What Happened in the Senate
- On February 5, 2026, the amendment was brought up for a vote. Every Democratic member of the New York State Senate voted against the proposal, so it failed.
Once upon a winter day in New York State, a State Senator named Mark Walczyk had an idea to help everyday people. Many families were struggling with very high utility bills — the cost of keeping their lights on and homes warm was putting a strain on their wallets. NYsenate.gov
Senator Walczyk thought, “There’s money that’s been set aside but not used. What if we returned that money to people so their bills could be a little lower?” So he proposed a plan to take $2 billion of unused funds and use it to give credits on utility bills, which could help families pay less. nysenate.gov/
But when it was time for the measure to be voted on in the New York State Senate, something surprising happened.
Every Democratic Senator said no to the plan. They all voted against it — even though it was meant to take effect right away and help with the high costs people were facing. nysenate.gov/
Senator Walczyk was disappointed. He said that this was a missed chance to help New Yorkers struggling with energy costs. And that’s how the day’s big idea to lower energy bills ended — not with a yes, but with a big no in the Senate.
What the Proposed Measure Would Do
- The proposal was offered as an amendment on the floor of the New York State Senate by Republican senators including Mark Walczyk and Tom O’Mara.
- It aimed to provide immediate relief for New Yorkers facing high utility bills by allowing unused funds in the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority’s (NYSERDA) Climate Investment Account to be returned directly to utility ratepayers as bill credits. Around $2 billion was cited as available from previously collected surcharges that hadn’t yet been spent.
- Sponsors argued these funds were already paid by ratepayers through charges on their utility bills and could be used to offset steep increases in energy costs many households face.
Why Democrats Opposed It
There hasn’t been a detailed official public explanation in the press release itself of Democrats’ specific reasoning for voting against this particular amendment. However, broader reporting on the context around utility-cost policy in Albany shows:
- The Democratic majority in the Senate has been advancing a separate legislative package focused on longer-term utility rate reforms — including changes to how utility rates are set and how regulatory authority is exercised — rather than one-time refunds or credits. nysenate.gov/
- Democratic leaders have emphasized systemic changes to the rate-setting process through bills meant to increase transparency, strengthen the Public Service Commission’s oversight, and protect consumers over time, rather than simply returning existing funds as credits. timesunion.com
- Some analysts and social media discussions note that Democrats may prefer a more comprehensive overhaul of energy policy and rate structures rather than targeted bill credits that Republicans proposed in this amendment.
Sources: NYsenate.gov , Midtown Tribune news