Ohio families are feeling the pinch of climbing utility bills, a concern that could significantly influence November's election. While the problem for voters is straightforward—higher bills are unwelcome—the underlying causes are complex, involving state and federal policies, as well as decisions by PJM Interconnect, the 13-state electric grid operator serving Ohio.
Data centers, in particular, have been identified as a major factor contributing to ratepayers' frustrations, attracting tax incentives while driving up energy costs. According to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO), 15 of 16 metro areas listed on its online dashboard last month reported higher year-over-year electric bills. Cleveland and Ashtabula experienced the steepest increase at 28.1%, with Cincinnati being the lone exception, showing a slight decline of 0.4%. State Auditor Keith Faber's recent report indicates that statewide average energy prices have more than doubled since 2001, with a 34% climb in the past five years alone.
Utility bills typically comprise three main categories: generation, transmission, and distribution. Generation covers the cost of power itself, including electricity usage and reserve capacity. Transmission refers to high-voltage power lines, while distribution encompasses the “last-mile” network that brings power to homes and businesses.
Generation costs have increased due to high demand, a phenomenon explained by Ohio Consumers’ Counsel Maureen Willis. She notes that as PJM contracts energy to meet demand, it moves up an “energy stack” to higher bids, which then sets the overall market price. PJM compares this to a taxi ride: low demand means consistent fares, but high demand leads to higher costs. Willis also pointed to the impact of data centers on PJM's annual auction for reserve power, which relies on demand forecasts. A report from PJM’s independent market monitor found that data centers contributed to $29.4 billion in higher capacity costs over the past four auctions.
At the transmission level, oversight is shared between PJM, state regulators, and the federal government. Despite this shared attention, Willis stated there is a “regulatory gap” because no one is reviewing projects for prudence, need, or cost-effectiveness. While the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has final authority over transmission rates, many projects proceed through a less rigorous “supplemental” process overseen by PJM. Willis explained that PJM's analysis is merely a “do no harm analysis,” ensuring projects don't negatively impact existing transmission, rather than scrutinizing their cost-effectiveness for consumers.
Willis contends that this lack of rigorous review incentivizes utilities to invest in projects that are profitable for them but expensive for consumers. Her office filed a complaint with FERC in 2023 regarding this oversight gap, but the commission has yet to act. Between 2017 and 2025, Ohio utilities passed $16 billion in new transmission expenses to consumers, according to Willis. Reporting from Cleveland.com indicated that more than $10 billion of this total went through PJM’s supplemental process, with many of these high-voltage lines built to serve data centers. Nationwide, utilities are planning $1.4 trillion in new transmission projects by 2030, costs that will ultimately appear on ratepayers' monthly bills. Willis warned of “stranded costs” if extensive systems are built for customers who then leave early or whose businesses do not succeed.
Oversight for distribution rates falls to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO). Maureen Willis also expressed concerns about utilities billing for upgrades that do not deliver sufficient benefits. She cited FirstEnergy's Distribution Modernization Rider, under which the company collected nearly half a billion dollars from customers but could not account for its spending. The Ohio Supreme Court struck down this fee in 2019. More recently, FirstEnergy sought state regulators' permission to reduce its reliability standards—potentially allowing for more frequent and longer outages—after billing ratepayers almost $1 billion for grid modernization projects that were supposed to improve reliability. Willis's office, along with the cities of Lakewood and Barberton, challenged FirstEnergy, and in June, the PUCO rejected the proposed changes. FirstEnergy has since appealed the decision. Willis summarized her concern by stating, "We have not seen the benefits, but we pay for the benefits ahead of time."
Politicians are proposing various fixes. Republican candidate for governor Vivek Ramaswamy has pledged to lower electric bills by increasing the energy supply. His plan involves expanding natural gas, deploying innovative energy technologies, and streamlining Ohio's permitting process to ensure projects are built “on time and on budget,” he’s said. Ramaswamy also announced an “Ohioans-first” data center pledge, promising free power for residents living near data centers and reduced property taxes for those facilities. He stated that data centers would be held to all air and water quality standards without exception. These changes would require legislation, but Ramaswamy promised an executive order banning data centers until such a law takes effect.
Ramaswamy asserted that if the governor sets the goal of eliminating electricity costs and “negotiates accordingly,” hyperscale data center developers would “fully cover the cost of power for Ohioans who reside near a data center.” He suggested that developers would build behind-the-meter power plants and contribute excess power to the grid, envisioning a surplus so significant that “most of Ohio’s counties would fit entirely within a benefit zone,” meaning entire counties could receive free power. However, experts are unsure how this promise could be accomplished legally and constitutionally. The Ohio Capital Journal sent multiple emails to Ramaswamy’s campaign requesting details on who would qualify for free power and for how long, but the campaign did not respond. Ramaswamy later clarified in an interview with the Statehouse News Bureau that his plan would cover the power.
The decisions made by Ohio’s leaders in the coming years are expected to significantly influence future utility bills, though major changes are unlikely to happen immediately.
