‘Take On The Resistance’: Who Could Trump Tap To Help Cement His ‘Drill, Baby, Drill’ Agenda?

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

Former President Donald Trump has promised to revitalize and unleash the American energy sector if he returns to the White House in 2025, and has a plethora of former officials and new faces he could tap for key executive branch roles.

The Biden administration has utilized executive agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Department of Energy (DOE) to implement many of the key policies driving its sprawling climate agenda. These agencies will be crucial to any effort by a prospective Trump administration to undo President Joe Biden’s energy legacy and execute Trump’s “drill, baby, drill” agenda.

Several insiders with extensive experience in Republican energy politics speculated to the Daily Caller News Foundation as to who Trump could pick to lead that charge if he wins in November.

“I am really impressed by the number of former Trump officials, as well as people who have not served before who are also interested in doing so in the future who have reached out to inquire about my prior experience or the process,” David Bernhardt, who served as the secretary of the interior during the latter half of Trump’s first term, told the DCNF. “If President Trump wins, he’s going to have droves of capable people to choose from to fill his political appointments this time around — a lot of seasoned veterans, and also a lot of people with new, fresh ideas. I think that’s very exciting and bodes well for the president’s second term and for our country.”

When asked how he would bring down the cost of goods such as gas, Trump says, "Drill baby, drill!" pic.twitter.com/cVjqzjeaAJ

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) May 11, 2023

However, the Trump campaign told the DCNF that internal discussions about who may fill these roles have not started.

“There have been no such discussions about who will serve in a second Trump Administration,” Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign’s national press secretary, told the DCNF. “When the time comes, President Trump will choose the best possible people to implement his America First agenda.”

Whoever Trump selects to lead the EPA will have to confront an agency that has been juiced with thousands of new employees and promulgated numerous major regulations. The Biden administration has used the EPA to advance some of its most aggressive environmental policies, which include a major green power plants regulation, electric vehicle (EV) mandates, stringent fine particulate matter emissions rules and more.

At least some of these rules figure to be on the chopping block if Trump returns to office, as the former president has already pledged to walk back EV regulations.

Andrew Wheeler, who helmed the agency between 2019 and 2021, could be tapped to take the reins again if Trump wins in November, one energy expert, who wishes to not be publicly identified, speculated to the DCNF.

Others who may be under consideration include Mandy Gunasekara, who served variously as EPA chief of staff, principal deputy assistant administrator and senior policy advisor during Trump’s first term.

“I have a beautiful community in Oxford, Mississippi, and it would be very hard to leave. Plus, the idea of going back into a hostile situation away from my children and the ‘Bible girls’ is hard pill to pill to swallow. Ultimately, that’s a bridge I’ll cross if I get there,” Gunasekara told the DCNF. “Andrew Wheeler is a very experienced leader at EPA and would no doubt faithfully execute the President’s agenda again.”

Myron Ebell, a recently-retired energy policy expert formerly at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and a member of the Trump EPA transition team, believes that Gunasekara and Wheeler “would both be great choices,” he told the DCNF.

“I think it’s inappropriate to discuss a position I may be offered,” Wheeler told the DCNF when contacted for this story.

Another name to watch is Anne Vogel, who currently runs the Ohio EPA, according to the energy expert. Prior to taking that role, Vogel worked for the American Electric Power Company, handling federal regulatory matters in Washington, and she also has experience working at a private law firm.

“Director Anne Vogel currently has no intention of leaving her position at Ohio EPA,” a spokesperson for the agency told the DCNF.

Notably, Vogel testified to Congress in March 2023 about the train derailment and subsequent chemical burn-off that marred the skies of East Palestine, Ohio, in February 2023.

“I think that we’re going to need people that are committed to reforming these agencies and advancing the Trump agenda, which is basically unleashing the energy sector, and that includes the coal industry, oil and gas and everything else,” Steve Milloy, a senior legal fellow for the Energy and Environmental Legal Institute and a former member of the Trump EPA transition team, told the DCNF. “They’ve got to be willing to take on the resistance. And in Trump one, people weren’t necessarily willing or prepared to take on the resistance, and there’s going to be a lot of resistance.”

