AEA Applauds Energy Champions Senator Cruz and Representative Hageman for Introducing Climate Liability Legislation

WASHINGTON DC (4/17/26) – Yesterday, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced S.4340. This bill would bar frivolous lawsuits from green activist groups seeking damages, injunctions, or other relief for harms allegedly caused by the end use of energy products. Senators Ted Budd (R-NC), Tom Cotton (R-AR), and Mike Lee (R-UT) are cosponsoring the legislation. The House’s companion bill, H.R. 8330, was also introduced yesterday by Representative Harriet Hageman (R-WY).

American Energy Alliance President Tom Pyle released the following statement:

“Green left activists have always gone to extraordinary lengths to impose their anti-energy agenda on Americans. Filing sweeping lawsuits against oil and gas companies in an attempt to force policy outcomes they have failed to achieve in the legislative and administrative arenas is some of their most egregious work yet. This kind of politically motivated litigation threatens not only energy stability, security, and affordability but also the integrity of our legal system.

“We applaud Senator Cruz and Representative Hageman for taking the lead on this issue and introducing legislation to end climate lawfare. We look forward to working with them to end this reckless assault on affordable and reliable energy once and for all.”

AEA Experts Available For Interview On This Topic:

Additional Background Resources From AEA:

For media inquiries, please contact:
[email protected]

American Energy Alliance Leads Coalition Letter in Support of American Energy Security and Competitiveness

WASHINGTON DC (04/16/2026) – Today, a coalition of 24 organizations, led by the American Energy Alliance, sent a letter to President Donald Trump and members of the United States Congress, urging a disciplined, evidence-based approach to rail regulation to ensure American energy security and economic competitiveness.

American Energy Alliance President Tom Pyle released the following statement:

“Reliable, affordable American energy relies not only on what we produce, but on how effectively and efficiently we move it. Rail transportation is critical for the movement of coal and crude, and linking production operations to manufacturers and export terminals. Policies that increase the cost and complexity of moving our resources, like the proposed Rail Safety Act, will inevitably affect our supply chains. The end result is higher energy prices for families and businesses across the country.

“This administration and this Congress have worked relentlessly to strengthen domestic supply chains and bolster energy security. Imposing sweeping new operational mandates on the way we transport that energy risks undermining those very goals. Burdensome new regulations will only hinder the long-term investments needed to maintain safe, efficient, and resilient energy transportation systems.”

AEA Experts Available For Interview On This Topic:

Additional Background Resources From AEA:

For media inquiries, please contact:
[email protected]

New LNG Projects Promise To Make Alaska Great Again

The conflict with Iran could lead to the construction of an Alaskan natural gas pipeline and export project. One project in the works since 2014 would entail an 810-mile pipeline to bring natural gas south from wells on the state’s North Slope for liquefaction and shipment to Asian customers. The project is estimated at $44 billion. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz and Iranian attacks on Qatari liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants are driving soaring LNG prices in Asia and Europe, prompting customers to seek more stable and secure supplies. That has accelerated interest in turning preliminary purchase plans into firm contracts and pricing deals, particularly from Asian customers, who get most of their oil and natural gas from the Middle East. In addition to benefiting the international market, the pipeline will provide a stable supply for Alaskan home heating, power generation, and industrial needs, while eliminating the need to import gas into Alaska. The “final investment decision” is expected to come within weeks.

Another potential way to move stranded North Slope gas (about 35 trillion cubic feet) to market was announced by Polar LNG. According to the Oil & Gas Journal, this LNG facility would use existing Prudhoe Bay infrastructure, transporting gas via a short pipeline to a modular, nearshore gravity-based facility that would process and liquefy it. The gas would then be loaded onto specialized ice-class carriers for year-round export. The company is planning to begin production at the seven-million-metric-ton-per-year plant between 2029 and 2030, at a cost of $8–9 billion.

According to Semafor, Polar LNG is exploring the potential repurposing of sanctioned equipment built for Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 project and is seeking permission from the US government to acquire parts affected by the Biden administration’s sanctions. Obtaining pre-built equipment is critical to meeting the project’s timeline. The project, when completed, would have one of the shortest LNG shipping routes from North America to key Asian markets, approximately 3,600 miles to Japan, for example, compared to over 10,000 miles from the U.S. Gulf Coast.

