A Democratic bill with no cosponsors
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
H.R. 8948 is known as the Home Energy Affordability Act. The bill amends the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. It requires states to consider measures limiting electric utilities regarding retail utility rate increases. Specifically, it dictates how often an electric utility can request a rate increase. The bill restricts state-regulated electric utilities to filing a request to increase a rate with the state regulatory authority only once every 365 days.
Yes· 3 of 20
- Scored +6
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill directly protects consumers from frequent utility rate hikes by capping requests to once per year.
- Scored +5
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income households are heavily impacted by utility costs and benefit significantly from rate hike caps.
- Scored +4
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Seniors on fixed incomes are disproportionately helped by protection against frequent utility rate spikes.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
It places a federal limitation on the frequency with which states can consider retail utility rate increases.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Section 2 of the bill amends the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to add a cap on retail utility rate increases. Under this provision, a state-regulated electric utility may only file a request to increase a rate with the state regulatory authority once every 365 days. This is positive because it limits how frequently electric utilities can ask for rate hikes.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- The provided text does not contain any information regarding potential negative consequences, burdens, or negative impacts for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
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? — Low-income households are heavily impacted by utility costs and benefit significantly from rate hike caps. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees relying on fixed pensions or social security benefit from predictability in essential household expenses. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors on fixed incomes are disproportionately helped by protection against frequent utility rate spikes. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class families gain protection from compounding annual retail electricity price increases. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Individuals with disabilities living on fixed incomes are protected from excessive utility cost increases. Would business owners be better off under this? — Business owners benefit from more predictable energy operating expenses. Would children be better off under this? — Stable and predictable utility costs benefit family households with children. Would farmers be better off under this? — Farmers benefit from controlled and predictable utility rates necessary for agricultural operations. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged homeowners and renters gain financial predictability regarding essential electric utility bills. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural residents served by regulated electric utilities are protected from frequent rate increases. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban residents who rely on regulated electric utilities benefit from rate stabilization. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Veterans, especially those on fixed or disability incomes, benefit from protected energy affordability. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults managing their own households benefit from capped utility rate frequencies. Would high-income households be better off under this? — High-income households experience minor financial relief from stabilized utility rate structures.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill directly protects consumers from frequent utility rate hikes by capping requests to once per year. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Small businesses benefit from predictable utility expenses by limiting rate increase requests to once every 365 days. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — Limiting the frequency of retail utility rate increases helps stabilize household energy costs and dampens inflationary pressures on consumers.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Capping utility rate increases helps low-income households better budget and avoid extreme energy cost burdens.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requiring utilities to space out rate increase requests brings predictability and transparency to the regulatory process. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill establishes federal guidelines under PURPA for state regulatory authorities regarding utility rate filings. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — It places a federal limitation on the frequency with which states can consider retail utility rate increases.
- 5/20/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Introduced in House