Authored by Elizabeth Gianini via RealClearEnergy,
Most Americans could not name a single member of their state Public Service or Utility Commission (PSC/PUC).
Radical climate activists are counting on that.
Across the country, radical climate activists and left-wing environmental organizations are pouring millions of dollars into obscure utility commission races because they understand something many voters do not: these commissions increasingly influence the future of America's electric grid.
These regulatory bodies decide how electricity is generated, how transmission infrastructure is built, how quickly power plants retire, how new resources are integrated into the grid, and ultimately how much Americans pay for electricity and whether the lights stay on when the system is under stress.
In Georgia, radical climate activists invested heavily in the 2025 PSC races, helping defeat Republican commissioners who supported an all-of-the-above energy strategy. In Arizona, activist-backed candidates won utility elections while advocating accelerated retirements of dispatchable generation. Similar efforts are already emerging in other states.
These organizations understand that utility commissioners play a critical role in shaping energy infrastructure, reliability, and investment decisions within the legal and regulatory frameworks established by their states. As national energy debates have become increasingly difficult to win in Washington, radical left-wing environmental activists have turned their attention to state-level regulatory races where those decisions are often debated and implemented.
What makes this debate so misleading is that activists frame it as a choice between renewable energy and the dispatchable generation still required to keep the grid reliable, affordable, and resilient.
It is not.
Most Republican PSC and PUC commissioners support an all-of-the-above energy strategy. They recognize that meeting America's growing energy needs while maintaining reliability and resilience will require contributions from virtually every available energy source.
What they reject is the fantasy that America can rapidly phase out dispatchable generation before replacement technologies are capable of providing the same level of reliability, resilience, and affordability.
Many radical climate activists have shifted their messaging from climate targets to affordability. Affordable electricity means very little if policymakers sacrifice reliability in pursuit of political timelines.
No major industrial economy has demonstrated that a heavily renewable-dependent electric system can operate at scale with consistent reliability and affordable consumer costs without substantial dispatchable backup generation.
At the same time, electricity demand is surging. Artificial intelligence, data centers, domestic manufacturing, and electrification are creating the largest increase in power demand America has seen in decades.
The Trump Administration's Ratepayer Protection Pledge reflects a simple principle: large AI and data-center customers should bear their fair share of the generation, transmission, and infrastructure costs associated with their growth rather than shifting those costs onto families, small businesses, and existing ratepayers.
America's electric grid was already facing enormous modernization requirements. Transmission systems are aging. Generation fleets are evolving.
AI is accelerating the urgency of these investments. It did not create the underlying challenge.
Utilities are expected to spend approximately $1.4 trillion over the next five years modernizing the electric grid, replacing aging infrastructure, hardening systems against extreme weather, and expanding capacity.
Recent Department of Energy actions to preserve dispatchable generation reflect a growing recognition that reliability and resilience must remain central considerations in America's energy transition. The challenge is not simply building new resources. It is ensuring the electric system remains dependable during periods of peak demand, extreme weather, and other conditions that place stress on the grid.
The real challenge is not choosing between renewable and traditional energy. It is building a reliable, affordable, resilient, and scalable system capable of supporting long-term economic growth while withstanding major disruptions and restoring service quickly when Americans need power most.
Pretending otherwise may satisfy radical climate activists.
It will not keep electricity affordable.
It will not keep the lights on during hurricanes, polar freezes, or extreme heat events when millions of Americans depend on electricity not simply for convenience, but for safety and survival.
Recent victories in Georgia and Arizona have emboldened radical climate activists and their allies, who increasingly view state utility and regulatory commission races as some of the most important battlegrounds in American energy policy.
Republicans, business leaders, and ratepayers should start paying attention. The decisions made by these commissions will shape the affordability, reliability, resilience, and economic competitiveness of the American economy for decades to come.
Elizabeth Gianini is President of the Regulators RoundTable PAC.
Tyler Durden Sun, 06/14/2026 - 11:40Update(1140ET): President Trump on Truth Social has sought to brush back the Israeli Sunday strikes on Beirut's southern suburbs, saying this morning's attack "should not have happened" and given it was on "a special day when we are so close to a Peace Deal with Iran.
