A trio of bills introduced by House Republicans would remove the combined public benefits charge from Connecticut electric bills and shift its roughly $1 billion annual cost to the state’s general fund.
The proposal carries a bit of irony: it was the legislature itself that made the charge visible in the first place.
The public benefits charge, which traces its origins to Connecticut’s electric restructuring in the late 1990s, now comprises 63 separate fees covering grid and power-contract expenses, energy-efficiency programs, renewable energy initiatives and low-income assistance. It accounts for roughly 20% of a typical Eversource Energy bill and just over 18% for United Illuminating customers.
For decades, those costs were bundled invisibly into electric bills. Then, in 2023, the legislature passed a law requiring utilities to break the charge out as its own line item — a transparency measure designed to help ratepayers understand what they were paying for.
The newly visible fee arrived on bills as rates were rising sharply, driven by factors including utilities recovering past under-collections tied to nuclear contracts, rising demand for low-income assistance and pandemic-era unpaid bills. What lawmakers intended as a transparency measure created a political firestorm.
Republicans have long characterized the charge as a “hidden tax” that funds government programs without the scrutiny that comes with the state budgeting process. The debate drew fresh attention in November when Digaunto Chatterjee, Eversource’s senior vice president of engineering, told attendees at the Hartford Business Journal’s Politics & Policy Forum that the charge should be moved to the state budget entirely.
“When you take it out of the bill, what happens is accountability comes, and more awareness comes with it,” he said.
Democrats and Gov. Ned Lamont have pushed back, arguing that shifting the full amount to the state budget would require either tax increases or cuts to other programs. State Rep. Jonathan Steinberg of Westport, a Democrat and co-chair of the Energy and Technology Committee, has warned that eliminating the charge could jeopardize grid reliability and long-term cost control.
“Either you’re paying it through your taxes, or you’re paying it through your electric bill,” Steinberg said in November.
During the 2025 legislative session, lawmakers passed a measure using $155 million in state borrowing to partially offset the charge, saving customers an estimated $5 to $10 per month through early 2027.
The three 2026 bills have been referred to the Energy and Technology Committee. House Bill 5028 was introduced by House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora of North Branford, Rep. Tom O’Dea of New Canaan, Rep. Dave Rutigliano of Trumbull, Rep. Tim Ackert of Coventry, Rep. Tami Zawistowski of Suffield and Rep. Devin Carney of Old Lyme. House Bill 5048 was filed by Rep. Dave Yaccarino of North Haven, and House Bill 5080 by Rep. Joe Hoxha of Bristol.
