Latest news with #SenateEnergyCommittee
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Ohio Senate committee advances energy compromise
File photo of electricity pylons. (Getty Images). With a final few tweaks, Ohio senators advanced a major piece of energy legislation. The Senate Energy Committee vote was unanimous. With both chambers in session Wednesday, it's likely lawmakers could sign off on the legislation and send it along to the governor. The most substantive change had to do with the Public Utility Commission of Ohio clock — it moved from 320 days to 360. Lawmakers are putting a ceiling on PUCO deliberations because they want rate cases to move more quickly. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX After Tuesday's hearing, state Sen. Bill Reineke, R-Tiffin, connected the longer shot clock to broader changes in the ratemaking process. Utilities must come before the PUCO every three years, and they'll be able to set rates in three-year increments with annual 'true-ups' to reflect the companies' actual balance sheet. Reineke explained the longer timeline will give regulators a bit of breathing room. Before lawmakers put the bill to a vote, Ohio Consumers' Counsel Maureen Willis made a final bid to remove a provision on consumer refunds. Under the changes, bill payers could receive refunds after the Supreme Court determines a charge was unwarranted, but any payments prior to that decision would be out of reach. Willis explained her office in the middle of a case against Dayton-area AES Ohio which could yield more than $300 in refunds per customer. 'If HB 15 becomes law as written AES's half a million consumers would lose that refund opportunity that has been in the making since 2019,' she said. Ohio senators propose changes to harmonize House, Senate energy bills The final version of the bill also left out a passage subjecting more power line projects to state oversight. Willis called that omission 'disappointing.' 'No one is reviewing these projects,' she argued. 'Not the Ohio Power Siting Board, not the PUCO and not (the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). Ohio consumers, your constituents, pay 100% of those costs through transmission riders.' Rebecca Mellino from the Nature Conservancy praised lawmakers for repealing a controversial coal subsidy approved as part of 2019's HB 6 but argued 'Ohio lags far behind neighboring states' when it comes to renewable energy. She suggested provisions encouraging brownfield redevelopment could offer an opportunity for renewable energy investment. The core incentive for new energy production is a reduction in tangible personal property taxes — levied on things like machinery and equipment. But while lawmakers attempt to boost energy production with a tax cut, they're also trying to find reductions in property taxes. Energy committee chairman, Sen. Brian Chavez, R-Marietta, insisted the reductions won't undermine services. 'We're not changing any taxes that are in effect right now,' he explained. 'So any taxes from power plants that are in place will stay in place as they depreciate out — this is only on new generation.' Sen. Kent Smith, D-Euclid, argued the tax break is an important cue to companies. When lawmakers passed HB 6, he said, they subsidized coal and nuclear facilities. 'It was not just putting your thumb on the scale,' he said, 'I mean, it wreaked havoc in natural gas generation.' With the current bill, lawmakers will remove the last of those subsidies. 'So we've sort of restored capitalism in the energy generation space,' Smith argued. 'And by reducing the tangible personal property percentage, hopefully that sends a signal.' Still, there's little Ohio's legislation can do to address lawmakers' central concern about power demand outstripping supply. The 13-state power network PJM has a substantial backlog of power plants that want to connect to the grid, and large-scale consumers like data centers are pushing demand for power higher. 'That's why we focused on behind the meter generation,' Chavez said, 'so that any new industry that comes into Ohio is not adding additional strain on the existing grid.' Behind the meter generation involves building a bespoke power plant directly connected to a given business. 'PJM is aware of the concerns that are out there. They're hearing that from all 13 states,' Chavez added. 'They are on our list. We're going to go talk to them in the fall, and we're going to have some frank conversations with them to see how we can partner to get through this.' Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Ohio senators propose changes to harmonize House, Senate energy bills
Transmission towers that carry high-voltage electricity are shown on March 8, 2025, in East China Township, Michigan. Ontario, Canada Premier Doug Ford put a 25 percent tariff on electricity that the province provides to Michigan, Minnesota, and New York beginning March 10 as a response to the tariffs President Donald Trump imposed on goods from Canada. (Photo by) Ohio lawmakers appear to have a deal on a wide-ranging energy bill meant to increase power production in the state. They're returning from a two-week recess with an amendment sanding off the differences between House and Senate proposals approved last month. The Senate Energy Committee meets Tuesday to introduce the changes and likely put them to vote. Both chambers will be in session the following day and could presumably vote on final passage in back-to-back sessions. The proposal offers tax breaks for companies investing in power plants and retools the ratemaking process for energy distribution companies. To further encourage new entrants, the measure reinforces barriers keeping the regulated