Ohio Senate considers House version of energy overhaul
File photo of electricity pylons. (Getty Images).
Ohio state senators took up the House version of a broad-based energy bill Tuesday aimed at encouraging new power generation. Backers warn the regional energy grid known as PJM is teetering on the verge of shortfall. Forecasts suggest energy demands could outpace supply as soon as next year.
With those alarms ringing in their ears, lawmakers in the House and Senate have been advancing bills on parallel tracks. Both chambers approved their proposals in recent weeks with broad bipartisan support.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
But Tuesday's hearing wasn't the beginning of a fast-track process. Senators cancelled a follow up hearing scheduled for Wednesday and they're preparing to leave town on a two-week recess. In the House, meanwhile, attention is focused squarely on the budget.
Sen. Brian Chavez, R-Marietta, who heads up the Senate energy committee explained they haven't yet settled on which bill will be the vehicle for passage.
'We haven't figured that out yet. The House is focused on the budget right now,' Chavez said after committee.
'I think we'll pick one and we'll just go with it,' he added, 'and we'll blend them together and hopefully come up with a really solid bill.'
There's agreement on the broad strokes, but with lawmakers headed for the exits, hammering out the details might stretch into May. And despite wrestling over language for months, lawmakers and stakeholders have a few additional tweaks in mind.
Both proposals encourage new power plant investment with tax incentives and assurances that monopoly distribution companies (think AEP, Duke or FirstEnergy) can't jump into the marketplace. They also shake up how those distribution companies set rates, and repealing a widely criticized subsidy for aging coal plants.
Ohio House approves sweeping energy generation bill
But HB 15 carries a handful of additional provisions. Utilities would have to create 'heat maps' reflecting energy capacity on quarterly basis. The state power siting board would gain oversight of transmission projects that currently have little. Critics argue that allows companies to make big investments and pass the cost on to ratepayers. The House bill also includes a pilot program for community power where small groups could chip in on new power generation to defray their existing power bills.
The Senate bill includes a program loaning schools money for solar from an existing fund. The House instead would eliminate it and refund the balance to consumers.
Senators sitting on the Energy committee heard another round of the suggestions they've heard before. AEP Ohio's Steve Nourse asked lawmakers for a 'glide path' off the coal plant subsidies. Those subsidies are the result of 2019's House Bill 6 which is at the center of the largest corruption case in Ohio's history. Consumers have already spent close to half a billion dollars on propping up the plants.
Utilities, barred from any role in energy production under HB 15, urged lawmakers to let them get involved 'behind the meter' — providing on-site power plants for big customers like data centers.
The Ohio Consumers' Counsel Maureen Willis suggested lawmakers should remove or revise a section in the bill about customer refunds.
'It may have the unintended effect of prohibiting a refund opportunity that currently exists for consumers,' she argued.
The bill allows customers to collect refunds from the date of an Ohio Supreme Court decision rather than the date when charges began. Her office is pursuing refunds right now on behalf of half a million Ohioans who get their power from AES, the company that used to be Dayton Power and Light.
House Bill 15 gives the Public Utility Commission of Ohio a 'shot clock' for many of its ratemaking decisions. State Sen. Shane Wilkin, R-Hillsboro, asked about adding one for an annual revision process. The House sponsor, Rep. Roy Klopfenstein, R-Haviland, said he's willing to consider it. But after the hearing, Chavez said 'I don't know why the PUCO wouldn't be diligent about it.'
'We're trying to let everyone do their job without putting too many restrictions on them,' he added, 'because everyone wants to do the right thing. So, it's something that we'll talk about.'
Chavez acknowledged he scheduled two hearings in case negotiations moved quickly, and they wanted to get the bill to the Senate floor Wednesday. 'We prepared for the possibility,' he said. The Committee's ranking member, Sen. Kent Smith, D-Euclid, added, 'Some of it is we want to have conversations with the House.'
Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Oregon lawmakers scale back proposal for unemployment strike payments amid blowback
Hundreds of educators, parents and students joined a rally Nov. 1. 2023 at Roosevelt High School in north Portland to support striking teachers. Teachers like them could soon receive up to 10 weeks of unemployment benefits under a compromise negotiated by Oregon lawmakers.(Alex Baumhardt/Oregon Capital Chronicle) A particularly controversial measure that would give unemployment benefits to public and private Oregon workers during labor strikes survived a key Wednesday hearing after lawmakers agreed to cut the length of time in which workers on strike could cash checks by more than half. Senate Bill 916 would have limited striking workers to receiving benefits for 26 weeks, in line with the current caps on unemployment checks for Oregonians. But after the Senate rejected an amended version of the bill on Tuesday, a bicameral conference committee voted Wednesday to set a new cutoff at 10 weeks after a two-week waiting period. Committee members voted along party lines, with the sole Republican present voting against the amendments. 'I do feel like this is a massive compromise,' said Rep. Dacia Grayber, D-Portland, the bill's lead author. 'It's not something I'm entirely thrilled with.' The measure would be a first-in-the-nation move by Oregon, establishing a right to strike for public and private employees while ensuring them the ability to apply for unemployment benefits. Aside from traditionally strike-exempt public employees such as firefighters and police, workers such as nurses and teachers could claim benefits after two weeks of striking. The bill has been among this session's most controversial measures, laying bare deep divisions over how best to use the state's $6.4 billion unemployment insurance fund. The changes come after support for a Democrat-led bill collapsed in a concurring Senate vote on Tuesday amid concerns from Republicans and a key dissenting Democrat. It had already drawn opposition from school board leaders who help negotiate teacher strikes, business groups, and local government leaders who contribute to the state's unemployment fund. 'We have a healthy fund today due in no small part because all the agreements in the years have been honored,' committee member Sen. Daniel Bonham, R- The Dalles, told his colleagues before voting against the amended bill. 'It is a healthy enough fund that I don't know that this will be a massive draw on it, but again the kids will lose if teachers are incentivized to strike.' House Democrats got the bill over the finish line in their chamber last week, arguing that the benefits would be used sparingly and not as a tool to prolong strikes, but to shorten them. A change made in a House committee would cap benefits to eight weeks if the state's unemployment fund is at risk, and lawmakers also included an amendment that mandates deductions in backpay for benefits claimed by teachers during strikes. Grayber on Tuesday repeated a promise she has made to continue monitoring the bill's implementation if it were to pass, but also signaled that she hoped to move past concerns that the bill would promote misuse of the unemployment system or dramatically hamper school life and public facilities. She said she's been 'guided by the math' behind the bill from the beginning, a subtle nod to the estimates from the state's employment department that the bill would not change existing tax structures for businesses and government agencies paying into the state's unemployment funding. 'I have heard the opposition,' she said. 'I very much look forward to moving past what feels like a worst-case scenario focus that we've maintained for several weeks now.' Oregonians who have lost a job can currently apply for unemployment weekly checks ranging from $196 to $836. The bill would allow benefits to kick in immediately if workers are locked out of facilities by their employer during negotiations. Sen. Mark Meek, D-Gladstone, is a sponsor of the legislation, but withdrew his support when it came up short in a 15-14 Senate vote on Tuesday. In a brief interview after the hearing, he declined to comment on whether he supported the proposed changes. He referred to another attempt at a transportation and infrastructure funding bill that the Legislature has taken up in the final weeks of the session: 'If there's time to pass a transportation package, there's time to get this right,' he said. The new amendment pushes the bill closer to a similar law passed in Washington that caps benefits at six weeks, but which doesn't go so far as to protect public employees like Oregon's proposed legislation. New Jersey and New York have also passed laws in recent years to provide unemployment benefits to striking private sector workers, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar effort in 2023 over fiscal concerns. Another bill extending benefits to striking workers in Connecticut is currently sitting on Gov. Ned Lamont's desk, but he is expected to veto it. The bill passed out of committee on a 4-1 vote. Rep. Lucetta Elmer, R-McMinnville, was excused. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
WATCH: Top Dem says he has 'never heard' his fellow party members call LA riots 'peaceful'
