Ohio senators propose changes to harmonize House, Senate energy bills
Ohio lawmakers appear to have a deal on a wide-ranging energy bill meant to increase power production in the state. They're returning from a two-week recess with an amendment sanding off the differences between House and Senate proposals approved last month.
The Senate Energy Committee meets Tuesday to introduce the changes and likely put them to vote. Both chambers will be in session the following day and could presumably vote on final passage in back-to-back sessions.
The proposal offers tax breaks for companies investing in power plants and retools the ratemaking process for energy distribution companies. To further encourage new entrants, the measure reinforces barriers keeping the regulated monopolies running distribution out of the production market.
From the outset, House and Senate lawmakers have worked along parallel tracks advancing similar, although not identical, versions of the same bill. Several core ideas have persisted throughout, like eliminating the coal plant rider from 2019's HB 6.
Along the way, lawmakers proposed a few sideline initiatives. The House bill included a pilot for small cooperative power generation facilities; the Senate added in a program loaning schools money for renewable energy improvements. The Senate's idea survived. The House's didn't.
For other provisions, the chambers offered different responses to the same question. The proposals incentivize investment with a tax break. Tangible personal property tax gets levied on the equipment used to generate electricity. The House proposed reducing the rate from about 25% to 7%. Senators meanwhile suggested eliminating it altogether for equipment brought online after 2025.
The amendment goes with the 7% mark and includes provisions to discourage companies from claiming the reduced rate after making modest changes or upgrades to existing facilities.
Another major element of the legislation has to do with the regulatory timeline. Critics argue Ohio's ratemaking process takes longer than most other states, so lawmakers proposed a 'shot clock' for those decisions. The House set the ceiling at 360 days, but the Senate's 320-day deadline is the one carried forward in the amendment.
A last-minute change to what qualifies as a 'major' facility isn't included in the amendment. House lawmakers lowered the cut-off for electric transmission lines to put more of them under the Ohio Power Siting Board's authority. Critics argued those investments get very little oversight and offer a path for utilities to over-charge customers for the upgrades.
Ohio Consumers' Counsel Maureen Willis is urging lawmakers to 'reconsider' a different provision related to consumer refunds.
'When we say 'reconsider' we mean delete it,' her written testimony states.
If the state Supreme Court determines a charge was unlawful, the legislation allows consumer refunds for any of those charges collected after the court decision. Willis questioned the idea of barring refunds on charges determined to be illegal.
What's more, she argued 'it may have the unintended effect of interfering with consumer refunds in pending appeals where charges have been collected 'subject to refund.''
One such case against Dayton-area AES Ohio is currently working through the appeals process. Because state regulators approved a $76 million charge — subject to refund, the Consumers' Counsel case could return more than $300 to each customer. But if the amendment's cut off is in place, those refunds would be in jeopardy.
'The current refund provisions risk perpetuating past injustices where consumers bore the cost of unlawful utility charges without remedy,' Willis wrote.
Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky.
