Utility political action committees (PACs) have poured nearly $11.5 million into congressional races this cycle. That amount is less than they had spent at this point in the 2024 cycle, when utility PACs had already contributed $13.6 million by the October reporting period. 

NextEra Energy, Southern Company, Entergy, and Duke Energy are spending the most of the investor-owned utilities this cycle, which is similar to last cycle when NextEra, Southern, and Dominion led the industry. Southern Company’s total is spread across various subsidiary committees representing Alabama Power and Georgia Power. The utility industry’s trade group, the Edison Electric Institute, contributed $636,500 through its PAC, called the PowerPAC. The PowerPAC regularly hosts joint fundraisers for Senators and Representatives throughout the year.

The industry’s PAC money has tilted toward Republican candidates and committees this cycle, by roughly 62% to 38%, as it has in previous cycles. The Republican Party is looking to maintain control of both chambers of Congress amid a period of growing public frustration with the high cost of living, especially utility bills. Among Americans whose energy bills have gone up, 64% told Pew Research Center that utilities trying to increase profits was a major reason. A Data for Progress poll found swing voters are drawn to candidates who will take action to lower costs, including capping utility costs. Electric utilities had another highly profitable year in 2025, with net income rising 16.2% year-over-year to $63.1 billion in 2025, and utilities have requested $23.1 billion in rate hikes through the first three quarters of 2026.

Where the money is going 

As in the 2024 cycle, the four national party campaign committees are the top recipients of utility PAC money this cycle: the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC),  National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), and National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC). Together, they have received $934,800 from utility PACs to date.

But the four committees did not fundraise in lockstep. Utility PACs favored the Republican committees early in the year, contributing a combined $125,000 to NRCC and NRSC in January, compared to $60,000 to the DCCC and DSCC. Contributions to the Republican committees then slowed. By February, Democratic committees’ cumulative total had overtaken Republican committees’, and it has stayed ahead on a running-total basis since, even though Republican committees actually out-raised Democrats in May and October. The NRCC and NRSC did not receive a single contribution from utility PACs in August or September – a change from 2024, when PACs for companies such as Pinnacle West (Arizona Public Service), FirstEnergy, and NextEra gave to the Republican committees during those months. 

The shift tracks the changing political outlook, as election forecasters grew steadily more favorable to Democrats throughout the year. Earlier this year, Democrats led the generic congressional ballot by about five points, and many election forecasters were describing the Senate as unlikely to change control. Nate Silver wrote that the Senate looked almost certainly out of play. Since then, the forecast has noticeably changed – Silver now gives Democrats a 93% chance of winning the House and a 75% chance of winning the Senate. 

Some Democratic candidates may, however, be hesitant to fundraise directly from utilities this cycle, given how salient high utility bills have become. State representative Donovan McKinney, running to represent Michigan’s 13th Congressional district, signed the “No Utility Money Challenge” – a pledge, organized by the Michigan League of Conservation Voters, for candidates to adopt a policy to not knowingly accept more than $200 in total contributions from monopoly utility PACs and groups aligned with utility interests. Paige Cognetti, Democratic mayor of Scranton, challenging Rep. Bresnahan (R-PA), has pledged not to take any money from corporate PACs. 

Former Sen. Sherrod Brown, who is challenging Sen. Jon Husted (R-OH), has highlighted Husted’s role in the House Bill 6 scandal, a $60 million bribery scheme to pass a $1 billion bailout of uneconomic coal and nuclear plants. Prosecutors have not charged Husted in the case. FirstEnergy admitted its role in the scheme and agreed to pay a $230 million penalty under a 2021 deferred prosecution agreement with the Justice Department. Husted has collected $52,000 from 10 different utility PACs this cycle, including AES Corporation, parent company of AES Ohio (also known as Dayton Power & Light), American Electric Power, and Southern Company. McKinney, Cognetti, and Brown have not received utility PAC money this cycle.

