Support passage of the Ratepayer Protection Act to require state utility regulators to consider standards ensuring large electricity customers, such as data centers, pay the full incremental cost of the energy infrastructure needed to serve them.

Jon Husted · Ohio · Republican

policy impact 0.70 specificity 0.86 extraction confidence 88%

Commitment kind: action. Promised action: Support passage of the Ratepayer Protection Act and urge Senate action on the bill.. Promised outcome: State utility regulators would consider standards to ensure large load electricity customers pay the full incremental infrastructure costs needed to serve them, protecting families and small businesses from those costs.. Deadline: unknown; not assumed expired. As a U.S. Senator from Ohio, Husted made the commitment while seeking Senate passage of the Ratepayer Protection Act by unanimous consent after House passage in September 2026.

Occurrences

“That is the principle behind the Ratepayer Protection Act. “When a very large electricity customer, such as the data center, connects to the grid, it can require investments in new generation transmission lines, substations and local distribution systems. “The Ratepayer Protection Act would require state utility regulators to consider standards, ensuring that large load customers pay the full, incremental cost of the infrastructure needed to serve them.” . . . “In plain language, if you create the cost, you should pay the cost.”

Husted advocated for the Ratepayer Protection Act, describing its requirement that state utility regulators consider standards making large electricity customers pay the incremental infrastructure costs they create.

Husted bill to protect Americans from footing the bill for new data centers blocked from passage
primary · press_release · model gpt-5.5

Evidence

verified · Source version 75202 · locator 1232

Mr. Husted introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

Fetched verbatim passage. AI summary (separate from source): Husted introduced the Senate Ratepayer Protection Act in the 119th Congress, showing direct support and legislative effort, but the bill was referred to committee rather than enacted.

unresolved same_term A for effort

S. 5028 (IS) - Ratepayer Protection Act - BILLS-119s5028is | Content Details | GovInfo
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 98%

unverified · Source version 75204 · locator unknown

The Ratepayer Protection Act would require State utility regulators to consider standards, ensuring that large load customers pay the full-- full--incremental costs of the infrastructure needed to serve it.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): The bill text matches the commitment’s core policy: standards for large-load customers, including data centers, to pay full incremental infrastructure costs.

unresolved same_term A for effort

S. 5028 Introduced in Senate - Ratepayer Protection Act
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 97%

unverified · Source version 75206 · locator unknown

Vote Question: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended Ratepayer Protection Act Vote Type: 2/3 Yea-And-Nay Status: Passed

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): The House passed the companion Ratepayer Protection Act 417-3, a concrete step toward enactment but not final passage into law.

partial same_term

Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 98%

verified · Source version 75208 · locator 6122

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 9340, which is at the desk; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed

Fetched verbatim passage. AI summary (separate from source): Husted personally sought unanimous consent to pass the House bill in the Senate, a clear passage attempt during the relevant lookback window.

unresolved same_term A for effort

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 147 (Thursday, September 17, 2026)
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 99%

unverified · Source version 75208 · locator unknown

Therefore, I object. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): The Senate unanimous-consent attempt was blocked by objection, leaving the commitment unresolved rather than delivered.

unresolved same_term

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 147 (Thursday, September 17, 2026)
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 99%

unverified · Source version 75210 · locator unknown

0928 Sep 28 | H.R.9340 | Ratepayer Protection Act motion to proceed | Thune | | |

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): The Senate record shows a cloture motion filed on the motion to proceed to H.R. 9340, indicating continuing action but no recorded cloture result or enactment as of the available record.

unresolved same_term A for effort

U.S. Senate: Cloture Motions - 119th Congress
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 93%

Assessments

Public state: delivered As of 2026-09-30 · verified · . Original AI recommendation (not independently established): delivered. same_term A for effort

The occurrence-specific commitment is an action promise to support passage of the Ratepayer Protection Act and urge Senate action. Verified evidence shows Husted introduced the Senate bill and later personally asked unanimous consent for the Senate to immediately consider and pass H.R. 9340. That is material candidate action satisfying the support/urge-passage commitment, though the verified record does not prove enactment of the underlying regulatory outcome.

provider codex_cli · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 93%