The Billion-Dollar (No Bid) Power Grab...

Ameren Bully

Chapter One: The Quiet Battle Over Who Controls Missouri's Electric Future

By Nosmo King

Most of us Missourians may never see the battle that could determine a significant part of our future electric bills. In fact, unless you spend your evenings reading federal regulatory filings, you probably have no idea that one of the largest financial fights in Missouri's utility history is quietly unfolding behind closed doors. Yet the outcome could influence billions of dollars in future electrical infrastructure and affect nearly every home, farm, and business connected to Missouri's power grid.

At the center of the controversy is a request by a coalition of major electric transmission companies (including Ameren and Evergy) to change the rules governing who gets to build the nation's largest high-voltage transmission lines. The utilities argue that America stands on the edge of an unprecedented surge in electricity demand driven by artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and new industrial development. They say the country simply cannot afford years of delay caused by competitive bidding for transmission projects. In their view, the companies that already own and operate the regional grid should be allowed to move quickly, without waiting for a lengthy solicitation process to determine who builds the next major line.

Their argument is straightforward. Time is money. Every month of delay means additional pressure on an aging electric grid while new data centers, factories, and industrial customers wait for power that isn't yet available. If America intends to compete in the global race for artificial intelligence, utility executives argue, the transmission system must expand at a pace not seen in generations.

It is a compelling argument but it's only one side of the story.

Across Missouri and throughout the Midwest, a growing coalition of lawmakers, consumer advocates, and energy policy experts believes something very different may be happening. They argue that eliminating competition could return the electric industry to an era when incumbent utilities automatically received enormous construction projects with little competitive pressure to control costs. They warn that if competition disappears, the incentive to build efficiently could disappear with it. They warn that ordinary ratepayers may ultimately finance the difference through higher electric bills.

Transmission lines are unlike most public construction projects. They are not simply wires stretching across the countryside. Once approved and built, they become regulated assets that utilities may earn an authorized return on for decades.

Every major transmission investment has the potential to generate long-term revenue while becoming part of the rate base used to calculate customer bills. That reality does not make expansion improper, but it does mean that every billion-dollar project carries long-lasting financial consequences for both utilities and consumers.

The timing of this request also raises important questions. America is experiencing an explosion in projected electricity demand unlike anything seen in decades. Artificial intelligence has become the newest economic frontier, and AI data centers consume extraordinary amounts of electricity around the clock. Technology companies are racing to secure reliable power. States are competing to attract investment. Utilities are planning billions of dollars in new infrastructure.

The question now confronting regulators is deceptively simple. Should existing monopoly utilities be awarded "No Bid contracts" because they already operate the surrounding transmission system?

Or, should every major project continue to be opened to competitive bidding in hopes of reducing costs and encouraging innovation?

What should concern every Missouri citizen, is that the debate is taking place largely outside public view while involving financial commitments measured not in millions, but in billions of dollars.

That is where this series begins.

Over the coming chapters, we will examine the federal petition itself, identify every company involved in the Grid Acceleration Coalition, trace the history of FERC's Order 1000, review whether competitive bidding has actually reduced costs, analyze campaign contributions and lobbying activity, and follow the financial incentives that drive transmission expansion. We will distinguish verified facts from opinion, separate documented evidence from unanswered questions, and allow readers to judge the evidence for themselves.

This investigation is not about opposing new transmission lines. Missouri will almost certainly need additional electrical infrastructure as demand continues to grow. The real question is whether that infrastructure should be built under competitive rules designed to protect consumers or under a system that gives existing utilities a preferred position before competitors even have an opportunity to submit a proposal.

When billions of dollars are at stake, transparency matters. When monopoly utilities seek changes that could affect every ratepayer, public scrutiny matters.

And when decisions made in Washington today may determine what Missouri families pay for electricity for decades to come, someone needs to read every filing, examine every financial incentive, and ask every difficult question.

That is exactly what this investigation intends to do.

Next Chapter: Order 1000—The Rule That Changed Everything.

Regards Fellow Maconites,

Nosmo King - Editor In Chief

maconmoonline.com