While cheaper, Polar LNG faces severe challenges of transiting ice-laden waters. As The Alaska Story reports, a Russian gas project has not been able to deliver shipments recently due to icebreaker breakdowns, and Russia has a much larger icebreaker fleet than the United States. Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 project is operating at only about 25% capacity because the ice is too thick for most tankers, so it relies on a single ice-class tanker to move fuel.

The Polar LNG project is complementary to the pipeline LNG project, which is partnered by the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation and the privately owned Glenfarne. Alaska has 25% ownership in the project. According to Governor Mike Dunleavy and Former Senator Mark Begich, the pipeline project has received its Federal Energy Regulatory Commission certificate and Department of Energy license. The necessary engineering has been completed, permits have been obtained, and lawsuits are over. The right-of-way is secured, and the gas is available to put into the pipe. Buyers in Japan, South Korea, and other Pacific partners have expressed interest in purchasing its gas rather than relying on Middle Eastern gas. Furthermore, the pipeline project will supply the needed gas to Southcentral Alaska to heat Alaskan homes and fuel military bases, while also creating more jobs.

The final holdup is with the mayors of the boroughs through which the pipeline will transit. Governor Dunleavy has a bill that would replace a statewide $20 million property tax on oil and gas infrastructure, split between state and local governments, with a volumetric tax based on the volume of gas flowing through pipelines. According to the borough mayors, the volumetric tax would bring in far less revenue than the property tax — about 90% less, which would not be enough to cover local costs, such as additional students in schools, more vehicles on the road, and more fire and EMS calls, resulting in some of the project’s cost having to be paid by local taxpayers.

Analysis

The energy crisis resulting from the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz due to the war with Iran is causing new interest in energy from Alaska’s North Slope. Alaska has the potential to be an energy powerhouse. As IER President Tom Pyle wrote for RealClearEnergy, “We cannot afford to keep Alaska locked up any longer. If we are serious about American energy independence and prosperity, the time is now to let Alaska do what it does best – develop and produce its God-given natural resources.”


*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

Cuba Provides Example Of Green New Deal In Practice

The U.S. oil blockade on Cuba is contributing to blackouts across the island, with nighttime lighting reduced by as much as 50%. Last year, China provided Cuba with a gigawatt of photovoltaic solar panels. On top of that, Cuba will soon begin installing 5,000 2-kilowatt solar panels donated by China, which has also provided technical advice. According to Belly of the Beast, the panels will be installed in a wide range of locations, and many will not connect to the national grid. Just over half of the panels will go to maternity homes, nursing homes, senior centers, emergency rooms, funeral homes, banks, municipal radio stations, radio transmitters, internet communications facilities, and the commercial offices of the Electric Union, the state-run electric company. The rest will be installed in “isolated” homes, some of which have never had electricity. The solar panels will provide relief to institutions that cannot afford electricity interruptions, but will not solve the overall electric grid problem because solar power is intermittent, and the capacity donated is insufficient to replace Cuba’s oil-dependent electric grid. Cuba’s goal is to reach 24% renewable energy by 2030.

Source: Semafor

According to the New York Times, solar power will help address power outages, as the blockade has led to severe shortages of oil, gas, and diesel fuel. It takes over a month for a private car in Cuba to fill up with gas because it has to join a virtual queue, but an official government car, such as a taxi, can fill up once a week. As a result, gas has been selling on the black market.

The blockade has also incapacitated Cuba’s universal health care system, with hospitals canceling surgeries because doctors and nurses cannot commute to work. Clinics are struggling to administer treatments like chemotherapy and dialysis, and refrigerated vaccine stocks could spoil because of power outages. Many ambulances are parked due to insufficient gas. Pharmacies are largely empty, as medicine production has mostly stopped due to the factories running on diesel. Vaccine makers are searching for ingredients because flights that once brought them are canceled due to a lack of jet fuel.

China Is Expected to Do Well with Renewable and EV Exports

According to the Washington Post, China will benefit from the Iran conflict, given its world-beating green-tech sector, which has suffered from overcapacity in recent years. The conflict with Iran has renewed interest in renewable energy and electric vehicles (EVs) due to the rising cost of oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) resulting from the 10% deficit in global oil supplies and Qatar’s production cut to LNG.

