South Carolina Voters Demand Energy Choice Amid High Bills and Economic Boom

COLUMBIA, SC – March 03, 2026 – A groundswell of public discontent over high electricity costs is putting intense pressure on South Carolina lawmakers to reform the state's energy market. A new statewide poll reveals that a staggering eight-in-ten voters are concerned about the affordability of their power bills, and an even larger majority—81%—support a proposal to allow the state’s largest businesses to choose their own electricity provider.

The poll, commissioned by Choose Who You Use, an advocacy coalition focused on energy market reform, suggests that electricity costs are a top-tier issue for residents, second only to the rising price of groceries. These findings arrive as the state grapples with the dual challenge of accommodating nation-leading economic growth while managing some of the highest residential energy burdens in the country. The results frame a pivotal debate in Columbia: can market competition for industrial customers lower costs for everyone, or will it leave average households paying more?

A Public Mandate for Change

The data, gathered by FTI Consulting, Inc. in a survey of over 1,000 residents, paints a clear picture of voter frustration. A full 90% of respondents believe the state's electricity system could be improved, and a similar number do not see the current monopoly-based system as completely fair. This sentiment is fueling a powerful call for legislative action.

"South Carolina consumers and families are demanding action from state leaders to address their concerns around energy affordability and cost savings," said Michael Wright, Executive Director of the Palmetto Industrial Energy Association and a member of the Choose Who You Use coalition. He argues that enabling choice for large energy users is a crucial step to support the state’s economic boom.

Proponents of the policy, often called commercial and industrial (C&I) retail choice, argue that it would create a more competitive marketplace. The theory is that if large manufacturers and businesses can shop for power from alternative suppliers, it will reduce demand on the existing utility grid. This, they claim, would free up capacity and help stabilize or even lower electricity costs for the residential and small business customers who remain with the traditional utility. The poll indicates this argument resonates with voters, as 73% believe C&I choice would help keep household electricity costs lower.

The political stakes are also high. The survey found that 71% of residents would be more likely to support political candidates who advocate for C&I retail choice legislation, signaling that the issue could become a key factor in upcoming elections.

The Legislative and Economic Gamble

South Carolina's legislature is already moving on the energy front, though not yet with full retail choice. Last year, Governor Henry McMaster signed the South Carolina Energy Security Act into law, a sweeping bill designed to bolster the state's ability to generate power for its rapidly growing economy. The act streamlines the regulatory process for building new power plants, including advanced nuclear and natural gas facilities, and gives utilities more flexibility in offering competitive rates to attract large industrial projects.

While advocates for C&I choice see the Act as a positive step, they argue it doesn’t go far enough. They point to the fact that South Carolina already allows large users to choose their natural gas supplier and that 19 other states, including neighbors like Georgia and Virginia, have similar electricity choice policies. According to the poll, voters agree, with 86% saying it makes sense to offer the same choice for electricity as for natural gas.

However, the proposal is not without its critics and significant risks. Utility companies, which have long operated as regulated monopolies, are generally cautious. Their primary concern, along with some consumer and environmental advocacy groups, is the potential for "cost-shifting." They warn that if the largest, most profitable customers leave the utility system, the massive fixed costs of maintaining the power grid—from power plants to transmission lines—will be spread across a smaller base of residential and small business customers, potentially causing their rates to rise.

Environmental groups also raise concerns, advocating for a transition that prioritizes clean energy and energy efficiency over expanding fossil fuel infrastructure. Groups like the Conservation Voters of South Carolina and the South Carolina Energy Justice Coalition emphasize that the state's low-income households already face a disproportionately high energy burden and that any policy change must prioritize affordability and equity for all, not just large corporations.

Lessons from Other States

The experiences of other states offer a complex and often contradictory picture of what South Carolina might expect. Proponents of C&I choice often point to Georgia's model of "Limited Retail Choice" (LRC) as a success story, arguing it introduced competition and attracted business without destabilizing the grid. They see it as a potential roadmap for South Carolina.

Virginia's experience, however, offers a more cautionary tale. While some large businesses have saved money by shopping for power, the market is more restricted. Regulators there have previously blocked large customers from leaving their utility, citing studies that showed doing so would directly increase monthly bills for the remaining residential customers. The debate in these states shows that the actual impact of retail choice can depend heavily on market design, regulatory oversight, and local conditions.

As South Carolina stands at this energy crossroads, its leaders face a difficult balancing act. The demand for more power to fuel economic growth is undeniable, as is the public’s cry for relief from high energy bills. The proposed solution of C&I retail choice offers a tantalizing vision of market-driven efficiency and lower costs, but it comes with significant risks that could impact millions of households. The coming legislative sessions will be critical in determining which path the state will take, with the economic future of its industries and the electricity bills of its residents hanging in the balance.