monopolies running distribution out of the production market. From the outset, House and Senate lawmakers have worked along parallel tracks advancing similar, although not identical, versions of the same bill. Several core ideas have persisted throughout, like eliminating the coal plant rider from 2019's HB 6. Along the way, lawmakers proposed a few sideline initiatives. The House bill included a pilot for small cooperative power generation facilities; the Senate added in a program loaning schools money for renewable energy improvements. The Senate's idea survived. The House's didn't. For other provisions, the chambers offered different responses to the same question. The proposals incentivize investment with a tax break. Tangible personal property tax gets levied on the equipment used to generate electricity. The House proposed reducing the rate from about 25% to 7%. Senators meanwhile suggested eliminating it altogether for equipment brought online after 2025. The amendment goes with the 7% mark and includes provisions to discourage companies from claiming the reduced rate after making modest changes or upgrades to existing facilities. Another major element of the legislation has to do with the regulatory timeline. Critics argue Ohio's ratemaking process takes longer than most other states, so lawmakers proposed a 'shot clock' for those decisions. The House set the ceiling at 360 days, but the Senate's 320-day deadline is the one carried forward in the amendment. A last-minute change to what qualifies as a 'major' facility isn't included in the amendment. House lawmakers lowered the cut-off for electric transmission lines to put more of them under the Ohio Power Siting Board's authority. Critics argued those investments get very little oversight and offer a path for utilities to over-charge customers for the upgrades. Ohio Consumers' Counsel Maureen Willis is urging lawmakers to 'reconsider' a different provision related to consumer refunds. 'When we say 'reconsider' we mean delete it,' her written testimony states. If the state Supreme Court determines a charge was unlawful, the legislation allows consumer refunds for any of those charges collected after the court decision. Willis questioned the idea of barring refunds on charges determined to be illegal. What's more, she argued 'it may have the unintended effect of interfering with consumer refunds in pending appeals where charges have been collected 'subject to refund.'' One such case against Dayton-area AES Ohio is currently working through the appeals process. Because state regulators approved a $76 million charge — subject to refund, the Consumers' Counsel case could return more than $300 to each customer. But if the amendment's cut off is in place, those refunds would be in jeopardy. 'The current refund provisions risk perpetuating past injustices where consumers bore the cost of unlawful utility charges without remedy,' Willis wrote. Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Testimony from Babydog at Dept. of Energy hearing ‘admitted to record without objection'
(WBOY) — Babydog, Sen. Jim Justice's (R-WV) English bulldog, has been making the rounds in Washington over the past few weeks, making appearances on the Senate floor and in several committee hearings. On Thursday, during Sen. Justice's testimony in the Senate Energy Committee, he lifted Babydog to the mic to bring a message of unity and love. In a clip shared by NBC News, Babydog can be heard panting while Justice speaks on her behalf, 'This little rascal has done something that I think is really important to all of us—she humanizes us.' Justice continued, 'I didn't intend in any way to be hauling a bulldog around. No way on Earth. We never owned a bulldog before. She's not supposed to like everybody, but she does. And with that being said, how can a message be any better?' President Trump appoints WV Prison Commissioner to federal post 'She would say just this: If you're rich or poor, or a kid or an adult, or, God forbid, a Republican or a Democrat, she still loves you.' Babydog's testimony was admitted to the record 'without objection.' Babydog, who became the face of the West Virginia governor's office during Justice's tenure, has gained a national following since she appeared at the Republican National Convention last year. Her X page, which documents her travels around West Virginia and now Washington, D.C., has more than 10,000 followers. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
New York Times
19-03-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Trump Does Actually Need to Legislate
For all the initiatives and proposals in the relentless opening weeks of the second Trump administration, there has been little in the way of a legislative agenda. Across his expansive address to a joint session of Congress, President Trump boasted about an array of executive branch initiatives and proposals — but very little about legislation. The limitations of this approach are becoming more visible. Mr. Trump's seeming indifference toward Congress proved costly in his first term — and threatens to constrain his agenda once again. Without a compelling legislative agenda, the Trump administration risks an early slide into lame duck status. The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act expires this year, and renewal will take up most of the bandwidth Congress has for at least the next several months. That leaves little time to pass other significant legislation before the 2026 midterm election campaigns begin. Democrats need to flip only a few seats to retake the House. Although the tax bill can be passed along narrow partisan lines via reconciliation, the administration should also begin exploring