Rising Utility Bills Aren’t Just a PSE Issue. They’re a Policy Issue.

When people see a headline about Puget Sound Energy seeking another major rate increase, the natural reaction is to blame the company whose name appears on the bill. That reaction is understandable, but it is incomplete.

This is not simply a PSE-at-fault issue. It is, to a meaningful extent, the result of policy decisions made by the Washington State Legislature over the last several years.

Two laws matter here: the Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA) and the Climate Commitment Act (CCA). CETA requires Washington’s electric system to move to greenhouse-gas-neutral electricity by 2030 and to 100% clean electricity by 2045. The CCA adds a cap-and-invest system that puts a price on carbon emissions and is designed to push the economy away from fossil fuels over time.

In plain English, the Legislature told utilities to do three things at once: clean up the grid, prepare for more electrification, and help power a future where more Washingtonians drive EVs, heat buildings with electricity, and rely less on gasoline and natural gas. That transition may have environmental logic behind it, but it is not cost-free. Building, procuring, and maintaining a cleaner and more heavily used electric system costs money.

That cost pressure is now showing up in the real world. Washington regulators said at the end of 2025 that PSE’s energy unit costs had increased 59% between 2025 and 2026. Separately, recent reporting on PSE’s latest filing says the company is seeking increases that would raise residential electric bills by nearly 30% by 2029, with gas bills also rising substantially if approved.

To be clear, the CCA is not a perfect one-to-one explanation for every dollar on an electric bill. Washington’s cap-and-invest program includes no-cost allowances for electric utilities specifically to mitigate customer impacts, and state law directs those mechanisms to protect consumers.

But that does not change the larger point: when the state imposes an aggressive energy transition, layers on emissions pricing, and pushes broad electrification as a central climate strategy, consumers should not be shocked when energy becomes more expensive. That matters even more because Washington has also made traditional fuel use more expensive. The state motor vehicle fuel tax is 55.4 cents per gallon from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026, before federal gas taxes are added. EV owners also face state vehicle fees, including a $75 transportation electrification fee, and Washington law has increased certain electric vehicle registration-related charges beyond the earlier $100 framework.

The practical result is that many Washingtonians are being squeezed from both directions. Gasoline is expensive. Electricity is getting more expensive. Heating a home is more expensive. Running an office is more expensive. Charging a vehicle is more expensive than many early adopters were led to expect. The promised savings from electrification begin to erode when the underlying cost of power keeps climbing.

And that ripple effect does not stop with households. It affects small businesses, office tenants, schools, nonprofits, and public agencies. When energy costs rise across the board, those costs move through the economy. They show up in prices, rents, budgets, and taxes.

The Legislature’s climate goals may have been well-intentioned. But intentions do not pay utility bills. Policymakers should be honest that large-scale energy transition policies carry real affordability consequences, especially when implemented on ambitious timelines and layered on top of a cost-of-living environment that is already difficult for many families.

This is why the debate should not be reduced to “PSE is at fault.” The more accurate question is whether Olympia fully accounted for the real-world cost of the energy transition it mandated. Consumers are now getting that answer one monthly bill at a time.