ROCKPORT, Maine — Trump administration officials say they have unexpected allies in President Donald Trump’s quest to increase the flow of natural gas into New England: its Democratic governors.
Two senior administration officials said several governors have expressed openness to extending pipelines into their states, in a move that would vastly expand the amount of fossil fuels in a liberal stronghold where climate change is a potent political issue.
Exactly how far the Democrats will go toward endorsing those projects is unclear. But Govs. Ned Lamont of Connecticut, Maura Healey of Massachusetts and Dan McKee of Rhode Island have publicly signaled support for pipelines while stopping short of throwing their weight behind specific projects.
The mere fact pipelines are being discussed shows just how much the political landscape has changed, as concerns over high energy costs overshadow efforts to cut carbon pollution.
The shift was apparent last month during an annual gathering of New England utility regulators at a tony seaside hotel on the Maine coast. Out were panels about lowering carbon pollution and offshore wind, which dominated past gatherings. In were discussions about affordability, data centers and nuclear energy.
Pipelines were not officially on the agenda, but they were an unmistakable feature of the event. When a Canadian company proposed a roughly 10 percent expansion of an existing pipeline on the meeting’s first day, its pitch to potential energy buyers was visible on computer screens and phones in the main conference hall.
“I think there’s a recognition that whether we like it or not, gas is still dominant to keeping the lights on,” Ron Gerwatowski, chair of the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission, said in an interview on the sidelines of the conference. “I think it’s caused people to start thinking about the fact natural gas will be around longer than we want, and we have to recognize that and start thinking about things.”
The new openness to gas marks a sea change in a deep-blue region where fervent grassroots resistance to fossil fuels prompted developers to abandon a pair of pipeline projects a decade ago. It comes as Trump erected roadblocks to building a phalanx of ocean-based wind facilities that political leaders hoped would lead to lower carbon emissions and a stronger economy.
The change puts New England at the center of a nationwide trend. Liberal states are rolling back climate measures due to growing concerns about energy affordability as data centers consume electricity and the Iran war pushes gasoline prices higher.
In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) supported a budget agreement that delays the state’s targets for reducing carbon emissions. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) signed a law this spring scaling back energy efficiency programs, a staple of his state’s climate efforts. And California’s top air regulator recently unveiled a proposal to water down the state’s two-decade-old cap-and-trade system, drawing criticism from environmentalists.
But the shift has been particularly stark in New England, where political leaders who had previously focused on achieving climate goals are increasingly attuned to rising energy costs.
The region recorded the largest increase in wholesale power prices nationwide in 2025, driven in large part by the rising cost of natural gas. Gas accounts for roughly half of the region’s electricity generation and is the leading source of home heating. Yet New England has a relatively limited network of pipelines to serve all that demand. When energy demand soars in the winter, the region often turns to oil and liquefied natural gas for electricity and residential heating.
Pipeline advocates argue the additional capacity will cut costs and emissions by relieving congestion on existing lines and reducing oil and LNG use.
“It’s commercially frustrating for ratepayers in New England to spend so much more money than pretty much every other part of the United States on delivered gas prices, and therefore wholesale electric energy prices,” Richard Levitan, an energy analyst based in Boston, told a panel at the New England Conference of Public Utilities Commissioners at the Samoset Resort in Rockport.
But environmentalists contend it makes little sense to double down on gas at a time when the U.S. has emerged as the world’s leading exporter of LNG, exposing consumers to global fluctuations in gas prices. They argue the region would be better served by a combination of energy efficiency initiatives, renewable energy projects and upgrading existing electricity infrastructure.
“Every projection of future gas prices shows dramatic increases. That’s been reinforced by the Iran war, which has shown the U.S. for all its oil and gas production is not insulated from world prices,” said Brad Campbell, who leads the Conservation Law Foundation, a prominent New England environmental group.
The governors’ mounting support for gas has unfolded against that backdrop. The biggest shift was in Massachusetts, where Healey has gone from bragging about her opposition to pipelines on the campaign trail four years ago to embracing an “all of the above” energy strategy as she gears up for a reelection bid this year. When POLITICO reported last month that Enbridge had briefed the White House on plans to expand its Algonquin Gas Transmission pipeline, the largest in New England, Healey pointed to her previous support for a smaller expansion of the Algonquin system.
“Governor Healey is focused on lowering energy costs, creating American jobs and reducing our dependence on oil and LNG,” Healey spokesperson Jillian Fennimore said at the time.
Healey isn’t alone. Lamont used his State of the State address last year in Connecticut to call for more pipeline access, along with more nuclear and renewable sources. He was joined by McKee, who said last year he was “with Gov. Lamont” in supporting “an all-in strategy” in Rhode Island. He also proposed delaying his state’s 100 percent renewable energy requirement by 17 years, rolling back a target he signed into law in 2022.
The shift was not lost on the White House.
“The governors in the New England states have been very receptive to the idea, and are working with us,” said a White House official who was granted anonymity to describe private conversations.
