Last month, I took a trip to St. John’s, Arizona, a small town with a population of just over 3,400. It wasn’t just a casual visit; this area could play a significant role in the next chapter of American energy. With proper investment, St. John’s could potentially host one of the country’s first small modular reactors (SMRs). This next-generation nuclear technology focuses on safety, adaptability, and cost efficiency.
However, as concerns for energy security rise, Congress appears to be moving away from supporting nuclear energy, which is puzzling, especially when there has been significant bipartisan progress in this sector. Even during the Trump administration, there was support for what many call a nuclear “renaissance.” It’s strange to see lawmakers, particularly Congressional Republicans, now pushing legislation that undermines this very technology.
Small modular reactors represent a major advancement in nuclear innovation. Unlike the standard large-scale facilities, which are built on-site, SMRs are produced in factories, then shipped in parts for assembly. This method cuts down on construction time and costs, allowing for nuclear power generation in more locations—potentially even at former coal plants like the one in St. John’s.
These reactors are designed with advanced safety features, including being built underground to mitigate external threats, reduce refueling frequency, and minimize the handling of nuclear materials. Moreover, they can complement renewable energy sources, providing a reliable backup when solar and wind are unavailable.
Investment in nuclear power isn’t solely about boosting energy supplies; it’s also about creating meaningful, well-paying jobs. A study at St. John’s Coronado Generation Station indicated that converting coal plants to SMRs could generate over 650 stable jobs while retaining 77% of existing employment, all without the need for additional licensing.
Moreover, the jobs created through this transition are mainly union positions, which offer good salaries, health benefits, and pensions—supporting working families in communities that often face economic challenges during energy shifts. Such long-term economic prospects have excited local leaders in Apache County.
In fact, another study suggests that a single 100 megawatt SMR could lead to approximately 7,000 jobs and inject more than $1 billion into the economy. For towns previously reliant on coal, SMRs could mean not only survival but revitalization.
Congressional Republicans often stress the importance of not leaving coal communities behind during this energy transition. So, it’s perplexing why they would promote initiatives that jeopardize the development of SMRs.
In recent years, we have seen genuine bipartisan efforts in nuclear energy advancement. Legislation related to coal-to-nuclear projects includes significant funding to support inflation reduction initiatives and the creation of tax credits for advanced nuclear facilities.
Yet, there are proposals from some Republican lawmakers to slash funding for the Department of Energy’s loan program, including cuts to tax incentives for nuclear facilities. These resources are vital; nuclear projects demand substantial capital and lengthy development times. Without government backing, private investors may choose to withdraw, stalling the progress of SMR technology.
This issue needs bipartisan cooperation, as both parties can be seen as neglecting the complexities of transitioning to clean energy. Some Democrats may give the impression that the push for clean energy focuses solely on easing costs for those worried about climate change. However, as we strive to decarbonize our energy grid, it’s equally important to support the livelihoods of those reliant on the fossil fuel industry.
I believe that fostering our energy future should be a shared goal across party lines. That’s why I supported the confirmation of the new Secretary of Energy, urging a commitment to protect investments in SMRs and ensure consistent funding for nuclear projects. There’s no reason for this topic to become a point of division in Congress.
Nuclear energy offers clean power, bolsters the energy grid, supports union labor, and revitalizes forgotten communities. These factors create a rare opportunity for collaboration.
If the United States aims to maintain its competitiveness and security in energy, we need to do more than safeguard existing progress. We must also eliminate unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles while ensuring safety and community involvement.
Moreover, supporting domestic innovation and building supply chains for nuclear components is essential to reduce dependence on potentially hostile nations. Meanwhile, other countries, like China and Russia, are already advancing with their operational SMRs. The U.S. must catch up.
I’m committed to advocating for these objectives in the Senate, but Congress must also step up. This is not about politics but about ensuring reliable power for our homes and businesses, strengthening our economy, and honoring our commitments to workers nationwide.
