Internet-driven schadenfreude politics — what political scientists call negative partisanship — prevents Congress from addressing even the most pressing national problems. Facing the biggest national energy crisis since the 1970s, Congress has repeatedly failed to enact permitting reform because each party hates the other party’s legislative “wins” more than they love their own.
Readers of this blog know that growth in demand for electricity is racing far ahead of supply growth, risking a national version of the kind of electricity crisis that struck California in 2000-01. There is no shortage of investment-driven projects for new generation plants and transmission lines, but regulatory veto gates slow or kill many of those projects. And Congress’ attempts to enact bipartisan legislation streamlining permitting for new energy projects keeps failing because some Republicans refuse to support anything that aids in the development of renewable energy, and some Democrats refuse to support anything that aids in the development of fossil fueled energy.
I wrote about this sort of schadenfreude politics in connection permitting reform 18 months ago, in a piece prognosticating about the 2024 Manchin-Barrasso permitting reform bill. I wrote about it again more recently in connection with the Hickenlooper-Peters permitting reform bill that remains before Congress. Most recently, it is the bipartisan version of the SPEED Act that has succumbed to schadenfreude politics.
Among other things, the SPEED Act would prohibit the executive branch from revoking or suspending already-issued permits for energy projects except in very limited circumstances. Republicans don’t want Democrats revoking fossil fuel permits, and Democrats don’t want Republicans revoking renewable energy project permits, something President Trump did recently with offshore wind projects in the North Atlantic. The House passed the SPEED Act last month, but not before destroying the bipartisan bargain by excluding renewable energy from many of its protections and benefits. Presumably, House Republicans feared the wrath of MAGA voters who share President Trump’s aversion to renewable energy.
A few days later Trump ordered a halt to already-permitted offshore wind projects, prompting a legal challenge from Dominion Energy and a strong rebuke from moderate Democrats in Congress. Even though courts are reinstating those permits, one by one, congressional Republicans continue to fear crossing the President on this issue. Which has led Democrats to walk away from the negotiating table on permitting reform more generally.
Schadenfreude politics seems to be winning again.
Doing what is popular is difficult in a world of safe seats. In that world, primary voters control election outcomes and members of Congress care most about pleasing their party’s extremists and bitter partisans, and less about pleasing their average constituents. So instead of the kind of durable energy and climate policies that come from bipartisan dialogue, we can look forward to a future of policy oscillation when the White House changes partisan hands: oscillations of increasing amplitude as each party tries to please the primary voters on its extremes.
These electoral incentives push Republicans to attack clean energy in unpopular ways, and Democrats to attack fossil fuels (particularly natural gas) in unpopular ways. Until these structural problems in our democracy are remedied, leaders will preserve their political futures by demonstrating contempt for what the other side likes, rather than sitting down to solve problems. And so goes permitting reform. — David Spence
