The Key to Effective Lobbying in the United States

Among the many industries in the United States, the oil industry has found huge success in lobbying the Trump administration, mainly through financial means. Oil companies set themselves up for success before Trump was elected for his second term, donating millions of dollars to his campaign efforts. Oil company executives such as Harold Hamm, Kelcy Warren, Jeffrey Hildebrand, and Tim Dunn gave more than $16 million before Trump was elected in 2024 (Morenne and Eaton). The oil and gas industry altogether contributed nearly $70 million to the Republican Party from 2023 to 2024 (Oil & Gas Contributors – OpenSecrets).

These enormous donations were certainly a financial risk, but Trump responded favorably. The individual executives who funded Trump’s reelection “now enjoy extraordinary access to the White House” (Morenne and Dawsey). These executives frequently visit Trump and socialize with him, even being invited to his election celebration at Mar-a-Lago. Trump’s way of thanking oil executives goes beyond social privileges, though: their lobbying efforts brought them leniency and expanded drilling allowances.

For example, Kelcy Warren of Energy Transfer personally donated over $13 million to Trump and was rewarded with a permit extension for building a liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal (Morenne and Dawsey). This is a project that Energy Transfer LP had been working on for years, but the Biden administration denied the same permit extension that Trump later granted. Notably, Energy Transfer LP never dedicated a significant amount of money or effort to lobbying Democrats, giving only 2.84% of its lobbying funds to the Democratic Party in the 2020 election cycle and 14.09% in the 2022 cycle (Energy Transfer LP Recipients – OpenSecrets). Energy Transfer holds a strong allegiance to the Republican Party, which proves highly successful when Republicans are in power, as shown by Trump’s permit extension. However, by failing to lobby Democrats, the company limited its progress during the Biden administration. It raises the question: would their permit have been approved sooner had they invested more resources in lobbying the party in power?

Likewise, the American Petroleum Institute (API), a major oil lobbying group, complained of a lack of cooperation from the Biden administration, stating, among other claims, that “the Biden administration’s policies, actions, and rhetoric toward oil and natural gas have not helped production and could lead to future production shortfalls that would impact the economy and America’s energy security” (Green). However, evidence shows that the API has consistently given less than half the amount of lobbying funds to Democrats as it has to Republicans. With only $58,060 going to Democrats in 2020—and even less in 2022—there was little incentive for the Biden administration to support the industry (American Petroleum Institute Totals – OpenSecrets).

Meanwhile, the API donated $305,520 to Republicans in 2024, and, in exchange, oil and gas were labeled Trump’s “favorite industry” and were exempt from the 2025 tariff increases on imports (American Petroleum Institute Totals – OpenSecrets; Morenne and Dawsey). While the API’s substantial donations secured privileges from the Trump administration, they also limited the industry’s ability to gain legislative support during the Biden administration by failing to invest in lobbying Democrats.

Open Secrets: American Petroleum Institute Totals

Furthermore, it takes more than money to convince a party to stray from its values. The Democratic Party is widely known to support clean energy and other efforts to combat climate change, and pouring money into Democratic campaigns likely will not change that. Instead, there are multiple ways in which the oil and gas industry could lead information campaigns to gain support from Democratic candidates. It is true that “the Biden-Harris Administration [had] made tackling the climate crisis a top priority” (The White House). As this is also a somewhat universal goal, the U.S. will have to face the reality of the situation at some point, even if not all Americans are eager to. By failing to lobby Democrats at all, the oil and gas industry is failing to prepare for the inevitable transition.

Logistically, the switch to renewable power cannot be immediate. For instance, “the Texas power grid gets 38% of its electricity from renewable energy sources and 42% from natural gas plants. Although it’s heading in the right direction, eliminating fossil fuels overnight would lead to major power supply issues” (Just Energy). Because no president, including a Democrat, wants to cause power supply disruptions, policymakers will need to continue supporting the oil and gas industry to some extent for a smooth transition. By presenting evidence to Democrats about the need for a gradual and methodical transition—alongside the already proven method of financial lobbying—the oil and gas industry could potentially gain support from the Democratic Party.

