Who Supports LNG Exports?




34 members of the U.S. Senate – 23 Republicans and 11 Democrats signed a bipartisan letter in support of expanded exports in July, 2013



110 members of the U.S. House of Representatives  89 Republicans and 21 Democrats signed a bipartisan letter in support of expanded exports in January, 2013


Phil Bryant (R-Mississippi)

Earl Ray Tomblin (R-West Virginia)

Mike Beebe (D-Arkansas)

Former Gov. Robert McDonnell (R-Virginia)

Mary Fallin (R-Oklahoma)

Rick Perry (R-Texas)
John Hickenlooper (D-Colorado)
Susana Martinez (R-New Mexico)
Matthew Mead (R-Wyoming)


Mayors and state legislators throughout Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Texas also support LNG exports.



Wall Street Journal

New York Times

Washington Post

Denver Post

Houston Chronicle

The Beaumont Enterprise


The Hill

The Charleston Daily Mail

USA Today

The Oregonian

“If the United States begins exporting natural gas, it would only encourage positive long-term structural changes in international trade – away from Kremlin domination and toward a larger and more nimble world market.”
Washington Post, 9/12/12, “U.S. gas exports could limit Putin’s influence”

“The same folks who complain about America’s trade deficit now want the U.S. government to ban the export of liquefied natural gas (LNG). This is one way to ruin what has been a very rare piece of good U.S. economic news.”
The Wall Street Journal, 10/10/12 “Energy Economics in One Lesson”


NERA Consulting

ICF International

Deloitte Consulting

Brookings Institute

American Security Projects

Boston Consulting Group

The Hamilton Project

MIT Energy Initiative

“Across all these scenarios, the U.S. was projected to gain net economic benefits from allowing LNG exports.”
NERA Consulting:  Should Free Trade Principles Apply To U.S. Exports Of Liquefied Natural Gas?, December 2012


National Association of Manufacturers
American Chemistry Council
Council on Foreign Relations
American Council for Capital Formation
American Security Project
Peterson Institute
Center for Strategic and International Studies
National Regulatory Research Institute
Marshall Institute
American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council
The Manhattan Institute
The Heritage Foundation
The Center for New American Security



Former Elected Officials

Hillary Clinton, former Democratic Senator from Louisiana and Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources from 1986-94

  • Assuming that our production stays at the levels, or even as some predict, goes higher, I do think there’s a play there…This is a great economic advantage, a competitive advantage, for us. … We don’t want to give that up.”  (Politico, 9/22/14)

J. Bennett Johnston, former Democratic Senator from Louisiana and Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources from 1986-94

  • “The free market might not always lead to everyone’s definition of the sweet spot, but experience has shown that it is a better allocator and regulator than bureaucrats and politicians. We should heed the admonition of Adam Smith that demand begets supply: Allow the free market to allocate the nation’s newfound energy bounty.”  (Wall Street Journal, 3/4/13)


Byron Dorgan, former Senator from North Dakota from 1992 to 2011, also senior fellow at the BiPartisan Policy Institute

  • “Even where controversy has surrounded a particular type of export, especially those with potential national security implications, the policy solution rarely has been to completely abandon the nation’s traditional commitment to free trade. In sum, we conclude that restricting international trade in fossil fuels is not an effective policy to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions or to advance domestic economic interests, and we recommend against any such restrictions.” (Testimony before House Subcommittee on Energy and Power, 5/7/13)


James Bacchus chairs the global practice of the Greenberg Traurig law firm, also former Chairman of the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization, and a former Member of the Congress

  • “All in all, it would be difficult for the U.S. to avail itself of an environmental defense if U.S. restrictions on natural gas exports were challenged in the WTO.  Certainly, restricting LNG exports would have environmental implications, but, to date, the professed motive behind the call for restrictions seems entirely economic.” (International Business Times, 8/19/13)


Bill Richardson, former U.S. energy secretary and governor of New Mexico

  • “By making larger amount of gas available on the global market, the U.S. will help reduce the political influence exerted by Russia… There are few foreign policy ‘no-brainers’, but exporting LNG to Europe – particularly eastern Europe – is definitely one of them.” (Financial Times, 11/21/13)



Lawrence Summers, former director of the National Economic Council under President Barack Obama and current president emeritus and Charles W. Eliot University Professor of Harvard University

