A handful of Democratic-led states are targeting energy-efficiency programs in an attempt to provide relief on soaring utility bills. It's surprising, given the broad support energy-efficiency programs have among Democrats — and the fact that these incentives produce energy savings that benefit both the climate and all consumers. The short-term savings may be tempting, advocates say, but chasing them is misguided. "The subject of affordability is a serious one across many states across the country. People are hurting, and energy costs are too high," said Forest Bradley-Wright, state and utility director for the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. "Energy efficiency did not cause the energy affordability crisis, and the problem can't be solved by cutting energy efficiency." It's the equivalent of trying to slash your grocery bill by eating out at restaurants more often, he said. Maryland lawmakers earlier this month passed a sprawling package aimed at improving energy affordability, which Gov. Wes Moore is expected to sign into law. One of the legislation's major provisions calls for lowering the state's emissions-reduction targets through 2035, thus shrinking the amount utilities must spend on efficiency programs that help reduce carbon pollution. Proponents say the measures will save residents at least $150 per year. A wide-ranging Massachusetts energy affordability bill would cut $1 billion in spending from the final year of the state's three-year, $4.5 billion energy-efficiency budget. State utility regulators already ordered a $500 million reduction in the plan last year. In Rhode Island, Gov. Dan McKee's proposed budget calls for capping the state's next three-year energy-efficiency plan at $75 million per year, a notable drop from the $95 million recently approved for 2026. Champions of these proposals say they offer ways to directly and quickly get residents immediate savings. The energy-efficiency programs are paid for by fees charged to customers' bills, so if you shrink the program, you shrink the bills, the thinking goes. And every dollar counts, they say, when prices are rising so much, so quickly. Opponents, however, say efficiency programs actually save everyone money in the long run — and even in the short run for households that take advantage of the incentives. The proposed cuts, therefore, are a misguided attempt at a quick fix that will only make things worse down the road, say many climate and consumer advocates. If these arguments about long-term gains are accurate — and plenty of reports suggest they are — then why are lawmakers in states dominated by Democrats embracing the idea of scaling back energy efficiency? And why aren't constituents rallying to push their elected officials to preserve long-term savings? We found three likely reasons. The appeal of immediate action It's not easy to lower energy costs. A monthly electricity bill includes multiple components: There's the costs for the power supply and the wires, poles, and substations needed to carry that energy; the guaranteed profit for utilities; and the fees that pay for programs like energy efficiency. Lowering the cost of the power supply would be an immense, long-term effort at the crossroads of public policy, politics, and technology, all made even more uncertain by fluctuations in the global energy markets. The massive transmission and distribution system needs maintenance and upgrades to operate properly, making it difficult — and incredibly slow — to lower costs on that portion of the bill. "These costs are technically and legally problematic to unwind," Bradley-Wright said. Lawmakers, however, can do something about fees by trimming the budgets of the programs they fund. The savings from this approach are generally modest. The promised decrease in Maryland breaks down to about $12.50 per month, only part of which comes from efficiency reductions. Rhode Island's cuts would shave a few dollars per month off the average bill. The savings would appear quickly, however. Maryland lawmakers, for example, say they expect consumers to see the difference in their bills within months. "The thing about surcharges like this is, it is one of our most direct tools," said Maryland Del. Marc Korman (D), a supporter of his state's legislation. "We don't want to forsake all efforts at energy efficiency, but we want to try to provide a little bit of relief for some time if we can." Savings you can see If you haven't taken advantage of an energy-efficiency incentive, it's easy to feel like you are paying for someone else to save money when you hear about the incentive your co-worker is getting to switch from oil to a heat pump. That's not the whole story, though. Efficiency programs benefit the entire system — not just direct participants, although these long-term systemic savings are largely invisible. The programs reduce demand on the grid, which means utilities don't have to pay as much — or charge customers as much — to