This week, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works held a major hearing examining federal environmental review and permitting, reinforcing what energy producers, labor unions and infrastructure developers have been saying for years: America’s permitting system is broken, outdated, and failing to keep pace with the nation’s energy and infrastructure needs.

Chairman Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) opened the hearing by stressing the cost of inaction:

“Without congressional action, we will continue to see the pattern of the last two decades. Each new administration will reverse the policies of the last, eroding trust of American businesses and workers and ensuring we cannot plan or build for either the present or for our future.”

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) echoed the urgency and reaffirmed bipartisan intent:

“I still want to pass bipartisan Senate permitting reform. I know we can expedite the permitting process with sound bipartisan ideas.”

Senator John Curtis (R-UT) equally reinforced concerns:

“The status quo is just not working… projects that are clearly in the public interest are taking years or even decades.”

Industry Leaders Unite Behind Reform

A wide range of witnesses, including labor, oil and natural gas executives, renewable energy advocates, state energy officials, and the broader business community, agreed that the current system is delaying investment and undermining U.S. competitiveness.

Across sectors, stakeholders emphasized that the solutions must deliver enforceable timelines, fewer duplicative reviews, limits on litigation abuse, and certainty that once a project is approved, it can move forward. These priorities have remained consistent as energy demand and infrastructure needs intensify.

For instance, Brendan Bechtel of Business Roundtable underscored the scale of the challenge, citing a 2025 McKinsey federal permitting analysis showing roughly $1.5 trillion in investments stalled in the federal permitting queue and $100 to $140 billion loses each year in unrealized returns due to prolonged delays.

Dustin Meyer from the American Petroleum Institute summarized the core imbalance:

“Energy demand is growing and its growing faster than our ability to build the infrastructure needed to meet it”

Meyer explained the current permitting framework discourages new investment by allowing years of delay even after agencies complete technical reviews and issue approvals. He pointed to litigation reform and updates to Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act as key steps toward predictable outcomes and reforms.

The Human Cost: Workers and Consumers Pay the Price

Witnesses repeatedly stressed that permitting delays are not abstract policy problems; they have direct consequences for workers, families, and consumers.

Brent Booker, General President of the Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA) put the human impact plainly:

“For our members this is not politics: these are paychecks, healthcare, and retirement money…stalling means another day without a paycheck.”

As projects are delayed, construction costs rise as materials and labor become more expensive over time. Some projects are ultimately canceled, while others move forward only by passing higher costs on to consumers. Even after approvals are granted, the unpredictability of the system makes long-term planning more difficult for workers, employers, and communities alike. David S. Terry, President of the National Association of State Energy Officials, explained:

“From an affordability perspective, the unpredictability is a hidden tax.”

These real-world impacts help explain the growing bipartisan focus on improving permitting outcomes. That focus has been reflected in recent federal actions, including the USDA Forest Service’s finalized revisions to its oil and gas leasing rules for National Forest System lands. Announcing the update, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins emphasized the importance of clarity and coordination in the permitting process:

“Energy security is national security. These revisions create clarity and alignment across federal agencies, allowing our teams to move swiftly on leasing and permitting so American families and businesses can rely on affordable, dependable energy, while continuing to be good stewards of our public lands.”

Global Competition and the Cost of Inaction

Several senators framed permitting reform as a matter of competitiveness, not merely a domestic policy concern. Senator Whitehouse warned that global competitors are moving far faster to build energy infrastructure:

“China, since January of 2022 has added more to its grid than the entire US energy grid as it exists… if we are in a race it is hard to see who we are winning.”

That’s not just about watts and pipelines. It’s about economic influence and national security. Recently, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said that the world needs to more than double oil production to address energy poverty. Wright’s remarks underscored a growing tension: as global energy needs accelerate, America’s permitting system continues to delay the infrastructure required to meet them.

Without faster project approvals, the United States risks ceding critical infrastructure development to competitors like China who are already building at scale.

As Terry cautioned, when projects relocate to foreign countries due to permitting uncertainty, the economic benefits do not return:

“If things go overseas, we lose them forever.”

Without permitting reform and the ability to build at scale, the United States will struggle to maintain its global influence in an increasingly competitive energy landscape.

Building on Progress

The Senate hearing builds on broader momentum to modernize permitting through both legislative and administrative efforts. Hearings in Fall 2025 on the SPEED Act highlighted bipartisan agreement that the NEPA process has become outdated and inefficient, and the bill’s passage in the House marked a meaningful step toward reform. Recent agency actions, including USDA’s updated leasing rules, further reflect recognition that permitting must be more predictable and timely to keep pace with rising energy demand.

At the same time, witnesses and senators were clear that executive action alone is not enough. The consistent message throughout the hearing was that durable reform must be enacted in law to provide certainty across administrations and restore long-term confidence for workers, consumers, and investors alike.

Bottom Line: Permitting reform has moved from partisan talking points to bipartisan priority. Senators and industry voices were clear that only congressional action can provide certainty across sectors. Without reform, investment stalls and affordability and competitiveness weaken. But with permitting solutions, the United States can meet growing energy demand and build the infrastructure in which the economy depends.