Fueling The Conversation, Week of June 2nd, 2025
After signing 17 energy-related executive orders on his first day in office, President Trump continues to pursue cuts to the “blue tape” that limits consumer choice and makes it more costly to produce energy.
On May 9, the Trump administration issued an executive order to fight overcriminalization in federal regulations, which discourages criminal enforcement of regulatory offenses and prioritizes only those who knowingly violate regulations and cause significant harm. According to the order, “The Code of Federal Regulations contains over 48,000 sections, stretching over 175,000 pages — far too vast for any citizen to fully comprehend, much less be criminally convicted over violations.” Over the years, these regulations have become even more difficult for businesses and individuals to keep track of as agencies stretched their mandates beyond what was dictated by statutory law. Fortunately, the Supreme Court recognized this problem in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which it reclaimed its authority to issue a judgment about whether an agency action exceeds statutory limits — in contrast to its policy of giving bureaucrats the benefit of the doubt under the now defunct Chevron deference precedent.
The mountain of federal regulations on the books makes it nearly impossible for Americans to operate a business without accidentally violating a regulation and, consequently, being branded a criminal. This risk is exceedingly high for energy producers, who face regulatory burdens greater than most industries.
An incident of this kind occurred in the 2010 case United States v. Apollo Energies, where the Tenth Circuit Court ruled that violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act were “strict liability” crimes, which means that intent is not a consideration. In this case, Apollo Energies was criminally prosecuted for bird remains found in several of the heater-treaters that they used for oil drilling. Wouldn’t it make more sense to order companies to dedicate resources to simply fixing the problem instead of chasing people down as criminals?
Energy production involves large capital expenditures. When companies are forced to spend huge sums of money on legal counsel to protect employees from being criminally prosecuted for even the most minute of regulatory violations, it unnecessarily directs resources away from value creation and enriches lawyers.
In the area of eliminating unnecessary federal programs, the Trump administration is planning to shutter the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Energy Star program — federal mandates that give companies the ability to place a blue EPA “seal of approval” on appliances.
At a cost of $32 million per year, the program’s proponents claim that it has helped save consumers an estimated $200 billion in utility bills since 1992. That may or may not be true, but a more important question is why the federal government needs to do this at all when there are multiple private organizations that can replicate the operations of Energy Star just as effectively.
As we argued in 2010, “Let Consumer Reports, JD Power and Associates, Underwriters Laboratories, CNET, or any other private efforts emerge to provide energy efficiency standards that make manufacturers compete for environmentally friendly labels.” Likely, the Energy Star program is actually crowding out more effective private labeling programs. Private programs can adapt faster to new technologies and market trends than large government programs. Under private labeling, companies have strong incentives to maintain high standards if the label enhances their brand reputation.
Energy Star requires companies to do their tests and submit results for approval, requiring third parties to certify the results. If the EPA can’t even act as a fact-checker, then what service does it provide that can’t be offered privately? Moving towards a private system of energy efficiency labeling would save taxpayer dollars and get the government out of the appliance business.
These are just two of the decisive actions by the Trump administration that mark a meaningful shift in federal governance — away from top-down control and toward a freer, more dynamic energy sector. By reducing the criminal penalties associated with complex and often ambiguous regulations, the administration is restoring fairness to a system that too often punished unintentional missteps. And by eliminating federal programs like Energy Star, it is signaling trust in consumers and the private market to make informed, efficient choices without government interference.
Together, these reforms reflect a broader philosophy: that innovation, affordability, and energy abundance thrive best when Washington steps back, not in. The Trump administration is showing what effective leadership looks like — cutting red tape, empowering entrepreneurs, and reaffirming the principle that prosperity grows when big government gets out of the way.
__________________
Fueling the Conversation, a weekly column by IER President Tom Pyle, offers a principled take on energy events. Energy underpins all aspects of modern life, so policies that artificially limit production hurt everyday people paying to heat their homes and driving to work. “Green” groups push these policies for idealogical reasons, but this column uses economic logic and hard facts to advocate for energy freedom.
