Effort to replenish Maine's depleted EV incentive program could also reduce electricity costs
Despite wanting 150,000 light-duty electric vehicles on Maine roads by the start of the next decade, the state ran out of funding for a key incentive program last year. However, a bill introduced Thursday could help fill that gap.
The Legislature's Energy, Utilities and Technology held a public hearing for LD 585, which would amend language in the Efficiency Maine Trust Act to allow more flexibility in using certain program funds that are currently only used for subsidizing heat pumps. The bill would remove those limitations so certain revenue, known as forward capacity market funds, could be used for electric vehicles as well.
This change, as well as other language updates proposed in the bill, could, in turn, reduce electricity costs for ratepayers, said Sen. Henry Ingwersen (D-York), the bill sponsor. The additional load from electric vehicles dilutes the rates utility companies must charge to maintain and operate the grid, which helps reduce costs for all ratepayers, Ingwersen explained.
While Efficiency Maine has a variety of funding mechanisms for heat pump incentives, there aren't other revenue streams for the now-exhausted electric vehicle rebate program, said Executive Director Michael Stoddard.
In mid-November, Efficiency Maine had to stop issuing EV rebates — except for those designated for low-income customers — because it exhausted the $13.5 million provided for the program when it launched in 2019.
Efficiency Maine's EV rebate program offered up to $2,000 for the purchase of a new battery electric vehicle or plug-in hybrid to Mainers of any income. The rebate amount increased to $7,500 for low-income consumers and included an option to get some money back for purchasing a used hybrid or electric vehicle.
Efficiency Maine originally forecasted its funding for EV rebates would last through this coming June, but Stoddard previously told Maine Morning Star that demand accelerated more than expected in the second half of last year.
Stoddard shared this unexpected ramp up with the committee Thursday when they raised questions about future demand for electric vehicles. Although there was high demand last year, Stoddard reminded the committee that the language in the bill would still allow the trust to use the money on heat pumps if EV demand were to fall off.
'It gives us some discretion to move around and adjust to the market,' Stoddard said, noting that demand for heat pumps remains high.
Gov. Janet Mills has encouraged the transition to heat pumps, setting a goal in 2019 of installing 100,000 by 2025. That goal was met in 2023, so the governor set a new target of another 175,000 heat pump installations by 2027.
The Governor's Energy Office testified in support of the bill, seeing it as a tool to aid in an affordable energy transition. Public Advocate Heather Sanborn also supported the bill for its potential to reduce costs for customers.
'[Efficiency Maine] has a track record of demonstrably driving down rates for all ratepayers,' Sanborn said. 'We think their efforts should continue.'
Environmental advocates also spoke in favor of the bill for its potential to encourage more Mainers to make the switch to EVs. Given that transportation is responsible for nearly half of the state's carbon emissions, the state's climate action plan calls for the adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles to combat climate change.
One member of the public spoke in opposition to the bill.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Effort continues to fix South Dakota elections that don't need fixing
In the past few years, a certain segment of South Dakota society has become adamant about making specific improvements in the way we live. Is this a citizen quest for more education funding? No. Is it a movement to put often overlooked Native American issues at the front of the state agenda? No. Is it a grassroots effort to revamp the way South Dakotans pay taxes? No. This effort is aimed at cleaning up the state's elections. 'Hold on,' you might say. 'I didn't know there was a problem with our elections.' Well, there isn't. But that isn't keeping the issue from being front and center at the Legislature and in county commission meetings across the state. In the last legislative session there were more than 50 election-related bills introduced. About half of those had to deal with 'election integrity' in the areas of voter qualification, technology and security. That's a great deal of attention being paid to a part of government that, in the past, has been noted for working just fine. Some of these bills may be duplicates. It has become a practice in the Legislature to introduce similar bills in the Senate and in the House. That way, if cooler heads prevail in the Senate, there's still a similar bill in the House, where bad ideas go to flourish. Spurring on the quest for election integrity is an entity called South Dakota Canvassing Group. The group's mission statement is on its website: 'We are a volunteer organization working to restore free, fair, transparent and secure elections in South Dakota, now and for future generations.' Their work to 'restore' elections in South Dakota implies that voting here has gone off the rails. If the Canvassing Group wants to ferret out corruption and illegalities in elections, they're best off moving to another state. South Dakota, with a history of fair elections, doesn't need their help. According to a story by The Dakota Scout, many of the election integrity chasers in this state got their inspiration at a three-day event in Sioux Falls. It turns out that their North Star, their inspiration, their muse, is none other than Mike Lindell. He's not just the My Pillow guy; he's the My President's Election was Stolen guy. Lindell was, and continues to be, one of the staunchest supporters of the idea that Donald Trump was somehow cheated out of victory in the 2020 election. At his 2021 'Cyber Symposium' in Sioux Falls, Lindell spent so much time offering false claims about Dominion Voting Systems throwing the election to Joe Biden that he was recently sued for defaming one of the company's executives. The jury awarded the executive $2.3 million in damages. Some bills backed by the Canvassing Group were approved by the Legislature and signed by the governor: assigning a federal-only ballot to people who don't live permanently in the state, changing the