Senator Schumer’s Energy Speech Sidesteps Accountability; Blue State Policies Have Long Kept Electricity and Gas Prices Sky-High

In his March 16, 2026, floor speech, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer accused the Trump administration of fueling an “energy affordability crisis” through canceled clean energy projects and foreign entanglements, particularly the conflict in Iran, which has indeed driven up global oil and gas prices.

While the Iran situation has contributed to higher gasoline costs nationwide, Schumer’s narrative conveniently sidesteps the deeper, pre-existing drivers of energy unaffordability in many Democrat-led states. These states have long prioritized aggressive renewable mandates, fossil fuel restrictions, policies that raise gasoline prices, and the premature retirement of reliable baseload power over consumer affordability and grid reliability.

For instance, California and New York’s residential electricity rates are almost double the national average. Democrats from these states have no interest in securing affordable energy for their constituents. Instead, they push mandates for 100% carbon-free or renewable power by mid-century, the premature retirement of reliable power plants, restrictions on natural gas infrastructure, and cost-shifting policies such as net metering for solar– all measures that burden everyday citizens and ratepayers. In fact, last year, 86% of states with above-average electricity prices were reliably blue, while 80% of the lowest-priced states were red. High costs aren’t an accident; they’re the predictable outcome of choosing climate symbolism and anti-fossil fuel regulations over consumer wallets. This pattern holds in the most recent data, with blue states consistently paying 30-40% more on average for electricity than red states. High costs in states like California, Connecticut, and Massachusetts aren’t anomalies; they’re policy outcomes.

New York

New York’s fracking ban provides a prime example of how the very policies championed by Democrat leaders like Chuck Schumer contribute to the energy affordability problems he decries. This suppression of domestic natural gas production has prevented the creation of thousands of jobs in the state, and it contributes to New York’s persistently high energy costs. Even though New York has trillions of cubic feet of natural gas, prices for residents run about 20% higher than the national benchmark.

Democrat-led state governments in New York have historically blocked or delayed several major natural gas pipeline projects. Key examples include the Constitution Pipeline, which was repeatedly rejected starting in 2016, and the Northeast Supply Enhancement project, which was denied multiple times between 2018 and 2020 for similar reasons. In 2016, Schumer and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand urged the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to reject the permit for the Northeast Energy Direct pipeline project, arguing it would impose environmental and health risks on New Yorkers with little benefit. Senator Schumer has spoken out against other regional gas infrastructure, such as the North Brooklyn Pipeline, protesting it in 2021 alongside activists.

California

In California, Governor Newsom has been eager to blame higher gas prices on the Iran conflict and even Trump, but this rings hollow. California’s gasoline prices are a stark story of self-inflicted wounds. The state consistently pays far more at the pump, with prices at $1.50 to $1.80 per gallon above the national average in recent years. In 2025 alone, Californians shelled out an extra $20 billion for gasoline compared to the national average, based on consumption of over 13.4 billion gallons.

California has the highest combined taxes and fees on gasoline in the nation, with direct taxes and fees totaling approximately 90 cents per gallon. This breakdown includes the federal excise tax of about 18 cents per gallon, the state excise tax of 61 cents per gallon, an average state and local sales tax component of roughly 9 cents per gallon, and the underground storage tank maintenance fee of 2 cents per gallon. In addition to these explicit levies, California imposes significant environmental compliance costs that are passed on to consumers, further driving up pump prices. These primarily arise from the state’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), which adds 14 cents per gallon, and the Cap-and-Invest Program, which adds 24 cents per gallon. Meanwhile, other blue states like Michigan and Washington recently raised their gas taxes by 5.2 and 6.2 cents per gallon, respectively. This isn’t primarily due to global events or Trump policies; it’s the direct result of decades of anti-production regulations under governors like Gavin Newsom and his predecessors.

California, once the third-largest oil-producing state, has seen production decline consistently since the 1980s. Domestic output didn’t dry up naturally; permitting and development were systematically restricted, leading to a collapse in production. California’s dependency on Middle Eastern oil stems from California’s own choices to suppress in-state and Alaskan production, which once fueled its refineries. Environmental groups and Democratic policies have pushed this outcome for years. Rather than owning it, Newsom deflects accountability while pursuing even more regulatory mandates that would further raise prices.

Political Games Aren’t a Substitute for Sound Policy

When the choice is between playing political games or pursuing sound policies, Democrats will choose the former every time. Schumer’s speech and the accompanying Democratic report are attempts to score points in the midterm messaging war, but they overlook how similar progressive energy policies have already made life more expensive for millions in Democrat-led states. True energy affordability comes from balanced, pro-production approaches, not from stonewalling market-driven projects, vilifying fossil fuels, or creating foreign dependencies that expose consumers to global volatility. Red states deliver reliable, affordable power by embracing oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear and avoiding aggressive phase-outs of these baseload sources–outcomes Democrats could replicate if they prioritized wallets over ideology.

Americans deserve an honest accounting of what actually drives costs, not partisan spin that ignores the mirror. If Democrats truly want lower energy bills, they might start by examining the high-price outcomes in their own backyards.