N.J. Dem senators call for probe of grid operator as electric prices surge
Democratic senators want grid operator PJM investigated. Republicans say the Murphy administration is to blame for high electric prices. (Dana DiFilippo | New Jersey Monitor)
State senators sparred on the chamber's floor Monday over a resolution directing New Jersey energy regulators to launch an investigation of the state's grid operator, one day after steep electricity price hikes took effect.
The resolution, which passed in a 25-12 vote along party lines and must still be approved by the Assembly, calls on the Board of Public Utilities to investigate PJM Interconnection's capacity market auction, a price-setting auction that saw a nearly tenfold increase over the previous sale last July.
Democrats have sought to pin the blame on the rise in electricity bills on PJM, arguing it was too slow to connect renewable projects to its grid, thereby depressing supply and pushing prices upward. In some cases, they've outright claimed PJM's process was corrupt.
'The problem begins and ends with a grid that doesn't work. We are not investing enough money in this grid. The grid is held together by chewing gum, toothpicks, and bobby pins,' said Sen. Bob Smith (D-Middlesex), who chairs the chamber's energy panel. 'So now anyone who wants to enter the grid has to get an approval for a connection, and in the case of New Jersey, for the last two-and-a-half years, we've had 79 projects in the queue that PJM would not approve.'
Industry officials and experts have said electricity prices are rising because of an imbalance between supply and demand.
Demand, which had been roughly stable for decades, is surging amid growing electrification and the rise of power-hungry artificial intelligence data centers.
Meanwhile, New Jersey's own supply of electricity has fallen as the state shuttered fossil plants and renewable projects — chiefly offshore wind — struggled to get off the ground, leaving it more reliant on power imported through PJM's grid.
Republican members have charged Gov. Phil Murphy's renewable-heavy energy agenda and reliance on offshore wind projects are responsible for the price surge. The offshore wind projects have stalled because of rising costs and opposition by the Trump administration.
'Experts pointed to a whole host of sources and culprits that have brought us here today, a place that was foreseeable and predictable. And now we want to limit the investigation to PJM?' said Sen. Tony Bucco (R-Morris), the chamber's minority leader.
Some GOP members argued the Board of Public Utilities, which they charge is partly to blame for rising energy prices, was an inappropriate pick to conduct the probe. Sen. Bob Singer (R-Ocean) said there is some support for sunsetting the board.
'You've got to put the problem at the foot of those who created it. You've got to investigate those who created it, and you have to replace them if necessary,' Singer said.
The Board of Public Utilities is the regulatory body charged with approving utilities' requests for rate increases. New Jersey's regulated utilities do not profit from the sale of electricity itself, but they are permitted to recoup the costs of their investments and some other costs at a markup, typically around 9.6%.
PJM itself declined to comment on the resolution but said the current price spike was driven by a divergence between supply and demand.
'These higher prices are the result of a loss in electricity supply caused primarily by decarbonization policies that have led to an uptick in generator retirements, coupled with an unprecedented spike in electricity demand due largely to the advancement of data centers to power artificial intelligence, the electrification of vehicles and heating systems, and the onshoring of U.S. manufacturing,' said Dan Lockwood, a spokesperson for PJM.
The Republicans said a special committee that held hearings on rising energy prices earlier in the spring should conduct the investigation, which they said should include a probe of the Board of Public Utilities.
Democratic members argued the board has institutional and subject matter knowledge that would lend expertise to an investigation that might be absent under the special committee, though some said the panel should continue to play a role.
Still, Sen. Paul Sarlo (D-Bergen), the chamber's budget chairman, questioned the regulatory agency's future.
'We ultimately should be part of the long-term solution, and I'm not sure if BPU should be part of the long-term solution under the next governor,' Sarlo said.
Murphy leaves office in January.