He emphasized, "We are very close to a Deal that will bring peace to the region, including to Lebanon, and all sides should stand down."
Some apparent last minute further Trump-Bibi fireworks, reported by Fox's regional correspondent...
President Trump told Fox News he will ask Iran not to respond against Israeli strikes that targeted Hezbollah.
Trump says he asked Israeli PM Netanyahu "what the fu*k are you doing?"
The President believes a deal with Iran will be electronically signed in the next 2-3 hours. pic.twitter.com/t689DQWfOE
He warned not just Israel against more attacks, but said Hezbollah must refrain, after the Iran-aligned Shia group sent more projectiles on northern Israel. "This could be the beginning of a long and beautiful peace" he said, and added "let's not blow it."
* * *
On Sunday the spokesman for the Iranian parliament's National Security Commission again warned against pursuing a deal with the United States without first restraining Israel. Iran has tried to force a 'red line' on Washington - essentially making clear that if it doesn't get Israel under control in Lebanon, it can kiss an Iran and Hormuz Strait reopening peace deal goodbye.
"One must not fall into a calculation error. Even if you seek agreement or understanding, its path is disciplining the Zionist regime. If this rabid dog is not controlled the ink of an agreement not yet dry will bite our own foot," the influential Ebrahim Rezaei wrote on X.
The site of an Israeli air strike in Beirut's southern suburbs on Sunday, via AFP.The warning came immediately on the heels of the Israeli military having hit Beirut hard on Sunday morning, with airstrikes on what the IDF called Hezbollah infrastructure, in response to recent attacks on northern Israel.
Iranian officials have in turn repeated their threat that they could respond with military action.
Just as President Trump has been touting that a landmark Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) will be signed Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has thrown a possible big monkey wrench into things by stating that "Israel will not tolerate firing into its territory."
From Tehran's perspective, this could put a deal with Trump on hold, as it seeks to maintain its firm line that Lebanon peace must also be incorporated into a broader overall US-Iran peace.
This has proven elusive thus far, and the Iranians have long charged that Trump acts at the behest of Israeli interests - while the White House has in turn sought to make clear it makes decisions independently, and that Israel answers to Washington, and not the other way around.
Iran's response to the new Beirut bombings has been as expected, with the deputy commander of Iran's top joint military command Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters stating that Israel's assault on Beirut "will not go unanswered," according to state media
"The Zionists' crimes in the suburbs will not go unanswered," Mohammad Jafar Assadi was quoted as saying. And more importantly:
Iran's top negotiator, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, said that Israel's assault on Beirut's southern suburbs showed that the US "either lacks the will to fulfill its commitments or the ability to do so".
"If you lack the will and ability to fulfill your commitments, speaking of continuing the path is not possible," he added.
Lebanon's civil defense agency has indicated that the new attacks on Beirut's southern suburbs killed at least three people. "The bodies of three martyrs were recovered from under the rubble and six wounded," the agency announced in a statement.
❗️BREAKING: Israel carried out attacks on Beirut’s suburbs pic.twitter.com/M8pkglo0qZ
— Arya Yadeghaar (Backup) (@AryJeayBackup) June 14, 2026Again, Israel is saying this was necessary out of self-defense. The IDF "just carried out strikes in the Dahiyeh district of Beirut against terrorist targets belonging to the Hezbollah terrorist organisation, in response to Hezbollah's firing toward Israeli territory," it said. But certainly Tehran will voice vehement disagreement with this version of events.
Tyler Durden Sun, 06/14/2026 - 11:40Summary:
Swiss Voters Reject Population Cap of Ten Million Propsal
The initiative "No 10 Million Switzerland" (population cap of 10 million) is being voted on by the Swiss and is likely to be rejected at the ballot box
New Projection by research institute GFS Bern, commissioned by SRG SSR, 1 pm local time
In a national vote, Swiss voters rejected the proposed 10-million-person cap, with 54% voting against the measure and 46% backing the initiative.
Public broadcaster SRF wrote:
Some had expected a close vote on the "No 10-Million-Switzerland" initiative. But shortly after noon – with the first projection showing 55 percent voting against – it became increasingly clear: the initiative would not find a majority among the Swiss electorate.
