Energy Bills: Why Does the Legislature Want to Relive the 2017 Disaster of V.C. Summer?

 

The Growing Energy Policy Debate in South Carolina: A Cautionary Tale for Ratepayers

South Carolina's energy policy is quickly becoming a battleground where legislative maneuvering and power struggles are resulting in bills that could dramatically impact ratepayers, businesses, and the state's economic future. With over 1,000 bills filed so far in the 2025 legislative session, it’s becoming increasingly difficult for grassroots movements to rally against specific bills, especially as the establishment seems bent on pushing multiple, similar bills through the legislative process in quick succession.

Two major energy bills, H.3309 and S.12, have stirred up significant debate and concern, with some critics warning they could lead to another disastrous energy boondoggle similar to the V.C. Summer nuclear project fiasco. Here’s a deeper look into these controversial bills and why they matter.

1. H.3309 – The South Carolina Energy Security Act

This bill, passed in the South Carolina House on February 12th, aims to overhaul the state’s energy policy. However, critics argue that it is essentially a rebranded version of last year’s H.5118, which failed due to disagreements between the House and Senate. Now, H.3309 is fast-tracked and gaining momentum.

Key Concerns:

• Public Service Commission (PSC) Manipulation: One of the bill’s most controversial provisions is how it restructures the PSC—the body that regulates utilities. H.3309 would limit the PSC’s ability to gather independent expert testimony, meaning they would only be able to consider evidence presented by utility companies. This setup heavily favors the utilities and ties the hands of the commission, limiting its ability to protect ratepayers.

• Nuclear Power Projects: The bill facilitates public-private partnerships for nuclear plant construction, allowing ratepayers to foot the bill even before the projects are approved. This echoes the failed V.C. Summer nuclear project where billions of dollars were spent on a plant that was never completed. Despite this failure, the bill sets the stage for another round of massive debt for ratepayers, even if the projects end up abandoned.

• Santee Cooper’s Debt: Santee Cooper, the state-owned utility, is currently $7.4 billion in debt. The bill’s provisions will allow Santee Cooper to incur more debt and involve itself in risk-heavy projects without clear fiscal accountability.

• State-Driven Energy Monopoly: Another troubling aspect of H.3309 is the shift toward a state-driven energy monopoly, limiting competition and stifling market-driven solutions. The bill also gives large businesses the ability to pick their energy providers regardless of where they are located, creating a dual system that could result in greater disparity between large and small ratepayers.

• Fiscal Impact: The fiscal cost of the bill is substantial—$23.5 million, a steep increase from last year’s version, raising questions about whether this bill is truly in the best interest of taxpayers and ratepayers.

Fast-Tracking and Political Maneuvering

The rapid passage of H.3309 in the House, combined with the lack of time for public debate, has raised alarms. Critics argue that the “energy crisis” narrative may be a pretext to push through risky, controversial energy bills without proper scrutiny. This mirrors previous legislative strategies where large, controversial bills are fast-tracked through the system with little oversight, making it harder for the public to get involved in the legislative process.

2. S.12 – Another Joint Power Plant Proposal

S.12 is a bill that authorizes Santee Cooper to build another jointly owned power plant with a private company. At the heart of the controversy is the bill’s vagueness—it does not provide details on the cost or financial impact, leaving many to wonder how much taxpayers and ratepayers will ultimately be on the hook for.

Santee Cooper’s Financial Situation:

• Santee Cooper is already in severe financial trouble, with $7.4 billion in debt. Their economic outlook is negative, raising further concerns about their ability to undertake new, costly projects without risking the state’s fiscal health.

• Lack of Transparency: The bill is vague, with no fiscal impact statement or details on how the plant will be financed, making it impossible for citizens and watchdog groups to assess its true cost or potential impact on ratepayers.

3. A "Win" for the Uniparty?

Republicans in South Carolina have paraded the passage of H.3309 as a "win" for ending the supposed “energy crisis” in the state. But there is growing skepticism about the legitimacy of this crisis. Critics question if the bills are truly about addressing energy shortages or if they are simply an excuse for backroom deals that benefit private utility companies and politicians, while burdening ratepayers with even more debt.

Representative Rob Harris, who voted against H.3309, voiced his concerns in a video explaining his "no" vote. His reasoning, which has been shared widely, underscores the bill’s potential long-term harm to South Carolinians.

4. Action Steps: What Can You Do?

As these bills move through the legislative process, it’s crucial for South Carolinians to stay informed and actively participate.

How to Get Involved:

• Contact Your Senator: With S.12 still awaiting a third reading in the Senate, now is the time to contact your state senator and urge them to oppose both S.12 and H.3309. Express your concerns about the lack of transparency and the risk of another financial disaster.

• Educate Your Community: Share Rep. Harris’s video and other informational resources to educate others about the potential consequences of these bills. The more people who understand the risks, the stronger the grassroots resistance can be.

• Track the Bills: Stay informed about the progress of these bills by checking their legislative status. Keeping track of when and where these bills are scheduled for hearings is critical for public participation.

The legislative maneuvering behind H.3309 and S.12 represents a larger trend of fast-tracking bad policy without sufficient oversight or transparency. South Carolinians cannot afford another energy disaster like the V.C. Summer nuclear project, which left ratepayers with billions in debt and no completed power plant. By raising awareness and mobilizing public opposition, South Carolina can push back against these potentially disastrous bills and demand more accountability and transparency from lawmakers.

Now more than ever, it’s important to hold legislators accountable for the bills they are pushing forward. We must ensure that any energy policy passed is in the best interest of South Carolina’s families, businesses, and ratepayers—not just special interests.

https://palmettostatewatch.com/energy-bills-why-does-the-legislature-want-to-relive-the-2017-disaster-of-v-c-summer/