Assembly lawmakers to weigh bills aimed at easing impact of electricity prices
Lawmakers are moving to defray the impact of surging electricity costs expected to raise monthly bills by about 20% beginning this June. (Dana DiFilippo | New Jersey Monitor)
An Assembly panel on Monday will consider a spate of bills meant to ease the impact of electricity prices set to surge in June.
Among the bills are measures that would alter how state regulators set profit margins for utilities, create training requirements for those regulators, and require the Board of Public Utilities to study the impact data centers have on electricity prices.
'We're not going to find a one-fix silver bullet that's going to solve the entire issue. It's going to need to be piecemeal,' said Assemblyman Avi Schnall (D-Ocean), a sponsor of one of the bills. We're going to have to find a little bit here and a little bit there and a little bit over there.'
The hearing comes about a month before electricity prices are set to surge upward by roughly 20% as a result of price-setting auctions held in July and February. The increase could add approximately $25 to an average customer's monthly bill.
Schnall's bill would require the Board of Public Utilities to use a stricter standard when setting utilities' return on equity rates — the rate at which they are allowed to profit on infrastructure and other investments.
At present, most New Jersey utilities' return on equity rates hovers around 9.6%. Utility providers are not permitted to profit off the sale of electricity itself — they sell it to customers at cost — but they can recoup costs for other investments, including capital costs, that are typically passed directly along to consumers.
The bill would require the BPU to approve the 'lowest reasonable' return on equity, rather than the fair and reasonable standard used under existing regulations. It's not clear how much the change would affect utility bills (parts of the measure would take effect months after being signed into law).
'More money going back to customers is more money going back to customers,' Schnall said.
Other bills in the package would require utilities to return excess profits to ratepayers as a direct credit to future bills or through direct payments to customers who have unpaid bills or are enrolled in utility assistance programs.
The BPU also sets revenue requirements for New Jersey utilities.
Republican officials have blamed Gov. Phil Murphy's ambitious clean energy goals — and his focus on offshore wind projects that are now stalled under the Trump administration — for growing rates.
Assemblyman Christian Barranco (R-Morris), an electrician by trade, panned most of the bills on the committee's Monday agenda, warning measures to limit utilities' profitability would limit their ability to attract the investment needed to upgrade their infrastructure. Barranco's comments echo concerns utility operators voiced at a legislative hearing on electricity prices in late April.
He noted Jersey Central Power and Light had recently pared down a $930.5 million infrastructure investment plan by nearly 80% in a bid to keep rates down.
'That's what's going to be affected, that sort of investment — that sort of keeping up with the reliability of the infrastructure that we'd like to see in a first-world country like ours,' Barranco said.
He praised a separate bill that would appropriate $5 million for the BPU to study the feasibility of small modular nuclear reactors statewide.
One Republican member expressed cautious support for the bill package but warned that, while the bills could help control the cost of electricity in the long run, they would do little to relieve the short-term impact of surging prices.
'I think it's a package that is not going to help ratepayers anytime soon,' said Assemblyman Alex Sauickie (R-Ocean).
He said Republican proposals to lower or suspend the societal benefits charge — a 3% surcharge on all New Jersey electricity bills — or exempt utility services from the state's sales tax would deliver more immediate relief.
Democrats have said that PJM Interconnection, the grid operator for New Jersey, 12 other states, and the District of Columbia, is to blame for the rate spikes because the interconnector has been slow to add some renewable projects to its grid.
Utility prices may become an even more pressing concern for low-income New Jerseyans in the next federal fiscal year. President Donald Trump has proposed zeroing out just over $4 billion in funding for a low-income home energy assistance program.
'The Budget proposes to end this program and to instead support low-income individuals through energy dominance, lower prices, and an America First economic platform,' the Trump administration said in a budget document released Friday.
New Jersey received nearly $133 million in awards under the program, which is meant to provide heating and cooling assistance to households making no more than 60% of the state's median income. That cutoff was $92,108 for a four-person household in the current federal fiscal year.
New Jersey Department of Community Affairs Commissioner Jacquelyn Suárez told state Senate lawmakers last week that she expected New Jersey to receive federal funds for the program approved for the current federal fiscal year, which runs through Sept. 30, but her department had not been told that the program would not be funded in the following federal fiscal year.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBS News
7 minutes ago
- CBS News
Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map
Less than a day after Tarrant County commissioners approved a controversial redistricting proposal, a group of citizens filed a lawsuit claiming intentional discrimination. According to the Lone Star Project, the lawsuit claims that Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare and his followers engaged in intentional racial discrimination in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution by drawing the new district lines. "Intentional discrimination is still against the law," said lead legal counsel for the citizen plaintiffs, Chad Dunn. "The map they drew, the process they used to draw it, and the animosity shown to the citizens of Tarrant County violate the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution." Hundreds of residents speak out for, against the redistricting More than 200 people spoke out about redrawing boundary lines during public comment Tuesday night. The majority who spoke were against redistricting, including the mayors of Arlington, Mansfield and Forest Hills. There were still several speakers who expressed their support. Several used the phrase "don't Dallas my Tarrant." Tarrant County "I want to say that I fully support deterring redistricting efforts. These lines haven't been updated since 2010," said Carlos Turcios, the community development committee chairman for the Tarrant Republican Party. Commissioners moved into executive session around 3 p.m. on Tuesday after some tense moments between the two Democrats and the three Republicans. As Commissioner Alisa Simmons expressed all the reasons she is against redistricting, Judge Tim O'Hare abruptly moved to executive session in an effort to limit her comments. O'Hare is spearheading this process and has been clear that it's about partisan politics. He wants another Republican seat on the court to ensure conservative leadership for the next decade. "It's a very divided country and the parties, I'm not sure, have never been further apart in their beliefs," O'Hare said. "I don't apologize for being a Republican. I don't apologize for being a conservative." "It's not partisan. It is racism." Critics believe the redistricting is racial gerrymandering, saying it goes beyond partisan politics and say it dilutes the voting power of minorities. "Absolutely, it's not partisan. It is racism," Simmons said during the meeting. The new map does appear to take areas with high Black and brown populations from precinct two and put them in precinct one. SMU political science professor Calvin Jillson said what the court did is not unusual, but the legality of the new lines comes down to intentions. "Oh, this absolutely gerrymandering – it is the redrawing of electoral boundaries for partisan purposes," Jillson said. "The question is whether the purposes behind the redrawing were actually political, in which case gerrymandering is legal, or racial discrimination, in which case it would not be legal." Check out more on the CBS News Texas YouTube page: contributed to this report.
Yahoo
10 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
10 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