Your Community Solar Bill Would Hide the Fee You Pay. That Is Not an Oversight. It Is the Design.

By John A. Nichols, Guest Contributor

There is a bill moving through the Delaware General Assembly that its sponsors describe as a step toward billing simplicity and transparency for community solar subscribers. Read carefully, the bill does the opposite. It would authorize a billing model called net crediting, under which the subscription fee a subscriber pays to a private solar company is permanently hidden from the subscriber’s monthly Delmarva Power bill. The subscriber sees only a net savings figure. The fee that produced it disappears.

The bill’s synopsis calls this “a simpler, more transparent experience.” That claim does not survive contact with the bill’s own text. What is transparent about a bill that shows subscribers their savings but conceals the fee deducted to produce it? Transparency means being able to see what you are charged. This bill ensures you cannot.

The Grid Is Not a Battery

Before examining the billing model, a common misunderstanding deserves correction. Some subscribers enroll in community solar believing that the grid functions like a battery — that electricity generated by a solar array during the day is stored and available for withdrawal at any hour. It is not. The electric grid moves power in real time. A solar array generates electricity only while the sun is shining, typically six to eight hours a day. That electricity flows into the grid and is consumed immediately by whoever is drawing power at that moment.

The credit that appears on a subscriber’s Delmarva bill is a financial mechanism, not a record of electrons reserved for that subscriber. It is calculated under 26 Del. C. §1014(f)(1) as the subscriber’s allocated share of the array’s output, valued at the full volumetric delivery and supply charges on their rate schedule. The subscriber is credited for kilowatt-hours of generation attributed to their subscription. They are not credited because those kilowatt-hours powered their home. In the evening, overnight, and on cloudy days, their home runs on Delmarva’s conventional grid power, as it always has. This matters because it defines what subscribers are actually purchasing: a financial credit derived from solar generation, not solar-powered electricity.

Who Keeps the Money

That credit is substantial. Under 26 Del. C. §1014(f)(1), it equals all volumetric delivery and supply charges on the subscriber’s rate schedule — the full per-kilowatt-hour retail rate, excluding only fixed charges (the flat monthly Customer Service Charge of $13.50 that every Delmarva customer pays regardless of how much electricity they use) and taxes. But subscribers do not keep it. They pay most of it back to the Subscription Coordinator — the private company that signed them up and manages their account.

The split is documented. Delaware’s first operating community solar array, a 4.7-megawatt project in Georgetown, Sussex County developed by Nautilus Solar Energy and TurningPoint Energy, advertises a 10 percent savings rate for general subscribers. (WHYY, June 16, 2025.) Ten cents of every dollar of credit value generated on the subscriber’s behalf stays with the subscriber. The remaining 90 cents flows to the Subscription Coordinator and developer through the subscription fee — every month, over contracts that typically run twenty years or more.

The private contract governing how the Coordinator splits that 90 cents with the array developer is not filed with the Public Service Commission and is not disclosed to subscribers. The subscriber who funds that revenue stream has no legal right to know how it is divided or what the Coordinator earns.

Net Crediting Hides the Mechanics by Design

This is precisely the information that net crediting conceals. Under the proposed consolidated billing bill, Delmarva would calculate the gross credit, deduct the subscription fee internally, apply only the net savings to the subscriber’s bill, and remit the subscription fee to the Coordinator within 60 business days. The subscriber’s bill shows one new line: a net credit. The gross credit that Delmarva calculated does not appear. The subscription fee that Delmarva deducted does not appear. The per-kilowatt-hour rate the Coordinator is charging does not appear.

From a subscriber’s consolidated bill under this model, it is impossible to determine the gross credit generated on their behalf, the fee deducted, the per-kilowatt-hour rate the Coordinator is charging, whether that rate matches the enrollment contract, or whether it has changed since enrollment. A subscriber who cannot answer those questions from their monthly bill is a subscriber who cannot protect themselves. The monthly bill is the only document a subscriber reliably receives and reviews every month. If the fee is not on it, it effectively does not exist in the subscriber’s awareness, regardless of what the enrollment contract says.

The bill’s synopsis describes this arrangement as delivering a “simpler, more transparent experience” because the subscriber receives one bill rather than two. One bill is simpler. It is not more transparent. Transparency is a property of information, not of paper count. A single bill that conceals 90 percent of the financial transaction is less transparent than two bills that show it completely.

Delmarva Would Collect Fees It Cannot Verify

Under current law, Delmarva’s role in community solar is administrative: it applies credits to subscriber bills and has no financial relationship with the Subscription Coordinator. The Coordinator invoices subscribers separately. Delmarva is not a party to that transaction.

The proposed bill fundamentally changes that relationship. Delmarva would collect the subscription fee from subscribers, deduct one percent as an administrative charge — paid not by the Coordinator as a cost of doing business, but by subscribers — and remit the balance to the Coordinator. Delmarva would become the enforcement arm of a private, unregulated commercial transaction.

When Delmarva collects a charge on a customer’s bill, customers reasonably assume that charge has been reviewed and authorized by the Delaware Public Service Commission. That assumption would no longer be correct for the subscription fee. The PSC has not reviewed the Coordinator’s fee structure. It has not determined the fee is just and reasonable. The subscription fee would carry the implicit authority of a regulated charge while receiving none of the oversight that regulated charges require.