EPA Chief Insists His Agency Has Not Sent ‘One Dime’ To Hardline Left-Wing Org — But There’s A $50 Million Problemhttps://t.co/BXjlAkuWup

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) July 11, 2024

‘Full Speed Ahead’

As the agency in charge of managing America’s federally-controlled lands and waters, DOI has a major role to play in the American energy sector given that it leases millions of onshore and offshore acres to oil and gas developers. Under Biden and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, DOI has taken numerous actions to restrict development on millions of acres of American land and issued a bare-bones leasing schedule for offshore oil and gas extraction in the Gulf of Mexico, for example.

In light of Trump’s calls to “drill, baby, drill,” the DOI’s approach to natural resource management is likely to change dramatically from its current attitude as part of the Biden administration.

Tom Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, told the DCNF to keep an eye on Republican Govs. Mike Dunleavy of Alaska and Doug Burgum of North Dakota as possible leaders of DOI under a prospective second Trump presidency. However, Burgum may be in play for other positions, such as secretary of the interior or perhaps a high-level White House role, Pyle told the DCNF.

A representative for Burgum referred the DCNF to the Trump campaign.

Both McKenna and Ebell indicated that Bernhardt could be a good fit to return to the top job at DOI should he and Trump have mutual interest. For his part, Bernhardt declined to comment about whether he wants to get back into the fray or specific roles he would ostensibly have interest in filling during a second Trump term.

Pyle said he does not expect Trump to feel an obligation to stick to the establishment when selecting his political appointees.

“It’s clear with President Trump’s vice presidential pick [J.D. Vance] that he no longer feels compelled to extend an olive branch to the GOP establishment,” Pyle told the DCNF. “It’s Trump’s party now, and he chose someone who he thinks will best help implement his agenda.”

Mike McKenna, a GOP strategist with extensive energy sector experience, agreed that Dunleavy and Burgum could each be the type of person to run the DOI for Trump if called upon to do so.

“I hope they will go full speed ahead on restoring or increasing energy production in the federal estate” regardless of who Trump might pick for the top job if he wins, Ebell told the DCNF. “But I also hope that they will focus and put some effort into improving federal land management.”

Ebell floated former Alaska Republican Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell as a possibility should he have interest. He also said that Republican Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming and Mike Lee of Utah would both do well in the position, in his view, but that they may both be too valuable as seasoned legislators to make the jump to the executive branch.

“Senator Barrasso is focused on working for the people of Wyoming and passing President Trump’s agenda in the U.S. Senate,” a Barrasso spokesperson told the DCNF.

SEN. HAWLEY: "Jobs for blue-collar workers in this nation are valuable resources…Why should those things…be sacrificed in favor of your agenda for radical climate change?"

HAALAND: "I know that there's like 1.9 jobs for every American in the country…There's a lot of jobs."… pic.twitter.com/n21gostPdE

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) May 2, 2023

‘Dark Horse’

Choosing a successor for Jennifer Granholm to lead the DOE will be another key decision for Trump should he prevail this November.

Among other initiatives, the Biden DOE has pushed regulations promoting energy efficient appliances, a broad building decarbonization agenda and sought to loan huge sums of taxpayer cash to green energy companies since 2021.

McKenna, who is plugged into both the energy industry and GOP politics, flagged several possible candidates to look out for.

Paul Dabbar, who served as the under secretary for science at DOE during Trump’s first term, could be an option, with McKenna pointing to his managerial skills as a strength that could appeal to Trump. Dabbar declined to comment when contacted for this story.

McKenna also identified Burgum as a possible option for DOE, but like Pyle, McKenna believes that Burgum could be called on to take any number of roles, stretching from DOE to the White House or even the Department of Commerce, should he have interest in serving in a possible second Trump administration.

