Congress mandates all new EVs power the grid by 2029—without funding the grid

What it does

This bill directs the Department of Energy to create a roadmap for bidirectional EV charging (technology that lets electric vehicles both charge from and send power back to the grid) within 12 months, and to issue technical standards and regulations requiring all new EVs sold after 2029 to support this capability. It also mandates that state and local disaster-recovery plans incorporate bidirectional charging infrastructure, and imposes civil penalties up to $21,000 per vehicle for manufacturers that fail to comply.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is to mandate bidirectional EV charging capability and create a regulatory roadmap for grid integration. It is a technology-forcing standard designed to modernize the electrical grid and reduce peak-demand strain, not a tax provision, subsidy, or commemorative measure.

• Section 4 requires FEMA to mandate bidirectional charging in state/local hazard mitigation plans under the Stafford Act. This is substantively unrelated to EV manufacturing standards and appears to be a policy rider.

What the text implies

• Bidirectional charging requires compatible grid infrastructure and utility coordination; the bill does not fund grid upgrades, potentially shifting costs to utilities and ratepayers.
• The 2029 mandate may accelerate EV adoption faster than charging infrastructure can support, creating consumer frustration and stranded assets.
• Disaster-recovery plans incorporating bidirectional charging may divert emergency-preparedness resources toward EV infrastructure rather than traditional resilience measures.
• The $21,000-per-vehicle penalty structure could incentivize manufacturers to lobby for exemptions or delays, creating regulatory uncertainty.

Who it affects

Ordinary citizens benefit from grid resilience, lower energy costs during peak demand (EVs can discharge stored power back to homes/grid), and reduced reliance on fossil fuels. The mandate standardizes technology, lowering consumer confusion and enabling broader adoption. Manufacturers bear compliance costs, but these are passed through the market and do not directly harm consumers.

Who stands to gain

• electric vehicle manufacturers
• EV charging equipment suppliers
• utilities and grid operators
• battery technology companies

Named in the bill

Department of Energy (DOE), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, electric vehicle manufacturers, EV supply equipment (EVSE) manufacturers

Where it stands

• Nov 19, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Nov 19, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and House Committee on Energy and Commerce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and…”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

1 lobbying clients named this bill on 1 disclosure filings across 1 quarter, Dec 2025 to Dec 2025. Those filings disclosed $700,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 56 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 0% of bills with at least one filing.

Julia Brownley, the sponsor, reported $296,500 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Associated Builders and Contractors Inc — $700,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jan 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.