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said Wednesday that he had no recollection of his fellow Democratic Party colleagues referring to the anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles as "peaceful." "What do Democrats mean when they say the riots in L.A. are peaceful?" Durbin was asked by a reporter outside the Capitol. "I never heard them say that," Durbin responded, leading the reporter to ask Durbin whether he condemned the ongoing anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles, which some have said amount to riots. "I condemn violence, whether it's in the Capitol or in L.A.," Durbin shot back before being ushered away out of earshot. California Officials Are Trying To Deny La Riot 'Chaos' For 'Political Gain,' Sheriff Says The No. 2 Democrat in the Senate may not have heard any of his fellow party members use the word "peaceful" in their descriptions of the ongoing chaos in Los Angeles, but that doesn't mean they have not. Read On The Fox News App "A lot of these peaceful protests are being generated because the President of the United States is sowing chaos," Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said on Sunday's "Meet the Press" on NBC. Just the day before, President Donald Trump called on thousands of National Guard troops to go to Los Angeles to help quell the ongoing chaos, which has included attacks on law enforcement, property damage and looting. "The vast majority of protesters and demonstrators are peaceful," Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., said on MSNBC. "They're passionate." Sen. Cory Booker Calls Los Angeles Riots 'Peaceful,' Slams Trump For Deploying National Guard Rep. Nanette Barragán, a Democrat who represents California's 44th Congressional District, said on CNN's "State of the Union" program on Sunday that "We are having an administration that's targeting peaceful protests." Conservative critics also fired back after former Vice President Kamala Harris referred to the ongoing chaos as "overwhelmingly peaceful." "The country really dodged a bullet in November," Fox News contributor Guy Benson posted on X in response to Harris' social media post. In another post, Benson added, "Their official position is that they're appalled by what's happening in Los Angeles…because of Trump and ICE, not the violent rioters. In its current form, this party cannot be salvaged." Dozens Of Anti-ice Rioters Arrested In La As Trump Sends In National Guard To Quell Violence Meanwhile, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got heat for describing the situation in Los Angeles as "peaceful." "California Governor Newsom didn't request the National Guard be deployed to his state following peaceful demonstrations. Trump sent them anyway. It's the first time in 60 years a president has made that choice," Clinton posted on X. "Trump's goal isn't to keep Californians safe. His goal is to cause chaos, because chaos is good for Trump." While there were initially examples of some peaceful protests at the start of this nearly weeklong chaos, by the start of the weekend, property destruction and violence broke out and devolved into a situation that became increasingly violent over the next few days. Several officers were injured during the riot, which included rocks and other projectiles thrown at them, and dozens of people were arrested related to the protests and rioting. Looting has also been an issue, as has property damage, and on Tuesday evening Democrat Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass instituted a citywide curfew. In a rare intraparty dissent, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., criticized his own party this week for failing to adequately condemn the violence in Los Angeles. "This is anarchy and true chaos," the Pennsylvania Democrat said in a Monday post on X alongside a picture of cars that had been destroyed by fire. "My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings and assaulting law enforcement." "I unapologetically stand for free speech, peaceful demonstrations and immigration," Fetterman added. "But this is not that."Original article source: WATCH: Top Dem says he has 'never heard' his fellow party members call LA riots 'peaceful'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Durbin pushes to pass DACA bill ahead of 13th anniversary
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WCIA) — Sunday is the 13th anniversary of the DACA program. Senator Dick Durbin is spearheading the movement to turn the executive order into law. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals allows undocumented immigrants who entered the country as children protection from deportation. The program has helped more than 800,000 young people. 'They've gone to our schools, they've stood up every morning in the classroom and pledged allegiance to the same flag we pledge allegiance, and they aspire to be great and make America a greater country,' Durbin (D-IL) said at a news conference Wednesday. Illinois bill ending scam gym membership tactic heads to governor's desk The senior senator from Illinois is one of the biggest supporters of the program. He first introduced a bill on the senate floor in 2001 but has not been successful codifying it into law.'Sometimes we'd pass it in the Senate, but the House wouldn't,' Durbin said. 'Sometimes we couldn't get 60 votes, sometimes we could.' President Barack Obama enacted the program with an executive order in 2012. Critics said implementing it was an overreach of Obama's powers. 'The program essentially rewards parents for bringing their children to the United States illegally,' Ira Mehlman, the Media Director for Federation for American Immigration Reform, said. 'And anytime you reward illegal activity, the inevitable result is you're going to get more of it.' Immigrant advocates say Dreamers serve many essential roles in their communities. 'There's a lot of doctors, nurses, individuals like myself doing advocacy based work, and pretty much any career you can think of here, there are DACA workers in our community,' Maria Jimenez, the Executive Director of Immigrant Services of Champaign-Urbana, said. Illinois bill on governor's desk would require law enforcement to work with federal gun tracing database But as the Supreme Court debates the constitutionality of the program, they're facing anxiety over a possible future without the program. 'It would mean a great deal of instability for my family,' Jimenez said. 'I have a partner, I have two young kids I provide for, it would mean myself, my brother, my family members would all of a sudden not have the stability and safety from deportation.' The proposed legislation, American Dream and Promise Act of 2025, would give anyone who is 18 or younger who's been in the U.S. since 2021 protected status. It would also provide a pathway to permanent legal status if dreamers get a degree or serve in the military for at least two years. The full bill can be found here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