proposals with some bipartisan appeal. Such legislation could expand upon, and put more resources behind, Mr. Trump's executive orders — and it could expand his political coalition. For instance, the administration's immigration policies appear to have been effective at reducing illegal border crossings, and his 'gold card' visa proposal suggests a desire to encourage highly skilled immigrants to come to the United States. But executive orders can easily be reversed by a future president, and they can go only so far. While Republicans still hold both houses of Congress, the administration should push party leadership to finally match their campaign rhetoric with action on immigration. In addition to appropriating funds for border enforcement, reforms to immigration law could include clarifying the asylum process, requiring E-Verify for employers or redesigning the flawed H-1B system for skilled immigrants. If successful, such legislation would make the administration's executive orders more effective and durable. Another issue that offers low-hanging fruit is environmental permitting reform. A proposal with bipartisan support, the Manchin-Barrasso Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024, passed the Senate Energy Committee during the Biden administration. A serious Republican permitting bill could attract significant Democratic votes and would be in line with administration priorities around 'energy dominance' and reindustrialization. The latter is the policy opportunity that is arguably most in need of ambitious legislation, and it offers significant opportunities for bipartisan collaboration. Strengthening the U.S. industrial base has both national security and macroeconomic implications, and the president has already issued multiple executive orders aimed at this goal. In his speech to Congress, he announced a new White House office to support shipbuilding. He might have also mentioned the bipartisan SHIPS for America Act of 2024, a bill before Congress that could augment these efforts. Another Trump executive order called for the creation of a U.S. sovereign wealth fund, an idea explored by the Biden administration. While it may be possible to create a fund without Congress, new legislative authorities would allow for greater resources and effectiveness. In fact, Vice President JD Vance, while a senator, had reportedly been working on a bipartisan proposal for a new federal investment vehicle to develop strategic industries. Such a proposal — together with others focused on strengthening American industry — could form the basis of major bipartisan legislation under Mr. Trump and become a cornerstone of the administration's economic agenda. Mr. Trump specifically criticized the CHIPS Act in his address as a failed government giveaway, suggesting that tariffs would be more effective. But imposing broad tariffs has already proven to be complicated, and on-again-off-again trade threats may not be enough to reorient entrenched supply chains and long-term investment patterns. Improving upon the Biden era industrial policy bills may not require similarly large appropriations, but it will require better funding and procurement mechanisms — thus, new legislation. Tariffs are also more likely to be effective as part of a broader, long-term industrial strategy rather than merely as bargaining chips in constantly evolving negotiations. On the tax bill, for now congressional Republicans seem to be zeroing in on major cuts to Medicaid to offset a portion of the cost of tax cuts, which has already rankled some populist and moderate Republicans and will provide campaign fodder for Democrats. Polling indicates that cutting taxes is not a high priority for voters, suggesting that the associated spending cuts — which were hardly a feature of the Trump campaign — will be unpopular. The 2017 tax cuts were disappointing in their effects on business investment and overall growth; a renewal that mostly extends the status quo is even less likely to drive significant growth in the economy. Assuming the White House is concerned about overall deficit levels — and it should be — then the administration needs to be willing to consider more revenue increases to offset its tax cuts. The White House has already proposed closing the carried-interest loophole, which allows Wall Street fund managers to pay lower tax rates. Other options, aside from raising marginal rates, might involve shutting down offshore tax avoidance schemes that allow the largest multinational companies to shift taxable income to havens such as Ireland. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick has put this proposal on the table, and ensuring that profits earned in the United States are taxed in the United States is certainly consistent with Mr. Trump's America First message. In addition to the budgetary impact, requiring the 'winners' of the U.S. economy to shoulder some of the deficit-reduction burden might make spending cuts slightly more palatable to voters. The furious pace of executive orders and announcements seems to have served Mr. Trump well so far, but the strategy is beginning to show diminishing returns. The president now has an opportunity to refocus the discussion on longer-term policy projects. Mr. Trump and his appointees tend to see the unelected bureaucrats of the 'deep state' as their foremost opponents. But Congress — and its difficult-to-navigate mix of ideologues and interest groups — may be the most formidable obstacle to achieving any lasting realignments in both policy and politics. Left to its own devices, the legislative branch is likely to be governed by inertia, and could send the second Trump administration down a similar trajectory as the first.