Delmarva would collect whatever the Coordinator instructed it to collect. If the fee rate changed, if an incorrect kilowatt-hour allocation was applied, if a subscriber was overcharged relative to the enrollment contract, Delmarva would collect it anyway. It has no obligation under the bill to verify that the amount matches the contract. Under net crediting, the subscriber — who could detect the discrepancy from an itemized bill — has no itemized bill to consult.

The bill does prohibit Subscription Coordinators from imposing unauthorized charges through consolidated billing. A prohibition the subscriber cannot monitor enforces itself against no one. It is a statement of aspiration directed at a party with every financial incentive to test its limits.

Twenty Years Without a Receipt

Community solar enrollment contracts in Delaware run for twenty years or more. Subscription Coordinators are sold. Developers are acquired. Fee structures are renegotiated. The subscriber who enrolled in 2027 may be dealing with an entirely different commercial entity by 2035, operating under assignment provisions in a contract the subscriber signed eight years earlier and has not reviewed since.

Under net crediting, if the Coordinator’s fee rate rises by a fraction of a cent per kilowatt-hour, the subscriber cannot detect it from the consolidated bill. If the gross credit falls and the net savings shrink, the subscriber cannot determine from the bill whether the credit calculation changed, the fee rate changed, or both. The bill shows only the result. The mechanics that produced it are hidden by design — and will remain hidden for the life of a contract that may outlast the company that wrote it.

What the Bill Should Require Instead

Three lines on a bill: the gross credit, the subscription fee, and the net savings. Delmarva already calculates all three under the net crediting model. The statute requires the gross credit calculation under 26 Del. C. §1014(f)(1). The subscription fee is the contractual basis of every subscriber’s twenty-year obligation. The net savings is what the subscriber keeps. Displaying all three is a formatting decision, not a technical challenge. The only party for whom that display creates a problem is the Subscription Coordinator, whose financial position improves when subscribers cannot see the fee.

A program that extracts fees from ratepayers through the state’s regulated utility infrastructure, under contracts lasting twenty years, without disclosing those fees on any bill the subscriber receives, is not a ratepayer program. It is a ratepayer extraction. The General Assembly should call it what it is — and require itemized billing before authorizing the mechanism that makes it invisible.

John Nichols is a long-standing advocate for affordable and reliable electricity in Delaware.

Sources: 26 Del. C. §1014(f)(1); Delmarva Power Tariff P.S.C. Del. No. 8 — Electric; Liberty Consulting Group, Technical Consultant Final Report, Delmarva 2025 SOS Auctions, Feb. 19, 2025 (Delaware PSC); WHYY News, “Wilmington residents encouraged to sign up for community solar initiative,” June 16, 2025; Sen. Hansen, Consolidated Billing Bill, 153rd General Assembly (draft March 18, 2026); 26 Del. C. §1014(f)(1)(e) (15% LMI subscriber requirement).

Delaware Can’t Compete If U.S. Can’t Build

By Charlie Copeland, Guest Contributor*

Delaware’s economy is sending a warning signal that policymakers cannot afford to ignore. In December 2025, the state’s unemployment rate hit 5.2% — well above the national rate of 4.4% and up from 3.6% just 12 months earlier. The number of unemployed Delawareans surged 45% year over year, the largest increase since the COVID-19 lockdowns of early 2021.

But even the headline number understates the problem. Delaware’s labor force participation rate has fallen to 59.4%, meaning that more than 4 in 10 working-age residents are not working and not even looking. Nationally, that figure is 62.5%. If Delaware’s workforce participated at the same rate as the rest of the country, the effective unemployment rate would be closer to 10% — roughly 27,000 additional Delawareans who have simply given up.

Against that backdrop, permitting reform is not an abstraction. It will determine whether Delaware can build the infrastructure, energy systems and housing it needs to reverse this slide — or whether the state continues to lose ground, while the country moves forward.

Delaware’s own leaders have begun to acknowledge the problem. In February, Gov. Matt Meyer signed Executive Order 18, creating the “Delaware Permitting Accelerator” to coordinate agency reviews and fast-track housing, energy and infrastructure projects. The order states plainly that state permitting timelines have “often stretched 18-24 months or longer, increasing project costs, discouraging private investment, constraining housing supply, and slowing delivery of essential infrastructure.”

The pressures behind that order are real. Delaware imports roughly three-fifths of its electricity from out-of-state suppliers, having retired significant generation capacity over the past two decades. The state’s Affordable Housing Production Task Force found a shortage of 45,000 housing units, with construction costs in Sussex County approaching $475,000 for a basic single-family home — beyond what working families can afford. Among the task force’s central recommendations: Streamline the permitting process.

Executive Order 18 is a positive step, but it is not a substitute for structural reform. An executive order can be revoked by a later governor, so it should be enacted into law by the General Assembly. Additionally, Delaware should advocate for federal permitting reform. No matter how much Delaware streamlines its own processes, major infrastructure — power generation, transmission, broadband and any project touching federal land, waterways or funding — must still go through a federal review system that has become a source of litigation and indefinite delays.

