Fast-track power plants, slow down solar and wind
H.R. 1047 — GRID Power Act · Filed by Troy Balderson (R-OH) · 17 cosponsors · Introduced Feb 6, 2025 · Passed chamber
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill requires the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to create new rules allowing electric utilities and grid operators to fast-track approval of new power plants that can reliably supply electricity on demand (called 'dispatchable power'). Utilities can now propose to move these projects ahead in the interconnection queue—the waiting list for new generators—if they can show the projects will improve grid reliability. The bill aims to speed up the process for adding reliable power sources to the grid.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism prioritizes 'dispatchable power' in interconnection queues—a category that includes natural gas, coal, and nuclear plants but excludes variable renewables. While framed as a grid-reliability measure, the bill functionally creates preferential treatment for conventional generation sources.
What the text implies
- The definition of 'dispatchable power' excludes battery storage and demand-response systems that can also provide reliable supply, potentially narrowing the bill's intent to conventional generation.
- Utilities gain discretion to propose queue prioritization without explicit statutory criteria—FERC approval is required but the bill does not mandate cost-benefit analysis or renewable-energy parity.
- The 60-day FERC approval window for utility proposals may compress stakeholder review and create pressure to approve prioritization schemes with minimal scrutiny.
- Ratepayers may bear costs of accelerated interconnection for dispatchable projects while renewable projects face longer delays, shifting the cost-benefit calculus in favor of conventional generation.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
Citizens benefit from faster grid modernization and potentially improved reliability through prioritized dispatchable resources. However, the bill creates a two-tier interconnection system that may slow deployment of cheaper renewable energy and shift costs to ratepayers, while reducing transparency in how projects are selected for priority treatment.
Who stands to gain
- natural gas generators and utilities
- nuclear power operators
- hydroelectric facilities
- transmission providers (utilities and RTOs/ISOs)
Named in the bill
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Independent System Operators (ISOs), Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs), transmission providers, bulk-power system, Federal Power Act (section 215, 201, 3), 18 CFR 35.28(f)
Where it stands
17 cosponsors: 17 Republicans.
- Feb 6, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Feb 6, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Energy and Commerce and Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce”
- Jun 5, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
- Jun 25, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 28 - 23”
- Sep 18, 2025 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 206 (Roll no. 279).”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
30 lobbying clients named this bill on 49 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $70,626,910 in lobbying spend. A filing names 34 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 98% of bills with at least one filing.
Troy Balderson, the sponsor, reported $1,174,882 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle. $10,000 of that came from 1 PAC tied to these lobbying clients.
- Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — $54,660,000 on 3 filings
- Edison Electric Institute — $4,248,610 on 2 filings
- Duke Energy Corporation — $2,280,000 on 1 filing
- National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (nreca) — $1,750,000 on 2 filings
- Public Service Enterprise Group — $890,000 on 2 filings
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (4,532 characters) on Jul 8, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Fast-track power plants, slow down solar and wind” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr1047 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.