It is not only the oil and gas industry that shows rigidity. Lobbying organizations, including the Solar Energy Industries Association and the National Hydropower Association, sent emails and letters to the Trump administration with requests but failed to back their efforts with significant financial contributions. In February 2025, the Solar Energy Industries Association sent an email lobbying Congress for tax credits on solar energy, which was unsuccessful (SEIA). Meanwhile, the organization donated less than half as much money to Republicans as it did to Democrats in the 2024 election cycle (Solar Energy Industries Association Totals – OpenSecrets). Similarly, after Trump was elected to his second term, the National Hydropower Association requested tax cuts and loosened development regulations despite donating just $500 to the Republican campaign in 2024 (Allen; National Hydropower Association Totals – OpenSecrets).

Unlike the oil and gas industry, the renewable energy sector did attempt to incorporate informational arguments into its lobbying through letters and emails. However, without meaningful financial contributions, it is not surprising that these efforts did not succeed.

Since these lobbying efforts were unsuccessful, these groups may need to adjust their strategies. For example, the Trump administration places strong emphasis on affordability for Americans, highlighting achievements such as the “wholesale price of a dozen eggs [being] down 67%, or $4.39, since the inauguration” and “real wages for blue-collar workers [rising] 1.4% over last year” (The White House). If economic benefits for citizens are a priority, renewable energy could align with those goals, considering that “in 2024, solar photovoltaics (PV) were, on average, 41% cheaper than the lowest-cost fossil fuel alternatives, while onshore wind projects were 53% cheaper” (Dhabi).

There is no guarantee that presenting this information would influence policymakers. However, rather than focusing primarily on financially lobbying Democrats while offering limited engagement with Republicans, renewable energy advocates might achieve better outcomes by combining financial contributions with targeted, evidence-based arguments that align with the priorities of both parties.

Industries and organizations that maintain less rigid partisan alignment and utilize both financial and informational strategies have often experienced greater lobbying success. The Renewable Fuels Association is a strong example. Since 1998, it has contributed relatively similar amounts to both parties and has adjusted its primary recipients depending on which party is in power.

Open Secrets: Renewable Fuels Association Totals

There is typically a clear pattern in the political direction organizations lean, with oil and gas companies supporting and receiving support from Republicans, and renewable energy companies supporting and receiving support from Democrats. The RFA therefore is expected to lean Democratic, but thanks to its flexible lobbying—as demonstrated in the graph—it has received significant Republican support as well. In 2025, the RFA lobbied “to allow uninterrupted sales of E15” in the summer months, which Trump fulfilled on his first day in office (“RFA thanks Trump administration”). This appealed to Republican values because E15 is not only a cleaner fuel option that releases fewer emissions, but it is also cheaper than alternatives (“University of California”).

Despite claims by the NHA and others that Trump is unwilling to support renewable energy, the RFA was extremely successful by going the extra mile that other renewable energy companies did not: they combined financial and strategic informational lobbying rather than relying solely on one method.

As demonstrated by the outcome of oil executives’ contributions to the Trump campaign, money talks. However, companies, lobbyists, and politicians alike seem to have overlooked the power and importance of other forms of lobbying, such as presenting information on what would benefit constituents. There is overwhelming evidence that financial lobbying is highly effective, but by failing to combine it with other strategies, money alone risks distorting government priorities.

In addition, too much commitment to a single political party has harmed multiple industries, while outlier groups that choose to cooperate with both parties and employ multiple lobbying methods—like the RFA—have been able to negotiate agreements that simultaneously benefit both the country and companies. By putting aside strict party allegiances and incorporating information-based lobbying, companies could make greater progress toward their goals and reduce the stop-and-start policy shifts that often occur with each new presidential cycle.

Works Cited:

  American Petroleum Institute. “Oil Production, Biden Policies and Risking Future Energy Security.” American Petroleum Institute, 16 Nov. 2023, https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-issues/blog/2023/11/16/oil-production-biden-policies-and-risking-future-energy-security. Accessed 24 July 2026.