The central problem is the National Environmental Policy Act. Signed in 1970, NEPA was designed to inform federal decision-making, not to provide endless opportunities for obstruction. Today, it does exactly that. Roughly 30% of projects undergoing a full environmental impact statement face litigation, and energy and infrastructure projects routinely spend four-and-a-half years or more in the federal permitting process. McKinsey & Company estimates that projects currently stuck in federal review represent enough generating capacity to power 38 million to 54 million American households.

Delaware cannot wait. The state has no nuclear generation, and its last coal plant closed in 2025. Legislators from both parties have begun studying small modular reactors and other alternatives — but any new generation project of meaningful scale requires federal permits, federal environmental review and federal interconnection approvals that can take the better part of a decade. Delaware can pass all the energy legislation it wants; if the federal system cannot process the applications, shovels do not go into the ground.

The case for reform has moved beyond argument. The U.S. House of Representatives has passed the bipartisan SPEED Act. Through reconciliation, Congress has begun setting enforceable timelines — an environmental assessment within 180 days and a full impact statement within one year. Polling by the Bipartisan Policy Center found that Americans support streamlining the permitting process by a margin of 61%-13%. This is not a close call.

For Delaware, the stakes are 27,000 working-age residents who have dropped out of the labor force, 45,000 housing units the state cannot build fast enough, and three-fifths of our electricity imported because we lack the capacity to power our own economy. Every month a project sits in review is a month when a home is not built and when a Delawarean who could be working is not.

Charlie Copeland is the director of the Center for Economic & Fiscal Policy at the Caesar Rodney Institute.

*Originally published April 6, 2026, in Bay to Bay News.

Fixing Delaware’s Healthcare: Why Free-Market Solutions Matter

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware 

Delaware has long struggled with providing easy access to superior health care at a reasonable cost. A number of factors have affected the failure to meet those goals, but public policy is a significant part of the picture.

Delaware spends more than$12,000 annually per person in the state, at the top (fourth highest) of spending among all the states. Yet the outcomes are bottom rate – we have the highest per capita overdose death in the country, we have the worst shortage of primary care physicians – meeting only 16% of our need, and Delaware hospitals have the second worst (longest) wait times in the emergency rooms in the country.

Why? We have a heavy-handed bureaucracy and policy mandates that makes care more costly, reduces incentives to innovate and discourages competition.

We at A Better Delaware have long encouraged lawmakers to get rid of the Certificate of Need, now called the Certificate of Public Review, which puts a group of individuals, some associated with providers already operating in the State, in charge of deciding if a new provider can enter the market, or any provider can offer new technology, additional bed space or expand services. This requires providers to grant others permission to compete with them. What could go wrong? Nearly every state that ever had a certificate of need requirement has revoked them, and Delaware should too. Studies consistently find the certificate of need decreases access, increases costs and negatively affects quality of care.

Recent legislation has only tightened the strain bureaucracy puts on health care providers. In the name of containing costs, the legislature has placed a politically appointed panel in charge of reviewing hospital budgets to oversee how much and for what health care providers are proposing to spend. Again, what could go wrong? We are only the second state to enact such a bill, and the first found it to be a failure by most accounts.

Reimbursement rates for primary care physicians is lower than for most other categories of providers, yet, because they know their patients, they can provide better diagnoses and assessments, make a better determination of what additional care is needed, and save the high cost of a visit to the hospital for patient and insurer.  They need fair reimbursement rates, but recent legislation would again impose mandates on insurers and providers that is driven solely by cost and not focused on the objectives of improved access and quality care.

And, we have to question how well informed any decision about the cost of health care can be under the current practices and the consistent failure of providers to comply with price transparency laws.  Delaware has laws that require providers to make costs clear to patients, for example, the cost of a CT scan, knee replacement or the birth of a child. Knowing that information would allow patients to choose where to undergo testing or procedures.  There is little to no compliance with those laws, and so, whether patient or legislator, it is hard to know how one can competently identify any problems, let alone solve them.

Delaware’s policies that put politicians in charge of health care expansion or operation, restrict competition and hinder excellence and competition are a large part of the problem with providing quality and accessible care in our state. Enforce the laws requiring transparency and create more competition which will encourage more providers to locate here.  Let’s create a health care community in which providers can give their patients the care they know our community deserves.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

Delaware’s Budget Reality: Seven Fiscal Headwinds and the Choices Ahead

By George Rotsch, Guest Contributor

When moderate voters in both parties understand the State Budget and the trade-offs that will shape Delaware’s future, they will vote differently.

Budgets have a way of clarifying reality.

Unlike campaign speeches or policy proposals, a budget cannot hide behind rhetoric. It must add up. Every dollar spent must come from somewhere, and every new program competes with existing priorities. In the end, a budget forces organizations — whether families, businesses, or governments — to make real choices.

Those choices always carry consequences.

Delaware is now entering a period where those consequences will become more visible. For many years the state benefited from relatively strong revenues and manageable fiscal pressures. That stability allowed policymakers to expand programs, increase services, and invest in new priorities without confronting difficult trade-offs.

That era may be coming to an end.

The fiscal pressures facing Delaware are growing. Slower revenue growth, rising healthcare costs, demographic changes, and other structural forces are beginning to collide with long-standing spending commitments. None of these forces are unique to Delaware, but for a small state with limited revenue sources, they can quickly create difficult decisions.

