Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
This bill amends the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to add a new standard that would bar electric utilities from recovering any costs of deploying “smart grid” systems from ratepayers. It requires State regulatory authorities and nonregulated utilities to commence consideration of that standard within one year and complete determinations within two years, with carve-outs where states already implemented comparable standards.
Liberals emphasize harm to renewables integration and resilience
Narrow technical subject could attract mixed support, but utilities and grid modernization proponents likely oppose; committee debate probable.
This bill amends the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to add a new standard that would bar electric utilities from recovering any costs of deploying “smart grid” systems from ratepayers.
It requires State regulatory authorities and nonregulated utilities to commence consideration of that standard within one year and complete determinations within two years, with carve-outs where states already implemented comparable standards.
The bill also repeals a prior PURPA subsection and aligns statutory timing references to the new standard.
Targeted but impactful federal intervention into state ratemaking with strong stakeholder opposition and limited compromise reduces prospects.
How solid the drafting looks.
Liberals emphasize harm to renewables integration and resilience
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize harm to renewables integration and resilience
Mainstream progressives would be torn.
They value lower utility bills and protections from wasteful projects, but they also prioritize grid modernization for clean energy and equity.
Many would worry this ban could slow renewables integration, resilience, and targeted customer programs.
A moderate view emphasises careful tradeoffs: protecting consumers from unjustified rate increases is valid, but blunt bans risk unintended harms to reliability and clean-energy goals.
Centrists would call for clear definitions, cost-benefit requirements, and state flexibility.
Mainstream conservatives would generally welcome protections against ratepayer-funded technology boondoggles and higher utility bills.
They would also be cautious about federal overreach into state utility regulation but likely view the bill as consumer-protective and fiscally prudent.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Targeted but impactful federal intervention into state ratemaking with strong stakeholder opposition and limited compromise reduces prospects.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize harm to renewables integration and resilience
Targeted but impactful federal intervention into state ratemaking with strong stakeholder opposition and limited compromise reduces prospec…
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for SMARTER Act.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.