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
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Taxes will change under Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' — and it's a huge deal for US retirees. Here's why
President Donald Trump's so-called 'big, beautiful bill' just became law and has unleashed far-reaching impacts that both supporters and critics are scrambling to unpack. I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 6 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich in America — and that 'anyone' can do it The 940-page legislative document touches on everything from immigration to healthcare, but it's the modifications to the tax code that could be most noteworthy if you're over a certain age. Here's why these new rules are a big deal for American seniors across the income spectrum, and why the next four years are a crucial window for you to adjust your tax plans accordingly. Older Americans who rely on fixed incomes and are struggling with the cost-of-living crisis can expect some financial relief from this bill's new tax credits and deductions. Those aged 65 and above can now claim an additional tax deduction of $2,000 for single filers or $1,600 for each partner filing jointly. This deduction is on top of the standard deduction that is available to all taxpayers who don't itemize their tax filings. This seniors deduction is available even to those who itemize, unlike the standard deduction. To qualify, individual taxpayers who earn up to $75,000 or couples who earn a combined income up to $150,000 can claim the full bonus deduction. The amount of deduction is gradually phased out at higher income levels and is fully phased out for anyone earning over $175,000 individually or $250,000 jointly. Besides this bonus, many seniors could also benefit from other deductions included in the bill. Auto loan borrowers, for instance, can deduct up to $10,000 in car loan interest payments if they meet certain eligibility criteria, and the amount of state and local tax (SALT) payments people can deduct from their federal taxes has been raised from $10,000 to $40,000. Altogether, many seniors, especially those with auto loans or living in high-tax states, may see a lighter tax bill as a result of this new legislation. Read more: Americans are 'revenge saving' to survive — but millions only get a measly 1% on their savings. However, it is worth noting that several of these deductions have expiry dates. The SALT deduction is set to revert to $10,000 in 2030, while the auto loan interest deduction only applies to purchases in 2025, 2026, 2027 and 2028. As for the bonus deduction for Americans ages 65 and over? That measure expires in the 2028 tax year. In other words, many of these tax relief measures are attractive but limited and temporary. Seniors who can qualify may have a short window to take advantage of these temporary benefits. Meanwhile, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) makes big and permanent cuts to the social safety net, retirement benefits and medical assistance that could impact many seniors in negative ways over the long term. The OBBBA includes funding cuts for some programs and tighter eligibility rules for others that could diminish the social safety net for many seniors. Federal funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps, is set to be slashed and offloaded to state and local governments in October, 2027. 'To manage these new costs, states may be forced to restrict eligibility, limit benefits or withdraw from the program entirely, which would make it more difficult for eligible individuals to access food assistance,' wrote AARP chief advocacy and engagement officer Nancy LeaMond wrote in a June 29 letter to Senate leaders. 'Currently, many individuals are limited to three months of SNAP benefits every three years unless they are working for 20 hours per week or qualify for an exemption,' noted CNBC. 'The new legislation will expand those requirements to individuals ages 55 through 64, parents of minor children ages 14 and up and veterans. It is unclear when those new rules go into effect.' Over 11 million Americans over the age of 50 relied on SNAP as of 2023. Meanwhile, the more than 9 million Medicaid recipients between the ages of 50 and 64 will face new work requirements to qualify for it as a result of this legislation, according to an AARP Public Policy Institute analysis. 'This big, beautiful bill — in terms of its impact on health care, on how physicians and hospitals are going to navigate the next few years — I think is the biggest immoral piece of health care legislation I've ever seen,' Arthur L. Caplan, PhD, a professor and founding head of the division of medical ethics at NYU Grossman School of Medicine, told Healio. 'Just unethical, indefensible and tragic.' These controversial measures could be why 53% of American adults strongly or somewhat oppose of Trump's budget, according to a YouGov/Economist survey. Nevertheless, since the bill has already passed, seniors have a short window of roughly four years to take advantage of temporary tax reliefs, credits and deductions to enhance their financial security independently. Older Americans cannot afford to waste the next four years by neglecting these changes. Every dollar saved over this period could offset the long-term impacts of reduced federal support for medical and food benefits. This tiny hot Costco item has skyrocketed 74% in price in under 2 years — but now the retail giant is restricting purchases. Here's how to buy the coveted asset in bulk Here are the 6 levels of wealth for retirement-age Americans — are you near the top or bottom of the pyramid? Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? Money doesn't have to be complicated — sign up for the free Moneywise newsletter for actionable finance tips and news you can use. This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump was shot a year ago today. The conspiracy theories about it persist