The Senate approved separate legislation Monday that would require the Board of Public Utilities to study data centers' impact on electricity prices after tabling a Republican attempt to amend it. That bill, which passed the Senate unanimously, now goes to Murphy's desk.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
State Department shifts $250 million from refugee aid to 'self-deportations'
By Jonathan Landay WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. State Department has moved $250 million to the Department of Homeland Security for voluntary deportations by migrants without legal status, a spokesperson said, an unprecedented repurposing of funds that have been used to aid refugees uprooted by war and natural disasters. The money has been transferred "to provide a free flight home and an exit bonus to encourage and assist illegal aliens to voluntarily depart the United States," the State Department spokesperson told Reuters. Historically, those funds have been used "to provide protection to vulnerable people" overseas and to resettle refugees in the U.S., said Elizabeth Campbell, a former deputy assistant secretary of state. The re-routing of the money comes as President Donald Trump pushes to reshape U.S. government agencies to serve his 'America First' agenda. The State Department's planned reorganization explicitly states that the agency's refugee bureau now largely will focus on efforts to 'return illegal aliens to their country of origin or legal status.' The funds came from Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) overseen by the Bureau of Population, Refugee and Migration. Its website says its mission is to "reduce illegal immigration," aid people "fleeing persecution, crisis or violence and seek durable solutions for forcibly displaced people." Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, citing the law authorizing the funding, said in a May 7 Federal Register notice that underwriting the repatriation of people without legal status will bolster the "foreign policy interests" of the U.S. He did not mention the $250 million transfer to DHS. The DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump's administration is working to speed up deportations in a crackdown that the Republican president vowed during the 2024 campaign would expel millions of people illegally in the U.S. It has encouraged migrants to leave voluntarily by threatening steep fines and deporting migrants to notorious prisons in Guantanamo Bay and El Salvador. But the volume of deportations since he took office in January appears to be less than those overseen by his predecessor Joe Biden in the February-May period of 2024, about 200,000 people versus 257,000. On May 9, Trump announced Project Homecoming, an initiative overseen by DHS that offers $1,000 stipends and travel assistance to migrants who "self-deport." DHS said in a May 19 news release that 64 people had "opted to self deport" to Honduras and Colombia on a charter flight under the program. Some experts said that while legal, sending the money to DHS for deportation operations was an unprecedented use of MRA funds. The main purpose of the funds historically has been "to provide refugee and displacement assistance, refugee processing and resettlement to the U.S., and respond to urgent and emerging humanitarian crises - not to return those very people to the harm or persecution they fled,' said Meredith Owen Edwards, senior director of Policy and Advocacy at the Refugee Council USA.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Top Dems claim 51K people will die annually from the 'big beautiful bill' and its Obamacare freeze
Two top Democrats claimed the Republicans' budget reconciliation bill and its proposal to let enhanced Obamacare credits expire will cause the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans. Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, along with Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., announced findings that an estimated 51,000 Americans could die each year due to Republican-led changes to the federal healthcare system and the broader reconciliation bill. The national debt — which measures what the U.S. owes its creditors — fell to $36,214,400,664,854.53 as of June 3rd, according to the latest numbers published by the Treasury Department. That is down about $1.4 billion from the figure reported the previous day. Wyden called the "stakes" of the 'big, beautiful bill' debate "truly life and death," as a statement from his office read that "a new analysis estimates that more than 51,000 people will die per year as a direct result of the Republican reconciliation bill, and their refusal to extend Affordable Care Act premium tax credits." "Taking away health insurance and benefits like home care and mental healthcare from seniors, people with disabilities, kids, and working families will be deadly," Wyden said. "This analysis shows the dire consequences of moving ahead with this morally bankrupt effort," he said, referring to a study he and Sanders asked the University of Pennsylvania and Yale to conduct. Read On The Fox News App Liberals Blame Big Beautiful Bill's Loss On Dying Dems The Democrats employed the Philadelphia college's Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, as well as the Yale School of Public Health's Center for Infectious Disease Modeling and Analysis. "Let's be clear," Sanders said in a statement, "The Republican reconciliation bill which makes massive cuts to Medicaid in order to pay for huge tax breaks for billionaires is not just bad public policy." "It is not just immoral. It is a death sentence for struggling Americans." "[N]ot only will some of the most vulnerable people throughout our country suffer, but tens of thousands will die. We cannot allow that to happen," Sanders added. Winners, Losers And Grab-bags From House Gop's Narrow Passage Of 'Big, Beautiful Bill' In a copy of the study posted on UPenn's website, economics and health-centric academics found 7.7 million people would be estimated to lose Medicaid or Obamacare coverage by 2034, and 1.38 million "dual-eligible beneficiaries" would find themselves "disenroll[ed]." In a statement, Wyden