One “dark horse” possibility to watch is Bill Cooper, who currently works for Golden Pass LNG as vice president and general counsel, McKenna said. In addition to his private sector mettle, Cooper has experience at DOE, having served in the agency for about two years in various senior roles during Trump’s first term, making him a possible candidate should he have interest in the gig.

Ebell is not discounting the possibility that Trump may dip into the private sector to find his potential energy secretary.

“I think looking in the private sector makes sense,” Ebell told the DCNF. “It makes a lot of sense if it’s somebody who isn’t part of the subsidy chain, who isn’t part of the corporate welfare world, special interests who get money under the so-called Inflation Reduction Act, or other DOE programs.”

Cooper, Treadwell, Lee’s office and Dunleavy’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Related Topics:#DailyCaller #NickPope TrumpEnergyPolicy TrumpPlanToDrill

Up Next

Defiant Trump to hold rally at same place he was shot at in Butler, Pennsylvania

Don't Miss

FBI Director Christopher Wray uses Trump assassination attempt to attack encryption

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Trump Moves To Reverse Biden’s Green New Deal Agenda — With A Special Focus On Wind

illegal immigration / 2 hours ago

Trump directs feds to target cartels that threaten homeland security

Business / 3 hours ago

Debunking the myth of the ‘new economy’

Daily Caller

Trump Moves To Reverse Biden’s Green New Deal Agenda — With A Special Focus On Wind

Published on January 22, 2025

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

Shares of big Danish offshore wind developer Orsted dropped by 17% Monday, the same day President Donald Trump took the oath of office to become the 47^th president of the United States. The two events are not merely coincidental with one another.

To be sure, Orsted’s loss of market cap was caused by several factors, including both the general slowing of the offshore wind business, and Orsted’s own announcement that it will incur a $1.69 billion impairment charge related to its Sunrise Wind project off the coast of New York. Company CEO Mads Nipper attributed the charge to delays and cost increases and said the project completion date is now delayed to the second half of 2027.

But there can be little doubt that the raft of energy-related executive orders signed by Trump also contributed to the drop in Orsted’s stock price. As part of a Day 1 agenda consisting of a reported 196 executive orders, the new president took dead aim at reversing the Biden Green New Deal agenda in general, with a special focus on wind power projects on federal lands and waters.

In addition to general orders declaring a national energy emergency and pulling the United States out of the Paris Climate Accords (for a second time), Trump signed a separate order titled, “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.” That long-winded title (pardon the pun) is quite descriptive of what the order is designed to accomplish.

Section 1 of this order withdraws “from disposition for wind energy leasing all areas within the Offshore Continental Shelf (OCS) as defined in section 2 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C. 1331.” Somewhat ironically, this is the same OCSLA cited in early January by former President Joe Biden when he set 625 million acres of federal offshore waters off limits to oil and gas leasing and drilling into perpetuity.

As with Biden’s LNG permitting pause, the fourth paragraph of Section 1 in Trump’s order states that “Nothing in this withdrawal affects rights under existing leases in the withdrawn areas.” However, the same paragraph goes on to subject those existing leases to review by the secretary of the Interior, who is charged with conducting “a comprehensive review of the ecological, economic, and environmental necessity of terminating or amending any existing wind energy leases, identifying any legal bases for such removal, and submit a report with recommendations to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy.”

Observant readers will know that the parameters of this order as it relates to offshore wind are essentially the same as a proposal I suggested in a previous piece here on Jan. 1. So, obviously, it receives the Blackmon Seal of Approval.

But we should also note that Trump goes even further, extending this freeze to onshore wind projects as well. While the rationale for the freeze in offshore leasing and permitting cites factors unique to the offshore like harm to marine mammals, ocean currents and the marine fishing industry, the rationale supporting the onshore freeze cites “environmental impact and cost to surrounding communities of defunct and idle windmills and deliver a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, with their findings and recommended authorities to require the removal of such windmills.”

This gets at concerns long held by me and many others that neither the federal government nor any state government has seen fit to require the proper, complete tear down and safe disposal of these massive wind turbines, blades, towers and foundations once they outlive their useful lives. In most jurisdictions, wind operators are free to just abandon the projects and leave the equipment to dilapidate and rot.

