Democrats used to back energy-saving plans. Now they’re wavering.

There’s a strange trend afoot on the East Coast, where residents have seen some of the highest increases in electricity costs in the country. As part of efforts to relieve the pressure, some Democrats are planning to slash energy-efficiency programs. Because utilities fund energy-efficiency measures through charges to their customers, the thinking is that scaling the programs down will reduce people’s bills quickly. The irony is that energy efficiency is meant to do exactly that: lower people’s energy use, and thus reduce their bills. 

“The cheapest, fastest thing you can do to help meet energy demand in this moment of increasing need for energy is energy efficiency,” said Mark Kresowik, senior policy director at the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, or ACEEE.

This emerging trend among Democrats, alongside a more established shift among Republicans, is the opposite of how politicians have reacted to similar situations in the past. In 1973, when Arab countries stopped exporting oil to the U.S. because it supported Israel during the Yom Kippur War, oil prices soared, drivers waited in long lines at gas stations, and electricity bills increased. In response, President Richard Nixon proposed measures to trim energy use, including reducing speed limits to 50 mph, and urged Americans to lower their thermostats in the colder months. It was the beginning of a decades-long, bipartisan effort to improve energy efficiency and reduce the country’s reliance on “foreign oil.” 

The effort ended up saving Americans trillions of dollars. As regulations prompted manufacturers to make cars with better gas mileage, they trimmed fuel costs for Americans by an estimated $5 trillion over the course of decades (as well as preventing 14 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions). In addition, the efficiency standards that the government set on home appliances and plumbing still save the average household about $576 a year on their utility bills, while cutting national energy use by 6.5 percent. That’s according to data from the Department of Energy in January last year, before President Donald Trump took office.

Read Next

How your showerhead and fridge got roped into the culture wars

Kate Yoder

But confronted with another oil crisis today, again sparked by a conflict in the Middle East, many politicians are taking the opposite approach. The Trump administration, along with Republicans in Congress, has attacked the Biden-era fuel economy standards for cars, along with rules requiring appliances to be more efficient. And some Democrats, previously reliable supporters of energy efficiency, are wavering in their support. The result is that as data centers gobble up electricity, and extreme weather and an aging grid further drive up prices, some politicians are weakening one of the best tools for lowering bills and protecting people from price swings.

In Maryland, for example, Democratic Governor Wes Moore is expected to sign legislation scaling back the state’s target to reduce emissions, which would cut the amount utilities have to spend on energy-efficiency programs and eliminate a surcharge ratepayers see on their bills. Politicians in the region are looking for anything to immediately decrease their constituents’ bills, and they don’t have a lot of options to address the drivers of rising costs. “Energy affordability politics are dominating the political agenda, and it’s very difficult to address energy affordability,” said Kelly Trombley, senior director of state policy at Ceres, a sustainability nonprofit. But politicians can remove energy-efficiency surcharges with the stroke of a pen.

That helps explain why Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee, another Democrat, floated the idea of capping spending for energy efficiency rebates at $75 million a year, down from $95 million approved for this year. Fees, state mandates, and other charges tied to state policies reportedly account for a quarter of energy bills. Affordability concerns also prompted Democrats in the Massachusetts House to pass a bill that would cut $1 billion, out of $4.5 billion, from the state’s energy-efficiency budget. That bill appears to have a tough path forward, since the chair of the state Senate’s energy committee has signaled his support for Mass Save, a program that rewards ratepayers for buying heat pumps and making other energy-saving moves.

In Maryland, supporters of the legislation to cut energy efficiency spending say it could save residents $150 a year or more on their bills. “The thing about surcharges like this is, it is one of our most direct tools,” state Delegate Marc Korman, a Democrat, told Canary Media. ​“We don’t want to forsake all efforts at energy efficiency, but we want to try to provide a little bit of relief for some time if we can.” 

To opponents, focusing on immediate savings misses the bigger picture, since it would hurt affordability in the long-term. An analysis from ACEEE found that the proposed legislation in Maryland would increase costs for the state’s electricity customers by a net $592 million.

“Unfortunately, cutting energy efficiency programs — it’s like trading in your car for one that gets worse gas mileage at a time when gas prices are going up, and it won’t do anything to address those real cost drivers that will only get worse,” Trombley said. “Energy efficiency is one of the only options customers have to insulate themselves from the volatility coming from things like natural gas or an aging grid susceptible to extreme weather.”

While the trend appears mostly limited to the Northeast and mid-Atlantic, there’s one recent example of Democrats opposing an energy-efficiency measure on the federal level. In January, 57 Democrats in the House voted with Republicans on a bill that would eliminate the Biden administration’s efficiency standards for manufactured homes, which haven’t been updated since 1994 and allow for poor insulation. It’s still awaiting a vote in the Senate.

Republicans have increasingly targeted energy-efficiency laws, a reversal from the days of presidents Nixon and Ronald Reagan, who signed the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act in 1987. These days, everything from dishwashers to laundry machines has been sucked into the culture wars. The Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have targeted efficiency standards enacted under the Biden administration, viewing them as symbols of Democrats interfering with “consumer choice.” Last week, the Trump administration urged the Supreme Court to strike down Biden-era rules that would have restricted gas-powered commercial water heaters and consumer furnaces, siding with the natural gas industry and utilities.

Still, some energy efficiency programs have survived the Republican-dominated federal government. After the Trump administration threatened to eliminate Energy Star, a government program that puts its certification label on products that meet its efficiency standards, Congress passed a bipartisan spending bill in January that ensures continued funding. Congress also allocated $3 million more in funding for the Weatherization Assistance Program, which provides free energy-efficiency upgrades for low-income households, than it did last year, for a total of $329 million. Some Republican members of Congress have proposed a bill to extend tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act that were set to expire at the end of June — including incentives for constructing energy-efficient homes and supporting retrofits for commercial buildings.

And in the bigger picture, state spending on energy efficiency, especially in terms of assisting low-income households, has been on the rise. Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat, signed a handful of pro-efficiency laws in April aiming to trim household bills by providing energy-saving upgrades to low-income families, some with bipartisan support. Also last month, Ned Lamont, Connecticut’s Democratic governor, announced a measure that’s supposed to save families about $30 a month by decreasing charges for public benefits on utility bills, with much of the reduction offset by contracts he negotiated with nuclear power plants that provide energy at fixed prices.

“We’re hopeful that there’s a pathway to strengthen and really recognize that you actually can’t have an energy affordability strategy without energy efficiency,” Trombley said.