The Cost of Politics Is Showing Up on Your Electric Bill

By Carl Marrara

When families in Central Pennsylvania open their electric bills, they need an explanation for why electricity keeps getting more expensive. Come November, voters will surely have this issue top of mind.

A quick look on the Pennsylvania 10th Congressional candidate’s websites shows stark contrast. U.S. Rep. Scott Perry addresses this concern and acknowledges, “The Biden-Harris anti-American energy policies threaten our national security and have ruined our economy.  America must be energy independent to grow our economy and maintain our security.” He correctly states he, “supports a blended energy portfolio that includes the development of clean energy technologies and using our vast energy resources – to reduce our dependence on foreign energy, turn around the economy, create jobs, reduce inflation, make energy more affordable, and preserve our environment.”

And on Janelle Stelson’s website? Nothing. Even with the find feature on and searching the word “energy,” it’s not mentioned once.

Janelle Stelson may not have released a detailed energy plan, but she has aligned herself with the broader Biden-era Democratic energy agenda on several social media posts. That matters because the policies that came out of the Biden-era White House, combined with policies pushed in Pennsylvania by Govs. Tom Wolf and Josh Shapiro, have made electricity more expensive for consumers. These policies have taken reliable baseload power offline, discouraged investment in new natural gas generation, and created uncertainty for the very projects Pennsylvania needs to keep the lights on and prices affordable.

The answer is pretty straightforward: energy markets run on supply and demand. When government policies make it harder to build and maintain reliable power generation, supply gets tighter. When supply gets tighter and demand keeps growing, prices go up. That is exactly what Pennsylvanians are feeling now.

Because new baseload energy production requires massive investments, the energy cost crunch can’t break or be fixed overnight. The Obama Clean Power Plan began the federal push to force coal-fired power plants and natural gas plants off the grid. Don’t take my word for it: In a 2008 interview President Obama admitted himself that, “my cap-and-trade program will cause electricity rates to necessarily skyrocket.” The Biden Administration charted a similar course with a new round of regulations aimed at coal and natural gas plants, including rules that would have required major emissions reductions from existing coal plants and new baseload gas plants. EPA has since described those Biden-era regulations as costly rules that raised costs and threatened grid reliability. Ms. Stelson said she supported these policies.

Simultaneously, Gov. Wolf’s push to enter Pennsylvania into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in 2019 created years of uncertainty for power producers. Though this was abandoned in 2024, Governor Shapiro continues to push his cap-and-tax PACER and PRESS plans that do the same thing. The Commonwealth Foundation estimates that the plan’s PACER and PRESS components would impose $157.2 billion in new electricity costs over ten years and more than double residential electricity bills. Carbon taxes and cap-and-tax schemes may sound clever in policy papers, but in the real world they raise the cost of power generation, discourage infrastructure investment, and leave consumers paying the bill. Governor Shapiro has endorsed Ms. Stelson.

Policies matter and the Obama Clean Power Plan, Biden-Harris Clean Energy Plan, RGGI, PACER, and PRESS are what regulatory uncertainty looks like in the real world. Developers do not commit billions of dollars to projects that may take five to ten years to produce revenue if the federal and state governments are threatening to impose new carbon taxes on the power those plants will generate.

A Commonwealth Foundation analysis found that from 2019 to 2025, while Pennsylvania was moving toward RGGI and then litigating over it, proposals for new generation fell 38 percent and natural gas generation proposals fell 65 percent. The same analysis found that Pennsylvania’s project conversion rate dropped from 73 percent before the RGGI period to just 9 percent during it. But in Ohio and West Virginia, energy investment increased. They estimated that Pennsylvania forfeited roughly 3,833 megawatts of generation capacity during the RGGI period, enough to power about 1.9 million homes.

Closing power plants is easy, but replacing them has become unnecessarily hard. A new power plant has to move from proposal to financing, permitting, construction, testing, and finally connection to the grid. That process can take years. When government adds more uncertainty, delays, and costs, fewer projects get built. The result is less reliable electricity supply at exactly the time usage is rising because of consumer demand for broader electrification and greater computational power.

PJM Interconnection, the regional grid operator that serves Pennsylvania and much of the Mid-Atlantic, has already warned that demand growth is outpacing new generation. In its 2025 annual report, PJM noted that its 2027/28 capacity auction fell short of its reliability requirement by 6,517 megawatts, the first time the auction had not met that requirement since it was created in 2007. That is not some abstract energy-market footnote; it is a warning sign that there is not enough dependable power being added quickly enough. It hasn’t been until the Biden-era regulations have been rolled back that energy markets are seeing investment again. But again, none of this happens overnight.

Pennsylvania should be leading the way out of this problem, not making it worse. Thanks to the Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania has abundant natural gas, and the shift from coal to natural gas has already delivered major environmental benefits. Congressman Perry’s assessment is correct – you don’t have to be anti-environment to be pro-production. According to Pennsylvania’s Independent Fiscal Office, the Commonwealth remained the top electricity export state while carbon emissions from electricity generation continued their long-term decline. This is true across the entire United States. New, market-driven solutions have lowered emissions 20 percent since 2005 and the main driver of this has been in electric power generation.  

Pennsylvania’s shift to natural gas happened because of unforced consumer choices, not top-down, cap-and-tax, government intervention. Access to highly efficient natural gas from the Marcellus Shale provided the feedstock for modern combined-cycle power plants, drastically lowering emissions while producing the reliable electricity our grid needs. That is a success story worth celebrating, not punishing. Pennsylvania reduced emissions not by shutting down the economy, but by using cleaner and more efficient baseload generation. Yet Democratic Party energy policy has too often punished that progress.

And higher electric bills do not stop at the kitchen table. Manufacturers use vast amounts of electricity and other energy to make the goods people buy and rely on every day. When energy costs rise, the cost of producing food packaging, steel, plastics, chemicals, building materials, machinery, and consumer products rises too. Those higher costs ripple through the economy and add to inflation. So, families pay twice: once through higher utility bills, and again through higher prices at the store.

Pennsylvania energy leadership is also American energy leadership. Our Commonwealth is the nation’s largest electricity exporter and a major producer of natural gas and coal. We help power the grid, and our production is essential to American energy leadership, geopolitical stability, and national security. When government taxes something, regulates it into uncertainty, or makes it harder to build, we get less of it. That is simple economics.

That is why energy affordability should be a major issue in this congressional race. Voters deserve to know whether Janelle Stelson would support the same energy policies that have tightened electricity supply, discouraged natural gas investment, and increased costs for consumers. Pennsylvania does not need more Washington-based mandates that make reliable power more expensive. We need policies that encourage new generation, speed up permitting, protect baseload power, and recognize the environmental progress we continue to make.

Why has Janelle Stelson aligned herself with failed federal policies that have been proven to make energy more expensive?  The choice is simple: Pennsylvania can build on what works, or face higher utility bills, steeper prices for everyday goods, and less reliable power.

This article was originally published by RealClearPennsylvania and made available via RealClearWire.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 7 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
12 Comments
Bill Toland
July 16, 2026 10:49 pm

The problem for Democratic Parry politicians is that if they told the truth about how useless “renewable” energy is, they wouldn’t be elected as the Democratic Party candidate. Janelle Stelson knows very well what is going on in the energy system in her state, but she cannot say anything about it without being attacked by the lunatics in her own party.

July 16, 2026 10:55 pm

What the western world is undergoing is best described as a neo-communist kleptocracy. Largely driven by the United Nations but literally booming in Australia.

Australia has it nailed down. Not a single Minister in Australia’s Federal Government has worked outside the Labor Party machine. They are career movers and shakers within the Labor machine in taking money from makers to enshrine their position.

They have massive taxpayer funded projects that feed back into Labor coffers through proponents’ direct gifts and extortion from unionised work force employed on the projects paying union dues to the Labor Party machine.

Energy Minister Blackout has gifted himself $155M to spread the message to COP31. All the Democrat participants from the USA will return with a new playbook. Blackout is the lead negotiator in the Capacity Investment Scheme that guarantees taxpayers funds for no electrical output. All secret deals with no taxpayer and voter given any information on how much they have been signed up for. All given legitimacy under the Climate Change™ hoax.

Herman Pope
July 17, 2026 12:01 am

We have the technology to build Coal Power Plants that burn the Coal Hot and Clean while Filtering out the Particulates that could be Harmful. On February 12, 2026, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized its rescission of the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding, we do not need to concern ourselves about danger from more CO2, that is official, that was well known by many of us already. We need to burn Coal to help our Natural Gas and Oil last longer. Nuclear will eventually supply most or much, much, more of our energy needs, but Fossil Fuels are used for many things other than providing energy. The war against Fossil Fuels is a war against Humanity, the war against Fossil Fuels is a war against me, my family, my friends, my country, my country’s allies, even against my enemies, maybe I can become OK with that part, for example, it may be many years before Iran benefits from their vast supply of oil. I do hope that Iran will abandon their support of terrorists and their war against infidels, their war against everyone who is not a Muslim, the Iranian people could become some of the most well off people in the world, if their leaders would allow that, I hope that they do that.

July 17, 2026 3:57 am

Bill McKibben: “We live on a planet where the cheapest way to make power is to point a sheet of glass at the sun.”

Shouldn’t we talk about how much trumps misadventures in Iran increase energy costs? Beside all the other costs and the increased instability.

oeman50
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
July 17, 2026 5:49 am

“Point a sheet of glass at the sun.”

What a totally idiotic over-simplification of solar power.

Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
July 17, 2026 6:31 am

What would it cost us if religious fanatics in Iran had several dozen nuclear weapons right now? In that case, I think Israel would be nuked, along with the Vatican/Rome, right off the bat

I paid $3.30 per gallon at the last fill up. A very small price to pay to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of suicidal maniacs.

Trump is in the process of opening up the Strait of Hormuz and then the oil prices will come down further.

Trump was asked if there was going to be a need to put troops in and Trump said that might have to happen, but he said it would not be U.S. troops, leaving the impression that Trump may arm Good Iranians to weed out the Bad Iranians.

The Islamic Republic of Iran needs to be obliterated. Religious fanatics are not good for anything.

If not for Trump’s actions, the religious, suicidal fanatics in Iran would have nuclear weapons right now. It’s either dumb luck or Providence that we don’t have a holocaust on our hands right now.

Notice how all the Democrats take the side of our enemies. The friend of our enemies is no friend to us.

Democrat delusional thinking is an existential threat to the future of the United States. Everything they do harms the United States. They are not fit to lead us.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
July 17, 2026 6:46 am

Still believe that WMD story? Obamas deal was far better than what trump will get:

He radicalized iran even more
Showed the population the US is not here to help
That any deal made with the US is worthless, as they won’t honor it if it fits them

He also showed that he can’t open the strait nor that the US is in control of it (His DUI hire hegseth lied about this at least twice.)

International politics is not something the NY real estate boy can deal with – and he shows that again and again and again.

But hey, keep on believing.

starzmom
July 17, 2026 4:35 am

Pennsylvania is the state that leveled to the ground a 2000 megawatt mine-mouth coal plant a few years ago. This should tell you all you need to know about Pennsylvania’s commitment to affordable electricity.

oeman50
July 17, 2026 5:46 am

Closing power plants is easy, but replacing them has become unnecessarily hard.

Amen to that.

Companies that want to build any FF power plant are whipsawed by the 4 year presidential cycle with alternating Republican and Democrat administrations and Congresses. You cannot propose, permit, finance, engineer and build a new plant in that time. If you have a favorable spot in the simple cycle gas turbine queue you might have a shot at it, but then new rules appear to handcuff that one at the beginning of the next 4 year cycle.

Reply to  oeman50
July 17, 2026 6:37 am

Yes, electing Democrats to the presidency always causes problems.

Maybe we should not elect Democrats to the presidency in the future. That would be what smart people would do.

How many smart people vote in the United States?

It’s hard to be smart when the Leftwing media does their best to make everyone dumber by telling lies and distorting the truth.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
July 17, 2026 7:38 am

In the case of populous states with universal mail in ballots combined with “legal” ballots harvesting the basic question is how many ballots are actually cast by living people who decided for themselves what is on the ballot “submitted” in their name?

starzmom
Reply to  oeman50
July 17, 2026 12:16 pm

When I worked for a utility company many years ago, we forecast 15 years to site, permit, engineer, finance and build a fossil fuel power plant. If you had an existing site, you might get by with a few years less. Nuclear plant, our forecast was 20 years–today I think that is way too optimistic.