The dirty secret of the wind industry, whether onshore or offshore, is that it is not sustainable without consistent new injections of more and more subsidies, along with the tacit refusal by governments to properly regulate its operations. Trump and his team understand this reality and should be applauded for taking real action to address it.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Business

Debunking the myth of the ‘new economy’

Published on January 22, 2025

Todayville

From Resource Works

Where the money comes from isn’t hard to see – if you look at the facts

In British Columbia, the economy is sometimes discussed through the lens of a “new economy” focused on urbanization, high-tech innovation, and creative industries. However, this perspective frequently overlooks the foundational role that the province’s natural resource industries play in generating the income that fuels public services, infrastructure, and daily life.

The Economic Reality

British Columbia’s economy is highly urbanized, with 85% of the population living in urban areas as of the 2021 Census, concentrated primarily in the Lower Mainland and the Capital Regional District.
These metropolitan regions contribute significantly to economic activity, particularly in population-serving sectors like retail, healthcare, and education. However, much of the province’s income—what we call the “first dollar”—originates in the non-metropolitan resource regions.

Natural resources remain the backbone of British Columbia’s economy. Industries such as forestry, mining, energy, and agriculture generate export revenue that flows into the provincial economy, supporting urban and rural communities alike. These sectors are not only vital for direct employment but also underpin metropolitan economic activities through the export income they generate.

They also pay taxes, fees, royalties, and more to governments, thus supporting public services and programs.

Exports: The Tap Filling the Economic Bathtub

The analogy of a bathtub aptly describes the provincial economy:

Exports are the water entering the tub, representing income from goods and services sold outside the province.
Imports are the water draining out, as money leaves the province to purchase external goods and services.
The population-serving sector circulates water within the tub, but it depends entirely on the level of water maintained by exports.

In British Columbia, international exports have historically played a critical role. In 2022, the province exported $56 billion worth of goods internationally, led by forestry products, energy, and minerals. While metropolitan areas may handle the logistics and administration of these exports, the resources themselves—and the wealth they generate—are predominantly extracted and processed in rural and resource-rich regions.

Metropolitan Contributions and Limitations

Although metropolitan regions like Vancouver and Victoria are often seen as economic powerhouses, they are not self-sustaining engines of growth. These cities rely heavily on income generated by resource exports, which enable the public services and infrastructure that support urban living. Without the wealth generated in resource regions, the urban economy would struggle to maintain its standard of living.

For instance, while tech and creative industries are growing in prominence, they remain a smaller fraction of the provincial economy compared to traditional resource industries. The resource sectors accounted for nearly 9% of provincial GDP in 2022, while the tech sector contributed approximately 7%.

Moreover, resource exports are critical for maintaining a positive trade balance, ensuring that the “economic bathtub” remains full.

A Call for Balanced Economic Policy

Policymakers and urban leaders must recognize the disproportionate contribution of British Columbia’s resource regions to the provincial economy. While urban areas drive innovation and service-based activities, these rely on the income generated by resource exports. Efforts to increase taxation or regulatory burdens on resource industries risk undermining the very foundation of provincial prosperity.

Furthermore, metropolitan regions should actively support resource-based industries through partnerships, infrastructure development, and advocacy. A balanced economic strategy—rooted in both urban and resource region contributions—is essential to ensure long-term sustainability and equitable growth across British Columbia.

At least B.C. Premier David Eby has begun to promise that “a new responsible, sustainable development of natural resources will be a core focus of our government,” and has told resource leaders that “Our government will work with you to eliminate unnecessary red tape and bureaucratic processes.” Those leaders await the results.

Conclusion

British Columbia’s prosperity is deeply interconnected, with urban centres and resource regions playing complementary roles. However, the evidence is clear: the resource sectors, particularly in the northern half of the province, remain the primary engines of economic growth. Acknowledging and supporting these industries is not only fair but also critical to sustaining the provincial economy and the public services that benefit all British Columbians.