Factories in Asia are curbing production to save energy, and some gas stations are telling drivers they cannot fill up, hoping volumetric limits help mitigate the short-term impacts of the war. Countries across Asia are switching to coal-powered electricity generation. In Japan, coal could offset up to 70% of gas-fired power generation, and the country is also looking toward reviving nuclear power. Taiwan may restart two coal-power units. Via Semafor, to be less dependent on oil and gas in the future, the Philippines plans to install 100 gigawatts of solar power in the next two years, and Germany is planning to spend billions toward expanding wind power and promoting EV sales.

Thus, the Iran war may help China further expand its renewable and EV export sales, despite doing well even before the conflict began. As reported by The Wire ChinaAfrican nations imported 18.8 gigawatts of solar panels from China in 2025 — 48% more than in 2024. The continent is a huge market for China’s solar panels since almost 600 million people still lack electricity there. China’s exports of batteries and electric vehicles rose 27% year-on-year in 2025, and sales of wind turbines rose nearly 50%. China’s battery manufacturer CATL’s Hong Kong-listed shares have gained nearly 30% since the war began, while its EV manufacturer BYD’s sales last month were 65% higher than a year ago.

China is the world’s leading exporter of automobiles, having mastered the EV market by producing inexpensive electric vehicles with new models quicker than its competitors. Low energy prices, cheap labor, dominance in the rare earth, mineral, and battery markets, and government subsidies have helped China expand its EV market at home and abroad. China has reached this dominance by burning over half of the world’s coal annually. Electric vehicles and hybrids made up almost half of all new car sales in China, helping the country reduce gasoline consumption and oil imports at a particularly good time, given the Iranian conflict.

Analysis

Lacking oil, Cuba has turned to China for help to supply power to the island through solar panels. The solar panels will provide some relief to institutions that cannot afford electricity interruptions, but will not solve the overall electric grid problem resulting from the blockade. According to an article by Ricardo Torres of Columbia Law School’s Cuba Capacity Building Project, “The recovery of the Cuban electrical system requires more than simply adding megawatts of installed capacity. It requires access to financing, operational discipline, and an incentive framework that values productivity and maintenance. Without these foundations, the grid will remain trapped in a cycle of temporary solutions—more rationing, greater wear and tear, and mounting losses—that erode economic activity and increase social discontent.”


*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

Blue States Blaming Data Centers For Their Own Disastrous Energy Policies

Maine may become the first state to ban new data centers, with its House passing legislation that would pause large data center construction until November 2027, applying to projects of at least 20 megawatts. The state wants the time to assess the impact of data center development on the environment and the electricity grid. Maine’s Governor, Janet Mills, supports a freeze. Other blue states, such as California and New York, are looking to block data center construction.

The hysteria over rising electricity prices and data center electricity demand has moved across the nation. According to the Wall Street Journal, at least 10 states other than Maine are advancing policies attempting to mitigate the cost and increase in generating capacity needed to accommodate new data centers. Legislators have introduced measures to temporarily ban or restrict data centers in New York, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and other states. In Ohio, some activists are collecting signatures to put a statewide ban on large data centers on the November ballot. Other municipalities and counties, especially small ones in Michigan and Indiana, imposed temporary pauses on data center development, and Denver and Detroit are among the major cities considering bans.

While Virginia is the current leader in data center activity, Texas is expected to surpass it as the top U.S. data center hub, with a projected total of 962 sites across operational, under-construction, and announced projects.

As the Journal reports, in Maine, some data center developments have targeted defunct industrial sites, such as closed mills. One company recently proposed building a $415 million underwater data center off Maine’s coast, powered by tidal energy. According to Data Center Dynamics, DeepGreen Western Passage SPV LLC wants to build a 51-megawatt power project offshore near the town of Eastport, which borders the Atlantic Ocean. The company submitted an application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, requesting a 48-month permit to conduct environmental studies and engineering work in the area. The company would build “universal docking cradles” on the ocean floor, into which it would plug energy-generating turbines and pods containing artificial-intelligence computer infrastructure. The initial deployment would house 170 turbines and 34 data center pods, providing power for the data servers and Maine residents. The project is estimated to cost $415 million, funded by DeepGreen and other backers.

