The Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act is a grand bargain rooted in national security—passing it now is the right approach to address energy costs.
By Devon Lammert, Associate, SAFE’s Government Relations and Skip Estes, Senior Director, SAFE’s Government Relations
The midterm election this week has delivered decisive control of the U.S. House and Senate to Democrats. They’re now faced with the same dilemma that Republicans faced in 2024 for a permitting bill: “We’ve won both chambers, so why don’t we wait until next year to get a better deal?”
The preamble of the Constitution includes among the primary purposes of American government the responsibility to, “provide for the common defence, [and] promote the general Welfare.” Both of these foundational charges are under threat due to the burdensome, byzantine federal permitting process. Fortunately, the last several Congresses have attempted some style of permitting reform varying in ambition and scope. The most recent iteration, the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA), introduced this fall represents a broad compromise between Republicans and Democrats. Most importantly, this bill proposes permitting improvements for sectors critical to national security, like critical minerals, grid infrastructure, and all forms of power generation. While previous permitting reform proposals have fallen prey to a difficult federal policy environment, this time may be different.
In 2024, Senators Manchin and Barrasso’s Energy Permitting Reform Act (EPRA) would have reversed Biden-era policies unfavorable to fossil projects in exchange for transmission permitting reforms that Democrats sought to bolster the grid. Before EPRA, a suite of permitting reform provisions to accelerate agency timelines and reduce review complexity were included in the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA), albeit as a slimmer version than advocates initially proposed.
In both these cases, politics complicated their advancement. While EPRA was a horse-trading deal where both parties would have secured some big wins that the other party was inclined to resist, changing political dynamics following the 2024 election tempted Republicans with the opportunity to pass a more expansive reform bill in the 119th Congress. Even though the Fiscal Responsibility Act made it marginally easier to get steel in the ground through modest reforms, it had to be attached to a must-pass debt ceiling deal to advance to President Biden’s desk. The Fiscal Responsibility Act was a good start. Even back then SAFE was pushing permitting reform as a means to meet national security objectives, but it was not the comprehensive package that we needed and now have within reach.
In some ways, BAAJA is like Manchin and Barasso’s EPRA. It is a combination of mostly partisan priorities that collectively amount to a 50-50 deal that allows both parties to secure their favored reforms. Democrats get transmission reform and certainty that solar and wind project permits cannot be rolled back once granted. Republicans get major changes to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and tweaks to the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Historic Preservation Act.
The comparison to EPRA can seem like a grim portent given its ultimate fate. While post-midterm politics could easily doom BAAJA as well, a lot has changed in the last two years.
In 2024, the U.S. was increasingly facing the shortcomings of an aging grid and the downsides of relying on an adversarial China for the bulk of our critical minerals. Two years later, the picture has not meaningfully improved. Polls across the political spectrum show that 70+ percent of voters see high energy costs as one of the fundamental components of their frustration with the current government. Meanwhile, critical mineral export controls implemented by the Chinese Communist Party in 2025 revealed how much leverage the U.S. allows its chief adversary to hold as domestic resources continue to go undeveloped. Something needs to be done, and BAAJA would make enormous progress towards solving both problems in the coming years. Unlike previous permitting reform attempts, the stakes have become much more real to families and politicians alike.
Now that a month has passed since BAAJA’s introduction, opposition has surfaced from a range of groups that oppose resource extraction or whose interests focus on blocking project development. But now is not the time to hit the brakes—or worse, fall into the “EPRA trap” and expect a better deal to be negotiated by the incoming congress. First, this bill is still a grand bargain between four of the most aggressive negotiators in both parties. Second, deals take time—this bill was crafted over the entirety of this congress, and an incoming congress would need to start from scratch. Finally, Democrats who want to start over on a more climate focused energy bill should bear in mind that much of their new majority is composed of members from historically red districts. We should anticipate many of these members in both chambers to be focused on energy pragmatism, or reflect the interests of major energy producing states.
Another variable is that many of the bill’s reforms are vital to long-term national security, and passing them is not something the United States can afford to delay.
SAFE’s Energy Security Leadership Council said it best in a recent letter to House and Senate Leadership, “If the United States cannot build the infrastructure required for economic growth and technological leadership, it will become increasingly dependent on foreign nations for the materials, energy, and manufacturing capabilities critical to our prosperity and security.” The need to secure energy and mineral supply chains has been covered at length within committee hearings and bipartisan proposals this Congress, and permitting reform is perhaps the most foundational step needed to turn talk into action.
The U.S. defense industrial base needs two things beyond all else: energy and secure critical supply chains. Defense companies cannot build missiles, drones, and fighter jets without critical minerals like aluminum, lithium, cobalt, and tungsten. Domestically producing these materials requires a permitting process that allows for new mines and processing facilities to move forward expeditiously, and electricity to fuel melters and factories. BAAJA would help with both.
Considering the massive policy wins for both parties within the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, permitting reform has never been more doable nor more vital. Democrats and Republicans alike should not wait. SAFE is eager to see this bill pass through the halls of Congress and advance to President Trump’s desk.
Twitter
