State Planning for Reliability and Affordability Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
ID: E000300
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
December 14, 2025
Introduced
Committee Review
Floor Action
Passed House
Senate Review
📍 Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
Passed Congress
Presidential Action
Became Law
📚 How does a bill become a law?
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Bill Summary
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Diagnosis:** This bill is a textbook case of "Regulatory Capture Syndrome," where special interest groups hijack the policymaking process to serve their own interests.
**Symptoms:**
1. **New regulations being created or modified:** The bill amends the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, adding a new standard for state consideration of reliable generation facilities. Sounds innocuous, but don't be fooled. 2. **Affected industries and sectors:** The electric utility industry is the primary beneficiary (read: puppeteer) behind this bill. Specifically, fossil fuel-based power plants will reap the rewards. 3. **Compliance requirements and timelines:** States have 1-2 years to implement these new standards, which will undoubtedly lead to a flurry of lobbying and regulatory capture. 4. **Enforcement mechanisms and penalties:** The bill relies on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for enforcement, but we all know how effective FERC is at policing its friends in the industry.
**Underlying disease:**
This bill is a thinly veiled attempt to prop up the dying fossil fuel industry by forcing states to prioritize "reliable generation facilities" – code for coal and gas plants. The real motivation? Follow the money:
* The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) has been lobbying heavily for this bill, with donations pouring in from major coal producers like Peabody Energy. * The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA), representing rural electric cooperatives, has also thrown its weight behind the bill. Guess who's a major donor to NRECA? You guessed it – fossil fuel companies.
**Treatment:**
This bill needs a healthy dose of transparency and accountability. We need to expose the cozy relationships between lawmakers, lobbyists, and industry donors. It's time to put an end to this regulatory capture nonsense and prioritize the public interest over special interests.
**Prognosis:** Without significant reforms, this bill will only exacerbate our addiction to fossil fuels, perpetuating climate change and harming public health. The patient (our democracy) is already showing symptoms of terminal illness – it's time for a drastic intervention.
Related Topics
💰 Campaign Finance Network
Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance
This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
Rep. Langworthy, Nicholas A. [R-NY-23]
ID: L000600
Top Contributors
10
Donor Network - Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 25 nodes and 23 connections
Total contributions: $102,573
Top Donors - Rep. Evans, Gabe [R-CO-8]
Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount
Industry Impact
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 helped,1 harmed.
- +Electric Utilities confidence 0.90
Section 2(a) requires State regulated electric utilities to establish measures ensuring reliable generation facilities, which could benefit utilities by allowing them to maintain or procure reliable generation, potentially reducing penalties for outages and supporting rate recovery for such investments.
- +Pipelines & Energy Infrastructure confidence 0.80
The definition of 'reliable generation facility' includes having adequate fuel or continuously available energy source on-site or via contractual obligations for 30 days, which supports midstream infrastructure like pipelines and storage that ensure fuel supply, thus benefiting energy infrastructure firms.
- +Nuclear Power confidence 0.80
Nuclear plants operate continuously for months with on-site fuel, satisfying the 30-day continuous generation and fuel availability criteria, making them likely to be classified as reliable generation facilities, thus benefiting nuclear.
- −Renewable Energy confidence 0.60
Wind and solar lack inherent fuel storage and may not meet the 30-day continuous generation or on-site fuel criteria without storage, which is not explicitly covered; thus they may be disadvantaged in utility planning under this standard.
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.
Introduction
AI Analysis:
"The bill's focus on promoting reliable generation facilities, particularly fossil fuel-based power plants, aligns with the Project 2025 policy objective of achieving American energy dominance and ensuring access to abundant, reliable, and affordable energy. However, the bill's emphasis on state-level implementation and FERC enforcement may not fully align with the policy's call for a more comprehensive 'all of the above' energy approach."
