. crude oil output is on track to set another annual record this year, according to the Energy Information Administration. Natural gas production has also reached record levels. That domestic cushion cannot insulate Americans from a global oil shock, but it can keep a bad situation from becoming worse.

The crisis also exposes the weakness of two familiar responses. Broad accusations of price-gouging are a poor substitute for understanding how energy markets work. Crude prices can jump immediately, and retail gasoline prices can follow as wholesalers and stations reprice the cost of replacement fuel, even though physical barrels still move through refineries, pipelines, terminals, and trucks.

A ban on U.S. crude exports would create a different problem. American producers often export lighter crude, while many domestic refineries are configured to process heavier grades. Disrupting that trade would not magically produce more gasoline. It could strand some domestic barrels, reduce the incentive to produce them, and weaken the same supply response that helps cushion global shocks.

Florida makes the larger point especially well. It is one of the nation’s biggest electricity consumers, and its energy system already depends on several sources.

More than 70% of Florida’s in-state electricity generation came from natural gas in 2025, while nuclear supplied more than one-tenth and renewables about 12%. Nearly all the natural gas Florida consumes arrives from the Gulf Coast through interstate pipelines. The state’s size and growth make energy resilience a practical necessity, not an abstraction. Florida’s energy profile is a case study in why diversity and infrastructure both count.

Florida also sits beside one of America’s largest strategic energy assets: the Gulf of America. The Gulf supplies about 14% of U.S. crude oil production and supports extensive offshore infrastructure, deepwater ports, processing facilities, and an experienced energy workforce.

That does not mean energy security begins and ends with drilling. Responsible offshore development in the Gulf should be part of the strategy, alongside expanded nuclear power, continued growth in renewables, stronger transmission and pipeline capacity, and the storage and port infrastructure needed to move energy when normal routes are disrupted.

RELATED: The diesel panic cure could make the disease worse

Frederic J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images

Every energy source carries environmental costs. Limiting domestic oil and gas production does not eliminate demand; it can move production to countries with weaker standards and worse oversight. The same problem is emerging with critical minerals. Solar panels, batteries, transmission systems, and advanced nuclear technology all require enormous quantities of mined and processed materials.

Environmental protection therefore belongs inside energy policy. Development should meet high standards, and a greater share of the economic value created by domestic production should support conservation and restoration. Producing more of what America needs at home also gives the country greater room to respond when foreign supplies are disrupted.

The lesson from the Iran conflict is straightforward. Energy security requires abundant and diverse domestic supply, reliable supply chains, and infrastructure that can absorb a shock. The United States should continue developing oil and natural gas in the Gulf while expanding nuclear and renewable power and maintaining strong environmental standards.

Global instability is an argument for investment, not retreat. America needs enough energy, infrastructure, and natural resources to meet its own needs and support its allies without treating the landscapes and wildlife that are also part of the national interest as expendable.

Big Law Is Backing The Climate Adversaries Of Their Energy Clients

Neither the law firms nor their massive energy clients responded to requests for comment on the potential conflict of interest, except one.

Trump EPA Moves To Permanently Eliminate Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rules for Power Plants, Gutting Biden’s Signature Environmental Policies

The Trump Environmental Protection Agency is planning to propose the permanent repeal of federal regulations of power plants’ greenhouse gas emissions, asserting that such rules have “virtually no benefit,” the Washington Free Beacon has learned. In tandem with that proposal, the agency is finalizing plans to gut other Biden-era climate rules that forced existing coal-fired plants to close down and stymied future gas plant development.

The post Trump EPA Moves To Permanently Eliminate Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rules for Power Plants, Gutting Biden’s Signature Environmental Policies appeared first on .

Ethanol is not the solution to higher gas prices



With current events stirring up global energy prices, corn ethanol is once again being dressed up as if it is a domestic energy source and agent of energy security.

The truth is that it takes more fossil fuel energy to make a gallon of corn ethanol than a gallon of gasoline. It is time to face this unpleasant truth and the other perverse outcomes achieved by 20 years of misguided policy.

Biofuels in general are just a way to put a green fig leaf on petroleum by rerouting it through a farm field.

In 2005 and 2007, Congress passed the Energy Policy and Energy Independence and Security Acts that together created the Renewable Fuel Standard program. RFS had three stated objectives: to improve U.S. energy security, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and to support rural economies and agricultural development.

Instead, RFS has increased motor fuel prices, increased food prices, put millions of carbon-sequestering acres of land into intensive cultivation, increased greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, and increased water consumption and pollution.

The gallons of U.S. gasoline displaced by federal ethanol blending mandates are being exported to Mexico and other nations. The great success of RFS has been the hand of the government transferring wealth from motorists to big agriculture corporations.

The government wanted biofuels bad, and it got them bad. Under Corn Belt lobbying pressure, Congress waived the need for RFS to achieve actual greenhouse gas reductions for all existing corn ethanol biorefineries, plus all that could be built by the end of 2010.