Via the Journalthe Maine House is considering adding exemptions to the bill that would allow two planned data center projects to move forward in Jay and Sanford, in southern Maine. Governor Mills supports an exception for the project planned in Jay, as it is “expected to bring much-needed jobs, economic activity and tax revenue to the region.”

Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently proposed legislation to temporarily pause data-center construction in the United States. Both Congress members support climate policies that are the real cause of the high electricity prices troubling blue states. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are from states, Vermont and New York, respectively, whose residential electricity prices are among the top 10 highest nationally — higher than those in states with more data centers. Both states are heavily into climate policies that have retired nuclear and coal plants, limited natural gas use, and created superfunds to punish oil and gas producers, while being members of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and having renewable portfolio standards or clean energy standards. IER’s Blue States, High Rates shows the linkage between a state’s approach to climate and “green energy” and high electricity prices.

Analysis

In blue states, it is easier to blame data centers than to admit that instituting policies that promote intermittent renewable energy, which requires expensive backup power and additional transmission to reach demand centers, raises rates. Data centers are an easy target for blame as prices continue to rise largely due to the addition of transmission projects implemented to bring renewable generation to demand centers. Because natural gas generation is easier to site, it doesn’t need the high level of transmission infrastructure that renewables do. If proponents of slowing or stopping new electrical demand in the United States succeed in linking increased demand to higher prices, it could have severe implications for all kinds of economic expansion in the United States.

However, as we highlight in Have Data Centers Driven Up Electricity Prices?, data centers and increased demand are not causing the high electricity prices. In fact, history shows just the opposite; more electricity sales actually correlate with lower prices, as the grid’s fixed costs are spread over more consumers.


*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

The Unregulated Podcast #269: Referendum

On this episode of The Unregulated Podcast Tom Pyle and Mike McKenna discuss the Iranian ceasefire and the conflict’s impact on energy markets, plus highlights from the last week in the world of energy and beyond.

Links:

Offshore Oil Production Restarts In California Thanks To President Trump

American oil executives told Trump administration officials that the energy crisis from the Iran war is likely to get worse — that the disruption to energy flows out of the Strait of Hormuz, where 20% of the world’s oil consumption flows through on its way to markets, would continue to create volatility in global energy markets. The Trump administration has implemented a number of measures to help mitigate the price increase, including a 30-day waiver of sanctions of Russian oil, a release of emergency energy reserves, and waiving the Jones Act.

The Trump administration has also ordered Sable Offshore to resume offshore oil drilling along California’s coast at the Santa Ynez Unit and reopen the associated Santa Ynez Pipeline System. Trump administration officials also want to increase oil flows between Venezuela and the United States to help solidify fuel supply chains in the Western Hemisphere. Chevron told U.S. officials that its oil production in the country has reached record levels and that it intends to pump more.

On March 13, Energy Secretary Chris Wright invoked the Defense Production Act for Texas-based oil company Sable Offshore to restore oil operations offshore southern California. According to a Department of Energy (DOE) news release, Wright invoked the Defense Production Act to address supply disruption risks that “have left the region and U.S. military forces dependent on foreign oil.” Sable Offshore’s facility can replace nearly 1.5 million barrels of foreign-sourced oil each month by producing roughly 50,000 barrels per day, resulting in a 15% increase to California’s oil production.

California Governor Gavin Newsom criticized the Trump administration for ordering the restoration of oil drilling off the state’s coast, calling it an attempt to illegally restart a pipeline that multiple court orders have prohibited from restarting and whose operators are facing criminal charges.

According to Newsom, the Sable Offshore pipeline would only increase total oil production by 0.05% and have “no impact on lowering global oil prices.” But California now relies on imported oil for more than 60% of the oil refined in California, including oil that must pass through the Strait of Hormuz. According to the DOE, California used to supply nearly 40% of the nation’s oil production, but onerous climate legislation and regulations, as well as a general hostility to oil and natural gas, have depressed the state’s oil production and closed numerous refineries.

California regulators further escalated the dispute by directing Sable Offshore to remove a contested segment of the pipeline crossing a state park. The order came from the California Natural Resources Agency, which said the pipeline segment crossing Gaviota State Park lacks the necessary state authorization. Sable Offshore is expected to challenge the state’s removal order.