definition of resident eligibility, designating county voter registration files as public records, changing the process for challenging someone's residency status, increasing the penalty for voting illegally, placing citizenship status on driver's licenses, and sending a constitutional amendment to voters clarifying that a person must be a U.S. citizen to vote in the state. However, just as Lindell continues to spout his falsehoods about the 2020 election, look for the Canvassing Group to keep up the pressure on legislators for more election integrity laws that aren't needed. On its website, the top issue on the group's want list is an effort to make Election Day a holiday. In the last session, this came to the Legislature in a bill sponsored by Dell Rapids Republican Tom Pischke. Pischke explained to the Senate State Affairs Committee that a holiday was needed because in some communities there are not enough poll workers nor enough polling places. He said he hoped to work on solutions to those problems without legislation, asking the committee to table the bill. Creating a Tuesday Election Day holiday might free up more people to work on the elections, but it could just as easily cut down on voter participation. Instead of looking ahead to how they'll mark their ballots, citizens could just as easily be looking ahead to using a vacation day on Monday to create a long weekend. South Dakota has a long history of running fair, accurate elections. For all their finger-pointing and hand-wringing, the Canvassing Group and the legislators who indulge them can't change that. Election integrity legislation amounts to nothing more than solutions in search of problems, trying to fix a system that doesn't need fixing. Dana Hess spent more than 25 years in South Dakota journalism, editing newspapers in Redfield, Milbank and Pierre. He's retired and lives in Brookings, working occasionally as a freelance writer. This article was originally published on South Dakota Searchlight. This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Effort continues to fix South Dakota elections that don't need fixing
Los Angeles Times
6 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
How redistricting in Texas and California could change the game for House elections
WASHINGTON — Congressional redistricting usually happens after the once-a-decade population count by the U.S. Census Bureau or in response to a court ruling. Now, Texas Republicans want to break that tradition — and California and other states could follow suit. President Trump has asked the Texas Legislature to create districts, in time for next year's midterm elections, that could send five more Republicans to Washington and make it harder for Democrats to regain the House majority and blunt his agenda. Texas has 38 seats in the House of Representatives. Republicans now hold 25 and Democrats 12, with one seat vacant after the death of Democratic Rep. Sylvester Turner in March. 'There's been a lot more efforts by the parties and political actors to push the boundaries — literally and figuratively — to reconfigure what the game is,' said Doug Spencer, the Ira C. Rothgerber Jr. chair in constitutional law at the University of Colorado. Other states, including California, are waiting to see what Texas does and whether to follow suit. The rules of redistricting can be vague and variable; each state has its own set of rules and procedures. Politicians are gauging what voters will tolerate when it comes to politically motivated mapmaking. Here's what to know about the rules of congressional redistricting: Every decade, the Census Bureau collects population data used to divide the 435 House seats among the 50 states based on the updated head count. It's a process known as reapportionment. States that grew relative to others might gain a seat or two at the expense of those whose populations stagnated or declined. States use their own procedures to draw lines for the assigned number of districts. The smallest states receive just one representative, which means the entire state is a single congressional district. Some state constitutions require independent commissions to devise the political boundaries or to advise the legislature. When legislatures take the lead, lawmakers can risk drawing lines that end up challenged in court, usually on claims of violating the Voting Rights Act. Mapmakers can get another chance and resubmit new maps. Sometimes, judges draw the maps on their own. By the first midterm elections after the latest population count, each state is ready with its maps, but those districts do not always stick. Courts can find that the political lines are unconstitutional. There is no national impediment to a state trying to redraw districts in the middle of the decade and to do it for political reasons, such as increasing representation by the party in power. 'The laws about redistricting just say you have to redistrict after every census,' Spencer said. 'And then some state legislatures got a little clever and said, 'Well, it doesn't say we can't do it more.'' Some states have laws that would prevent midcycle redistricting or make it difficult to do so in a way that benefits one party. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has threatened to retaliate against the GOP push in Texas by drawing more favorable Democratic seats in his state. That goal, however, is complicated by a constitutional amendment — approved by state voters — that requires an independent commission to lead the process. Texas has done it before. When the Legislature failed to agree on a redistricting plan after the 2000 census, a federal court stepped in with its own map. Republican Tom DeLay of Texas, who was then the U.S. House majority leader, thought his state should have five more districts friendly to his party. 'I'm the majority leader and we want more seats,′′ he said at the time. Statehouse Democrats protested by fleeing to Oklahoma, depriving the Legislature of enough votes to officially conduct any business. But DeLay eventually got his way, and Republicans replaced Democrats in five districts in the 2004 general election. In 2019, the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts should not get involved in debates over political gerrymandering, the practice of drawing districts for partisan gain. In that decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said redistricting is 'highly partisan by any measure.' But courts may demand new maps if they believe the congressional boundaries dilute the votes of a racial minority group, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Washington state Rep. Suzan DelBene, who leads House Democrats' campaign arm, indicated at a Christian Science Monitor event that if Texas follows through on passing new maps, Democratic-led states would look at their own political lines. 'If they go down this path, absolutely folks are going to respond across the country,' DelBene said. 'We're not going to be sitting back with one hand tied behind our back while Republicans try to undermine voices of the American people.' In New York, Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul recently joined Newsom in expressing openness to taking up mid-decade redistricting. But state laws mandating independent commissions or blunting the ability to gerrymander would come into play. Among Republican-led states, Ohio could try to further expand the 10-5 edge that the GOP holds in the House delegation; a quirk in state law requires Ohio to redraw its maps before the 2026 midterms. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said he was considering early redistricting and 'working through what that would look like.' Askarinam writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Longtime lawmaker shapes the debate as Arizona grapples with dwindling water supplies
Arizona Groundwater Reform PHOENIX (AP) — Throughout two decades marked by drought, climate change and growing demand for water, Arizona's leaders have fiercely debated an increasingly urgent problem: how to manage dwindling water supplies in an arid state. At the crossroads sits Rep. Gail Griffin, a savvy and quietly assertive lawmaker who has for years used her status as the leader of key water and land use committees in the Republican-controlled Legislature to protect property owners' rights, deciding which bills live and die. Griffin's iron fist has infuriated residents and other lawmakers worried that unfettered groundwater pumping is causing wells to run dry. The GOP lawmaker has also drawn the ire of Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, who considered her the barrier to legislation that stalled this year despite having others at the negotiating table. Without the Legislature charting a path, Hobbs could tap her executive authority to carve out specific areas where regulations could be imposed, like she did in recent months with the Willcox Basin north of Douglas. Fighting over a rural framework At the start of this year's session, Hobbs floated a proposal to regulate pumping in rural areas but the bipartisan deal failed to get Griffin's support. Griffin, however, did back a separate measure to let farmers transfer their pumping rights to developers, who can then access credits to demonstrate they have enough drinking water to supply future housing projects. It was one of the most significant pieces of water legislation to win approval this year. Still, domestic well-owner Karen Weilacher and other residents are frustrated that efforts to expand Arizona's 1980 groundwater code have repeatedly failed despite pleas to address unchecked pumping as conditions worsen — in the state and greater Southwest region. Arizona's code already allows for managing pumping in major metropolitan areas. The disagreement is over a framework for rural areas. Lawmakers also have clashed over who would govern the use of the water and pathways for future regulation. Weilacher, earlier this year, addressed the natural resources committee led by Griffin. She pivoted to let the powerful panel read her shirt: 'Water is life.' 'I shall use the remainder of my time to do what Representative Griffin has done to us,' she told committee members, as she turned her back on them. Griffin declined to comment specifically on her role in shaping Arizona's water policy, but she's adamant about her belief that Hobbs' proposal would devastate agriculture and rural economies. 'As we work with stakeholders, we will continue to support private property rights and individual liberty while ensuring that any legislative solution protects local communities and our natural resource industries, allowing rural Arizona to grow,' Griffin said in an emailed response to an interview request from The Associated Press. Rural way of life With a legislative tenure dating back to 1997, Griffin's convictions are anchored in preserving a rural lifestyle in which residents help each other and reject government mandates, said former GOP House Speaker Rusty Bowers, a friend of hers for decades. 'She was a hard-core believer in her principles,' Bowers said. 'And if you didn't respect it, then get the heck out of the way, she'll run over you like a Mack truck.' Back home in Hereford, Griffin has been known to go on walks, armed with her gun and mobile phone. A member of the Arizona Farm Bureau and the Arizona Cattle Growers Association, she has referred to her ranching neighbors as 'true environmentalists' because they take care of the land year-round. At a 2019 forum, Griffin recounted an exchange in which she was advised how to handle a bear busting into her home, questioning at the time whether calling authorities for help would be enough to keep her safe. 'And what will you do when I shoot and kill that bear?' Griffin had asked. She didn't like the answer she got — that prosecution, jail time and a fine would be likely. Griffin won the crowd over with her rural sensibilities. She told them the desire to give people the tools they need to protect themselves and their property is what first led her to run for public office. That hasn't changed. Her stances resonate with voters who repeatedly send her back to the statehouse. Cochise County farmer Ed Curry is one of them but wouldn't say whether he would do so next year as Griffin eyes a seat in the state Senate. He said he and other constituents have begged Griffin to usher in change, sharing stories at a town hall last year about wells drying up and the exorbitant costs residents face when digging deeper wells. 'She doesn't ask, she tells. She doesn't listen, she speaks,' Curry said of Griffin. Curry, who serves on the governor's water policy council, said that even growing crops that don't require much water hasn't kept his wells from dropping. He said new regulations will help to ensure Arizona's future. 'Something has to be done,' he said. ___ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at Solve the daily Crossword
