Democrats seek to capitalize on climbing energy bills

David Jordan, CQ-Roll Call on Sep 8, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

WASHINGTON — As electricity prices outpace inflation, members of Congress and the administration have constituents’ bills on their mind, with Democrats hoping they will help them make the case against Trump administration policies.

Last week, the House passed the fiscal 2026 Energy-Water appropriations bill in a 214-213 vote. The bill would provide $57.3 billion for federal energy and water programs, including the nuclear defense programs and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, much of the concern during floor debate was on how the measure would affect consumer energy bills.

Republicans said the provisions of the bill that increase investments in nuclear energy, fossil fuels and critical minerals would support the Trump administration’s goals for constantly running baseload power, while Democrats said spending cuts, such as a 47% reduction to the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, would cede U.S. leadership on renewable energy sources as China continues to invest in the sector.

Increases in energy costs are “not sustainable for working families, and sadly, this Republican Energy and Water bill does not meet our nation’s energy and water imperative for the future, nor for the present,” said Energy-Water Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, adding that she had heard from a constituent whose energy bill doubled in July.

Energy demand is increasing across the country, at an average rate of 1.7% per year, according to the Energy Information Administration. This is largely driven by the commercial and industrial sector, which includes data centers for artificial intelligence and manufacturing.

With this, electricity prices have risen at double the rate of inflation in the past year.

Trump administration officials have acknowledged growing consumer concern about energy costs but say intermittent wind and solar energy are to blame for the increases.

“We had 100 years of flat to declining inflation-adjusted electricity prices until President Obama decided we’re going to save the planet with renewable power,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright said in an interview with Laura Ingraham on Sept. 4. Wind and solar energy “are the reason we have more expensive electricity,” he said.

The Trump administration has used this argument to support actions such as issuing a stop-work order for the nearly completed Revolution Wind facility off the coast of Connecticut and Rhode Island. The states and the developer, Danish wind giant Ørsted S.A., have sued the administration over this decision.

When announcing their intent to sue on Sept. 4, the states’ Democratic attorneys general cited an August statement from regional grid operator ISO New England that said project delays will jeopardize reliability in the summer and winter peak periods and “will adversely affect New England’s economy and industrial growth, including potential future data centers.”

As they aim to retake power in the 2026 midterm elections, Democrats have sought to tie the increase in electricity prices to President Donald Trump’s policies on wind and solar, which they say have been borne out of a desire to support fossil fuels.

“The president has a long-standing distaste for wind power and solar power, but the practical impact is that bills do go up,” Rep. Mike Levin, D-Calif., said in a brief interview. “And so I think long term, how you address energy costs is you invest in American clean energy security. You modernize the grid, and you do everything we can to harness the lowest-cost source.”

Last week, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and Senate Energy and Natural Resources ranking member Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., renewed their push for a joint resolution that would terminate the energy emergency that Trump declared on his first day in office. Trump’s executive order has been used to support actions to keep fossil fuel plants open and take actions that supporters of wind and solar energy say make them less competitive.

The 1976 law that gives the president the power to declare a national emergency also established procedures for a privileged resolution to end the emergency declaration, which can be reintroduced every six months if the emergency declaration is maintained. Any member can bring the resolution up for a vote in the coming weeks.

In February, the Senate rejected, 47-52, an earlier joint resolution along party lines, but Kaine and Heinrich are tying a potential vote on the newer joint resolution to rising energy costs and the cancellation of renewable energy projects to pressure Republicans who previously supported the emergency declaration.

“The real energy emergency isn’t a made-up crisis — it’s the skyrocketing energy costs American families are facing because of Republicans’ relentless attacks on clean energy,” Heinrich said in a statement.