American Petroleum Institute. “Oil Production, Biden Policies and Risking Future Energy Security.” American Petroleum Institute, 16 Nov. 2023, https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-issues/blog/2023/11/16/oil-production-biden-policies-and-risking-future-energy-security. Accessed 24 July 2026.

Biden White House. “The Record.” The White House (Archived), https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/therecord/. Accessed 24 July 2026.

The Wall Street Journal. “Donald Trump Energy Policy, Oil & Gas Donors.” The Wall Street Journal, https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/donald-trump-energy-policy-oil-gas-donors-1cbc98f6. Accessed 24 July 2026.

The Wall Street Journal. “Trump, Oil Industry Executives and Energy Policies.” The Wall Street Journal, https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-oil-industry-executives-policies-85eb74e6. Accessed 24 July 2026.

Hydropower Foundation. “What to Expect for U.S. Water Power in 2025.” Powerhouse, https://www.hydro.org/powerhouse/article/what-to-expect-for-u-s-water-power-in-2025/. Accessed 24 July 2026.

International Renewable Energy Agency. “91 Percent of New Renewable Projects Now Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels Alternatives.” IRENA, July 2025, https://www.irena.org/News/pressreleases/2025/Jul/91-Percent-of-New-Renewable-Projects-Now-Cheaper-Than-Fossil-Fuels-Alternatives. Accessed 24 July 2026.

Just Energy. “Fossil Fuels vs. Renewable Energy.” Just Energy, https://justenergy.com/blog/fossil-fuels-renewable-energy/. Accessed 24 July 2026.

OpenSecrets. “American Petroleum Institute: Organization Profile.” OpenSecrets, https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/american-petroleum-institute/totals?id=D000031493. Accessed 24 July 2026.

OpenSecrets. “Energy Industry Contributions, 2024 Cycle.” OpenSecrets, https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib?cycle=2024&ind=E01. Accessed 24 July 2026.

OpenSecrets. “Energy Transfer LP: Recipients.” OpenSecrets, https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/energy-transfer-lp/recipients?candscycle=2020&id=D000025688&toprecipscycle=2020&candscycle=2020. Accessed 24 July 2026.

OpenSecrets. “National Hydropower Association: Organization Profile.” OpenSecrets, https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-hydropower-assn/totals?id=D000054268. Accessed 24 July 2026.

OpenSecrets. “Renewable Fuels Association: Organization Profile.” OpenSecrets, https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/renewable-fuels-assn/totals?id=D000056027. Accessed 24 July 2026.

OpenSecrets. “Solar Energy Industries Association: Organization Profile.” OpenSecrets, https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/solar-energy-industries-assn/totals?id=D000029109. Accessed 24 July 2026.

Renewable Fuels Association. “RFA Thanks Trump Administration, EPA for Allowing Lower-Cost E15 This Summer.” Renewable Fuels Association, Apr. 2025, https://ethanolrfa.org/media-and-news/category/news-releases/article/2025/04/rfa-thanks-trump-administration-epa-for-allowing-lower-cost-e15-this-summer. Accessed 24 July 2026.

Renewable Fuels Association. “University of California Research Shows Emissions-Reducing Benefits of E15 Blend.” Renewable Fuels Association, June 2023, https://ethanolrfa.org/media-and-news/category/news-releases/article/2023/06/university-of-california-research-shows-emissions-reducing-benefits-of-e15-blend. Accessed 24 July 2026.

Solar Energy Industries Association. “Letter to Congress.” Solar Energy Industries Association, 5 Feb. 2025, https://seia.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Feb-5_Letter-to-Congress-1.pdf. Accessed 24 July 2026.

The White House. “Economy.” The White House, https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/economy/. Accessed 24 July 2026.

The White House. “Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government's Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects.” The White House, Jan. 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/temporary-withdrawal-of-all-areas-on-the-outer-continental-shelf-from-offshore-wind-leasing-and-review-of-the-federal-governments-leasing-and-permitting-practices-for-wind-projects/. Accessed 24 July 2026.