Background

According to the Desert Sunthe Sable Offshore facility includes offshore platforms, subsea pipelines, and the Las Flores Canyon processing facility near the Santa Barbara coastline. The system has been largely dormant since the 2015 oil spill, during which a corroded onshore pipeline ruptured above Refugio State Beach, releasing about 100,000 gallons of oil, of which about 21,000 gallons flowed into the Pacific Ocean. The area was restored at a cost of about $100 million. Criminal charges were filed against the pipeline’s former owner, Plains All American Pipeline. The spill shut down the entire pipeline network serving the offshore platforms, and it has remained offline for more than a decade.

Sable bought the system from ExxonMobil in 2024 and has claimed it can increase production from about 30,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day to more than 50,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day when the system restarts. The oil would be fed to refineries in Los Angeles, Bakersfield, and the Bay Area, replacing imported oil.

The Trump administration has wanted to restart the facility even before the current crisis because it would provide more domestic oil to California and to the military bases it hosts. Last month, however, a Santa Barbara County Superior Court judge ordered the pipeline to remain shut, ruling that the Trump administration’s earlier intervention was not enough to override an injunction requiring Sable to obtain state approvals before restarting.

March 3 legal opinion from the Justice Department, however, concluded that a federal order under the Defense Production Act of 1950 could preempt state law in the Sable case. It also said such an order could override a 2020 federal consent decree stemming from the 2015 Refugio spill that requires approval from the California State Fire Marshal before the pipeline can restart.

Analysis

California has stood in the way of energy production for far too long, and its people have suffered. As we’ve written previously regarding California’s anti-energy policies, “The consequence is not a California free of fossil fuels. It is a California that imports the fossil fuels it refuses to produce — from Iraq, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and now even the Bahamas.” The high prices resulting from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz are just amplifying the issues that have long existed in California.


*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

President Trump Unveils First Major American Refinery To Be Built In Over Fifty Years

President Trump announced that America First Refining will build a 168,000-barrel-per-day refinery in Brownsville, Texas, a deep-water port with direct rail and sea access, supported by investment from India’s Reliance Industries. The facility — the first new major U.S. refinery project in roughly 50 years — will operate on light shale oil and help reduce the U.S. trade deficit with India by $300 billion. Many Gulf Coast refineries ‌are unable to process light, sweet oil from ⁠fracking shale fields because they were configured in the last 40 years to run on lower-cost heavy, sour oil, which has higher density and has been readily available from Canada, Venezuela, and Mexico. U.S. light oil resources were on the decline before hydraulic fracking and directional drilling brought an explosion in production. America First plans to break ground on the refinery in the second quarter of this year.

According to CNBC, the refinery will process 1.2 billion barrels of U.S. light shale oil and produce 50 billion gallons of refined products. According to Trey Griggs, president of America First Refining, “The United States has a surplus of light shale oil but a shortage of refining capacity designed to process it. By building this refinery at the Port of Brownsville, we’re unlocking a major expansion of American energy production while creating thousands of high-paying jobs and strengthening our domestic supply chain.” Unlike many existing U.S. refineries that rely on heavy oil from Venezuela, Canada, and Mexico, this facility does not require imported oil, thereby strengthening U.S. national and economic security.

Reliance owns the world’s largest oil refinery, a 1.4 million barrel-per-day refining complex, in Jamnagar, India, and has a market capitalization of $206 billion. The firm, which reported $125 billion in ‌revenue last year, also operates businesses in retail, new energy, ​digital services, media, and entertainment. Reliance has signed “a binding 20-year offtake term sheet” with America First, and will buy the products that the refinery produces. According to Reuters, the cost of constructing refineries or adding capacity in the past decade has averaged about $40,000 per barrel of capacity, or about $6.7 billion for 168,000 barrels.

The last major refinery built in the U.S. was located in Garyville, Louisiana, in 1976. According to the Energy Information Administration, U.S. ​refining capacity is currently at 18 million barrels per day, and operational utilization is around 90%. While Texas is adding refining capacity, California is permanently shuttering its refining facilities with two recent departures.

Forty years ago, California had 42 refineries. After the closure of the Valero refinery in Northern California, it will have eleven. The exodus of refineries is forcing California to turn to imports. It is even importing gasoline from the U.S. Gulf Coast refineries, sending ships to the Bahamas first to avoid the higher costs of the Jones Act.

