The United States has more oil, natural gas, and other energy resources than we know what to do with. Does anyone think Democrats will do a good job stewarding those resources?
Headline after headline is bemoaning the high price of gas and diesel. Don’t get me wrong, those prices are bad news for American consumers. When it costs $100 to fill up your car, it hurts. And the price of diesel in particular affects the price of anything that has to be moved from point A to point B in a semi-truck. Given that proximate blame can be placed on President Donald Trump for launching strikes against Iran, it’s understandable that voters may take it out on Republicans in November. That’s especially true with the Leftmedia shouting doom and gloom.
Yet there’s plenty of reason for optimism — with the right approach.
The U.S. already is a world leader in energy production. We have large reserves of oil and natural gas, and we export a great deal.
Unfortunately, as the Trump Department of Energy notes, “A burdensome federal permitting process undermines America’s competitiveness and national security.” Under Secretary Chris Wright, however, the department promises to “prioritize more efficient permitting to enable private sector investments” in energy infrastructure.
That’s good news. Deregulation of the energy industry is the only long-term solution to high prices. I’ll ask again: Does anyone think Democrats will do that?
Frankly, that’s the unspoken point of a recent Debbie Downer article on the subject. Tsvetana Paraskova writes for Oilprice.com about a recent White House meeting with several oil executives. “Despite record-high margins and sky-high profits over the past few months, none of the refiners plan to build new crude processing facilities,” Paraskova says. “Despite the deep pockets and the blockbuster profits this year, oil companies are unwilling to sink billions of U.S. dollars into a costly new construction venture that may not even be too profitable when it starts up in about five years, as fuel demand is expected to level off and even decline.”
I’d argue the real problem is that refineries and other facilities are multiyear projects that depend on consistent policy. Right now, the Leftmedia would have us all believe that Democrats may prevail in 2026 and 2028, which leads oil executives to batten down the hatches, not freely invest in growth.
Meanwhile, “With refineries running at the closest pace to capacity in years, there’s really no more room for U.S. refiners to process more oil — Venezuelan oil or anything else,” said GasBuddy analyst Patrick De Haan after that White House meeting. “Refiners have been operating over 95% all summer long.”
Speaking of refineries, chemical engineer Robert Rapier explained earlier this year at Forbes why U.S. refineries process foreign heavy crude instead of American light crude. The short answer is that many American refineries are designed to handle the heavy stuff, and switching to our own lighter crude is less efficient and less profitable. Hence, we export the light and import the heavy.
Are oil companies “gouging” us? Not really; it’s called capitalism, and Democrats hate it. They aim to make gas and diesel more expensive because they envision a world of electric cars and “clean” energy. They will cap, regulate, and obstruct any efforts to drill or refine, all while complaining to voters that Trump and the Republicans are to blame for high prices.
That said, some Republicans are so fearful of electoral losses that they are also proposing bad ideas — namely, a temporary ban on diesel exports. “I’ve said let’s not send out the diesel,” President Trump said Tuesday. “We make a lot of diesel.” Diesel is now over $6.50 a gallon nationwide, so it’s understandable that politicians would want to (artificially) increase supply with a ban.
If you are curious why diesel prices have risen disproportionately to gas prices, it is primarily because Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian refining facilities significantly reduced global diesel output. Secondarily, temporary disruptions through the Straight of Hormuz have also had an impact.
In any case, the undesirable effects of an export ban are many, including market disruption and higher prices down the road. As De Haan wrote, “An export ban could temporarily depress Gulf Coast diesel prices, but there’s no guarantee that relief reaches the regions with the highest prices, and over time it could cut refinery runs and tighten supplies of other fuels, gasoline included.”
A better idea would be to eliminate biofuel mandates, but farm-state politicians aren’t about to endorse that.
If President Trump and his party want to make the best case to voters ahead of the election, they’d work toward deregulation of the oil industry and victory against Iran.
So why be optimistic? Well, because Republicans tend to return to free-market principles, and Trump administration officials like Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum have poured cold water on the idea of a diesel export ban. Besides, Trump has an outstanding record on energy and deregulation.
Oh, and anti-energy Democratic Socialists don’t have nearly the lead they think they do heading into November.