cited figures of 11,300 deaths from the loss of Medicaid or Obamacare coverage, 18,200 deaths from the loss of Medicaid coverage among low-income beneficiaries and 13,000 deaths of Medicaid enrollees in nursing homes due to the rollback of a "nursing home minimum staffing rule" from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Wyden attributed an additional projected 8,811 deaths per year to the "failure to extend the enhanced [Obamacare] premium tax credits," citing the academics' analysis. Fox News Digital reached out to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., -- who spearheaded the "big, beautiful bill" in the House -- for comment. A representative for UPenn told Fox News Digital the university sent the results of their analysis to Wyden and Sanders in response to a request on the matter. "The estimates of mortality that are contained in the letter were based on peer-review research that was done independently and well before their request," the UPenn representative said. "The senators' request was to take the research results and translate into the estimated number of deaths."Original article source: Top Dems claim 51K people will die annually from the 'big beautiful bill' and its Obamacare freeze
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans aren't following Elon Musk's lead anymore
Months ago, Elon Musk helped tank a government funding bill. Now, Republicans are mostly shrugging off his criticism of their "Big Beautiful Bill." "I don't think it's gonna move the needle in any direction," one House Republican told BI. Elon Musk says President Donald Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" is a "disgusting abomination." Republicans on Capitol Hill are making clear that they don't really care. "I think he's flat wrong," House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Wednesday. "I think he's way off on this." "We have a difference of opinion," Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters on Tuesday. "He's entitled to that opinion, we're going to proceed full speed ahead." It's a far cry from December, when Musk, then the incoming de facto leader of the White House DOGE Office, helped generate an online pressure campaign that swiftly tanked a government funding bill. That episode was a dramatic sign of the tech titan's burgeoning influence in Washington, suggesting that GOP lawmakers would be taking his cues — perhaps as much as they took Trump's — in the months to come. Now no longer leading DOGE, Musk has returned to being another outside voice. Fiscal hawks who agree with him don't mind getting a little backup. Other Republicans are happy to brush him off. "Elon, of course, is the wealthiest man in the world, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's wrong or he's right. He has an opinion, just like the rest of us," Republican Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee told BI. "I don't think it's gonna move the needle in any direction." Musk did not respond to a request for comment. Trump has continued to pressure Republicans to support the bill, and the White House has said that those who vote against it should face primary challenges. Trump himself has not yet responded to Musk, though Johnson told reporters that the president is "not delighted that Elon did a 180" on the bill. Musk's broadside against the bill, according to him, is about its impact on the debt. Multiple forecasters who have analyzed the bill, including the Congressional Budget Office and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, have estimated that the current version of the bill would add more than $2 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years. Musk has argued that this undermines DOGE, which has been trying to significantly reduce federal spending. Republicans were already arguing about this amongst themselves. Fiscal conservatives like Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin say that the version of the bill that passed the House last month adds too much to the debt, and they're now seeking to amend it. Most Republicans, however, have argued that outside projections about the bill's impact on the debt are flawed and don't account for potential economic growth as a result of the bill's eventual passage. Even those who agree with Musk don't seem to believe that his comments will strengthen their hand that much. "Sure, it helps bolster the case," Sen. Ron Johnson told reporters of Musk's tweet. "But again, the President wants to balance the budget as well." Perhaps the biggest reason why Musk's comments are unlikely to tank the bill: It's the centerpiece of Trump's legislative agenda, and it's simply too important to them. The bill includes a permanent extension of tax cuts that Trump and Republicans first enacted in 2017, contains new funding for border security and immigration enforcement, and is chock full of other GOP priorities that they're not going to give up simply because of Musk's concern about the deficit. "All the things that are in this bill are so important for the US economy, it's going to be jet fuel for the US economy," Speaker Johnson told reporters on Wednesday. "The risk of not getting it done is enormous, not just for the Republican Party, but for the country. We've got to do this." The government funding bill that Musk helped tank in December, on the other hand, was a bipartisan piece of legislation that included all kinds of provisions that Republicans don't agree with. Plenty of fiscal conservatives planned to vote against it anyway, and Musk's involvement strengthened their case, eventually making it untenable for Speaker Johnson to move forward with it. Republican Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, the chairman of the hardline House Freedom Caucus, voted "present" when the "Big Beautiful Bill" passed the House last month. He told reporters on Wednesday that he hopes senators keep Musk's criticism "in mind" as they make changes to the bill, but he didn't predict that it would change much. "He doesn't have to change the dynamic," Harris told BI. "I'm glad that he reminded people that the federal deficit is of grave concern." Read the original article on Business Insider