The bulk of the corn ethanol produced over the past 20 years and today comes from these waivered plants. The EPA’s specious 2010 prediction that corn ethanol would achieve a 21% greenhouse gas reduction by 2022 was immediately challenged by the National Research Council for not properly counting land-use change and not realistically treating food competition and water use.

This panel of experts from the National Academy of Sciences even questioned the viability of the entire concept of reducing greenhouse gas with biofuels. The most rigorous and honest estimate by a third party in testimony before Congress used the EPA’s own methodology to show that adding corn ethanol to gasoline has increased greenhouse emissions by 28% over the pure gasoline baseline, with no trajectory to ever recover.

As for energy security, the goal was noble, but the method was irrational. Corn ethanol is critically dependent upon fossil fuels at every stage of production — tractor and truck fuel, fertilizer and pesticides, biorefinery energy and chemicals. Biofuels in general are just a way to put a green fig leaf on petroleum by rerouting it through a farm field.

RELATED: How the Union Pacific merger could revitalize America's rail industry

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

While corn ethanol production has plateaued at 15-16 billion gallons for the past 10 years — not coincidentally matching the federal subsidy limit — domestic crude oil production has skyrocketed due to technological innovations.

The U.S. is once again energy self-sufficient and the world’s largest producer of crude oil and natural gas. In 2024, the U.S. exported 100 billion gallons of refined petroleum. Other countries are burning U.S. gasoline in their cars and producing the same CO2 emissions as Americans would be if they were allowed to use it.

One of the great ironies is that RFS was authorized under the Clean Air Act. The EPA’s own 2010 regulatory impact analysis showed it would increase net air pollution and cause up to 245 more U.S. deaths per year. The EPA also granted corn ethanol a perpetual vapor pressure waiver for smog-causing emissions that it has denied to petroleum.

Perhaps worse, ethanol in gasoline enables the hydrocarbons to mix with water and thereby increase ground water and surface water contamination from fuel leaks to a far greater degree than the demonized MTBE it replaced.

A government program that has strayed so far from its objectives should be terminated. The federal agency in charge of protecting the nation’s environment should not be allowed to administer a program that increases air pollution and stresses on water, land, and climate. Fuel should be fuel and food should be food.

Surely Congress can find a better way to promote U.S. energy security and boost rural economies without imposing the highly regressive tax of increased fuel prices, inflicting such harm to the nation’s air and water resources, and promoting global food insecurity.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.

The Misleading Media Groupthink On China’s Renewable Energy

“Never just read one newspaper” is one of my media literacy rules. Sometimes even that fails, as it did on Monday April 13, 2026, when the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal both weighed in with suspiciously similar, and sadly unskeptical, stories claiming that the Iran war somehow provided vindication for China’s emphasis on wind and solar energy.

The post The Misleading Media Groupthink On China’s Renewable Energy appeared first on .

Biden said $5 gas was inevitable. Biden was wrong.



When gasoline surged past $5 a gallon in 2022, the impact landed on every household, every small business, and every industry that depends on transportation — which is to say, nearly all of them.

Families were reshuffling budgets, truckers were adding unavoidable surcharges, and businesses were raising prices simply to stay afloat.

It remains true that no president controls gas prices outright. But federal policy does shape how quickly American energy can be produced, moved, and delivered.

At the same time, Americans were told that there was little anyone in Washington could do to ease the burden. The message stayed the same for months: Global forces were responsible, and there was no quick fix for the pain drivers were feeling at the pump.

Yet while families struggled with the highest fuel prices ever recorded — a national average of $5.02 per gallon — the federal government was encouraging Americans to buy electric vehicles costing between $50,000 and $70,000.

All pain, no gain

Transportation officials suggested that the “more pain” people felt from gasoline prices, the more attractive EVs would become. Energy officials repeated that an electric car was the fastest way for families to reduce their gas bills to zero. For most households, though, the math just didn’t work. The average new EV price in 2022 was $66,000 according to Kelley Blue Book, while the median U.S. household income was around $74,000. A new electric car was not an immediate or practical solution.

Meanwhile, federal actions during those early years reflected a shift away from domestic oil development. The Keystone XL pipeline permit was canceled on day one, new federal oil and gas leasing was paused, existing Arctic leases were withdrawn, and a record 180 million barrels were released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Drilling permits decreased, and U.S. oil production fell below 2020 levels despite growing demand. Those choices — combined with refinery constraints and global volatility — kept domestic supply from growing at the pace needed to bring relief.

Supply high

The landscape looks very different today. By late 2025, U.S. energy production had expanded significantly. Federal lands reopened for leasing, permitting became faster, and producers were able to meet more of the country’s energy needs. American crude oil production climbed to an all-time high of 13.4 million barrels per day, and the number of active drilling rigs rose substantially from pandemic-era lows. More supply began moving through the system, helping stabilize markets that had been strained for years.

The results are unmistakable. The national average for regular gasoline sits near $3 per gallon — roughly 40% lower than the 2022 peak. Eighteen states now have average prices below $2.75. These aren’t isolated discounts; they are widespread indicators of stronger supply and more balanced market conditions.

