Kansas and Missouri utility customers deserve rate relief, not monopoly | Opinion
For generations, competition has fueled American progress. It drives down costs, increases innovation, rewards efficiency and helps ensure consumers receive the best value for their hard-earned dollars. As families and businesses across Kansas and Missouri grapple with rising electricity costs, preserving competition has never been more important.
Unfortunately, a group of for-profit utilities, including Evergy, has asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to prohibit them from having to compete with other utilities to build new transmission lines for five years. There are billions of dollars in planned transmission projects planned over that time period.
The consequences of such a decision would increase electricity prices and their profits. Without competition, a utility monopoly has zero incentive to reduce costs. The more they spend, the more their profits increase. When competition is removed from the process, consumers lose the benefits that come from the most cost-effective solutions.
Even more concerning, the costs associated with these projects do not simply disappear. Every dollar spent on transmission infrastructure is ultimately recovered from utility customers through their monthly electric bills. Decisions made today that allow monopoly utilities to expand their control could impact Evergy’s residential customers for decades, as transmission costs are recovered over the life of these assets — often 40 years or more.
Competition exists for a reason. It creates incentives to reduce costs and deliver projects efficiently and on time. Without those market pressures, utilities operating under a cost-recovery model have little motivation to minimize expenses because higher project costs can translate into higher returns. At the same time, many consumers in the region have already faced electricity rate increases exceeding 20% in recent years, while household incomes have not kept pace.
The good news is that opposition to the utility’s efforts is growing. Consumers, state officials and policymakers from Kansas, Missouri, and 17 other states throughout the Midwest and Southwest have urged FERC to reject efforts that would weaken competition. Among those raising concerns are Kansas House Speaker Daniel Hawkins and House Energy, Utilities and Telecommunications Committee Chair Leo Delperdang.
Their concerns are supported by independent research. A May 2026 report from the Washington-based R Street Institute found that competitively awarded transmission projects cost approximately 30% less than comparable projects developed by incumbent monopoly utilities. The report also concluded that competitive projects are generally planned and completed faster than similar projects awarded without competition.
Additional analysis reinforces these findings. Our own review of publicly-available data from 15 recent transmission projects built by incumbent utilities without a competitive process found average cost overruns of 84%. Those overruns translated into more than $4.8 billion in additional costs ultimately borne by consumers.
As America commemorates its 250th anniversary, it is worth remembering that competition and free enterprise have been central to our nation’s economic success. The same principles that have strengthened American industries for centuries should continue to guide how we build critical energy infrastructure. Protecting transmission competition will encourage innovation, control costs and help ensure that consumers, not monopolies, are the ultimate winners.
Paul Cicio is chairman of the Electricity Transmission Competition Coalition and president of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America, a 501(c)(6) business league.