A Democratic bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The "Stop Unfair Electricity Prices Act" sets rules for the Secretary of Energy regarding financial assistance to regulated investor owned electric utilities. For the first year, the Secretary cannot provide assistance to utilities that raise residential electricity rates above what they were on January 1, 2026. Utilities receiving assistance during this first year must also keep rates at the January 1, 2026 level or face termination of that assistance. For the following two years, assistance is barred for utilities raising rates unless they limit or reduce the compensation of their five highest-paid employees. These employees' pay must be reduced by twice the percentage point increase of the new electricity rate. Additionally, the utility must report the compensation levels of those five employees to the Secretary.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +7
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Prevents electricity rate increases which disproportionately affect low-income budgets.
- Scored +6
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
Protects residential consumers from unfair electricity price increases through financial incentives for utilities.
- Scored +5
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Seniors on fixed incomes benefit significantly from stabilized residential electricity rates.
The opposite· 3 of 4
- Scored -4
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
Negatively impacts the highest-compensated utility executives through mandatory pay cuts.
- Scored -4
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?
Negatively impacts high-earning utility executives.
- Scored -4
Would billionaires be better off under this?
Negatively impacts high-earning utility executives.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Preservation of Electricity Rates: Residential electric consumers may benefit from stabilized costs because the Secretary cannot provide financial assistance to regulated investor owned electric utilities that raise rates above the January 1, 2026 level during the first year (Section 2(a)(1)).
-
Executive Pay Accountability: For a two-year period, financial assistance is tied to the compensation of the five highest-paid employees. This ensures that if rates increase, the highest-paid employees must see a reduction in their total compensation (Section 2(b)(1)(A) and (B)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Loss of Financial Assistance: Regulated investor owned electric utilities may have their financial assistance terminated by the Secretary if they violate rate or compensation rules (Section 2(a)(2) and 2(b)(2)). This could impact the utility's operations.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Prevents electricity rate increases which disproportionately affect low-income budgets. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Provides stability and protection against rising energy costs. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees benefit from the prevention of electricity rate hikes. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors on fixed incomes benefit significantly from stabilized residential electricity rates. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Negatively impacts high-earning utility executives. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Negatively impacts the highest-compensated utility executives through mandatory pay cuts. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Negatively impacts high-earning utility executives.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Protects residential consumers from unfair electricity price increases through financial incentives for utilities. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — By discouraging electricity rate hikes, the bill helps mitigate utility-driven inflation for residential consumers.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases the Department of Energy's leverage over utility companies through conditional financial assistance. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires utilities to report compensation levels of their highest-paid employees to the Secretary. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Imposes federal conditions on state-regulated utilities, potentially infringing on state regulatory authority.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Stabilizing energy costs reduces the financial burden on low-income households.
- 8/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/12/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Introduced in House
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia