OPINION:
I don’t imagine many Americans are talking about federal permits around the dinner table, but really, they should. Why? Because they feel the consequences of a broken system every day. When they pay their energy bills, sit in traffic, or watch vital infrastructure projects stall for years they’re seeing firsthand what a system designed to unnecessarily say “no” looks like.
Despite widespread agreement that permitting reform is necessary, partisan divides, special interests, and legislative gridlock have prevented meaningful action. Republicans and Democrats both support reform, but they disagree on priorities. Republicans want faster approvals for energy and mining projects, arguing that excessive environmental reviews harm national security and domestic production. Democrats want to speed up permitting for renewables and power transmission lines but worry that broader reform could weaken environmental protections. The result is a political standoff where each side blocks progress on reforms that would benefit the other, leading to repeated legislative failures.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a major sticking point. Environmental groups oppose weakening NEPA, fearing that reform could lead to unchecked development. Industry leaders argue that NEPA causes years of costly delays and lawsuits, making projects infeasible. Finding the higher ground of common ground that cuts red tape while maintaining responsible environmental oversight has proven elusive. Special interests further complicate the issue. Activist groups use the current system to stall projects in court, sometimes delaying construction for a decade or more. Certain businesses benefit from the status quo, as delays prevent competitors from entering the market. Labor unions and industry groups support reform, but their influence is often overshadowed by environmental lobbying.
By design, legislating is hard work. Senate filibuster rules require 60 votes, making bipartisan compromise essential. House Republicans have passed permitting bills that go too far for Senate Democrats, while Senate proposals have included trade-offs that the House refuses to accept. Efforts to attach reforms to larger bills such as the debt ceiling or infrastructure legislation have repeatedly failed, leaving the issue unresolved.
The cost of failing to act on permitting reform is steep. Infrastructure projects will continue to face unnecessary delays, preventing needed improvements to roads, bridges, and transit systems. Energy prices will rise as domestic production and grid expansion are slowed by permitting bottlenecks. Manufacturing growth will be stifled, making us more dependent on foreign supply chains at a time when we need to be strengthening American industry. Inflation will persist, as construction and industrial costs continue to rise. Our national security risks will worsen, as critical defense and mineral processing projects languish in bureaucratic limbo.
The lack of permitting reform is not just a bureaucratic issue; it’s an economic, security, and quality-of-life issue that affects every American. If Congress fails to act, businesses will continue to struggle with delays, consumers will face higher costs, and our nation will fall further behind in global competitiveness.
A permitting system that takes years, or even decades, to approve projects is not a system designed for a modern, competitive nation. It’s a system designed to say “no” when we need it to say, “let’s get to work.” Permitting reform isn’t just an abstract policy debate, it’s a problem that affects every American’s wallet, commute, and ability to keep the lights on in their homes. Congress must break the gridlock and pursue a balanced approach that reduces unnecessary delays without eliminating environmental protections.
• Sen. John Curtis was elected as the junior U.S. Senator from Utah in 2025. He previously represented Utah’s 3rd congressional district for seven years. He serves on the Senate Environment and Public Works, Commerce, Foreign Relations and Small Business Committees.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.