Phil Mickelson Advocates for Lower Gas Prices in California, Endorses GOP Candidate’s Energy Plan
Golf legend Phil Mickelson has taken to social media to express his concern over California’s soaring gas prices and voice his support for Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton’s energy policy proposals. The six-time major champion, who relocated from his native San Diego to Florida partly to escape California’s high tax burden, shared images of gas stations charging over $5 per gallon, commenting that the situation is “sad and going to get worse.” This marks another instance in which Mickelson has used his platform to weigh in on socio-political issues, particularly those stemming from progressive policies in his former home state.
Mickelson specifically endorsed Hilton, a leading GOP contender for California’s 2026 gubernatorial race, by resharing an interview where Hilton discussed his support for offshore oil drilling and promised to reduce gas prices to $3 per gallon. “Finally, someone speaking common sense,” Mickelson wrote, clearly aligning himself with Hilton’s more production-focused energy approach. This public endorsement highlights not only Mickelson’s concerns about California’s economic challenges but also represents his increasingly vocal conservative political stance, following previous expressions of support for figures like Donald Trump and the late Charlie Kirk.
The golfer’s comments come at a particularly concerning time for California drivers, as energy experts predict even higher prices on the horizon. University of Southern California professor Michael Mische’s analysis suggests Californians could face gas prices as high as $8.43 per gallon next year as refineries in the state prepare to close. The announced closure of Valero Energy Corp.’s Benicia refinery near San Francisco in 2026 threatens over 400 jobs and could further strain the state’s fuel supply and pricing. These developments paint a troubling picture for a state already burdened with the nation’s highest gas prices, exceeding even those in geographically isolated Hawaii.
Hilton, for his part, has made California’s energy policy a central component of his campaign platform, arguing that the state’s abundant oil reserves should be leveraged to provide relief at the pump. In a Fox News Digital opinion piece published in June, he criticized fifteen years of Democratic leadership, including policies supported by Governor Gavin Newsom and Vice President Kamala Harris, claiming their “war on fossil fuels” and climate change priorities have directly led to the state’s extraordinary fuel costs. Hilton’s perspective presents a stark contrast to California’s current energy approach, which has prioritized environmental concerns and emissions reductions over production expansion.
The controversy around California’s gas prices reflects a broader national debate about energy policy, environmental priorities, and economic impacts on everyday Americans. For residents of California, the issue is particularly acute as they navigate the highest gas prices in the continental United States while also facing elevated costs for housing, food, and other essentials. The economic pressure has contributed to California’s ongoing population decline, with many residents like Mickelson choosing to relocate to states with lower tax burdens and costs of living. This demographic shift has potential long-term implications for California’s economic future and political landscape.
Mickelson’s social media activism represents the growing tendency of high-profile athletes to engage in political discourse, utilizing their substantial platforms to influence public opinion on matters extending far beyond their professional domains. While some applaud his willingness to speak out on economic issues affecting ordinary Americans, others might question whether sports celebrities should involve themselves in complex policy debates. Regardless of one’s view on athlete activism, Mickelson’s commentary highlights the very real financial strain facing millions of Californians and brings additional attention to an issue that will likely feature prominently in upcoming election cycles, both within California and nationally as energy policy continues to divide American political discourse.