— 363 — 12 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND RELATED COMMISSIONS Bernard L. McNamee AMERICAN ENERGY AND SCIENCE DOMINANCE The next conservative Administration should prioritize energy and science dominance to ensure that Americans have abundant, affordable, and reliable energy; create good-paying jobs; support domestic manufacturing and technology leadership; and strengthen national security. Achieving these goals will require bold policy action and reforms that involve the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE); the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC); and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). American Energy Dominance. Access to affordable, reliable, and abundant energy is vital to America’s economy, national security, and quality of life. Yet ideologically driven government policies have thrust the United States into a new energy crisis just a few short years after America’s energy renaissance, which began in the first decade of the 2000s, transformed the United States from a net energy importer (oil and natural gas) to energy independence and then energy dominance. Americans now face energy scarcity, an electric grid that is less reliable, and arti- ficial shortages of natural gas and oil despite massive reserves within the United States—all of which has led to higher prices that burden both the American people and the economy. The new energy crisis is caused not by a lack of resources, but by extreme “green” policies. Under the rubrics of “combating climate change” and “ESG” (environmen- tal, social, and governance), the Biden Administration, Congress, and various states, as well as Wall Street investors, international corporations, and progressive spe- cial-interest groups, are changing America’s energy landscape. These ideologically — 364 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise driven policies are also directing huge amounts of money to favored interests and making America dependent on adversaries like China for energy. In the name of combating climate change, policies have been used to create an artificial energy scarcity that will require trillions of dollars in new investment, supported with taxpayer subsidies, to address a “problem” that government and special interests themselves created. The result has been increased energy costs that: l Hurt individuals and families, especially low-income Americans and seniors on fixed incomes; l Make businesses that create the jobs that drive our economy and quality of life less competitive; and l Make America less energy secure. Moreover, increased energy scarcity will allow government, either directly or through access to banks and Wall Street investors, to decide who is “worthy” to receive funding for energy projects. In the end, government control of energy is control of people and the economy. This is one reason why the trend toward nationalization of our energy industry through government mandates, bans on the production and use of oil and natural gas, and nationalization of the electric grid is so dangerous. At the same time, adversaries like China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and non-state actors are constantly engaged in cyberattacks against our energy infra- structure. We have already seen what supposedly “minor” attacks, such as the cyberattack on the Colonial Oil Pipeline1 or the physical attack on electric infra- structure in North Carolina,2 can do. A coordinated cyber and physical attack on natural gas pipelines and the electric grid during an extended cold spell could be catastrophic. Yet the current Administration’s first concern is plowing taxpayer dollars into intermittent wind and solar projects and ending the use of reliable fossil fuels. A conservative President must be committed to unleashing all of America’s energy resources and making the energy economy serve the American people, not special interests. This means that the next conservative Administration should: l Promote American energy security by ensuring access to abundant, reliable, and affordable energy. l Affirm an “all of the above” energy policy through which the best attributes of every resource can be harnessed for the benefit of the American people.
Introduction
AI Analysis:
"The bill's focus on promoting reliable generation facilities, particularly fossil fuel-based power plants, aligns with Project 2025's objective of preventing socializing costs for customers who do not benefit from transmission projects and ensuring that transmission planning is resource neutral. However, the bill's approach may actually exacerbate the issues highlighted in the Project 2025 policy."
— 405 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l End undue discrimination that allows subsidized resources to distort price formation in RTOs. l Affirm its commitment that states will decide whether to join an RTO instead of imposing RTOs on regions that do not want them. FERC should also consider allowing states to enter into non-RTO power pools with alternative structures for the sharing of resources and electric generation. FERC: ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION Mission/Overview Under the Federal Power Act, FERC has the authority to regulate the rates, terms, and conditions of interstate electric transmission. (Pursuant to court cases, interstate transmission can be entirely within a state, although the part of Texas served by ERCOT is not under FERC transmission jurisdiction.) Needed Reforms FERC has been considering how to plan for and allocate costs for new trans- mission lines and how new generation resources will be interconnected to the transmission grid. (Transmission expansion and replacement decisions are usu- ally made by local utilities or by an RTO or regional planning entity). Through two major rulemakings,118 FERC is attempting to facilitate the building of more long-range transmission lines and to socialize more of the costs of transmission buildouts to more customers in order to make it cheaper for renewable develop- ers (primarily) to interconnect to the grid and sell their power. Socializing such costs is a form of subsidy for generators