Skip to main content

A governing scenario · Reviewed September 22, 2026

Ted Cruz
Beyond 100 days.

Cruz's deregulation-focused record would be judged by which costs disappear and which are shifted elsewhere. Shorter approval processes need to be distinguished from durable increases in output or consumer welfare.

A hypothetical presidency, not a claim of candidacy or an election forecast. Policy effects below are analytical possibilities conditional on authority, financing and delivery.

Person-specific focus · source-linked analysis

From a position to a governing program

The selected themes below come from this person’s series coverage. A source passage is separated from our analysis of implementation. The proposed federal pathway is an analytical translation, not a newly discovered promise. Unselected issues remain outside this review.

01 · Mixed executive and legislative authorities

Permitting and regulatory delivery

Series context · Limited or mixed evidence

The comparative frame for a Cruz energy presidency is Cruz versus the 2025-26 status quo he would inherit — and, more sharply, Cruz versus his own party. On paper he is the purest deregulator in the 2028 field: no industrial-policy enthusiasm, no permitting-reform bipartisanship, a decade of bills aimed at one target. Against a Vance-style industrial-policy Republicanism, Cruz's model is anti-pick-winners — build everything, tax nothing, let markets choose. Against a Shapiro-style Democratic permitting reform, the…

Read the full context: Deregulator in a party that now picks winners

What can start before the program is complete

Identify the exact approval steps, agency capacity and statutory authority before changing timelines or enforcement priorities.

What must change for the result to endure

Legislate changes where required and fund the review capacity needed to maintain predictable, defensible decisions.

Drill down: failure modes and the test of success

Where it can stall: Court reversals and understaffed review agencies can erase nominal gains in speed.

Evidence that would change the assessment: Approval-to-construction conversion, decision time, litigation reversals, compliance costs and adverse incidents. Compare outcomes with the pre-policy baseline and affected groups that did not receive the intervention; distinguish outside shocks from the policy’s contribution.

Before assigning a net winner: obtain the actual proposal, funding source, affected population, transition plan and independent cost estimate. An announcement, sponsorship or appropriation alone does not establish the final effect.

02 · Mixed executive and legislative authorities

Energy production and reliability

Series context · Limited or mixed evidence

Day 1 of a Cruz presidency would be a sequence of executive orders with one theme: unleash supply. The first would likely restore and harden the "no pause, no slow-walk" standard for LNG export permits — the exact policy Cruz attacked in 2024, reversed by executive order and then defended at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy. The second would accelerate federal onshore and offshore leasing where existing statutes allow executive discretion. The third would freeze new EPA…

Read the full context: Day 1: executive orders

What can start before the program is complete

Set lawful leasing, licensing and regulatory priorities, identifying fuel, grid and workforce constraints.

What must change for the result to endure

Align capital investment and infrastructure with a durable statutory and funding framework.

Drill down: failure modes and the test of success

Where it can stall: Permits do not guarantee financing, customers, transmission or lower retail prices.

Evidence that would change the assessment: Operating capacity, reliability, delivered energy prices, emissions, local impacts and lifecycle public liabilities. Compare outcomes with the pre-policy baseline and affected groups that did not receive the intervention; distinguish outside shocks from the policy’s contribution.

Before assigning a net winner: obtain the actual proposal, funding source, affected population, transition plan and independent cost estimate. An announcement, sponsorship or appropriation alone does not establish the final effect.

Beyond the opening hundred days

How Cruz’s agenda could develop

Choose the governing conditions. These scenarios test mechanisms and tradeoffs; they do not assign election odds, assume passage, or predict a numerical economic result.

Assume the specific proposal wins the votes and funding it requires; party control alone is insufficient.

Years 1–2

Use the first two years to enact the specified law, finish required procedures and start delivery.

Years 3–4

By years 3–4, evaluate actual use, costs and unintended effects; amend or stop ineffective components.

Years 5–10

In years 5–10, assess whether later governments retain the law, financing and operating capacity. This horizon does not assume reelection.

