This November, Michigan voters won’t just be choosing a new governor. They’ll be choosing between two dramatically different energy bills. That’s according to a new analysis from Greenline Insights, commissioned by Evergreen Action and the Michigan League of Conservation Voters, which finds that policies modeled from Jocelyn Benson’s energy platform would reduce household energy costs, while John James’s proposal to repeal Michigan’s 2023 clean energy laws would increase them. The two paths carry a $11.6 billion cumulative swing in household energy costs between 2027 and 2040, a $2,772 difference for the average Michigan household’s energy costs.
Benson’s plan saves families $638 per household on average—$2.7 billion statewide—through 2040, driven by codifying comprehensive large-load protections that require data centers and other major new electricity users to cover the system costs they create. ($1.2 billionin savings), expanding customer-owned clean energy ($500 million in savings), and expanding home weatherization and efficiency programs ($951 million in savings).
James’s plan raises costs by$2,135 per household on average—$8.9 billion statewide—through 2040, driven by repealing Michigan’s 100% clean energy standard and expanded energy-efficiency requirements.
The gap: $2,772 per household on average—$11.6 billion statewide—between the two agendas.
The biggest opportunity for savings is making large new energy users like data centers pay their fair share. New major electricity users can require substantial investment in generation, transmission, and distribution infrastructure. Requiring them to cover the system costs they create would help prevent those costs from being shifted onto everyday Michigan customers—an increasingly important protective policy as data center development accelerates across the state and country. Both Benson and James have said data center development should not increase electricity costs for existing customers and have called for holding off on new development until additional protections are in place. However, Benson has backed specific legislation (SB 1047) to ensure data centers bear their additional energy costs, while James has stated that residents’ electricity bills should not increase because of data centers but has not proposed or endorsed a state-level cost-allocation mechanism in his platform as of September 2026.
“Michigan families are feeling the squeeze of rising energy bills, and this analysis puts a real number on what November’s election means for their wallets. Policies that make data centers and other large new users on the grid pay their fair share, and reinvesting those dollars in efficiency and clean power, will bring costs down over time. At the same time, this analysis shows that repealing Michigan’s clean energy laws would carry significant costs for households. Nearly $3,000 per household isn’t a rounding error. That’s rent. That’s groceries. That’s a car payment,” said Courtney Brady, Evergreen Action State Advocacy Director.
“At a time when people are struggling with high energy bills, we need leaders who will push investments in the cheapest and fastest energy we can build,” said Ben Poulson, state government affairs director for the Michigan League of Conservation Voters. “This analysis makes one thing clear: rolling back Michigan’s clean energy laws means higher costs for Michigan families. Our energy bills are on the ballot in November, and voters deserve to know who’s fighting to lower energy bills and who is working to make them more expensive.”
Energy affordability is shaping up to be one of the defining issues in Michigan’s governor’s race, and this analysis puts a number on what’s at stake: a $2,772 swing per household. The 2023 clean energy laws will help keep costs down, support quality jobs, and cut pollution. Rolling them back wouldn’t ease the pressure on family budgets—it would add to it, leaving Michigan households to cover the difference through higher costs and a weaker economy. The choice voters make this fall will show up on utility bills for years to come.
