Democrats debate taking a page from Trump's economic playbook

• They're looking at investments and aid for clean energy and other priorities, like support for energy infrastructure.

State of play: The Trump administration's investments in energy, critical minerals and other industries are already drawing calls for congressional investigations.

"The Trump administration has widened the aperture for industrial policy," Jennifer Granholm, who served as President Biden's Energy Secretary, said at a gathering of energy and climate experts Axios attended in Berkeley, Calif., last month.

• "You're not going to have state ownership of enterprises," Granholm told Axios in an interview afterward. "But maybe you do take a little bit of an ownership slice" for national security or global competitiveness reasons, she said.
• Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) has also expressed openness to federal ownership stakes, while raising concerns about the Trump administration's lack of transparency and accountability, he told Semafor.

Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) has argued that the U.S. needs to consider a more aggressive industrial policy to compete with countries like China, while warning against direct government ownership.

• "We are long overdue for having a conversation about, 'should the United States even have an industrial policy?'" Casten said at a recent University of Chicago event. "For a long time, we viewed industrial policy as something that socialists do."
• Casten said he would support the U.S. ensuring domestic manufacturing of certain parts of supply chains, like electronic control systems that operate energy infrastructure, and even pursuing "smart tariff policy" to have competitive markets.

The big picture: The Biden administration spent billions subsidizing clean energy and semiconductor manufacturing. Trump has taken government intervention a step further by acquiring ownership stakes in companies ranging from Intel to critical mineral producers.

• It's been a striking reversal for a president who has repeatedly criticized Democrats for government overreach.

How it works: The Trump administration has announced more than $30 billion in investments across nearly 50 deals involving government ownership and related financial arrangements, according to a Council on Foreign Relations tracker.

• The investments span semiconductors, critical minerals and energy — strategically important industries where high costs and long development timelines can make private financing difficult.

Flashback: Washington has taken ownership stakes in private companies before, including during the 2008 financial crisis. But those investments were intended as temporary measures to rescue struggling businesses, unlike Trump's national security-focused investments.

What they're saying: "Equity from the U.S. government can act as patient capital that helps derisk an investment with a long time horizon or technological risk that would otherwise not attract sufficient private investment," said Jonathan Hillman, a Council on Foreign Relations fellow behind the tracker.

• Hillman said the deals announced since January 2025 have also mobilized $28.5 billion in private capital.

Yes, but: Some politicians and energy leaders warn that direct government ownership could open the door to political favoritism and market distortions.

• "Government is not a venture capital fund. It's not a private equity fund. It's not well suited to pick winners and losers in the marketplace," said Tim Pawlenty, former Republican governor of Minnesota who now leads the Solar Energy Industries Association, at the same University of Chicago event.
• "If it starts to go down the slippery slope of 'it's just the flavor of the day company because we like it' or they're well connected or whatever, then you got problems."

Threat level: "Buying stakes in public companies is so, so, so dangerous," Casten said.

• "I have no idea how a future president unwinds our stake in Intel without totally tanking Intel stock," he added, referring to the administration's roughly 10% stake in the semiconductor giant.
• To avoid such concerns, Hillman suggests creating a federal chief investment officer to oversee investments and eventual sales.

The other side: The White House defended the investments as a way to rebuild American manufacturing and secure critical supply chains, emphasizing that companies participate voluntarily, spokesman Matthew Middleton said.

What we're watching: Democrats could spend the next two years scrutinizing Trump's investments — while debating whether a future Democratic administration should make similar deals of its own.

Sign up here for Axios' Future of Energy newsletter.