President Donald Trump said he turned to look at a chart displayed at a Pennsylvania rally on July 13, 2024, when pops rang out as a shooter on a nearby roof fired eight shots toward the then-candidate. The footage from the incident shows Trump flinch, raise his hand to his ear, and check it to find blood before crouching down behind the lectern. He appeared in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, a few days later to accept the Republican presidential nomination with a bandage on his ear. The FBI later deemed that a bullet had struck Trump in the ear, either whole or fragmented, though unfounded conspiracies initially questioned if it was glass or some other piece of shrapnel that injured the president. But a year later, the conspiracy theories haven't stopped. A quick scroll through X shows close-ups of Trump's ear comparing recent and old photos and false theories that the assassination attempt was staged. Here is what we do know about the shooting, and what questions remain: More: One year after Trump's attempted assassination, how politics has changed On July 13, 2024, Trump was speaking at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, when a gunman positioned on a rooftop near the rally fired multiple shots toward the then-presidential candidate. Trump was shot in the ear and ducked behind the lectern as Secret Service agents swarmed him and ushered him off stage. However, they did not get him out of public sight before he raised a fist in the air as blood streaked down his face in a photo moment that would be a defining image of his campaign. The shooter was later identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, and he was killed by law enforcement. Crooks appeared to have acted alone and did not belong to any particular political leanings. A spectator at the rally was killed, and two were critically injured. Yes, multiple pieces of evidence show Trump was struck in the ear by a bullet. A bipartisan congressional task force was created in the weeks following the first attempt to "investigate all actions by any agency, department, officer, or employee of the federal government, as well as state and local law enforcement (LLE) or any other state or local government or private entities or individuals, related to the attempted assassination," according to a December report from the task force. A timeline of events included in the report shows Crooks fired three shots at 6:11 p.m., with one round hitting Trump's ear before his detail immediately covered his body. A few seconds later, Crooks fired five more shots, the report stated. A week after the shooting, Trump's previous White House physician Rep. Ronny Jackson issued a memo on Trump's injury. "The bullet passed, coming less than a quarter of an inch from entering his head, and struck the top of his right ear," the memo posted to X read. "The bullet track produced a 2 cm wide wound that extended down to the cartilaginous surface of the ear." Dr. Anthony Fauci said on CNN that the doctors' reports indicated it would just be a surface-level wound with no further complications. Trump has mentioned multiple times that he still experiences a "throbbing feeling" in his ear where he was shot. Between the incident in Butler and a second apparent attempt on Trump's life two months later at his golf course in Florida, some Republicans also stirred up conspiracies about the shooting. Trump himself blamed Democrats for the plots while on the campaign trail. The congressional task force report argued that the Secret Service and other federal agencies failed in some of their planning, execution and leadership. The Secret Service also said on July 10 it disciplined six staffers with suspensions without pay between 10 days and six weeks, and it was implementing some of the recommendations from the congressional report. Trump, now in office, said he was briefed by multiple agencies on the shooting in a previewed clip of an interview with daughter-in-law Lara Trump. "They briefed me and I'm satisfied with it," Trump said on Fox News' "My View with Lara Trump." "There were mistakes made, and that shouldn't have happened ... I have great confidence in these people." But Rep. Mike Kelly, the Pennsylvania Republican who chaired the task force, said he was continuing to push for more answers about the agencies' failures. "We can't quit on it because we never got the answers," Kelly said in June in an interview with the USA TODAY Network at his Butler office. "The public deserves to know what happened that day." Contributing: Zac Anderson, Matthew Rink, Bart Jansen, Josh Meyer, Jeanine Santucci, David Jackson, USA TODAY Network Kinsey Crowley is the Trump Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at kcrowley@ Follow her on X and TikTok @kinseycrowley or Bluesky at @ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Was Trump really shot? Yes, despite conspiracy theories, see evidence
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
J.D. Tuccille: U.S. Department of Education should be abolished