This is precisely why a deeper public understanding of the state budget matters.

A well-informed electorate — particularly the moderate and independent voters who increasingly determine election outcomes — should understand not only what policies promise, but what they cost and what trade-offs they require.

That kind of civic understanding is healthy for democracy. And frankly, it is good for both parties.

For candidates in both parties, it presents an opportunity to speak clearly about fiscal discipline, sustainability, and long-term planning. But those arguments are far more persuasive when voters themselves understand the financial realities behind them.

To have that conversation honestly, we must begin with the structural challenges shaping Delaware’s budget.

Seven Fiscal Headwinds Facing Delaware

These pressures are not ideological arguments. They are fiscal realities that will shape policy debates for years to come.

Understanding them helps voters recognize why the next generation of budget decisions will likely involve difficult choices.

1. Slowing and Uncertain Revenue Growth

Delaware’s budget depends heavily on a relatively small number of major revenue streams, including personal income taxes, corporate franchise taxes, and business formation revenues.

For years, these sources have performed well, particularly the corporate franchise tax system that has made Delaware the legal home for many of America’s corporations. But these revenues are also sensitive to economic cycles, financial markets, and policy changes outside the state’s control.

Recent projections suggest that revenue growth may slow significantly in the coming years, in part because of federal tax changes and economic uncertainty. When growth slows, the state cannot continue expanding spending at the same pace without eventually running into fiscal constraints.

That is the nature of a balanced budget system.

Delaware cannot simply spend money it does not have.

2. Rapidly Rising Healthcare and Medicaid Costs

Healthcare spending represents one of the largest and fastest growing portions of Delaware’s operating budget.

Medicaid alone serves tens of thousands of residents, including low-income families, seniors in long-term care, and individuals with disabilities. As healthcare costs rise nationally, those increases are reflected in the state’s budget as well.

In addition, medical advances, demographic changes, and expanded eligibility for services have increased demand for healthcare spending.

These programs are vital to many Delawareans, but they also create long-term fiscal pressure. If healthcare spending grows faster than state revenue, policymakers will eventually be forced to shift funding away from other priorities or pursue reforms.

3. Demographic Changes and an Aging Population

Delaware is growing, but the composition of that growth matters.

The state has become an attractive destination for retirees, thanks in part to its tax policies and quality of life. While this brings many benefits — including economic activity and community stability — it also affects the fiscal structure of the state.

Older populations tend to require more healthcare services and public support programs while contributing less in income tax revenue compared to younger working populations.

Over time, this demographic shift can increase demand for government services while placing pressure on the revenue base that funds them.

4. Education Spending and the Demand for Better Outcomes

Education is one of Delaware’s largest and most important investments. Improving student outcomes, particularly in areas such as literacy and workforce readiness, is essential to the state’s long-term economic future.

However, education funding continues to rise as schools address classroom staffing, special education services, building maintenance, and program improvements.

Many advocates argue that additional funding is necessary to achieve meaningful educational progress. Others emphasize the need for stronger accountability and better outcomes from existing investments.

Both perspectives highlight an important reality: improving education often requires significant financial commitments, and those commitments must fit within the broader fiscal structure of the state budget.

5. Growing Competition Between States

In the near term, one of the most important factors supporting Delaware’s fiscal stability is its unique role as the nation’s corporate capital.

More than two-thirds of Fortune 500 companies are incorporated in Delaware, and the state’s Court of Chancery and well-developed corporate law system have made Delaware the preferred jurisdiction for businesses seeking legal certainty and efficient dispute resolution.

This advantage is not just a point of pride — it is a critical pillar of the state budget.

Corporate franchise taxes and incorporation fees generate hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenue, helping fund schools, healthcare, public safety, and other core services. For a state with no general sales tax, this revenue stream is especially important.

However, Delaware’s position cannot be taken for granted.

Other states continue to look for ways to compete for corporate registrations, and national policy discussions about corporate taxation and regulatory structures could influence where companies choose to incorporate. In addition, legal changes that weaken Delaware’s reputation for predictable and balanced corporate governance could gradually erode the state’s competitive advantage.

In the short term, protecting Delaware’s reputation as the most reliable and stable place to incorporate is one of the most important steps policymakers can take to preserve fiscal stability.

If that reputation were ever significantly weakened, the consequences for the state budget could be immediate and substantial.

Maintaining Delaware’s leadership in corporate law is therefore not simply a legal issue — it is a fundamental component of responsible fiscal management.

6. Infrastructure and Capital Investment Pressures

Infrastructure is one of the least visible but most essential responsibilities of state government.

Roads, bridges, public buildings, schools, water systems, and environmental protection projects all require long-term investment. These projects are typically funded through the state’s capital budget, which must be managed carefully to balance infrastructure needs with responsible debt levels.

Delaying necessary infrastructure investments can lead to higher costs in the future, but accelerating projects also requires financial resources today.

Finding the right balance between investment and fiscal restraint is an ongoing challenge.

7. The Challenge of Long-Term Fiscal Sustainability

Ultimately, the central question facing Delaware’s budget is simple:

Can spending commitments grow at a pace that the state’s revenue system can sustain?

