As broad affordability concerns define elections across the country, voters in several states on Tuesday will have a say on their future utility bills.

State utility regulators, who are facing heightened levels of attention and scrutiny amid high prices, are on the ballot in nine states: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Dakota.

Most Americans are served by utilities overseen by state regulators, who approve or deny rate increase requests from providers. Public outcry over rising utility prices has pushed state regulators and lawmakers to consider rate freezes, additional energy assistance funds or new rates targeting large energy users such as data centers. And it’s brought even more attention to high prices in races for both governors and utility regulators.

“I think it’s different and it really emerged in the off-year elections,” said Ted Thomas, an energy consultant and the former Republican chair of the Arkansas Public Service Commission. “It began to emerge in 2024 as part of the overall concern on inflation, and then it seemed to have gone beyond that with a focus on energy specifically.”

Utility prices played a major role in 2025 Democratic gubernatorial wins in New Jersey and Virginia. And in Georgia, Democrats last year flipped two seats on the board that regulates public utilities — the first time Democrats won statewide constitutional office there in nearly two decades.

Thomas is a senior adviser to the consumer advocacy group PowerLines, which is tracking how gubernatorial and utility regulator candidates are talking about power bills in races across the country. This cycle has so far proven bruising for incumbent utility regulators: In Alabama, two Republican incumbents were ousted during primary and runoff elections as the state faces some of the highest electricity prices in the South. Two of the three Alabama Public Service Commission seats are on the ballot Tuesday. 

Likewise, in Arizona, a Republican incumbent lost during his primary contest, leaving two Democrats and two Republicans running for two open seats this week. The Arizona Corporation Commission is currently composed of five Republicans.

“We can literally elect folks that are going to lower our electricity bills,” state Rep. Mariana Sandoval, a Democrat, said last month, according to the Arizona Mirror.

While Thomas expects an anti-incumbency wave Tuesday, he noted that there’s no guarantee for immediate relief on consumers’ bills. Though lawmakers of both parties are increasingly scrutinizing high electricity prices, state leaders say they have little ability to lower costs because of broader energy market realities.

While states can’t stop rising prices altogether, Thomas said they can do more to protect consumer pocketbooks and ensure residential households aren’t paying for large-scale industrial energy users.

“It’s a large, complex system that costs a lot of money, and it provides an essential service that is a good value, even at an elevated price,” he said. “But at the same time, (affordability) needs to be more of a priority. It doesn’t need to be the back burner issue.”

Utilities have requested billions of dollars in upcoming rate increases across the country.

This winter, U.S. households are projected to spend an average of $1,030 to heat their homes, an increase of $82 over last year, according to the National Energy Assistance Directors Association. That organization, which represents state employees administering federal energy assistance programs, said this winter’s predicted 8.7% increase is more than 2.5 times the rate of inflation. 

Projections are more daunting for the large share of people in Northeastern states who heat their homes with oil. The association projects a 50% spike in the average cost of heating homes with oil this winter.

The LCV Victory Fund, a political action committee associated with the League of Conservation Voters, has pledged to spend over $110 million to help elect Democrats to key House, Senate, and state races. Since summer, that organization has targeted the “energy bill voter,” which it describes as a crucial voting bloc of women, Black and Latino people, non-college-educated residents and voters who are less engaged with politics.

“This is an energy election,” Sara Schreiber, senior vice president of campaigns at LCV Victory Fund, said in an October news release. “We identified early on that Republicans were vulnerable when it came to energy costs. Voters are not simply frustrated, they’re angry at monopoly utility companies, Big Tech, and Big Oil, who are making record profits while families struggle.” 

While much of the backlash over rising costs has focused on the growing number of data centers, electricity providers say that isn’t the major driver of rising prices.

In a recent study it commissioned, the Edison Electric Institute, which represents the nation’s investor-owned electric utilities, said electric providers were working with state regulators to ensure data centers pay their fair share “and help keep electricity as affordable as possible.”

That study blamed rising prices on higher wholesale electricity prices and broader issues with regional multistate grids — components of electric bills that are not controlled by electric companies or state regulators. 

“Our focus is on protecting existing customers and communities and strengthening the grid we all rely on,” Edison Electric Institute President and CEO Drew Maloney said in a news release last month.

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.

WASHINGTON — The rare 2026 issue that draws huge support from Republicans and Democrats in Congress is the same one that’s mobilized many Americans: restrictions on giant data centers.

The House has overwhelmingly passed legislation forcing state regulators to consider requirements that data centers absorb the cost of the electricity they use. 

But there’s more to be done, say data center critics, and they’re finding there is no easy or even obvious answer about what to do next.

Leave it to state and local governments to decide whether and how the centers should function? Should their size be restricted? Should they be banned altogether?

The future of data centers has become a flashpoint in this year’s congressional races. It’s woven into the debate about affordability, artificial intelligence and corporate influence on government.

“People see big energy cost increases and say data centers must be the reason,” said Daniel Birdsong, senior lecturer in political science at the University of Dayton.

Before leaving Washington for an extended recess not due to end until after the election, the House voted Wednesday 417-3 on a bill that requires states to consider having data centers using large amounts of electricity pay the full additional cost of that generation, as well as transmission and distribution upgrades that are needed.

Obstacles to action

The vote was only a prologue for action. There’s no clear next chapter, as skepticism is coming from critics at the White House and among progressives.

The biggest obstacle appears to be President Donald Trump.