The United States Department of Education was born as a political payoff by then-president Jimmy Carter to reward teachers' unions for supporting his candidacy. While it doesn't operate any schools or educate any children, the funding and rules administered by this meddlesome federal bureaucracy allow federal politicians to limit educational experimentation and variety at the state and local level. That, in turn, has spurred an exodus from American public schools. President Donald Trump has promised to kill the department and it's a promise he needs to keep. It's not at all clear that the U.S. needs a federal Department of Education. While there are some federally operated schools — on military bases, for example — those are run independently of the Education Department. The agency itself admits that, 'Education is primarily a state and local responsibility in the United States,' and that, 'At the elementary and secondary level … about 92 per cent of the funds will come from non-federal sources.' Most public schools are operated by local governments or, in the case of charter schools, by private groups and businesses with state and local funding. State governments exercise varying degrees of control, as you'd expect in a federal system, with California and Texas centralizing the purchasing of textbooks (a 2020 New York Times report found otherwise identical texts given a liberal spin for California buyers and a conservative one for Texas purchasers). Importantly, the U.S. Constitution details the powers of the federal government and nowhere does it mention schools or education. In March, Thomas A. Berry, director of the Cato Institute's Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, noted that, 'The vast majority of functions carried out by the Department of Education are not authorized by the Constitution. That is because the Constitution grants the federal government only limited, enumerated powers, none of which encompass education policy.' So why does the federal government have a Department of Education that runs no schools? Because once upon a time a politician owed favours. After Carter died in December, journalist Mark Walsh summarized part of his legacy for EducationWeek. 'As a presidential candidate in 1976, Carter promised the National Education Association that he would push for a separate education department,' he wrote. 'In return, the nation's largest teachers' union made the first presidential endorsement in its then-117-year history.' Thus, the U.S. ended up with a cabinet-level department devoted to education that operates no schools, employs (or used to) roughly 4,000 people and spends about four per cent of the federal budget. What does the department do? It enforces rules — such as anti-discrimination laws — compiles statistics, sets goals and funnels money to local public schools that accept federal conditions (which most do). This gives educational bureaucrats outsized influence over institutions they don't actually operate. In 2017, an article in the Harvard Graduate School of Education's Ed. magazine noted that, 'The federal government uses a complex system of funding mechanisms, policy directives and the soft but considerable power of the presidential bully pulpit to shape what, how and where students learn.' In fact, state and local educators, largely linked by the culture and ideology that permeates teachers' unions and the federal Department of Education, are usually more than happy to have their arms twisted into accepting the latest trends favoured by Washington. The result is less variety and experimentation among schools that are locally operated but don't want to offend the feds. Maybe that would be tolerable if such standardization produced well-educated kids, but it doesn't. In January, the Department of Education announced the results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) — often called 'the nation's report card' — by admitting they 'reveal a heartbreaking reality for American students and confirm our worst fears: not only did most students not recover from pandemic-related learning loss, but those students who were the most behind and needed the most support have fallen even further behind.' Inefficient and unresponsive public schools aren't a new thing — Americans have complained about them for decades. But they're now doing more than complaining — they're heading for the exits in favour of alternatives, such as private schools, publicly funded but privately run charter schools, co-operative learning pods, micro-schools and various forms of homeschooling. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, while traditional public schools saw enrolment decline by over a million students, private schools, which educate nine per cent of combined public and private students, picked up enrolment, many paying tuition with the help of tax credits and education savings accounts explicitly established to support school choice. At the same time, charter schools increased enrolment by 400,000 and now educate roughly seven per cent of all students. Homeschooling is harder to measure since not all states track those who choose DIY education, but the Johns Hopkins University Homeschool Hub estimates that six per cent of students are educated through various homeschooling approaches and that, 'The number of home-schooled students is going up as the total number of U.S. students in going down.' Culture wars and battles over politicized classrooms — exemplified in those competing California and Texas textbooks — only serve to accelerate the exodus. If the U.S. Department of Education is doing anything, it's presiding over a decline in public education that Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Cara Fitzpatrick dramatically overstates in her 2023 book, 'The Death of Public Schools.' The public schools aren't dead, but they're mortally wounded and shedding support after having been rendered repulsive by their own advocates. In March, President Trump ordered Education Secretary Linda McMahon to 'take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the states and local communities.' He's since laid off almost half the department's workforce — a move boosted this week when the U.S. Supreme Court eased the way for mass firings of federal workers. But President Carter's payoff to the teachers' unions required an act of Congress to create. It's long past time that lawmakers act once again to put the Department of Education out of our misery. National Post J.D. Tuccille: Americans flee Big Government schools for better, private options J.D. Tuccille: DEI is in retreat