Over time, programs expand, new priorities emerge, and political pressure builds to fund additional initiatives. While many of these efforts serve worthy goals, the cumulative effect can place strain on the budget if revenue growth does not keep pace.

Delaware has historically maintained important fiscal safeguards, including spending benchmarks and reserve funds. Preserving these guardrails will be essential as new pressures emerge.

The challenge is not simply balancing next year’s budget — it is ensuring the state remains financially stable over the long term.

Why Voters Must Understand the Trade-Offs

The most important lesson of budgeting is that choices are unavoidable.

A budget forces decision-makers to weigh priorities against limited resources. Funding one program may require slowing growth in another. Expanding services may require higher taxes or reduced spending elsewhere.

These are not ideological questions alone. They are practical questions about trade-offs.

A smarter electorate — particularly moderate voters within both political parties — should understand these trade-offs clearly.

Democratic proposals often emphasize expanded services and public investments. Republican proposals frequently stress fiscal discipline, economic growth, and spending restraint.

Both perspectives raise legitimate questions about how Delaware should allocate its resources.

But voters can only evaluate those proposals responsibly if they understand the fiscal realities behind them.

For Republicans, this represents an important opportunity.

Arguments about fiscal responsibility resonate most strongly when voters understand the structural pressures within the budget. When citizens recognize the limits of revenue growth and the rising cost of government commitments, they are more likely to appreciate the importance of sustainable spending.

Ultimately, this is not about winning a political argument.

It is about strengthening civic understanding.   Budgets force choices. Delaware will face those choices in the coming years. And the voters who take the time to understand the numbers, the pressures, and the trade-offs will be the ones best equipped to guide the state toward responsible solutions.

A more informed electorate is not just good for democracy.   It is essential for Delaware’s future.

George Rotsch is currently Editor and Publisher of Delaware LIVE News.

Long-term Care, Mental Health Staff Needed*

By: Marie Wenzel

As the number of older adults increases, so does the demand for behavioral health services, case management, peer support and skilled nursing. However, the workforce needed to meet that demand is not keeping up.

Delaware is in the midst of a workforce crisis that is putting our most vulnerable residents at risk. Older adults who want to age in place, people struggling with behavioral health challenges and families trying to care for loved ones are all facing a harsh reality: There simply are not enough trained professionals to meet their needs.

As the number of older adults increases, so does the demand for behavioral health services, case management, peer support and skilled nursing. However, the workforce needed to meet that demand is not keeping up.

Today, more than 289,000 Delawareans live in areas where mental health care professionals are in shortage, accounting for more than a quarter of our state’s population. At the same time, national workforce projections show significant shortfalls in key behavioral health and long-term care professions. By 2037, the U.S. will face shortages of more than 87,000 mental health counselors, 113,000 addiction counselors and tens of thousands more psychologists, therapists and support staff (bhw.hrsa.gov).

Behavioral health providers alone are not enough. We also need more skilled nursing employees — including home health aides, personal care aides, nursing assistants and psychiatric aides — to support individuals aging in place or living with serious mental health or long-term care needs. National data projects that the need for long-term services and support professionals will grow by 42% between 2021-36. Demand for direct care workers, such as personal care aides and psychiatric aides, is expected to grow by 38%-135% over that period (dhss.delaware.gov).

For Delaware, these trends are especially concerning. Our over-60 population is roughly 290,180 individuals and is expected to grow dramatically in the coming decades (dhss.delaware.gov). Without a concerted effort to expand our care workforce, many residents could face long waits, limited services or forced institutional care, simply because no one is available to assist them at home.

To effectively respond, we must adopt an intersectional, collaborative strategy. Agencies and stakeholders — including behavioral health providers, Medicaid, the Delaware Division of Substance Abuse and Mental Health, the Delaware Division of Services for Aging and Adults With Physical Disabilities, and the Delaware State Housing Authority — should come together to pool resources, align programs and expand access to services statewide.

Specifically, we must:

• Immediately increase the reimbursement rates to community-based behavioral health providers.
• Invest in training, certification and retention for behavioral health professionals and skilled nursing caregivers.
• Provide incentives, including competitive pay and benefits, to attract providers to underserved areas and populations.
• Expand access to community-based long-term care, peer support and integrated care models that combine behavioral health, medical needs and housing support.

Delaware has long stood as a state that cares for its people. To keep that promise for the future and guarantee that older adults, individuals with mental health needs and residents living with disabilities have the support they deserve, we must act now. Strengthening our workforce is not just about filling jobs; it is about preserving dignity, independence and hope for thousands of Delawareans and their families.

Marie Wenzel is the CEO of Delaware’s branch of the National Alliance on Mental Health.

*First published in the Delaware State News on December 12, 2025. Reposted here with permission from the Author.  

The Physics Problem Policymakers Won’t Face

By John A. Nichols, Guest Contributor

After years of fighting Delaware’s energy subsidies, I’ve learned that some truths are tough for leaders to accept. I asked an AI, Claude, to challenge three ideas: wind and solar only succeed because of subsidies, reliable power needs dependable sources, and people need lots of energy to thrive. Claude couldn’t prove me wrong—the facts were clear.

