Republicans laid trap for Biden on Russian energy sanctions

Republicans set a trap for President Joe Biden. They demanded he take actions that will raise gasoline prices — with obvious plans to attack him politically after the prices rise.

In just a few days, there has been a dramatic change in political consensus over how to respond to Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine. Initially, policymakers appeared to go along with the Biden administration’s argument that they should carve energy-related transactions out of their sanctions.

That way, Russian President Vladimir Putin would suffer, but U.S. and European consumers mostly wouldn’t, the White House said. Lawmakers generally seemed okay with this setup.

But then the conventional wisdom rapidly shifted, at least on Capitol Hill.

Now, U.S. lawmakers say, we must cut Russia off from global energy markets. Oil prices spiked in anticipation of some sort of embargo.

U.S. politicians could make the case that higher energy prices are a cost of defending freedom and democracy, upholding international law, resisting armed aggression. We’re not sending American sons and daughters into this war, they could say; instead, Americans’ sacrifice could be economic. We’ll pay more for gasoline — and perhaps other things, too — to help shoulder the burden of fighting Putin.

But that’s not the argument most U.S. politicians are emphasizing. Instead, they suggest there’s a free lunch to be had.

Republicans (and some Democrats) have argued that the United States can apply sanctions to Russia’s energy sector while enduring virtually no economic pain at home, and without turning to unsavory alternative sources such as Venezuela. U.S. energy producers alone, they claim, can immediately ramp up supply to offset the shortfall.

Big, Bad Government just needs to get out of industry’s way.

This is a fantasy — one born either of confusion about how energy markets work or a cynical desire to set up Biden.

For starters, it usually takes 10 to 12 months for a change in oil prices to lead to an actual change in oil production in the United States, according to John Kemp, senior market analyst at Thomson Reuters.

That’s because there are many time-consuming steps involved, regardless of the regulatory environment: contracting a new rig, moving the rig onto the drilling site, recruiting workers and so on.

Already, U.S. oil producers have responded to the recent run-up in oil prices by taking steps to increase production. In January, there were 502 rigs drilling in this country for crude, according to energy research firm Wood Mackenzie.

Today, there are 540. Unfortunately, any additional barrels that become available from these added rigs are months away.

Republicans are ignoring all this. They’ve started argued — with relatively little pushback — that if we can’t immediately replace lost Russian supply, it’ll be because of Biden’s supposed war on fossil fuels.

Despite his tough campaign rhetoric, though, Biden has been relatively gentle on the fossil fuel industry. Much to the dismay of climate hawks, his climate agenda is based almost exclusively on carrots, not sticks. As recently as January, he was outpacing Donald Trump in authorizing new drilling permits on public lands.

Republicans point to Biden’s decision to “shut down” the Keystone XL pipeline — but it was only 8 percent built when Biden revoked a U.S.-side permit for construction last year. Even if construction had continued, additional supply via this pipeline would still be years away.

Abruptly cutting Russia off from global energy markets would be painful for more than just the Russians. It could lead to a recession.

It may nonetheless be the right thing to do — but we should all be clear-eyed about likely consequences.

And if Republicans truly believe our patriotic duty is to orchestrate a Western embargo of Russian energy, they should commit to not politically exploiting the economic pain such sanctions will inevitably cause American consumers.