HOUSTON—The White House’s big initiative for 2016: keep fossil fuels in the ground.

President Barack Obama is preparing to take steps to close a significant gap between the U.S. climate pledge in Paris and the country’s current trajectory, made increasingly evident in his recent budget proposal for fiscal year 2017.

Not only does it include a $10 per barrel oil fee to be paid by U.S. producers, it’s cover-to-cover driven by climate change, said Dan Naatz, senior vice president of government relations and political affairs for the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA).

The president’s aggressive action on climate change shouldn’t come to a surprise, Naatz said at the NAPE business conference on Feb. 10.

“Don’t forget the day that he got elected he said we’re going to heal the planet—that hasn’t gone away,” he said.

The president might have moved forward with healthcare reform when he first took office in 2008, but now he’s pursuing climate change and using the regulatory process to achieve his goal.

Obama is being met with opposition, and not only from the oil and gas industry.

NAPE, Dan Naatz, IPAA, President, Obama, oil, gas, ground, regulatory, climate change, fracking, budget, Clean Power Plan, coal, federal, Hart Energy, Emily Moser

On Feb. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to block his Clean Power Plan, which would curb carbon dioxide emissions mainly from coal-fired power plants, until legal challenges to the law are resolved.

Though not necessarily a victory for oil and gas, Naatz said the Supreme Court’s decision highlights an alarming trend the industry has faced when dealing with the current administration.

“It wasn’t a slam dunk—the court basically said that they want to hear the whole case,” he said. “We haven’t been actively involved in it, but you see again really the only relief the industry has is to get into litigation, which is something we don’t do lightly.”

In the past year, IPAA has put its “flag in the ground” on several key issues including the Bureau of Land Management’s hydraulic fracturing proposed rule.

“It’s the vehicle of last choice. But when this regulatory regime keeps coming and coming, it’s really the only way that you can address that,” he said.

In March 2014, the U.S. Department of the Interior unveiled new mandates to regulate hydraulic fracturing on public and American Indian lands.

Following the announcement, the IPAA and the Western Energy Alliance filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming requesting that the court set aside the final rule, claiming it’s “both substantively meritless and the product of a procedurally deficient rulemaking process.”

“When the federal government passes something, the leverage starts to happen… Nine times out of 10 the regulatory agencies of the state will slap into what the federal agencies are going to do,” he said.

Naatz argues that states are better equipped to regulate the industry within their borders than Washington. “The states know their geology, hydrology. They know how to do this far better than the federal government,” he said.

Related: Obama’s $10 Oil Tax Would Be ‘Death Sentence’ To Industry

Furthermore, the government needs the mineral royalties it receives from its land, Naatz continued.

“The president loves to talk about wind and solar. I get it,” he said. “But you’re not getting mineral royalties off of wind and solar.”

Federal onshore natural gas production has decreased by 22% since 2009, which means less revenue. That drop not only affects the oil and gas industry, but state and national budgets as well, Naatz said.

“Nobody is talking about it during the presidential campaign, but we just went over $18 trillion of national debt,” he said. “I’m not saying oil and gas is going to solve an $18 trillion debt, but you’re going to need those resources.”

Contact the author, Emily Moser, at emoser@hartenergy.com.