Let’s look at subsidies. In 2010, taxpayers paid $56 for every megawatt-hour of wind energy but only about 64 cents for coal or gas. By 2022, renewables got $15.6 billion in federal aid, while fossil fuels got $3.2 billion, even though renewables produced less energy. If all subsidies ended, only dependable energy sources would survive. That’s not politics, it’s just how physics works.

The problem is basic: Solar doesn’t work at night. Wind doesn’t work when it’s calm. Germany saw this in November 2024, when renewables supplied just 30% of power for days; fossil fuels and imports filled the gap. Even with the best setup, renewables are unpredictable. We always need a backup.

Backup means either huge batteries or keeping fossil fuel plants ready. To fully rely on renewables, the UK would need enough battery storage to power the country for 27 days, which would take decades to build. The other option is to pay for both renewables and backup plants, so we pay twice.

This leads to the “missing money” problem. Subsidies let wind and solar sell electricity cheaply, which lowers prices and hurts traditional power plants. In my area, this caused a big issue: the 2027/28 auction for backup power fell short by 6,625 MW, even though prices were high. Old plants can’t make enough money to stay open.

Renewables also make the grid less stable. Unlike old power plants that help keep the grid steady, solar panels and wind turbines use electronics that can make the system more fragile and increase the risk of blackouts.

This matters because data centers—especially those running AI—are using more and more power and need reliable electricity all day, every day. Renewable energy’s ups and downs just won’t work for them. But current policies are making the grid weaker by supporting unreliable energy and not encouraging steady power sources. Then we wonder why new power plants aren’t being built.

The stakes are high. Poor countries use less than 500 kWh per person per year—just enough to run an American fridge all year. Richer nations use 4,000 to 6,000 kWh. That extra energy means hospitals, schools, and clean homes. Abundant energy is not just nice, it’s essential. No country has ever prospered with too little energy.

We have to choose stable power or current policies. Physics doesn’t bend. Solar and wind only work when the weather cooperates. Batteries can’t store enough. Backup plants need funding. These are facts, not opinions.

In the age of AI, both humans and machines need lots of affordable, reliable power. We can either have that or face blackouts and high costs. We can’t have both unstable energy and a stable grid. I asked Claude to prove me wrong. The AI couldn’t. Maybe leaders should ask themselves why.

John Nichols is a long-standing advocate for affordable and reliable electricity in Delaware.

Delaware Needs Certificate of Need Reform for Better Health Care Access

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware 

“We must reform Certificate of Need to increase both access to and competition.”  So said Governor Matt Meyer, in his State of the State Address on January 22, 2026, as he spoke about health care in Delaware.

What a relief to hear those words. We at A Better Delaware have advocated for reform of the certificate of need law, or Certificate of Public Review, as it is now called in Delaware, for a number of years. We have cited to repeated studies that show that removing the certificate of need requirements will increase access to, the cost of, and the quality of, health care in Delaware.

A certificate of need (CON) is, essentially, permission, required to be approved by a committee appointed by the political process, to open a new facility or expand healthcare services, even to adding new imaging technology or adding more bed space to an existing facility. Those who serve on that committee often operate competing facilities. That process has been shown to keep new competition from entering the market, leaving fewer healthcare choices for patients.

While the federal government first thought certificate of need laws would improve prices and service, in the mid-1980s Congress repealed the law requiring such a program, acknowledging that the law had failed to meet the goal of controlling health care costs.

Since then, most states have repealed their certificate of need laws.  They have concluded, reasonably, that they do not help the citizens of their state receive quality health care at a reasonable cost in a reasonable period of time.

As with many issues, the cost of certificate of need laws was made more clear during the COVID pandemic. One study, published in the Journal of Risk and Financial Management, found that hospitals in states with a certificate of need law were 27% more likely to run out of beds. The capacity was not there, because those laws restricted expanded access to care.

The impact also extends to cost. In a Cost of Care survey, conducted by Carescout and Genworth, Delaware was found to be in the top 10 most expensive states for the cost of assisted living, and semi- and private care facilities.

Delaware also has the third longest wait for emergency room care in the country – over 214 minutes. When you consider that many hospitals have opened smaller, emergency care facilities throughout the state, some of which see a patient before they are fully checked in, the actual time in the emergency rooms can be much longer. Indeed, before Delaware hospitals opened those smaller facilities, the average wait time in Delaware emergency rooms was over 5 hours.

In addition to the high cost of, and restricted access to, health care, Delaware suffers a severe shortage of doctors. According to the U. S. Health Resources and Services Administration, as cited in Becker’s Hospital Review, Delaware stands last among states nationwide for access to primary-care physicians, according to figures released this month.

Recently the federal government has made it even clearer that these laws are not effective and should be repealed. Federal assistance to states for rural health care and hospital programs has, in some instances, been conditioned on the repeal of certificate of need laws. Other states have simply taken the initiative to repeal or reform them. Delaware would be well-served to follow their path.

We are pleased to hear the Governor’s words, and hope that he will take charge and lead an effort to encourage more access, lower costs and better-quality health care for Delaware patients.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

Saving Delaware Kids Is Our Responsibility

By Nancy Mercante, Guest Contributor

What will the future hold for our kids, grandkids, and especially those who live in poverty in Delaware?