RELATED: America First energy policy is paying off at the pump

Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Where the rubber meets the road

It remains true that no president controls gas prices outright. Global crude markets, refinery operations, seasonal demand, transportation costs, and taxes all influence what drivers pay. But federal policy does shape how quickly American energy can be produced, moved, and delivered. When supply is constrained, prices rise. When supply grows, prices ease. The past three years have demonstrated this in real time.

The contrast between the experience of 2022 and the reality of 2025 underscores a simple point: Energy policy affects everyday life in immediate, measurable ways. It determines what families pay to commute, what businesses spend to operate, and what consumers pay for goods delivered across the country. It is not theoretical. It shows up every time someone fills a gas tank.

For millions of Americans now seeing sub-$3 gasoline again, the numbers tell the story more clearly than any political argument.

America First energy policy is paying off at the pump



When it comes to gas prices, what a difference one administration can make. After peaking above $5 a gallon under President Biden, prices at the pump are now at their lowest levels in more than four years — and still falling. Today, the national average for regular gas sits at about $2.85, and a growing number of stations are dipping below $2. That’s a real Christmas gift for working families, one that makes a meaningful difference.

Falling gas prices bring immediate relief to households worried about affordability while also easing pressure across the broader economy. Compared with this time last year, Americans are saving a collective $400 million per week at the pump, according to GasBuddy.

Cheaper fuel deserves celebration, but there is more work to be done to lock in these gains and drive prices even lower.

Most people associate the One Big Beautiful Bill Act primarily with tax cuts. But it may prove to be one of the most consequential pro-energy laws passed in years. Lower gas prices do not happen by accident. They are the result of deliberate policy choices — specifically, President Trump’s reversal of the anti-energy agenda pursued by the Biden administration.

That agenda, driven by radical environmental activists, sought to force a rapid transition away from oil and gas regardless of cost. It relied on higher taxes, blocked infrastructure projects, restricted leasing, and constrained production. Taken together, those policies drove up prices and fueled inflation that hit working families hardest.

On day one, President Trump moved quickly to unwind many of those decisions, issuing nearly half a dozen energy-focused executive orders that restored certainty for producers. That early action was followed by his signature legislative achievement, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which combined broad-based tax relief with policies designed to restore American energy dominance.

The bill reduces production costs by repealing the Inflation Reduction Act’s misguided fee increase on oil and gas produced on federal lands. It cuts that fee by 25%, making domestic production more attractive and more affordable for drillers.

Just as important, the OBBBA restores predictability to federal leasing. The law mandates nearly 40 offshore oil and gas lease sales in the Gulf of America, Alaska, and other regions. It also establishes quarterly onshore lease sales and biannual offshore sales, giving the private sector long-term certainty. Under President Biden, leasing all but ground to a halt, with fewer leases issued than at any point since the 1960s — crippling the pipeline of future energy projects.

The bill also repeals or tightens a range of Green New Deal-style tax credits that heavily subsidized renewables at the expense of oil and gas. Those credits masked the true costs of renewable projects and distorted electricity markets, contributing to grid instability and higher energy prices.

RELATED: 5 truths the climate cult can’t bury any more

Justin Hamel/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The bottom line is simple: The OBBBA encourages more oil and gas production at lower cost. Over the next decade, that means a steadier supply of crude ready to be refined into affordable gasoline.

Still, Congress and the administration should not take their foot off the gas. Cheaper fuel deserves celebration, but there is more work to be done to lock in these gains and drive prices even lower.

At the top of the list is permitting reform. Energy projects routinely take longer to permit than to build. Environmental reviews intended to inform decisions have morphed into open-ended processes that stretch on for years. Even approved projects can be tied up indefinitely by duplicative reviews and serial lawsuits from activist groups. The result is uncertainty that discourages investment and delays infrastructure Americans depend on every day.

America First energy dominance is working, and families are saving real money because of it. The House has already passed several pro-energy permitting reforms, but meaningful engagement with the Senate will be required to deliver a comprehensive overhaul to the president’s desk. Without permitting reform, the full benefits of the OBBBA’s energy provisions will remain unrealized.

The lesson is clear: Energy dominance follows when government gets out of the way. If permitting reform advances next year, producers will gain the certainty and speed they need to deliver reliable, affordable energy to consumers. In 2026, Congress should finish the job.

SCOTUS Can Stop Blue Cities From Forcing Energy Diktats On The Rest Of The Country

One locality’s attempt to subvert the democratic process could metastasize into a nationwide regulatory free-for-all.

Trump Admin Takes Emergency Action To Keep Michigan Coal Plant Open

The Department of Energy is invoking emergency powers to keep a decades-old coal-fired power plant in Michigan online, an effort designed to avoid power outages and grid reliability issues as summer, a peak power demand season, fast approaches, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

The post Trump Admin Takes Emergency Action To Keep Michigan Coal Plant Open appeared first on .