“The people that say AI is going to destroy the World, and that Data Centers are bad for your neighborhood, are the same people that said, just a short time ago, that the World would be extinguished by ‘Climate Change,’” he said on his Truth Social site Monday.

“That HOAX never worked out for them, and now they’re on to the next one. These people are Revolutionaries, but Revolutionaries for a Bad and Evil Cause. Soon you’ll find out they’re working for people that do not have the best interests of the United States in mind!”

Senate leaders have not said how or if they’ll take up the House bill, or any other data center legislation.

Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat, was not optimistic.

“There aren’t many alternatives to a president who thinks this is a wonderful asset and communities who think just the opposite,” he said.

The lawmakers know this much: Their constituents don’t like data centers. 

“I’ve never seen people come together across the political spectrum like I have the last few months on concerns about big tech, concerns around AI, concerns around data center development,” said Rep. Chris Pappas, D-N.H.

A national University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll released this week showed just 11% said they backed the construction of the data centers in their local area. Sixty-five percent were opposed, and about half said they were strongly opposed.

“Opposition to AI data centers has emerged as one of these rare areas of consensus,” said poll director Tatishe Nteta.

The political divide

Solutions tend to fall along three very general lines: A complete ban or moratorium; giving state and local governments more tools to regulate the centers; and withdrawing federal support.

Putting pressure on utility companies appears to have the most legislative traction. Rep. Rob Latta, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Energy Subcommittee, found the House-passed legislation would protect consumers from runaway center-inspired utility rates.

The bill, he said, “protects American ratepayers from being forced to cover the cost of energy infrastructure upgrades needed to support data centers.”

Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla., one of the bill’s lead sponsors, saw the measure as help for constituents facing affordability issues. “Data centers cannot come at a cost to neighbors who are already facing high grocery, gas, utility, health care and housing costs,” she said.

At the Edison Electric Institute, which represents the nation’s investor-owned electric companies, Drew Maloney, president and CEO, said in a statement that he appreciated Congress’ work and that EEI’s members “will continue working in lockstep to ensure large customers cover the costs of the energy infrastructure they use, and communities have a strong voice from the beginning of the planning process.”  

But some environmental activists saw big flaws in the bill.

“With only a weak directive to states to voluntarily consider adopting cost protections against the energy costs of data centers for ratepayers, state regulators could ultimately choose to ignore this bill,” said Sara Chieffo, senior vice president for government affairs at the League of Conservation Voters. 

A report last year from the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that in 2023, data centers used roughly 4.4% of total electricity in this country. It forecast that the figure could double or triple by 2028 to meet the needs of more data, notably from artificial intelligence.

Consumers’ costs are generally figured by how much it costs to generate and deliver electricity. State and local regulators usually set those rates.

Looking ahead 

While the House bill had strong Democratic support, many in the party wanted to go further.

“It’s a step forward,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, told reporters when asked about the House bill. “But more needs to be done.”

That could include some sort of ban, or at least a moratorium, on building more centers, an approach favored by many Democratic progressives.

“Communities should have the right to say ‘no’ to a data center being shoved down their throats,” Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., told colleagues in a floor speech. 

In the Senate, some Democrats sent a strong signal that they wanted to do more than the House bill provided.

The bill “does nothing to meaningfully address the rising costs of AI data center development. Instead, it relies on a voluntary framework that does not require AI data centers to pay the full cost of the energy they consume or the strain they place on the grid,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, top Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

“We need legislation that makes AI data centers pay their fair share and actually protects families,” he said. 

Among this week’s efforts was new legislation from a group of House Democrats to end certain currently available federal tax incentives available to data centers.

“Tax cuts need to go to families, not data centers. We absolutely should not cut healthcare and food assistance for children and seniors to pay for tax giveaways to corporations,” said Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet, D-Mich., one of the bill’s lead sponsors, at a Capitol Hill press conference.

“Why incentivize this right now?” asked Rep. Don Davis, D-N.C., another top sponsor.

Political fallout

Find a close House or Senate race and chances are good there’s a brawl between candidates over who can best deal with the data center issue.

In Ohio, Sen. Jon Husted, a Republican, is in a close battle with former Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat.

Husted is the lead sponsor of the Senate ratepayer protection bill. Husted tried to get the Senate to consider the measure Thursday but it was blocked by Heinrich.

Asked why he doesn’t support a ban, Husted said, “Whether you want a data center should be a local decision. What we should do is protect the ratepayers from bearing the burden of the cost of building the electricity those data centers use.”

Husted is in a difficult position, Birdsong said, because his call for limits on data centers “puts him at odds with Trump.”

Close House races have similar fights. In Michigan, Rep. Tom Barrett, a Republican, is campaigning as the voice of the consumer.

One way to deal with data centers, he said, is by “stopping federal overreach and preventing the secrecy pledges that have plagued Michigan and undermined the power of local residents.”

The House, though, left Washington and won’t be back voting until a lame-duck session starting Nov. 8, sparking outrage from Democrats.

“That means ZERO votes on lowering costs, ending corruption, addressing AI, or responding to the Iran war before Election Day,” tweeted Rep. Johnny Olszewski Jr., D-Md. 

The Senate’s scheduled to be around through September, but there’s no sign it will take a close look at the data center issue. The big hope is that it will continue to be discussed back home and lawmakers will return ready to act or at least debate.

“We have to understand, ‘What’s the real implication here?’” Davis said.