Who would be the best U.S. presidential candidate for oil and gas companies?

As the 2016 presidential race starts to heat up it’s time to take a look at the rest of the serious candidates and just what each one of these might mean for energy policies and companies in the U.S. While a great deal can occur within the next couple of months, the current leaders for the Republican Party are Mr . trump, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio. For the Democrats, the race will probably get down to an extended brawl between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. As a bonus, it is also worth looking at what Michael Bloomberg might do for energy if he enters the Presidential race and wins.

Donald Trump

Defying skeptics and conventional wisdom Mr . trump appears to be a real possibility as the Republican Presidential nominee. Trump disappointed having a second place finish in Iowa’s caucuses, but he is doing well in New Hampshire and nationally within the polls. Should Trump win the nomination and so the election, chances are that oil and gas companies would get a big boost. Trump has actively discussed his curiosity about confronting OPEC and making the U.S. energy independent. He is a firm advocate for oil and it is importance within the overall U.S. economy. A Trump presidency would definitely help investors in most conventional energy companies, especially if the Republicans retain charge of Congress as many are projecting.

Ted Cruz

Despite as being a Republican, Cruz is probably less favorably inclined towards energy companies as Trump or Rubio. Cruz is cited as opposing all energy subsidies including those for oil companies. As they has supported revoking offshore drilling moratoriums previously, it’s very unclear at this time if that point could be relevant for energy companies given the current price of oil. Cruz is a supporter of the Keystone XL pipeline, however, and has supported the vista that global warming is a natural phenomenon rather than manmade.

Macro Rubio

Rubio appears to be a supporter of conventional fossil fuels like Trump and Cruz. Particularly, Rubio is in favor of stopping the EPA’s clean Power Plan, which may likely help certain power companies tremendously and could give a small boost to coal miners. Rubio as President would also considerably diminish the strength of the EPA as a regulatory authority instead giving much more of a job to states and local governments. This would likely help many conventional energy companies.

Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton as president would likely continue most of the policies advocated by President Obama. For instance, Clinton has been cited to be against offshore oil drilling, against the Keystone XL pipeline, and against drilling in the Arctic.

In addition, Clinton supported the December 2015 Paris Climate Accord. All this suggests she would be inclined towards new regulations that would harm utilities, conventional energy companies, and automakers. As a staunch advocate of environmental policies, Clinton would likely take various actions to support solar and wind power companies. Using the recent passage of continuing subsidies for all those industries, it’s unclear what additional concrete measures Clinton could take to help alternative energy companies, so a Clinton Presidency might have a muted effect on those firms. It would have in all probability a pronounced negative impact on all conventional energy firms.

Bernie Sanders

Sanders could well be even more progressive than Hillary Clinton, so it’s likely he would adopt all the same policies as Clinton or Obama, and potentially put even greater restrictions on conventional wind turbine. While Obama’s proposed $10-per-barrel tax on oil is not going to happen during his presidency, if Sanders were to become president, it’s possible circumstances could arise that will permit him to implement that tax, which of course could be extremely damaging to grease companies. Sanders can also be in favor of a tax on carbon emissions which may have wide ranging impacts for numerous businesses across a variety of industries. Generally then, a Sanders presidency would likely be harmful for most major U.S. manufactures and companies.

Michael Bloomberg

If Michael Bloomberg does end up entering the race and running for President it could certainly throw both political parties into turmoil. Should Bloomberg become President, the chances are he’d represent a middle ground between anti-renewables policies from the Republicans and anti-conventional energy policies from the Democrats. Bloomberg has certainly shown support for climate initiatives and environmental concerns. The coal industry, however, would not be spared. Bloomberg has spent a lot of money trying to kill off coal plants in the usa.

However, Bloomberg has additionally shown a steak of non-ideological pragmatism which includes being willing to approve the Keystone XL pipeline under certain conditions. Given that pragmatism and his reputation like a centrist, Bloomberg may likely have a positive effect on both conventional energy companies and renewables firms alike.

By Michael McDonald Of Oilprice.com