The relief among the broad political opposition was correspondingly great. The Social Democratic Party (SP) wrote in a statement: "The clear result sends a signal to the Swiss People's Party (SVP) and right-wing populist forces: The population no longer wants any new Schwarzenbach initiatives."
Furthermore, the population supports stable relations with the EU. "This gives momentum to the upcoming debates on the Bilateral Agreements III," the SP continued.
The Greens are also relieved after the public rejected the initiative. "The bourgeois parties must finally end their long-standing pandering to the SVP's misanthropic narratives," demands President Lisa Mazzone.
Like the Social Democratic Party (SP), the Greens want to secure European cooperation through the Bilateral Agreements III. "Switzerland is not an island," parliamentary group leader Greta Gysin points out.
Vote Projection: 52% against Population CapSwiss voters are likely to reject the "No 10 Million Switzerland" (population cap of 10 million), according to public broadcaster SRF, which cited a political scientist at GFS Bern. These early projection results come after voting closed on Sunday.
As of 1 pm local time, GFS Bern political scientist Lukas Golder says the new projection of the "No 10 Million Switzerland" initiative shows 47.6% of voters in favor and 52.4% opposed.
The measure, backed by common-sense right-leaning politicians, including the Swiss People's Party, argued that out-of-control migrant population growth was worsening overcrowding, housing costs, public transport pressure, and overbuilding.
Switzerland, with 9.1 million people, has the highest proportion of foreign-born of any major country, and the Swiss are sick of it.
On Sunday, Swiss vote on a referendum to cut family reunification and asylum claims to zero, if popultion reaches 9.5 million. At 10 million, not… pic.twitter.com/7Brx9CNPFj
Opponents, including the government, parliament, globalist CEOs, and economists, warned that the cap would restrict access to foreign labor, damage growth, and reduce long-term economic output.
Related:
Switzerland has been pursuing largely unchecked mass-migration policies, with roughly one-quarter of its resident population being foreign nationals.
Consequences of mass-migration:
Switzerland is doing the right thing. Poor immigration policy has resulted in more crime and ghettoization of their cities. pic.twitter.com/u8qCxwvyGw
— Casa ♱ 🇺🇸 (@geezindigenous) June 13, 2026Last year at the UN, President Trump warned globalists in the West who pushed nation-killing open borders and the migrant invasion: "When prisons are packed with 'asylum seekers' who repay kindness with crime, open borders have failed."
🚨 Trump at UN: “When prisons are packed with ‘asylum seekers’ who repay kindness with crime, open borders have failed.”
2024 stats:
• Germany: ~50% inmates foreign/migrant
• Austria: 53%
• Greece: 54%
• Switzerland: 72%
Close the borders.
pic.twitter.com/AXXqzlbXec
Across Europe and the U.S., years of top-down nation-killing open border policies by globalist politicians have collided with public outrage. In many countries, voters never gave left-wing political elites a mandate for the invasion of migrants. Now, out-of-control migrant crime, combined with pressure on housing, public services, wages, and social cohesion, is helping fuel a broader populist backlash against the left-wing political establishment.
Globalists Spread Doomer Propaganda As Switzerland Votes On Immigration CapSwitzerland is not a part of the European Union; it's an independent state operating in the midst of the EU apparatus, but you wouldn't know it with so many EU representatives and globalist proponents demanding the right to dictate Swiss immigration policy.
The Swiss public is voting on June 14th on a population cap which is aimed at ending the steady stream of mass immigration into the country over the past 10 years. In response, globalists and multiculturalists from within the country and without have launched a propaganda campaign to frighten voters with fears of economic collapse should they vote yes.
It's a narrative that has been repeated in the UK, the US, and a number of EU member states: "Without steady immigration, western economies will dry up from the lack of a skilled labor pool."
The Guardian has platformed a member of the German branch of the Council on Foreign Relations (an institution specifically tasked with ending national sovereignty and erasing borders) who claims the Swiss are about to undermine their own prosperity by refusing to accept more immigrants. They refer to the vote as a "Swiss Brexit by stealth..."
