Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress Bill Spotlight: Repealing Trump's National Energy Emergency

News

Congress Bill Spotlight: Repealing Trump's National Energy Emergency

White smoke pouring out of the chimneys of the power plant.

Getty Images, Eric Yang

The Fulcrum introduces Congress Bill Spotlight, a weekly report by Jesse Rifkin, focusing on the noteworthy legislation of the thousands introduced in Congress. Rifkin has written about Congress for years, and now he's dissecting the most interesting bills you need to know about, but that often don't get the right news coverage.

President Donald Trump has labeled everyone from Hillary Clinton to Jeb Bush as “low energy,” but what about his executive order on the subject?


The Bill

A new bill would repeal Trump’s executive order that declared a “national energy emergency,” which was crafted to primarily (or, perhaps, even exclusively) benefit fossil fuels like coal and oil.

The Senate joint resolution was introduced on February 3 by Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA). The bill does not appear to have a title. No House companion version appears to have been introduced yet.

Context

The president has authority to declare a national emergency without congressional approval, which gives the president many increased powers. In theory, these emergencies are supposed to primarily be events like natural disasters, national security threats, or health crises, such as the COVID emergency in effect from March 2020 to April 2023.

Trump declared three national emergencies on his first day back in office: two about the U.S.-Mexico border, plus another about energy.

While Democrats disagree with most Trump border policies, many nonetheless acknowledge the current border situation indeed constitutes an “emergency.” Democrats say America’s energy situation is different, though. America’s current energy situation is not an “emergency” at all, they argue, but rather doing quite well.

Trump’s executive order allows suspensions of certain environmental considerations that are usually taken into account under the Endangered Species Act, plus faster federal approvals on certain energy projects.

Not for all energy projects, though. The executive order specifies several different types of energy including coal, oil, petroleum, and natural gas —but intentionally left out certain renewables like wind and solar.

What Supporters Say

Supporters argue the human-caused climate crisis is real, causing increasingly damaging natural disasters like Hurricane Helene in North Carolina and January’s California wildfires. They say lessening reliance on coal, oil, and natural gas is the best way to ameliorate such threats.

“The United States is producing more energy than at any other point in history,” Sen. Kaine said in a press release. “So why would Donald Trump spend his first day in office declaring a national energy emergency? … Because Trump will do anything for Big Oil. This sham emergency [is] nothing more than a shameless power grab to suspend environmental regulations and make it easier for massive fossil fuel corporations.”

What Opponents Say

Opponents counter that more energy is still needed for three main reasons:

A backstop against grid failures. For example, Texas experienced a February 2021 energy grid failure, losing power for millions of residents during an extreme winter storm. “The integrity… of our nation’s energy infrastructure, from coast to coast, is an immediate and pressing priority,” Trump’s executive order said.

Guarding against hacks or blackmail. For example, hackers in May 2021 seized control of Colonial Pipeline’s infrastructure and demanded $4.4 million in cryptocurrency. (The CEO agreed to pay the ransom, though the FBI later seized about half of the money back from the hackers.) “In an effort to harm the American people, hostile state and non-state foreign actors have targeted our domestic energy infrastructure,” Trump’s executive order said.

Accommodating growing new technologies. Artificial intelligence is such an energy-intensive service that its use is already straining many electric grids, a problem only expected to surge in the coming years. “The United States’ ability to remain at the forefront of technological innovation depends on a reliable supply of energy,” Trump’s executive order said.

Odds of Passage

The bill has attracted 11 cosponsors, all Democrats. It awaits a potential but unlikely vote in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, controlled by Republicans.

Jesse Rifkin is a freelance journalist with the Fulcrum. Don’t miss his weekly report, Congress Bill Spotlight, every Friday on the Fulcrum. Rifkin’s writings about politics and Congress have been published in the Washington Post, Politico, Roll Call, Los Angeles Times, CNN Opinion, GovTrack, and USA Today.

