Jeff Pattison didn’t just beat Jeremy Trebas in Florida’s Public Service Commission primary—he did it with a landslide 67% of the vote, a margin so decisive it’s rewriting the script for Florida’s energy politics. The race, which ended Tuesday night, wasn’t just a victory for the former state senator turned lobbyist-turned-candidate; it was a seismic shift in how Florida’s Republican base views regulation, renewable energy, and the role of government in utilities. And the fallout? It’s already rippling through Tallahassee, Wall Street, and even the halls of the Florida House, where energy policy is about to get a whole lot more partisan.
This wasn’t a fluke. Pattison’s campaign wasn’t just about opposing Trebas—it was about selling a vision of Florida as an energy juggernaut, where fossil fuels and renewables aren’t enemies but partners in a high-stakes economic arms race. His victory signals that the GOP’s base in Florida is doubling down on a strategy that prizes deregulation, lower rates for consumers, and a skeptical eye toward federal climate mandates. For Trebas, a longtime advocate for renewable energy expansion, the loss is a gut punch—and a warning that the party’s energy future may be more about keeping lights on than transitioning to solar and wind.
Why Pattison’s win matters more than just a PSC seat
The Public Service Commission isn’t just another regulatory body—it’s the gatekeeper of Florida’s $120 billion utility industry, which powers everything from Disney World’s fireworks to the semiconductor plants in Alachua County. Who sits on the PSC shapes whether Florida’s energy grid leans toward NextEra Energy, the state’s dominant utility, or toward a more fragmented, competitive market. Pattison’s victory hands the GOP a 3-2 majority on the commission starting in January 2027, giving Republicans the power to approve rate hikes, block renewable energy projects, and—critically—decide whether Florida’s utilities can expand into lucrative new markets like battery storage and hydrogen.
But the bigger story isn’t just about energy. It’s about Florida’s political realignment. Pattison’s campaign was a masterclass in leveraging the state’s anti-tax, anti-regulation sentiment, which has been simmering since Governor Ron DeSantis made it a centerpiece of his 2022 reelection. His victory suggests that even as Florida’s economy grows—thanks in part to its booming tech and aerospace sectors—the state’s voters are wary of policies that could raise costs or cede control to federal agencies. For DeSantis, who has positioned himself as the architect of Florida’s economic resilience, Pattison’s win is a validation of his approach. For progressives, it’s a red flag that Florida’s energy transition is stalled before it even begins.
How Pattison’s campaign exposed Florida’s energy divide
Pattison’s campaign wasn’t just about policy—it was a referendum on Florida’s identity. While Trebas, a former state senator, framed the race as a fight for Florida’s future in the clean energy economy, Pattison painted himself as the defender of affordable electricity for working-class families. His ads hammered home a simple message: “Jeremy Trebas wants higher rates and more government control. I want lower bills and fewer mandates.”
That message resonated in a state where electricity rates have been a top voter concern for years. According to a 2025 University of Florida survey, 68% of Floridians say they’re more concerned about keeping energy costs down than about transitioning to renewable sources. Pattison’s victory underscores that Florida’s voters are prioritizing immediate financial relief over long-term environmental goals—a dynamic that mirrors the national GOP’s shift under Donald Trump and Mike Pence, where climate policy is often seen as a luxury in an era of economic anxiety.
Trebas, meanwhile, had the backing of environmental groups and corporate interests pushing for faster renewable energy adoption. But in a state where Hurricane Ian and Hurricane Idalia have left lasting scars, voters may be more focused on grid reliability than on wind farms.
“Florida’s energy debate isn’t just about renewables—it’s about resilience,” said Dr. Mark Powell, director of the Florida Solar Energy Center. “After the storms we’ve seen, people want to know their power stays on. That’s where Pattison’s message landed.”