  • And whether we move beyond fossil fuels will not be affected one way or the other by our export policy, or our natural gas export policy. What is true, however, is that more extensive and more widespread use of natural gas in replacing coal, assuming that the production of natural gas is regulated, so that there aren’t excessive leaks of methane associated with its production, will reduce emissions in the near- to medium- term. (Brookings Event, 9/9/2014)


Dr. Jack Rafuse, former White House energy adviser and current principal of the Rafuse Organization

  • “Isolating the U.S. from global energy markets and limiting demand for domestic gas won’t grow the economy or improve America’s access to a secure and stable supply of energy,” said Rafuse. “In fact, it will have the opposite effect, increasing the volatility of energy prices for consumers and slowing the shale gas boon that is at the heart of our economic recovery.” (Rafuse Organization Blog, 1/11/2013)


General James L. Jones, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO’s Allied Command Operations and former National Security Advisor to President Obama

  • “..I believe the United States should undo outdated regulations that prevent us from sharing our energy abundance with friendly countries. Doing so would benefit our allies, but also provide important economic and trade benefits to the United States.” (Atlantic Council event, 3/31/2014)


Raymond J. Keating, Chief Economist for the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council

  • “No sound economic reasons ever existed for these approvals to stop in order to assess the effects of exports. As in any other industry, increased export opportunities means expanded domestic investment and production, new and growing businesses, and stepped up job creation. That, of course, is exactly what this country needs.”  (SBEC Press Release 5/2/13)



Jason Bordoff, a professor and director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, former senior director and special assistant to President Obama for energy and climate change on the staff of the National Security Council.

  • “The president has a goal of doubling exports, recognizing the broad economic consensus that free trade leads to faster economic growth. Energy should be no different. Increasing global energy market integration will benefit both the U.S. economy and our national security.”  (The Hill, 6/4/13)


Ken Medlock, the Baker Institute’s James A. Baker III and Susan G. Baker Fellow in Energy and Resource Economics and an adjunct professor and lecturer in Rice University’s Department of Economics

  • “The bottom line is that certification of LNG exports will not likely produce a large domestic price impact, although the entities involved may be exposed to significant commercial risk,” Medlock said. “As the story plays out, the international gas market will evolve into something dramatically different from what it is today.”  (Rice University Press Release, 8/15/12)


Richard Schmalensee, Howard W. Johnson Professor of Economics and Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

  • “One of the great strengths of the U.S. economy historically had been our flexibility and our ability to react quickly and effectively to changes in the global marketplace. Restricting LNG exports would be resisting what we are good at, which is reacting to change.”  (ACCF Special Report, 4/15/12)


Jagdish Bhagwati, professor of economics, law and international affairs at Columbia University and senior fellow in international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations

  • [W]e objected correctly to the Chinese restrictions on rare earth for reasons similar, in part, to our in case of LNG exports. Are we to undermine these efforts by surrendering to demands to restrict LNG exports?”  (ACCF Special Report, 4/15/12)


Amy Myers Jaffe, the executive director for energy and sustainability at University of California, Davis.

  • “…by embracing the build-out of natural gas and distributed energy networks in the United States, including export capacity, the U.S. can lead the way globally to “democratize” energy, much the way its Silicon Valley giants have democratized information. Now, on the 40th anniversary of the 1973 embargo, the United States has a historic opportunity to lead an energy counterrevolution.”  (Fuel Fix Blog, 10/16/13)



Tohimitsu Motegi, Trade and Industry Minister for Japan

  • “If LNG can be imported from the U.S., with growing production of shale gas, it will make a lot of difference to Japan to be able to diversify its fuel-supply sources and shrink the price gap… A new flow of LNG supply from the U.S. to Asia would be an essential game changer that would contribute to energy security as well as to economic and geopolitical stability in Asia.” (Market Watch, 5/13/13)
Simonas Satunas, Deputy Chief of Mission for the Embassy of Lithuania

Anita Orbán, energy ambassador at large for Hungary and Vacláv Bartuska, energy ambassador at large for the Czech Republic

  • “The United States has the chance to become a key player in international exports of natural gas. If Washington expands export opportunities, the results would include strengthened domestic production, enhanced global energy security, expanded market opportunities, lower global prices and stronger transatlantic alliances.” (Washington Post, 10/10/13)