Should the U.S. lift the moratorium on new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export licenses?

No, it would undermine climate change goals, and contribute to the continued reliance on fossil fuels rather than investing in renewable energy sources

The decision to lift the moratorium on new LNG export licenses requires careful consideration of both the economic benefits and the potential environmental and domestic impacts. While expanding LNG exports may strengthen the U.S. economy and support global energy security, it is crucial to address concerns related to domestic energy prices and environmental sustainability. A balanced approach that includes stringent environmental safeguards and measures to protect domestic consumers may be necessary to ensure that the benefits of increased LNG exports are realized without compromising long-term environmental and economic goals.

Yes, but with strategic conditions that serve America's long-term security interests. LNG exports should be approved when they: 1) Strengthen relationships with democratic allies while reducing their dependence on hostile regimes like Russia/Iran, 2) Generate revenue that funds domestic energy innovation and infrastructure, 3) Don't compromise our own energy security or drive up domestic prices significantly. Use export revenues to accelerate research into all alternative energy sources in parallel. This isn't just about fossil fuels - it's about using our current energy advantages to build the bridge to our energy-independent future.

Lifting the moratorium could benefit the U.S. economy and global energy security—if it’s accompanied by robust environmental regulations. Ensuring LNG export projects minimize methane leaks, include carbon capture, and align with climate goals is essential. Unrestrained expansion without oversight, however, risks undermining climate efforts and raising consumer prices.

Yes, and give exclusive access and sales to the European Union in case if Russia shuts off the natural gas line.

Yes, but at the same time, the United States needs to be energy independent; for the sake of keeping prices gasoline, oil, diesel, electricity, and any element of energy low and stimulating the GDP, the supply chain, good trade, and keeping the unemployment rate low

I do not support the United States Government in any endeavor regardless of whether it is a positive or negative for anyone because the precedent of them being in control of more is the last thing I would support