Are any of us happy that student performance in Delaware ranks fourth from the bottom in national testing?  On the contrary, this is an embarrassment and a disgrace to deprive Delaware’s children of a good education. Think about it: 49^th in eight grade math and reading scores are at a 27-year low with 41% reading below basic proficiency. In a 2025 survey, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce reports that four out of five managers say high school students are unprepared to enter the workforce.

The problems begin in the lower grades and become critical and hard to overcome by fourth grade. Since 2013, this group has lost more than 30 points and ranks 49^th in the nation. Compare this to Mississippi, one of the poorest states in the nation, which leapfrogged over Delaware during the same period.

Far too many Delawareans don’t know these facts. That’s why later this month we will launch a state-wide “Wake Up Delaware” campaign. Nothing will change until more people, especially parents, understand how serious the problem is.

Truth is that school boards tackle many vital issues plaquing education today, but they can and should elevate academic outcomes to the highest order of business. That’s the whole purpose of schools, isn’t it? We need people who feel passionate about giving kids a better education to run for their school board.

Boards have a vital oversight role that includes setting education policies, approving multi-million-dollar budgets and above all, holding superintendents accountable for delivering improved academic outcomes. Board members serve as liaisons between the education system and the people who are its customers.

I’m not going to kid you – it requires work to get candidates up to speed and know how to work effectively with other members who may have different views. The good news is that Citizens for Delaware Schools is creating a network of useful resources to ease candidates into the role.

Thirty-four seats are up for election across the state in May. With the March 6 filing deadline looming, we need more people to run so we voters have choices. Our Republic depends on this kind of local civic involvement from citizens. If this role is not for you, print out this recruitment flyer and hand them to friends, family or associates saying, “I think you’d be good at this.”

Equally important, we the people – parents, grandparents, taxpayers, teachers, you, me – must step up big time to be part of the solution. One way is to insist that school boards lead differently and put all children on the path to academic excellence. Another is to get informed and step up in small but meaningful ways: Monitor and speak up at school board meetings; sign up to get our newsletter; read our online Voter Guide before you go vote on May 13.

This fight is not about blame or numbers. It’s about saving lives.  Think about your kids or grandkids, and all children in public schools who might be lost in a system that is broken. They matter. Let’s stand up for them while there’s still time and help them find their way to the American Dream.

Nancy Mercante had a career in corporate communications for major companies in the financial, pharmaceutical and telecommunications industries. She founded Citizens for Delaware Schools, a nonpartisan nonprofit, two years ago to advocate for a better education for every student in Delaware.

Tackling Delaware’s Housing Crisis

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware 

Delaware is known as The First State, a source of pride for us. We think of our state as a good place to live, work and do business.  But, behind that pride, there are eroding numbers.

Take, for instance, housing in Delaware. We don’t have enough, and what we do have is not affordable for a lot of us.

Delaware has a housing shortage.  Some estimates put the number of housing units we need for those who are in need at over 20,000.  The number may vary, but the shortage is not a new development.  You would think there would be some urgency on the part of our state leadership to resolve the issue.  After all, homelessness affects so many aspects of one’s life.  The lack of stability is pervasive. Children, students, workers, mothers and fathers suffer the effects of the uncertainty lack of housing generates.  Their physical and mental health suffers.

Recently, Kevin Smith, CEO of Habitat for Humanity of New Castle County reportedly stated, “Every delay in building affordable housing shows up in a child’s life sooner or later. We see it in instability, a lack of sleep, higher stress levels, and academic struggles.”

What are the policies that can change the dynamics of this situation? Well, to begin with, we can make it easier and less expensive to get permits to build. That reduces the time it takes to get to construction, and the costs, ultimately, of the housing that is constructed.

Red Tape Index recently posted a measure of the speed with which building permits are issued, and Delaware ranked 40^th.  Time is money for business, and the delays in getting projects approved, makes the cost of housing go up and reduces the number of projects that can begin construction. This delay includes not just big projects, but smaller ones and renovations and improvements to existing structures to make them livable and assure safe housing for tenants as well as homebuyers.  Incredibly, while many leaders imply that only big business complains about the delays in permitting, in fact, over 70%, of landlords are smaller, individual investors.

When the costs of building rental units goes up, the rents go up. Renting becomes unaffordable for too many. Desperate ideas like rent control or “rent stability” which freezes rent where it is, are suggested, but studies continue to show such steps only exacerbate the problems.  We need more units that are livable and affordable.  That requires permits. Cut the red tape!

Additionally, our transfer tax is the highest in the nation – 4%. That is the tax on the sale price of property, a home or a condo. The tax adds thousands of dollars to the cost. The State increased the tax when Delaware was experiencing a revenue shortage and promised at the time that when times go better, it would be reduced. Well, we have been through ups and downs and still the tax is at 4%.

Just how does that affect the availability of housing?  Usually, the buyer and seller each pay half as part of the settlement agreement, so it affects both the decision to buy and the decision to sell. The reality? The transfer tax on the sale of a house costing $384,079, not a mansion by any means, is $15,363!!!