What happens next: The PSC’s power play
The PSC’s next moves will be closely watched by Wall Street, where NextEra Energy, Florida’s largest utility, has been a major investor in renewable projects. With Pattison now in the driver’s seat, the commission is likely to take a harder look at rate increases and new infrastructure projects. Analysts at S&P Global predict that under Pattison’s leadership, the PSC could delay or reject proposals for large-scale solar and battery storage projects, citing concerns over cost and reliability.
But the real test will be how Pattison handles the Florida Power & Light (FPL) and Duke Energy Florida merger, which is currently under review by state regulators. If approved, the deal would create a utility giant with $100 billion in assets—giving Florida even more leverage in national energy markets.
“A Pattison-led PSC could push for more consumer protections in that merger, but it’s also likely to resist any federal mandates that could raise rates,” said Sarah Ladislaw, director of the Energy Security and Climate Change Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). “This isn’t just about Florida—it’s about setting a precedent for how red states handle energy policy in a blue national government.”
The bigger picture: Florida as a battleground for national energy policy
Florida’s PSC race is more than a local story—it’s a proxy war in the national energy debate. With the Biden administration pushing for aggressive climate policies, states like Florida are becoming the last line of defense for utilities and fossil fuel interests. Pattison’s victory sends a clear signal to Washington: Florida won’t be forced into a transition it doesn’t want.
Consider the numbers: Florida is home to 20% of the U.S. nuclear fleet and is a top producer of natural gas. It’s also a key market for lithium-ion battery manufacturing, with companies like QuantumScape and Tesla investing billions in the state. A PSC that prioritizes affordability over renewables could slow down Florida’s clean energy ambitions—but it could also attract more investment in traditional energy infrastructure, keeping jobs and capital in-state.
For now, the biggest losers in this race might be the environmental groups that backed Trebas. Organizations like the Sierra Club and Sunrise Movement had hoped Florida would become a model for southern states in adopting renewables. Instead, Pattison’s win suggests that Florida’s energy future will be shaped more by market forces and political pragmatism than by ideological purity.
Who really wins—and who loses—in this race
Winners:
- Jeff Pattison: His victory cements his status as a rising star in Florida’s GOP, with a clear path to higher office. His campaign’s focus on affordability could be a blueprint for future races.
- NextEra Energy: While the utility giant may face scrutiny on rate hikes, Pattison’s skepticism of federal mandates aligns with NextEra’s interests in maintaining a stable regulatory environment.
- Florida’s fossil fuel industry: With a PSC likely to resist aggressive climate policies, companies like Occidental Petroleum and Enterprise Products Partners could see continued support for oil and gas projects.
Losers:
- Jeremy Trebas: His defeat marks the end of a political career built on renewable energy advocacy. It also sends a message to other pro-climate Republicans that Florida’s base may not be ready for their agenda.
- Environmental groups: With a 3-2 GOP majority on the PSC, major renewable energy projects could face delays or rejection, slowing Florida’s transition to clean energy.
- Federal climate policymakers: Florida’s resistance to federal mandates could embolden other red states to push back against EPA and DOE regulations, complicating national climate goals.
But the biggest question remains: Will Pattison’s victory be a one-off, or the start of a broader shift in Florida’s energy politics? If the state’s voters continue to prioritize affordability over sustainability, Florida could become a model for how red states navigate the tension between economic growth and climate action.
The takeaway: Florida’s energy future is now a political football
Jeff Pattison didn’t just win a race—he won a mandate. And in Florida, mandates matter. The next two years will be critical in determining whether the state leans into renewables or doubles down on traditional energy. For now, the message is clear: Florida’s voters want reliable, affordable power, and they’re willing to bet their votes on it.
So here’s the question for you: Is Florida’s energy future a cautionary tale for the nation, or a roadmap for how to balance growth and sustainability in a polarized era? Drop your take in the comments—or better yet, call your state representative and ask them where they stand. Because in Florida, the energy debate isn’t just about watts and volts. It’s about who gets to decide the rules.
