A new U.S. president will be inaugurated in less than five months. Polls show the race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris to be very close, with potentially only a few swing states deciding the election. While energy policy may not be a deciding factor for many Americans in choosing who they will vote for, it is very important to power industry professionals.

With that in mind, Mary Anne Sullivan, senior counsel with the law firm Hogan Lovells, and Megan Ridley-Kaye, a partner with Hogan Lovells, were interviewed as guests on The POWER Podcast to discuss how the candidates might differ in their areas of focus after the election. Among the most pronounced differences is the rhetoric the two might espouse.

“A Trump administration, I think, would talk a lot more about energy security, energy independence, and the need to be friendly to American-made fossil fuels,” Sullivan said. “A Harris administration, I assume, will follow in the footsteps of the Biden administration and focus on the need to respond to climate change and build on what have truly been unprecedented accomplishments under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the IRA [Inflation Reduction Act],” she said.

Although a Trump administration might seek to repeal all or at least parts of the IRA, Sullivan thought that would be hard to achieve. “I think recent indications are that it [the IRA] has now a fair bit of support in Congress,” she said. Ridley-Kaye agreed. “Obviously, key to what happens there [the fate of the IRA] is what happens in Congress,” she said. “It seems increasingly unlikely that it will be repealed.”

And, while the government has made major investments that support energy and power projects, private parties have invested a lot of money too. At this point in the cycle, however, Ridley-Kaye suggested some of her clients are beginning to take a wait-and-see approach, especially if project economics are not viable without tax credits. Still, many other investors are unworried about the possibility of policy changes. “We do have a large group of clients that would say, ‘The train has left the station. Corporate America expects the tax credits. There’s no way that they would be taken away,’ ” Ridley-Kaye said.

Meanwhile, there are some areas where the candidates may see eye to eye. “No matter which of them is elected, I think they will both recognize the need for more power transmission and more power generation,” said Sullivan. “Although the Biden administration has talked a good game about greening power generation, they have also very much pursued an all-of-the-above approach to generation resources. And I would expect that to continue in a Harris administration, just because there are so many new demands for electricity—the data centers, AI [artificial intelligence], vehicle electrification, the sort of ‘electrify everything’ movement that some people talk about,” she said.

Two other areas where Trump and Harris might support similar policies are on nuclear power, and carbon capture and storage. “The two administrations might have different motivations for pursuing that, but I think either one will support further technology development there,” Sullivan supposed.

Sullivan would expect a more light-handed approach to regulation under a Trump administration, specifically, as applied to permitting energy infrastructure projects. “But that more light-handed regulation on permitting helps the carbon-free power projects as much as the carbon-intensive power projects. It cuts both ways,” she said.

Depending on how the election plays out, the energy and power landscape could change very quickly. “Trump’s team seems much more ready to move on policy than it did when he ran the last time. I think they’re thinking about it in advance. They’re building a desired set of policies,” Sullivan said. “I do expect them to be more ready to move on their policy objectives.”