A study by the Sage Policy Group, “The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of High Transfer Tax Rates found that high real estate transfer taxes trap families in their homes, reduce housing construction and slow commercial development. Further, the study found that the consequences hit low-income families the hardest, because it results in fewer apartments and higher rents. The study cites to the experience in Los Angeles, where, when the transfer tax was increased in an effort to bring in revenue, multifamily construction dropped 18%, the equivalent of about 2,000 units, and resulted in the loss of a number of construction jobs. Whether you are a young, first-time buyer, or an older person looking to downsize, the cost of the transfer tax factors in and discourages moving forward.  Cut the transfer tax!

Let’s adopt policies that make housing affordable in Delaware and put children, families, seniors and all of us, in stable living situations.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

Delaware Deserves Better: Holding Government Accountable for Your Tax Dollars

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware 

We’ve read a lot in the newspapers recently about the fraud that has occurred in other states involving the misuse or downright theft of public funds. The amount that has been discovered is staggering and reflects poorly on the care government takes with our money. One mother was heard to lament that her son, who has legitimate and significant challenges, cannot get the help he needs because the money for the services he requires was taken by fraud.  Fraud, when discovered, can be addressed in the justice system. Offenders can be held accountable.

But there is an equally, if not more, insidious way by which we are deprived of the benefit of the use of the funds we contribute through taxes, assessments and fees. That is, the waste of taxpayer dollars. When our government does not use the money we pay to it effectively, adopts policies that cost us more, or fails to address system shortcomings that interfere with accountability, just as surely as fraud, we are being shortchanged.

There are so many examples here in Delaware of waste and costly policy decisions that reduce return on our tax dollars.

Let’s talk about education. Delaware is among the highest spending states (more than $20,000.00 per student, per year) in the country – top 10.  Yet we are in the bottom 10 in student performance (number 44).  New and innovative strategies in other states, like Mississippi and Louisiana, have proven tremendously effective in improving student outcomes. Most effective? Making sure students can read at 3^rd grade level before moving up to 4^th grade. When students can read, students can learn. In Delaware, the majority of our students, at any grade, cannot read at grade level.  Our leadership in Delaware is and has been aware of the success this commitment can bring to our students but have failed to implement any program requiring that benchmark.  Failing to address this serious shortcoming in Delaware consigns our students to less fulfilling lives and limits their employment options and earning power. We spend nearly one third of our budget on education, and even more spending has been proposed, but this powerful and proven strategy has not been adopted. Government can spend our money better on education.

And who has not noticed the tremendous increase in our electric bills. One year ago, in January 2025, a tremendous wave of dissatisfaction spread across Delaware as electric customers received their bills. Your electricity does not have to cost so much. Again, policies have increased costs without improving results. First, we shut down plants in Delaware generating electricity before we replaced them with new generation options.  We then had to import more power from outside our state, making it more costly and less efficient (we lose power in the course of transmission from sources outside Delaware – the further away the source, the more power we pay for but never receive).  Fortunately, the legislature heard, loud and clear, your dissatisfaction, and has taken steps to look into alternatives. We at A Better Delaware have made clear we do not support offshore wind (although some members of the General Assembly do) because it is more expensive, less reliable and more harmful to the environment that other choices we could make. But we do support, and the future likely belongs to, nuclear power. There is now a legislative task force looking into bringing the generation of nuclear power to Delaware. The good news is that there are new, less dangerous methods of generating power with nuclear sources, and there is plenty of power left in the discarded fuel cells collecting in the current, larger and more traditional, funnel nuclear plants.  You should encourage your legislator to do all in their power to bring nuclear generation to Delaware. Costs will stabilize, we can become an exporter, rather than importer, of electric power, and will stand at the forefront of adopting this means of creating power.

Healthcare is another area where policies adversely affect the value of our tax dollars and restrict access to and the quality of health care in Delaware. We are one of only a few states remaining in the country that has a certificate of need statute (we call it the Public Review). That statute, populated with current providers of health care in Delaware, determines whether a hospital or other facility will be allowed to expand, offer new services or technology and whether a new provider can enter the market in Delaware. Those companies which are already providing services are not inclined to allow competition, and therefore, the costs are higher, and, if denied, fewer and less advanced services are offered. Study after study has shown this to be true – certificate of need laws increase costs and restrict access to care. Delaware’s legislators also need to be honest to the many current and former employees of the state who receive health care – and increase fees as costs go up, just as other insurers do.  By waiting years to dare to suggest an increase, the sticker shock is huge, the outcry is loud, and the legislature backs down – doing no one a good service.

Finally, in the category of “whatever happened to…?”  Whatever happened with the inability of our state government to account for money in the unemployment fund? We do know there was some money that was embezzled, but you may recall, they could not audit the fund because they could not determine, based on the record keeping, how much money there was, where it went, if it was paid legitimately, and, if there was fraud, by whom?  Well, as of January 9, 2026, the Delaware Auditors Office reported that, once again, the fund was not able to be audited. The Department of Labor remains in the midst of updating systems. Meanwhile, we don’t know what the integrity of our unemployment compensation system is – a system that in 2024, administered approximately 344 million dollars.

The bottom line? The state is not careful with our money – they have in place policies that cost us money with no, or negative, results.  We have to look out for our bottom line in our personal finances. We should expect no less from the state with our public finances.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.