The United States is on the verge of an energy and economic transformation — and at risk of missing it. Across the country, hundreds of billions of dollars are being invested in new electricity generation: renewables, advanced nuclear and natural gas, all buttressed by battery storage. At the same time, an unprecedented surge in electricity demand driven by artificial intelligence, reindustrialization and the displacement of fossil fuels is accelerating rapidly.

In essence, the U.S. economy is doing what it does best: adapting to changing technology and business environments. But there is a critical bottleneck that could dog the transition for decades: the inadequacy of the electricity transmission grid.

Today, the grid is barely able to serve legacy demand, let alone new sources of demand where it will be desperately needed in the next few years. Projects sit idle for years in interconnection queues, with many ultimately withdrawn before completion. Renewable energy is curtailed. Data centers critical to feed the hungry maw of AI face an uncertain future. In short, the transmission grid is now the limiting factor in American growth.

Think Nationally, Act Nationally

Transmission in the United States is largely planned, permitted and financed at the regional or state level, while the need is unmistakably national. Electricity demand does not respect state boundaries. The best wind resources are in the Great Plains or offshore, while the fastest-growing demand is in cities and data centers often hundreds or thousands of miles away. Connecting supply to demand thus requires long-distance, high-capacity transmission lines that cross multiple jurisdictions — each with its own permitting rules, political dynamics and timelines.

The result is paralysis. Projects that should take a few years routinely take a decade or more. Many never get built at all. But take heart: We’ve seen this problem before — and solved it.

The Interstate Highway Precedent

In the 1950s, the United States faced a fragmented and inadequate system of intercity roads that constrained commerce, personal mobility and national defense. The solution was bold, federal and transformative: the Interstate Highway System initiated under President Eisenhower, which, he argued, was a national security priority.

States and localities had plenty of experience building roads. The Interstate Highway System added three critical ingredients to the mix: a national vision that translated into a network plan, an irresistible incentive to the states in the form of a 90 percent share of funding from Washington, and streamlined rules for minimizing delays and cost. The result was one of the most successful infrastructure programs in U.S. history, rivalling the transcontinental rail buildout after the Civil War. Today’s grid challenge demands a similarly ambitious response.

Where Projects Stall

If there is a single most frequent point of failure that has created the slow-motion crisis over grid expansion it is in permitting. Building a major interstate transmission line today can require approvals from literally dozens of entities — federal agencies, multiple state commissions, counties, municipalities and sometimes tribal authorities. Any one of them can delay and sometimes effectively veto a project by making them prohibitively expensive to complete. Some real-world examples:

• The Grain Belt Express, an 800-mile transmission line designed to link three regional grids running from Kansas to Missouri, Illinois and Indiana, has been in limbo for more than a decade thanks to multi-state regulatory hurdles.
• The 700-mile TransWest Express Transmission Project tying Wyoming, Colorado and Utah to Nevada was stalled for 18 years in federal review under the National Environmental Policy Act — and is still under construction. 
• The SunZia Transmission Line linking the eponymous wind farm (the world’s largest) in New Mexico to demand centers in California took roughly 15 years from concept to construction.

The structural causes are many and clear. States and localities judge need by parochial criteria and in the process often give way to NIMBY interests. Meanwhile, the federal government adds years with statutory environmental hurdles. Projects that should take 3-5 years take 10-15 years — or never happen at all.

A Federal Transmission Initiative

What would it mean to build the grid like the highways? For starters, a national transmission backbone plan connecting major generation regions — most in the windy Great Plains — to centers where the customers are. No less important, a streamlined permitting process that establishes clear national priorities and a commitment to private sector execution to ensure efficiency and speed. But ambition requires funding—and here, history offers a clear path.

Following the Money

The Interstate Highway System was not just a planning success, it was a financing success. Washington underwrote roughly 90 percent of costs, supported by a dedicated stream of fuel taxes through the Highway Trust Fund. A modern grid initiative should follow the same model: broad-based, predictable, dedicated funding tied to usage.

A practical approach would be a 5 percent surcharge on electricity nationwide, applied across residential, commercial and industrial customers. Because electricity is the system being serviced, the logic is straightforward: those who benefit contribute.

The numbers are compelling. The average household electricity bill is roughly $120-150 per month, implying a 5 percent charge would amount to approximately $6-8 per month for a typical residential customer. Across the entire electricity market, this would generate roughly $25 billion annually. And over a decade, the revenue would exceed $250 billion — enough to finance a substantial portion of a national transmission backbone.

There is also a deeper historical precedent. After the Civil War, the federal government enabled the construction of the first transcontinental railroad through measures such as the Pacific Railway Acts, providing land grants contiguous to the right of way along with financial support to private companies. Like today’s grid, the railroad network crossed vast distances and multiple jurisdictions. It would not have been built at scale — at least not as rapidly — without federal leadership and backing.

For the average household, the cost is modest — less than a monthly subscription to HBO Max — while the economic payoff in terms of grid adequacy and reliability would be substantial.

The Cost of Inaction

Failing to act would carry daunting consequences. Without expanded transmission, clean energy deployment — mostly wind and solar backed by battery storage — will stall and systemic blackouts and brown-outs will be more frequent. AI and data center growth will be constrained and high-tech industrial investment may shift overseas to places where electricity is reliable and affordable. In effect, the United States will be stuck trying to build a 21st-century economy on a 20th-century grid.

The scale of the opportunity is enormous — but so is the urgency. This is not simply an energy issue. It is an economic competitiveness issue, a national security issue, and a defining infrastructure challenge of our time.

The interstate highways were built because the country recognized that fragmented solutions were insufficient to meet a national need. If the United States is serious about leading in artificial intelligence, decarbonization and advanced manufacturing, it must first ensure that the electrons can flow.

It is time to build the grid — the way we built the highways.