House Energy and Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie (R-KY) and Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith (R-MO) are the top candidate recipients this cycle from utility PACs, with $174,000 and $159,000, respectively. Guthrie has collected money from 30 different utility PACs this cycle, including PPL and Duke Energy. 

Guthrie said recently that “‘we absolutely would love to see changes to the’ grid section of the Senate’s bipartisan permitting bill,” Punchbowl reported. Investor-owned utilities have lobbied against those transmission reforms.

Smith has collected money from 32 utility PACs, including Southern Company, Exelon, and PG&E.

Utility money shows up in competitive races

Utility PACs have put $940,619 into this cycle’s toss-up and lean races, as rated by the Cook Political Report. That money skews even more Republican than the industry’s giving overall: 75% of the giving in those races has gone to Republicans, compared to 25% to Democrats. The tilt is sharpest in the Senate, where utility PACs have sent $219,500 to Republican candidates, compared to just $5,000 to Democrats. That $5,000 went to Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH), who is running against Republican nominee and former Senator John Sununu. Sununu has received $7,500 in utility PAC money.

Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA) has pulled in more utility PAC money than any other candidate in a competitive race, at $97,500. Miller-Meeks sits on the Energy and Commerce Committee. Her largest utility donors include Alliant Energy and ITC Holdings (a Fortis subsidiary), which operate in Iowa. Her Democratic opponent, Christina Bohannan, has made rising electricity costs and “cracking down on utility monopolies” central parts of her campaign, and has not accepted any utility PAC money. 

Rep. David Valadao (R-CA) is again in a competitive House race. He has received contributions from the PACs run by PG&E Corporation and Edison International. His Democratic opponent, Randy Villegas (D-CA), has not accepted any utility PAC money.

In the Senate, Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-IA) is running to replace retiring incumbent Joni Ernst, while Republican Mike Rogers faces Democrat Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan to replace Gary Peters. Hinson and Rogers have received utility PAC money. Hinson has pulled in $63,500 from 13 different utility PACs, led by Alliant Energy at $15,000. Rogers has taken $15,000 from just two utility PACs: Pinnacle West and Southern Company. Hinson’s opponent Josh Turek (D-IA) and Rogers’ opponent Abdul El-Sayed (D-MI) have both not received utility money.

The PACs for Pinnacle West, the parent company of Arizona Public Service, and Southern Company are among the industry’s biggest givers in competitive races.

Utility PACs were also biased toward incumbents. Of the $940,619 that has gone into toss-up and lean races, 90% has gone to the sitting members of Congress. Every House candidate who received utility PAC money in a competitive race is an incumbent. In the open Senate races where there is no incumbent to protect, utility PACs far preferred Republicans: they contributed $86,000 to Republicans and $5,000 to Democrats.

Democrats may target utility costs next year 

Democrats have already signaled that they could seek reforms to utility rates and profits if they win power. Rep. Josh Riley (D-NY) created the Congressional Lowering Utility Bills Caucus this year, and he and Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-TX) introduced the “Lowering Utility Bills Act,” H.R. 8568. The bill would require federal regulators to set a “zone of reasonableness” for utilities’ return on equity (ROE), the profit margin regulators let them earn. Riley and Casar have not received contributions from utility PACs this cycle.

Methodology

Data is available here. EPI downloaded utility political action committees from the FEC database. Examples of these PACs include the American Electric Power Committee for Responsible Government, Alabama Power Company Employees Federal PAC (Southern Company), and CMS Energy Corporation Employees For Better Government Federal PAC (Consumers Energy), along with the PACs run by the Edison Electric Institute and the American Gas Association. EPI then analyzed contributions to federal candidates, candidates’ joint fundraising committees and leadership PACs, party committees, and super PACs involved in the 2026 cycle. EPI did not analyze contributions made by utility PACs to other industry-associated PACs, such as the National Association of Home Builders PAC and the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America PAC. Utility PAC dollars originate from the utility employees themselves and may be governed by bylaws governing how contributions are made. Data reflects FEC filings through October 19th, 2026.