Pennsylvanians are paying more for utilities than ever. As lawmakers campaign against increased charges and the impact of data centers on electric and gas bills, some are blocking legislation that could lower rates—and critics point out they’re also taking campaign dollars from utility companies and data centers.
“There is a long history of Republicans in this state doing absolutely nothing to bring more clean energy online that would lower rates, to stop data centers, to protect consumers,” said Molly Parzen, executive director of Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania. “There is a long history that runs parallel to a long history of taking campaign finance donations from utilities.”
Each year, House lawmakers in the state propose and pass legislation to regulate data centers and curb utility costs, but Parzen said Senate Republicans have repeatedly failed to pass the same bills. For example, three environmental bills the Senate passed during the 2023 to 2024 session died in the House, including one that would have allowed offshore wind, kinetic, and solar energy production in Lake Erie.
And in cases where they have voted in ways that might help utility payers make ends meet or hold data centers to higher standards, Parzen said there’s a catch. Those same lawmakers are also accepting campaign donations from PECO, FirstEnergy, Duquesne, and the like.
“Since 2024 or so, you have state senators who have taken $10,000, $20,000, $60,000 from state polluters and utilities and who have consistently, if not actively, voted against protecting consumers,” Parzen said.
With that in mind, the occasional vote to the contrary or press release advocating for consumers feels hollow to her.
“If you scratch the surface a little bit more, it becomes obvious what it is, which is pretty performative,” she said.
Who is blocking clean energy bills?
Conservation Voters of Pennsylvania rates state lawmakers each year based on how they voted on a list of key bills. The advocacy group tells lawmakers in advance which votes they’ll be scored on. For the 2025-2026 legislative session, the group scored nine Senate votes, all of which they determined should be voted down to advance their environmental goals.
A score of 100% means a lawmaker voted in line with CVP on all nine bills. Only two Senate members did that, both Democrats: Katie Muth and Nikil Saval. But 23 Senators received a failing score of 0%, meaning they voted against every CVP recommendation. All 23 of those Senators were Republicans.
Yet all nine of the bills passed in the Senate. Perhaps most consequential was the Anti-RGGI Fiscal Code bill HB 416, which Gov. Josh Shapiro signed into law in November. The bill removed Pennsylvania from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, in what some are calling a sacrificial move by Democrats to pass a state budget. RGGI served as the only local cap on carbon emissions for state energy suppliers.
“The state Senate has still completely abdicated their responsibility, largely, to pass any meaningful policies to protect ratepayers and to bring down utility prices,” Parzen said.
CVP called the RGGI program the “most consequential climate program in our Commonwealth’s history.” Critics say the vote kneecapped the state’s ability to curb carbon emissions and reinvest in clean energy, while Republicans said the move improved grid reliability.
Who is taking money from utility companies and data centers?
Dive a little deeper, and the Venn diagram of senators voting against CVP recommendations shows overlap with senators who are also accepting money from utility bills. Parzen has pieced together some of those donations over the past three years, highlighting which Pennsylvania politicians are receiving the most from utility bills and data centers.
All lawmaker scorecard information is searchable through the CVP website.
Republican State Sen. Frank Farry, who received a score of 0%, has accepted $40,850 from utility companies including PECO, First Energy, Bistra Energy, and Constellation Energy Corporation, among others, according to Parzen.
Rosemary Brown, who also received a score of 0%, has accepted $13,100 from FirstEnergy, Marathon Petroleum Corporation, UGI Energy, and Duquesne Light Co.
But the senator with the most money from energy companies was Jarrett Coleman with $60,750—$20,000 of which was from the CEO of Lehigh Gas. Coleman, however, voted against HB 416 and in favor of remaining within the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Coleman voted against CVP recommendations for the eight other bills, earning an overall score of 11%.
Representatives are also scored by CVP each year, and this year CVP reviewed 16 bills. Craig Williams earned a score of 56% this year, and a lifetime score of 49%. He also received $23,700 in campaign donations from utility companies.
Valerie Gaydos scored 44% for the 2025 to 2026 session but has a lifetime score of 15%. Over the past three years, she’s taken in $19,600 in campaign donations from utility companies.
Environmental activists wonder if lawmakers’ moves are performative
Parzen believes some lawmakers are trying to “look good” on data center reform issues, even as they make more potentially harmful choices for the environment and utility ratepayers. Republican State Sen. Rosemary Brown, who voted against all nine CVP recommendations this year, is one such lawmaker, she said.
“All of a sudden this year, after she has a 0% score on her scorecard this year and a lifetime 5% score—so a really bad record…she introduced a bill in the state Senate to have a moratorium on data centers,” Parzen said.
Data center regulation, which has been framed as a bipartisan issue in recent months, offers a good example of the kind of litmus test for tangible lawmaking in favor of voters and the environment, as opposed to the performative moves Parzen criticizes, she said.
”You could say you’re against data centers. You could write a nice bill and introduce it with the knowledge that’s never going to get past the committee. You could put out a press release,” Parzen said. “But you know, at the end of the day, if your historical record on energy issues is in the single digits of how often you voted in support, that’s pretty strong evidence that a potential change of heart may be temporary at best.”
That’s when looking into campaign donations and voting records is so important, especially as voters head into the November midterms, she said.
“Everyone wants to look like they’re doing something. And so I think there’s a lot of jockeying and gesturing and scrambling to be seen to be doing something. But the fact of the matter is that we don’t have policies protecting ratepayers right now.”
A closer look at RGGI
When the state first joined RGGI in 2022, a study claimed participating could save ratepayers $1.5 billion over a five-year period. Now, Pennsylvanians won’t get those savings, and could even see increases instead.
Hannah Wiseman, a professor of law at Penn State Dickinson Law, said RGGI incentivized fossil fuel guzzlers to cut carbon emissions by imposing fees in the form of carbon allowances, effectively leveling the playing field for cleaner energy options that wanted to buy into the regional grid. No more without RGGI participation.
“For the state, it allows fossil fuel generating units to continue to externalize all of the health and other impacts of fossil fuels,” Wiseman said.
So while ratepayers won’t see a massive spike in rates without RGGI, they will still feel the effects. After all, Wiseman said, “Pennsylvania ratepayers are already impacted by RGGI, like it or not, because these other states are participating.”
And without regional oversight of carbon emissions from fossil fuels, cleaner options could be overlooked, Wiseman said.
“To the extent this non-participation negatively impacts or disincentivizes the construction of new solar, that is disincentivizing the construction of a very cheap form of electricity that would be injected into the PJM grid.”
Republicans who voted for withdrawing from RGGI said remaining in the initiative would subject Pennsylvanians to higher monthly utility bills. In 2023, a Pennsylvania court ruled that the RGGI fee for carbon emissions was an unconstitutional tax. The state’s Supreme Court did not hear an appeal of the case this year after Shapiro backed out of the RGGI
“For nearly six years, we have been taking actions to stop the RGGI Electricity Tax,” Senator Majority Leader Joe Pittman said in a release.
“Even though the Commonwealth Court has ruled RGGI is unconstitutional, Gov. Shapiro has continued his push with the Supreme Court. If the RGGI Electricity Tax would go into effect, it would mean hundreds of millions of dollars of increases on electric bills, impacting every electricity consumer in this commonwealth. We must help families feeling the strain of inflation—not put more pressure on their household budgets.”