and will cause further price distortions in RTOs and ISOs that will make it less economical for reliable, dispatchable resources like coal, nuclear, and natural gas to stay operational and support reliability.119 Also, under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, DOE and FERC are granted authority to site and permit high-priority transmission lines as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETCs). The Inflation Reduction Act provides funding to DOE to support transmission expansion.120 These initiatives will undermine state input and decision-making. FERC will consider rules on how NIETC transmission applications are to be made. New Policies FERC should either change course on its existing transmission rulemakings (if still in progress) or issue a new rulemaking to: — 406 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Ensure that transmission planning and interconnection processes are resource neutral. l Prevent socializing costs for customers who do not benefit from the projects or justifying such cost shifts as advancing vague “societal benefits” such as climate change. l Stop cost allocation from becoming a subsidy for generators, such as renewables. With respect to NIETCs, FERC and the new DESAS should ensure that state interests are respected and not allow such NEITC transmission lines to be devel- oped as a mere subsidy to renewable developers. Furthermore, much of the transmission buildout (including its attendant costs) is being driven by renewable developers seeking market share. These projects are causing rates for customers to go up and hurting reliability. FERC needs to ensure that transmission buildouts are planned for the benefit of customers. FERC: NATURAL GAS PIPELINES Mission/Overview FERC permits, sites, and authorizes the construction and operation of inter- state natural gas pipelines.121 It also regulates the rates for the shipping of natural gas122 (but not the price of the natural gas commodity, which is market based). FERC is charged with ensuring that natural gas pipelines are approved if they are required by the “public convenience and necessity.”123 Pipeline permitting is sub- ject to environmental reviews under NEPA, and the rate for the pipeline and the shipping of the commodity is set by FERC under a just and reasonable standard. Once FERC approves a project, the holder of the certificate has the sovereign’s power of eminent domain. Needed Reforms Natural gas pipelines are vital for the economy, manufacturing, heating, and electric generation. Opposition from “Keep it in the ground” environmentalists has made it harder to gain approvals for natural gas pipelines. Under Democrat leadership, FERC has proposed official policies to consider upstream and down- stream GHG emissions from the use of the natural gas that would be shipped in the pipeline to be part of FERC’s public-interest determination when deciding whether to approve a pipeline. There is conflicting direction from the D.C. Circuit on the GHG issue, which also could be seen as a “major questions” issue under the U.S. Supreme Court’s West Virginia v. EPA decision.124
Introduction
AI Analysis:
"The bill's focus on promoting fossil fuel-based power plants and its reliance on FERC for enforcement aligns with Project 2025's objectives of stopping the 'war on oil and natural gas' and refocusing FERC on ensuring affordable and reliable energy. However, the bill does not directly address other key aspects of the policy, such as repealing massive spending bills or promoting private-sector energy innovation."
— 365 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Support repeal of massive spending bills like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)3 and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA),4 which established new programs and are providing hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to renewable energy developers, their investors, and special interests, and support the rescinding of all funds not already spent by these programs. l Unleash private-sector energy innovation by ending government interference in energy decisions. l Stop the war on oil and natural gas. l Allow individuals, families, and business to use the energy resources they want to use and that will best serve their needs. l Secure and protect energy infrastructure from cyber and physical attacks. l Refocus the Department of Energy on energy security, accelerated remediation, and advanced science. l Promote U.S. energy resources as a means to assist our allies and diminish our strategic adversaries. l Refocus FERC on ensuring that customers have affordable and reliable electricity, natural gas, and oil and no longer allow it to favor special interests and progressive causes. l Ensure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission facilitates rather than hampers private-sector nuclear energy innovation and deployment. American Science Dominance. Ever since the age of Benjamin Franklin, the United States has been at the forefront of scientific discovery and technological advancement. Beginning with the groundbreaking science of the Manhattan Proj- ect, the U.S. has developed 17 National Laboratories that conduct fundamental and advanced scientific research. The National Labs have been critical in supporting national defense and ensuring that the United States leads on scientific discoveries with transformative applications that benefit America and the world. In recent years, however, U.S. science has been under threat. Externally, adversaries like the Chinese military have been engaged in scientific espionage, infiltrating taxpayer-funded scientific research projects, and funding their own science research. In addition, the National Labs have been too focused on climate change and renewable technologies.
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
About These Correlations
Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.
Related Bills
Other Bills by Rep. Evans, Gabe
Similar Topics
Tradeable Energy Performance Standards Act
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to "Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers".
CORE Act of 2025