Bill to force formal utility rate hearings for the first time in more than 40 years delayed

 1678145990 
1772793096

Alabama’s Public Service Commission hasn’t held a formal rate hearing for utilities since 1981. A bill that would force the commission to hold such hearings is under consideration in the state legislature, although the measure was delayed in a House committee this week. We get more details on our weekly legislative update with Todd Stacy, host of Capitol Journal on Alabama Public Television. He spoke with WBHM’s Andrew Yeager.

This interview was edited for length and clarity.

This bill regarding the Public Service Commission and rate hearings — give us some context around this. Why was it delayed?

Go back a few weeks ago and this package of bills was introduced to really to make energy more affordable, going after data centers and reining in some of those. But another bill would have reformed the PSC to make it an appointed rather than an elected body. That did not go over well with lawmakers. That’s been put on hold. But what it did do was really raise the issue. You mentioned the rate hearings and not having one since the 80s. A lot of lawmakers weren’t aware of that. I was talking to the majority leader and he said he didn’t even realize that. So it kind of uncovered an issue.

Obviously, energy affordability is a big issue, not just in Alabama, but around the country. I’m not sure if it’s going to be this bill. It may be another one. But I think lawmakers are pretty serious about doing something to address energy affordability and governance of the Service Commission sometime this session. It’s just such a big issue. But we’re getting pretty late in the session. There’s only 11 more days to go.

I wonder if you could talk a little bit more about the pressures at play for those of us who aren’t in Montgomery. Because this bill would affect Alabama Power, which is a major player in state politics. Residents, of course, are looking at their utility bills and have opinions about that. It’s an election year. It seems like there’s a lot of interest swirling around energy bills.

That’s right. And again, when this package of bills got introduced, the whole point behind what the lawmakers wanted to do was address that affordability problem, because it is an issue. You talk to lawmakers, they’re hearing from their constituents about electricity rates and things like that. But it’s a pretty sticky issue. That’s why we have a public service commission, by the way. They’re charged with regulating the power company, the gas company, railroads, even Uber and Lyft and things like that. It’s just not that easy to address.

I do think there is the will this session to do something about it. It kind of reminds me of the education situation several years ago when a proposal was floated to make the state school board appointed rather than elected. That failed overwhelmingly at the ballot box. But after it failed, the legislature got a lot more involved in education policy. And the same thing might happen this time around with electricity rates.

A pair of bills dealing with school prayer advanced out of two house committees Wednesday. What would these bills do, these two of them?

It’s essentially requiring local school boards to provide a time of day each day for prayer for students. But it has some teeth on it. One of these bills would allow the state to take away up to 25 percent of a school district’s budget if they fail to allow this or if they don’t go along with it. So that’s pretty aggressive in terms of legislation and that’s why it’s been controversial. If it was just about allowing school prayer and things like that, I don’t think it would be all that controversial. But when you talk about taking away funds, well, that’s when school boards really get involved, because every district might want to handle the situation differently.

So again, two different bills. The reason for that is the bill originally did not pass to the House Education Policy Committee, and so Representative Reed Ingram, the sponsor, kind of did a roundabout. He went through a different committee to try to get it passed. But now the same bill is through to both committees and it’s ready to hit the floor. It could hit the floor soon as next week.

Finally, the Senate gave approval this week to a bill that would prevent SNAP benefits, commonly known as food stamps, from being used to buy soda or candy. Tell us about the thinking behind this.

The idea has been around for a long time to say SNAP recipients, those that use food stamps, shouldn’t be able to purchase really sugary, unhealthy stuff like candy and sugary sodas. The idea’s been around a while, but it’s kind of hard. It’s never really gotten off the ground. So this is about as far as I’ve seen a bill get so far. Senator Arthur Orr is the one sponsoring it. I think one thing in his favor this year is they’ve talked about that policy on the national level. President Trump has talked about that. House and Senate, Republicans have talked about it on the national level. So there’s a little more momentum this year. So the fact that it’s through the Senate, you could actually see something like that pass. Of course, there are caveats and restrictions and everything, but the state seems to be on board this time and it’s got a chance.