The energy and natural resource sector has poured nearly \$240 million into federal lobbying during the first half of 2025, according to data from OpenSecrets, placing it as the fifth-largest lobbying sector so far this year. This surge in spending aligns with a series of major policy victories for the fossil fuel industry under the Trump administration, even as environmental and renewable energy initiatives face mounting setbacks.

Electric utilities led the charge, spending close to \$75 million—more than half of their total for all of 2024, which had been the industry’s most expensive lobbying year in over a decade. The oil and gas industry followed closely behind, spending approximately \$71 million in the first two quarters. While slightly behind its 2024 pace, when lobbying costs exceeded \$150 million, oil and gas still far outpaces renewable energy groups, which have collectively spent just \$40 million this year.

Despite the high numbers, watchdog organizations argue that these figures tell only part of the story. The apparent efficiency in lobbying spending, they suggest, is less about budget cuts and more about the existing influence the fossil fuel industry already wields within the federal government. Many officials occupying key roles in the current administration, including within the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy, have strong ties to oil, gas, and utility companies. This embedded influence, critics contend, reduces the industry’s need to aggressively lobby for favorable policy—it’s already being shaped from within.

Under the Trump administration, fossil fuel interests have seen an unprecedented wave of support. Legislation such as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” has opened millions of acres of federal lands for drilling and mining, while scaling back regulatory oversight. The bill also included a phaseout of key tax credits for wind and solar energy, creating significant obstacles for renewable development.

Additionally, fossil fuel-powered plants have been granted exemptions from Clean Air Act requirements, delaying mandates to reduce emissions of mercury and other harmful pollutants. The administration has announced plans to rescind the EPA’s endangerment finding for greenhouse gases, a move that would dismantle the legal foundation for regulating emissions across major industries, including transportation and power generation.

Wind energy has faced particularly strong opposition. A presidential memorandum signed on Trump’s first day in office halted approvals and financing for both onshore and offshore wind projects. In an unusual move, the administration later issued stop-work orders on several offshore wind farms that were already under construction, signaling a clear retreat from federal support for renewable infrastructure.

While lobbying spending remains high, the industry’s access to decision-makers appears to be a more decisive factor in shaping policy outcomes. Nearly half of the 2,200 lobbyists registered for the energy and natural resources sector are former government employees, many of whom now work on behalf of the very industries they once regulated. This “revolving door” has created a network of influence that watchdogs believe undermines democratic processes and favors industry agendas over environmental and public health considerations.

Insiders within the oil and gas sector suggest that the administration’s alignment with fossil fuel priorities predates any specific lobbying efforts. They argue that the current regulatory environment reflects a long-standing ideological alignment rather than transactional lobbying success. Still, they acknowledge that working with officials who are more familiar with and sympathetic to the industry’s needs has reduced the effort required to influence key policy decisions.

While fossil fuel companies continue to face policy debates—such as ongoing negotiations over tax credits for clean hydrogen projects—the general political climate remains highly favorable. Critics maintain that this favorable stance has allowed the industry to achieve major policy goals with less resistance, raising questions about the balance of influence in Washington and the future of renewable energy under current leadership.