Senate Hands Trump a Powerful Win to Advance His Energy Sector Goals.
Senate Hands Trump a Powerful Win to Advance His Energy Sector Goals.
WASHINGTON, D.C.
— The Trump administration’s “American Energy Dominance” agenda remains the core effort to strengthen the U.S. energy sector through increased domestic production of oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear power, and critical minerals, alongside aggressive deregulation and faster permitting.
The push began on day one with a national energy emergency declaration and the executive order “Unleashing American Energy,” which reopened federal lands and offshore areas, accelerated approvals, and prioritized a “drill, baby, drill” philosophy. And the president and Republicans are not slowing down. As of mid-July 2026, the administration's agenda heavily emphasizes fossil fuel expansion, coal revival, nuclear growth, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) streamlining, and baseload grid reliability to support economic and AI-driven demand.
While official sources highlight record production and permitting wins, independent reports note the subsequent impacts on renewables investment.
I. Senate Overwhelmingly Passes Nuclear Energy Package
In a massive legislative victory for the administration's agenda, the U.S. Senate voted overwhelmingly to pass a key piece of legislation aimed at bolstering the country’s nuclear energy sector. The bill passed by a decisive vote of 88-2, with only Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) opposing the measure.
The nuclear package was combined with another bill that reauthorized the U.S. Fire Administration and grant programs for firefighters.
The measure aims to accelerate the approval process for new nuclear plants as many of the country’s existing plants reach the end of their serviceable lives. Additionally, it significantly reduces the licensing fees that power companies must pay to initiate projects. It also mandates the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to prepare a report examining ways to simplify and expedite the environmental review process.
In tandem with the Senate's action, President Trump has issued four executive orders directing the NRC to streamline regulations and expedite the issuance of new licenses for nuclear power facilities, acting on applications within an 18-month timeframe. The United States was formerly the world leader in nuclear design and construction, but delays and exorbitant prices allowed China—which is currently building a record number of reactors—to capture that position. The new directives aim to expedite federal permitting for new nuclear projects and implement cost-cutting strategies to reduce the NRC’s regulatory footprint.
II. The Homeowner Energy Freedom Act
While the Senate focuses on nuclear power, a separate federal bill that could lower the cost of new homes by repealing energy efficiency programs is currently headed to the upper chamber.
The House bill, led by Fort Worth Republican Congressman Craig Goldman, aggressively targets and eliminates energy rules for home appliances that were put in place by the Biden administration. Goldman argues that the Biden administration’s expensive mandates have artificially inflated housing costs, making homeownership feel out of reach for many Americans. Proponents estimate that the law could let house prices drop by as much as $31,000.
“Affordability is way more than just a buzzword,” Goldman stated. “How do we decrease housing costs? How do we decrease oil and gas prices, like I mentioned? How do we decrease healthcare costs? You know, big issues that affect people in my district.”
The proposed *Homeowner Energy Freedom Act* would make it easier to install gas stoves and water heaters in new homes. If the bill passes the Senate and is signed by the president, the Department of Energy will be stripped of programs that reward low- and middle-income homes for utilizing specific, highly efficient electricity projects.
Furthermore, the legislation would end federal grants for training contractors in home energy efficiency and halt assistance to state and local governments for adopting strict building energy codes. The bill has garnered broad support, with representatives from both parties sponsoring the measure, including Texas Republicans Dan Crenshaw and Jake Ellzey.
Goldman, who made it a priority to undo Biden-era rules on the House Energy and Commerce Committee during his first year, noted that his main goals for his second year on Capitol Hill remain focused on broader affordability. He is hopeful the Senate will “swiftly” pass the legislation to deliver economic relief.
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