A senior official at the Department of Energy said Healey talks regularly with Energy Secretary Chris Wright and that they are aligned on pipeline issues in the Northeast. The official said Healey recognizes that Massachusetts needs more natural gas and is committed to working with the administration.
Exactly how closely the states are working with the White House remains unclear. Healey’s office declined to comment, and a spokesperson for McKee did not respond to requests for comment. Cathryn Vaulman, a spokesperson for Lamont, said the Connecticut governor works “with the White House on a range of issues,” but declined to answer specific questions. In a statement, Lamont said he favored an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy.
“That is why my administration remains open to a range of energy sources that increase supply, strengthen reliability and help lower costs for consumers,” he said.
Two pipeline options are being considered in the region. Enbridge, the owner of Algonquin, has proposed a roughly 10 percent expansion of that line. And Williams Cos. has proposed building a new 125-mile line from Pennsylvania to just outside Albany, New York, called the Constitution pipeline.
It’s unclear where New England’s governors stand on those projects. The White House official said they support the Constitution pipeline and are pressing Hochul to approve its state permits. Lamont told reporters last year he had productive conversations with Williams, as well as Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, about increasing pipeline access into the region.
Others were skeptical that Healey’s support extends to Constitution. One person who is familiar with the Healey administration’s thinking and was granted anonymity to discuss private conversations described the talks with the White House as a one-way conversation, with Trump officials pressing the case for more pipelines.
Separately, an industry representative simply laughed when a reporter told them the White House had said Healey supports the Constitution project, saying that seems far-fetched.
Building the Constitution pipeline is a heavier lift politically than expanding the existing Algonquin line, analysts and regulators said.
“The idea that we’re going to build a pipeline in New England, that one’s tough,” said Gerwatowski, the Rhode Island regulator. “But there may be other ways you can enhance the system.”
The three New England governors publicly assert that they are committed to their states’ climate goals. All of them have fought the Trump administration’s attempts to shut down wind projects off their coastlines. They also pushed back against the president’s attempts to cancel funding for clean energy initiatives like electric vehicle charging.
Healey recently signed an executive order directing the state to secure new battery storage projects and successfully pushed through siting policies designed to make it easier to build renewable energy projects. Lamont is touting new long-term power contracts for the Millstone nuclear power station, the region’s largest power plant, as a way of reducing emissions, cutting costs and bolstering energy supply.
But their embrace of gas cuts a stark contrast to the states’ political attitudes during Trump’s first term, when New England leaders sprinted to strengthen climate commitments by setting ambitious clean energy targets and slashing planet warming pollution. Today, five of the region’s six states have committed to cutting greenhouse gas levels at least 80 percent by 2050. (New Hampshire is the lone exception.)
The move toward gas is in part a response to the difficulties around building offshore wind, which the southern New England states were banking on to green their economies and address their wintertime power needs. Wind over the North Atlantic tends to blow hardest in the coldest months.
Two offshore wind projects, Vineyard Wind and Revolution Wind, are expected to begin commercial operations this year, nearly doubling New England’s wind power. But they can’t buttress the system on their own. They are expected to generate enough power to supply roughly 5 percent of the region’s annual electricity demand. But the one-two punch of higher costs and Trump’s attacks on wind energy have limited the prospects for additional offshore projects.
The emerging tableau of rising fossil fuels and muted clean energy has angered environmentalists as the Democratic governors face reelection this fall.
“The governors are putting their fingers in the air and using terms like ‘all of the above’ all the time,” said Larry Chretien, executive director of the Green Energy Consumers Alliance, a nonprofit that promotes clean energy in Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
Tensions are particularly high in Massachusetts, where many greens saw Healey as a climate champion. On the campaign trail in 2022, she asserted how “I stopped two gas pipelines from coming into this state” as attorney general and appointed a climate czar to oversee the state’s carbon-cutting efforts.
Healey drew the ire of greens earlier this year when she proposed cutting environmental spending roughly 4 percent. And disagreements over a ballot measure intended to increase conservation spending led to the cancellation of a Healey fundraiser by the Environmental League of Massachusetts’ Action Fund, due to waning interest among donors, according to one person familiar with the event.
Healey remains a strong favorite to win reelection in a deep-blue state where nearly two-thirds of voters hold a negative view of Trump, according to one recent survey. But there are signs that support for her is eroding. A poll by the MassInc Polling Group last month found that 45 percent of respondents viewed her unfavorably, compared to 39 percent who saw her positively.
The reemergence of the pipeline debate has added another headache by deepening the fissures between her campaign and environmentalists, who were already concerned about the fading urgency around climate change, according to some green advocates.
“It’s just disappointing to see how quickly the pivot happens,” said Nathan Phillips, an outspoken climate advocate and professor of earth and environment at Boston University.
He blamed much of the shift on Trump, but added, “Our political leaders, in Massachusetts and elsewhere in New England, just seemed really ready to cave.”