SUGGESTIONS:

Congress Bill Spotlight: Panama Canal Repurchase Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: Make Greenland Great Again Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: BIG OIL from the Cabinet Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: renaming Gulf of Mexico as “Gulf of America”

Congress Bill Spotlight: constitutional amendment letting Trump be elected to a third term

Congress Bill Spotlight: adding Donald Trump’s face to Mount Rushmore

Congress Bill Spotlight: BAD DOGE Act

Read More

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

President Donald Trump speaks at a White House press briefing on Jan. 30, 2025.

Credit: Jonah Elkowitz/Medill News Service

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

WASHINGTON — Paul Ingrassia withdrew his nomination to lead the Office of Special Counsel on Tuesday night after facing Republican pushback over past controversial statements.

While Ingrassia joins a growing list of President Donald Trump’s nominees who have withdrawn from consideration, many who have aired controversial beliefs or lack requisite qualifications have still been appointed or are still in the nomination process.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making
low light photography of armchairs in front of desk

A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making

The dysfunction of today’s federal government is not simply the product of political division or individual leaders; it is rooted in the internal rules of Congress itself. The Founders, in one of their few major oversights, granted Congress the authority to make its own procedural rules (Article I, Section 5) without establishing any framework for how it should operate. Over time, this blank check has produced a legislative process built to serve partisan power, not public representation.

The result is a Congress that often rewards obstruction and gridlock over compromise and action. The Founders imagined representatives closely tied to their constituents—one member for every 30,000 to 50,000 citizens. Today, that ratio has ballooned to one for every 765,000 in the House, and in the Senate, each member can represent tens of millions (e.g., California). As the population has grown, representation has become distant and impersonal, while procedural rules have tightened the grip of party leadership. Major issues can no longer reach the floor unless the majority party permits it. The link between citizens and decisions has nearly vanished.

Keep ReadingShow less
Lasting peace requires accepting Israel’s right to exist

US President Donald Trump hailed a "tremendous day for the Middle East" as he and regional leaders signed a declaration on Oct. 13, 2025, meant to cement a ceasefire in Gaza, hours after Israel and Hamas exchanged hostages and prisoners. (TNS)

Lasting peace requires accepting Israel’s right to exist

President Trump took a rhetorical victory lap in front of the Israeli parliament Monday. Ignoring his patented departures from the teleprompter, which violated all sorts of valuable norms, it was a speech Trump deserved to give. The ending of the war — even if it’s just a ceasefire — and the release of Israel’s last living hostages is, by itself, a monumental diplomatic accomplishment, and Trump deserves to take a bow.

Much of Trump’s prepared text was forward-looking, calling for a new “golden age” for the Middle East to mirror the one allegedly unfolding here in America. I’m generally skeptical about “golden ages,” here or abroad, and especially leery about any talk about “everlasting peace” in a region that has known “peace” for only a handful of years since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Keep ReadingShow less
A child looks into an empty fridge-freezer in a domestic kitchen.

The Trump administration’s suspension of the USDA’s Household Food Security Report halts decades of hunger data tracking.

Getty Images, Catherine Falls Commercial

Trump Gives Up the Fight Against Hunger

A Vanishing Measure of Hunger

Consider a hunger policy director at a state Department of Social Services studying food insecurity data across the state. For years, she has relied on the USDA’s annual Household Food Security Report to identify where hunger is rising, how many families are skipping meals, and how many children go to bed hungry. Those numbers help her target resources and advocate for stronger programs.

Now there is no new data. The survey has been “suspended for review,” officially to allow for a “methodological reassessment” and cost analysis. Critics say the timing and language suggest political motives. It is one of many federal data programs quietly dropped under a Trump executive order on so-called “nonessential statistics,” a phrase that almost parodies itself. Labeling hunger data “nonessential” is like turning off a fire alarm because it makes too much noise; it implies that acknowledging food insecurity is optional and reveals more about the administration’s priorities than reality.

Keep ReadingShow less