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Ohio Senate committee prepares to vote on sweeping energy measure
File photo of electricity pylons. (Getty Images). Ohio Senators are gearing up to vote on a major energy bill, but over the course of half a dozen hearings, it's gone through several iterations. The proposal aims to encourage new power plants to get up and running quickly, as the state's power demands are poised to outstrip supply in the not-too-distant future. On the opening day of the current session, Senate President Rob McColley made it clear that increasing energy production — becoming a 'net exporter' — was one of his early priorities. 'What we need to do is we need to create policies that will create more investment in energy in the state of Ohio,' he said. 'Primarily base load power, primarily natural gas that can be extracted here from inside the state, and that's going to be a win-win for the state of Ohio.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX But beyond incentivizing new production, Senate Bill 2 includes several other provisions reframing the way energy companies do business in Ohio. The Senate Energy Committee is set to take up yet another iteration of SB 2 on Tuesday morning with plans to put the latest version to a vote. Last week, Sen. Bill Reineke, R-Tiffin, introduced the fourth version of SB 2. Despite tweaks along the way, many of the measure's initial elements remain in place. The measure funnels power companies toward the traditional ratemaking process. Electric security plans, which allow utilities can bill consumers for various grid improvements, would be abolished; some companies have relied on security plans to avoid the more rigorous rate setting procedure. But lawmakers have also taken steps to make the ratemaking process more attractive. At the utilities request, rates can be forecast up to three years in the future, with annual adjustments based on utilities' actual costs. Critics worried that 'true up' would be a one-way street with rates climbing higher. Reineke sought to allay those concerns, insisting rates would be 'properly moved up and down' based on the company's financials. He also explained there's a so-called shot clock for ratemaking. 'The PUCO has a total of one year to complete a rate case,' he said, 'with a 45-day period for the application to be approved, 290 days for the rate case process and 30 days to make a decision.' The bill includes shortened timelines for siting decisions, too, particularly in brownfields. The poster child for SB 2's necessity is the data center. These warehouse-sized server farms are driving energy demand, and in some cases, the firms building them would like to build their own power plants to get them up and running. The measure takes steps to ensure those 'behind the meter' power sources can go forward. But lawmakers want to keep energy giants focused on power distribution out of that power generation market. 'With the exception of what they have already grandfather(ed) in,' Reineke explained, 'and any projects that are in the process have one year to be completed.' But perhaps most notable to the average Ohioan, the proposal eliminates the coal plant subsidies passed as part of 2019's House Bill 6. According to the Ohio Consumers' Counsel, those riders have cost ratepayers nearly $450 million already. The agency is currently challenging the legality of the surcharges before the Ohio Supreme Court, and the measure would allow for refunds when the court determines any charge is improper. But don't expect SB 2 to return half a billion dollars to Ohio ratepayers. Under its provisions, the clock for refunds starts with the date of a Supreme Court decision — not the date that utilities began collecting. In last week's hearing, committee members heard a handful of last-minute concerns. Environmental activist Cathy Cowan Becker objected to sharply reducing the timeline for siting decisions. She noted there's an Amazon data center that went up just outside her housing development in Hilliard. 'They could go to this guy who owns (the adjacent) field, offer him probably more money than he's ever seen, buy that field, propose to put a 100-megawatt gas plant there, and that would have a 45-day approval process,' she said. 'And the local officials in Hilliard would have no say.' Tony Long from the Ohio Chamber of Commerce praised the three-year pricing model for rate setting, but dinged the proposal for not doing more to encourage smart grid programs and other tools reduce demand for energy. Ohio Manufacturers Association lobbyist Kim Bojko argued three-year ratemaking is based on flawed logic. She explained the stated argument for taking a longer view is predictability, but that's not what ratepayers will get. Bojko said utilities will build in steady increases for outyears and then raise rates again when they start the next round. 'So, they'll change in year one, two, three, and four,' she said, 'thereby resulting in customers rates to not be stable or certain, and they could change even twice a year based on the true up provisions.' She also criticized the breadth of behind-the-meter facilities the measure would grandfather in. 'It would still allow the regulated utilities to own and operate generation if they made a filing — doesn't have to be approved — just make a filing before this bill passes,' she said. Dylan Borchers, speaking on behalf of Ohio Independent Power Producers, echoed complaints about behind-the-meter exceptions. He argued that allowing distributors into generation marks 'a dramatic change' to the market Ohio has had in place for 20-plus years. He said it's almost impossible to maintain a level playing field when electric companies have so much leverage over their customers. 'A customer needing to connect to the grid may feel compelled to now also agree to utility-owned behind the meter generation,' Borchers said, 'if it leads to quicker, more favorable treatment by the utility.' Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