The reason for the exodus of refineries from California is its policies and regulations that drive fuel prices above the national average. California’s combined taxes add about $1.00 per gallon, with $0.18 from a federal gasoline tax, $0.709 from a state gasoline tax, $0.10 from a sales tax, and $0.02 from a storage tank fee. California also imposes several “hidden taxes” that directly affect the price of gas. These hidden taxes take the form of environmental compliance costs, which add an estimated $0.54 per gallon from California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the state’s Cap-and-Invest Program, formerly called Cap-and-Trade.

The conflict with Iran has increased oil prices, which in turn has increased the national average and California’s gasoline prices. According to AAA, as of April 7, the national average gasoline price is $4.14 per gallon, and California’s average price is $5.93.

Analysis

Since a new domestic refinery was built in 1976, the U.S. has become a net exporter of energy products and the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas. As we’ve explained previously, “The lack of refining capacity for our domestic production stems from U.S. policy that has blocked the development of new refineries for decades through adverse environmental standards and regulatory uncertainty.” The Brownsville refinery will redirect up to 60 million barrels of American oil annually back into American refining, creating thousands of both construction and permanent refining jobs, and producing gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel from an entirely domestic supply chain.


*This article was adapted from content originally published by the Institute for Energy Research.

American Energy Alliance Joins Coalition Demanding Swift Passage of ESA Amendments Act

On Friday, April 3rd, a coalition of twenty organizations dedicated to promoting property rights, free markets, and responsible environmental stewardship, including the Pacific Legal Foundation and the American Energy Alliance, sent a letter to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise. The coalition urged them to pass H.R. 1897, the ESA Amendments Act of 2025. After more than 50 years of failure, it is time to modernize the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to prioritize actual results over bureaucratic red tape. The full letter and list of signatories is available here.


The Honorable Mike Johnson
Speaker of the House
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Steve Scalise
Majority Leader
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Speaker Johnson and Majority Leader Scalise,

We, the undersigned organizations, write to urge prompt consideration and passage of H.R. 1897, the ESA Amendments Act of 2025. As organizations committed to property rights, free markets, and responsible environmental stewardship, we believe this legislation would strengthen the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) so that it more effectively ensures species conservation while protecting the rights of landowners.

When Congress enacted the ESA in 1973, the law was intended to identify endangered and threatened species and implement measures to recover them. However, in the more than 50 years since its enactment, the ESA has often failed to achieve its intended purpose. Approximately 1,700 species have been listed under the law, yet the successful recovery rate remains just three percent.

To address shortcomings in the current framework, Chairman Bruce Westerman introduced the ESA Amendments Act of 2025, which contains numerous reforms designed to improve the effectiveness of the law and promote responsible conservation while supporting species recovery. On December 17, the legislation was reported out of the House Natural Resources Committee on a bipartisan basis.

The bill includes several important reforms. First, it provides clear guardrails around the definition of “best scientific and commercial data available” to ensure that data used in ESA decision-making is impartial and applied objectively—without reliance on precautionary assumptions that can skew scientific analysis. Second, the legislation requires agencies to consider both conservation outcomes and economic impacts when issuing regulations governing the take of threatened species, codifying the recent federal district court decision in Kansas Natural Resources Coalition v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Third, the bill places reasonable limits on attorney’s fees associated with ESA litigation. For too long, certain advocacy organizations have funneled millions of taxpayer dollars into their operations through fee recoveries. The ESA Amendments Act would establish common-sense caps on the amount of attorney’s fees generated from a single lawsuit and limit the total fees that a single organization may receive each year.

Taken together, these and other reforms in the legislation would strengthen the ESA, promote species recovery, and better protect the rights of landowners.

As Congress continues to consider comprehensive permitting reform, modernizing the Endangered Species Act will be an important step toward a more effective and predictable regulatory framework. We therefore urge the House to act quickly to consider and pass this long-overdue legislation.

Sincerely,

The American Energy Alliance & Coalition Partners

The Unregulated Podcast #268: God Squad 

On this episode of The Unregulated Podcast Tom Pyle, Mike McKenna, and producer Alex Stevens discuss the updates from the Iran conflict, the upcoming midterms, Democrats’ affordability problem, and more.

Links: