Dear Neighbor,
As we move further into October, one issue continues to rise to the top of conversations taking place in Harrisburg and in states across the PJM energy grid region: affordability. Families, small businesses, school districts, and local governments are all feeling the impact of rising electricity costs, yet none of these stakeholders have a real voice in the decisions that shape those costs.
That's why I've spent the past year working with legislators, regulators, consumer advocates, and state leaders from across the PJM region to push for greater transparency, accountability, and public representation in the decisions that affect our electric grid and, ultimately, our monthly utility bills. While these issues can be complex, the underlying question is simple: Are the institutions making decisions about our energy future acting in the public interest?
In this week’s newsletter and on Substack, I'm taking a closer look at that question and at the concerns about PJM's governance structure being raised by federal regulators, governors, consumer advocates, and other stakeholders.
While these voices come from different states, political perspectives, and areas of expertise, they are increasingly flagging the same concerns about transparency, accountability, and how the decisions affecting our electricity prices and grid reliability are made. At a time when affordability remains a top concern for so many Pennsylvanians, I believe those warnings deserve our attention.
What are regulators and stakeholders saying about PJM, and why does it matter?
Every month, families, businesses, schools, municipalities, and nonprofits across Pennsylvania pay electric bills that are directly affected by decisions made by PJM Interconnection, the organization responsible for managing the electric grid serving 67 million people across 13 states and the District of Columbia. As large-load customers, particularly data centers, continue to drive increased energy demand, these regular consumers are becoming a smaller portion of a utility’s total electricity demand, even as they carry a larger share of the financial burden for capacity prices and grid infrastructure.
When electricity prices rise, when reliability becomes a concern, or when major infrastructure investments are proposed, those decisions don't happen in a vacuum. They happen within a governance system that determines who has a voice, whose interests are prioritized, and ultimately who pays the bill.
For the past year, I have worked with legislators from across the PJM region through the bipartisan PJM Legislators' Collaborative to advocate for greater transparency, accountability, and public representation within PJM's governance structure.
Our goal has been straightforward: the people paying the bills deserve a meaningful voice in the decisions that affect them.
That should not be a controversial position. Yet for years, lawmakers, consumer advocates, and state officials have raised concerns that PJM's governance structure gives disproportionate influence to industry stakeholders while limiting the ability of states and everyday consumers to shape decisions that have enormous consequences for affordability and reliability.
Those concerns came to a head earlier this year, when Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Chair Laura Swett called for governance reform at PJM that would increase PJM’s independence from big-industry stakeholders and provide states with a more meaningful role in the governance process.
But rather than embracing meaningful reform, the PJM Members Committee ultimately advanced a proposal that moves in the opposite direction, increasing industry influence and further limiting the role of states and smaller consumers.
When the Chair of FERC calls PJM a "mess," when state governors accuse PJM members of writing and approving their own reforms, when state officials say they have been offered "a highchair in the corner" instead of a real seat at the table, and when the U.S. Department of Energy is warning that existing ratepayers deserve stronger protections, these concerns can no longer be brushed aside as isolated complaints.
Visit my Substack for a sampling of comments from federal regulators, governors, senior officials, legislators, and other stakeholders who have sounded the alarm in recent weeks.
The challenges we face will not be solved overnight, but that does not mean we can afford to accept the status quo.
I will continue working with my colleagues in the bipartisan, multistate PJM Legislators’ Collaborative to ensure that the people paying the bills have a meaningful voice in the decisions that affect their monthly electricity costs. We will continue to push for stronger consumer protections, fair cost allocation, and reforms that prevent the costs of new infrastructure and large energy users from being unfairly shifted onto existing ratepayers.
Most importantly, I will continue pushing for a system that puts people before profits.
PJM was created to serve the public interest. If it is going to maintain the trust of the people who depend on it, then it must be willing to listen to the growing chorus of voices calling for reform.
At the end of the day, this is not about excluding industry stakeholders from the conversation. The question is whether the residential consumers, communities, schools, businesses, and local governments that ultimately bear the costs of these decisions will finally have a seat at the table alongside them.
Read the full story here.