Chart 4 · From agenda to durable governance
ThemeWhat this scenario requiresWhat can interrupt it
Permitting and regulatory deliveryLegislate changes where required and fund the review capacity needed to maintain predictable, defensible decisions.Court reversals and understaffed review agencies can erase nominal gains in speed.
Energy production and reliabilityAlign capital investment and infrastructure with a durable statutory and funding framework.Permits do not guarantee financing, customers, transmission or lower retail prices.

Conditional winners and losers

Who could gain—and who could bear costs

Chart 5 · Qualitative exposure map. These groups can overlap: the same person can gain as a worker and pay more as a consumer or taxpayer. No net ranking is possible without specified legislation, financing and independent estimates.

The channels below assume the relevant policy is enacted and delivered as designed. Benefits remain conditional on implementation.

Permitting and regulatory delivery

Potential beneficiaries

Projects delayed by avoidable administrative friction and the workers or users they serve could benefit.

Potential costs and risks

Communities, workers or ecosystems can bear external costs if substantive safeguards are weakened rather than duplicated steps removed.

Check the result: Approval-to-construction conversion, decision time, litigation reversals, compliance costs and adverse incidents.

Energy production and reliability

Potential beneficiaries

Producers, construction workers and energy users could benefit if additional reliable supply reduces scarcity.

Potential costs and risks

Nearby communities and public budgets may absorb environmental or infrastructure costs; stranded investments remain possible.

Check the result: Operating capacity, reliability, delivered energy prices, emissions, local impacts and lifecycle public liabilities.

Keep the source trail intact

Original articles and citations

The original reporting and analysis remain unchanged. Citations below are retained from those articles and are not all independently revalidated in this extension. Consult the linked passage, date and underlying document before treating a proposal or officeholding assertion as established fact.

All 5 series articles

View 52 preserved external citations
  1. Congress.gov — S.3762 Energy Freedom Act, 117th Congress (2021-2022) (article context)
  2. Senator Ted Cruz — Cruz reintroduces the Energy Freedom Act to make America energy secure again (Jan. 30, 2023) (article context)
  3. Senator Ted Cruz — Cruz introduces the Energy Freedom Act: accelerating federal permitting for energy projects and pipelines (article context)
  4. Senator Ted Cruz — Cruz, Cassidy, Senate Republicans blast the LNG export-permit re-evaluation (2024) (article context)
  5. Congress.gov — S.3016 Advancing Research in Nuclear Fuel Recycling Act of 2025, sponsored by Sen. Cruz (introduced Oct. 16, 2025) (article context)
  6. U.S. Senate Commerce Committee — Sen. Cruz designated chairman (Jan. 7, 2025) (article context)
  7. Congressional Research Service — Executive Orders and U.S. LNG Exports: Frequently Asked Questions (E.O. 14154 and the LNG export pause) (article context)
  8. Congress.gov — S.2975 Pipeline Safety Act of 2025 (119th Congress) (article context)
  9. Senator Ted Cruz — Energy and Environment issue page and press releases (article context)
  10. Congress.gov — Congressional Record, Sen. Cruz energy amendment (113th Congress) (article context)
  11. Hero photo — Ted Cruz senatorial portrait, U.S. Senate Photographic Studio, public domain (article context)
  12. Sen. Cruz press release — Cruz and Britt introduce the Mandatory E-Verify Act of 2026 (with 8.3M/10.8M workforce estimates) (article context)
  13. Congress.gov — S. 4620, Mandatory E-Verify Act of 2026, introduced-in-Senate text (May 21, 2026) (article context)
  14. GovInfo — S. 4620 content details: sponsors and cosponsors, referred to Judiciary Committee (article context)
  15. AP News — A by-the-numbers look at E-Verify: 1.39M employers, ~20% of firms, 43.5M FY2024 checks (article context)
  16. USCIS Annual Statistical Report FY2024 — 44 million E-Verify cases, fee-supported $6.3B budget (article context)
  17. E-Verify.gov — History and milestones: 1996 pilot origins, E-Verify+ expansion, one million enrolled employers (article context)
  18. E-Verify.gov — Usage statistics: state-by-state enrollment, MOUs, and quarterly case data (article context)
  19. Cornell LII — Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting (2011): Supreme Court upholds Arizona's state E-Verify mandate (article context)
  20. GovInfo — S.4620 xhtml text: Sec. 3 phase-in (6/12/18 months), Sec. 4 penalties, Sec. 9 preemption, Sec. 10 access to information (article context)
  21. DHS Office of Immigration Statistics — unauthorized population and workforce estimates (the bill's cited baseline data) (article context)
  22. Hero photo — Tomascastelazo, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0 (article context)
  23. File:Internal Revenue Service Building.jpg (article context)
  24. Congress.gov — S.129, No Tax on Tips Act (Cruz, introduced Jan. 16, 2025; passed Senate May 20, 2025) (article context)
  25. Sen. Ted Cruz — No Tax on Tips Act, introduced bill text (119th Congress) (article context)
  26. The Texas Tribune — American babies may get $1,000 each to invest because of Ted Cruz (June 19, 2025) (article context)
  27. Bipartisan Policy Center — How the tips deduction works in the One Big Beautiful Bill; JCT $32B score (article context)
  28. Kitces — Breaking down the One Big Beautiful Bill Act: permanent vs. temporary provisions (article context)
  29. Fortune — Ted Cruz says Trump accounts are Social Security personal accounts (May 9, 2026) (article context)
  30. The Hill — Cruz: Trump accounts could reform Social Security (Milken Institute remarks) (article context)
  31. Newsweek — Social Security personal accounts under the Trump plan, per Cruz (article context)
  32. LegalClarity — One Big Beautiful Bill: CBO $3.4T deficit estimate and final votes (P.L. 119-21) (article context)
  33. WAFB — Senate leaders explain the tips and overtime deductions at Baton Rouge event (Jan. 2026) (article context)
  34. Florida Senate — HB 1645 (2024): energy policy, signed by Gov. DeSantis May 2024 (article context)
  35. Institute for Energy Research — States should follow Florida's example in energy policy (HB 1645/7071/1331) (article context)
  36. Politico — Florida has unraveled climate goals for years. DeSantis struck the latest blow. (article context)
  37. Sen. Cruz — Natural Gas Tax Repeal Act (Jan. 16, 2025) (article context)
  38. Sen. Cornyn — Cornyn, Cruz, colleagues introduce Protect LNG Act (May 2025) (article context)
  39. Congress.gov — Energy Act of 2020 (S. 2657, Cruz among negotiators) (article context)
  40. Florida climate-policy analysis — DeSantis HB 1645 and 2026 local net-zero preemption (HB 1217) (article context)
  41. BOEM — Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act leasing framework and judicial review (article context)
  42. Hero photo — Quintin Soloviev, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0 (article context)
  43. Congress.gov — Build Back Better Act (2021) and the parliamentarian pathway-to-citizenship rulings (article context)
  44. Congress.gov — Byrd Rule (Section 313) reconciliation constraints, Congressional Research Service summaries (article context)
  45. National Archives — U.S. Constitution, Article I (naturalization, war powers, appropriations powers of Congress) (article context)
  46. California SB 100 (2018) — Newsom-model clean-energy mandate (article context)
  47. PA Environment Digest — Shapiro Lightning Plan (PACER, PRESS, PJM settlement), Jan. 2025 (article context)
  48. Congress.gov — H.R. 5383, Ocasio-Cortez decriminalization bill (2021) (article context)
  49. Congress.gov — Medicare for All Act (H.R. 1384 and predecessors), the 60-vote health proposal (article context)
  50. White House OSTP — federal AI executive-order and procurement framework (authority for the AI square) (article context)
  51. Supreme Court — West Virginia v. EPA (2022), major-questions constraint on the regulatory square (article context)
  52. Hero photo — Martin Falbisoner, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0 (article context)

Framework for the new analysis

The framework sources explain institutions and constraints; they do not support a numerical forecast or endorse these scenarios. Read the full method ↗