But Switzerland cannot "Brexit" if they were never a member of the EU to begin with. This does not seem to concern The Guardian:
"If there is one near-uncontested lesson from modern economic history, it is that open societies win. Openness to immigration was long the defining superpower of the US. Japan's strict immigration policy explains its dismal growth performance, and the fact that its average effective retirement age for men stands at 69.5 years.
Switzerland's remarkable ascent from peasant backwater to high-tech economy in 200 years tells the same tale. With no natural resources, Switzerland has grown wealthy because it has provided a stable economic climate that attracted foreign innovators..."
There is absolutely no evidence to support this claim. In fact, the data shows quite the opposite is true. Mass immigration, specifically immigration from the third world, consistently drags the economy down. The US has seen this problem surface over and over again and it is largely due to the quality of the migrants. Third worlders do not bring wealth or skill value to any first world nation.
The EU, as an authoritarian body, might seek to punish the Swiss for defying the globalist agenda, but that is an engineered consequence, not a natural one.
Switzerland is the richest economy in Europe per capita and they do have an extensive migrant population. Around 30% of the nation's current citizenry is foreign born. However, 80% of these "migrants" are western born and are not from the third world. The "skilled labor" is coming from other western nations, not India, not Pakistan, not the north of Africa.
The increasing tide of migrants from these parts of the world into Europe is starting to bleed into Switzerland, and the Swiss see the writing on the wall. The EU members with the most immigration are also dealing with the worst economic stagnation.
For example, Germany continues to deal with an unemployment rate hovering around 6.3%, with about 2.9 million people out of work. The labor market is experiencing a slowdown. Despite the rising joblessness, severe skilled labor shortages persist. In other words, migrants are not filling the job roles most needed within the German economy.
France's unemployment rate climbed to 8.1% in the first quarter of 2026, reaching its highest level in five years and surpassing mainstream expectations. The increase brings the total number of unemployed job seekers to approximately 2.6 million. The French government has been flooding the country with migrants for over a decade and the system is drowning.
Spain has recently instituted an amnesty program for hundred of thousands of third worlders, which has triggered another migration rush. It's important to understand that migrants from developing nations view the west as a target to be fleeced, not as a new home. Many migrants continue to maintain residency in their home countries while they siphon welfare benefits from Europeans.
Spain has the second-highest unemployment rate in the EU at 10.8% and a 23% unemployment rate for young workers 25 years old and under.
All of these countries are also facing a disastrous housing crisis. Mass immigration is destroying the rental and home owner markets. Germany has seen a 15% rise in rental costs, France is at 20% and Spain is at 25%. Rental availability is tight across the board with around 2% vacancy in medium to large population centers. Home prices in all three countries have skyrocketed by 15% to 40% depending on the region. Structural shortages continue to plague home buyers.
Switzerland has seen these numbers and they have seen the rising tide of third worlders trying to gain entry. It makes perfect sense for them to cap immigration. The Guardian Op Ed is revealing in the way it exposes the globalist ideology - Their argument is, essentially, that foreigners are entitled to access western economies as a kind of "civil right".
"...Beneath the economics lies something even more troubling. What makes the Dubai model so appealing to the radical right is that abandoning EU treaties would not only allow the SVP to cut immigration but also to strip foreigners of their rights entirely. For instance, they have proposed barring German and French workers from bringing their families. Switzerland would join the league of autocratic states that deny foreigners what conservatives claim to hold most dear: a life rooted in family."
It might sound like empathetic advocacy, but it is actually insanity. If it is "autocratic" for a nation to limit foreign access, then so be it. Foreigners (whether from the West or the Third World) are not entitled to the fruits of the Swiss economy. The idea that limitations are "unjust" or despotic is a product of leftist tripe and globalist disinformation.
Whether the vote on the population cap succeeds or fails, the Swiss have a renowned reputation as purveyors of order and common sense. It would be a shame for them to abandon it simply to avoid meaningless accusations of "xenophobia" or "autocracy". Frankly, their economy will remain far better off than the rest of Europe by applying a measure of logical discrimination.
Tyler Durden Sun, 06/14/2026 - 11:15