Review: Montana Public Service Commission District 5 — 2026 General Election

Review: Montana Public Service Commission District 5 — 2026 General Election

by Shawn White Wolf

The Tri-County Postcard

Review: Montana Public Service Commission District 5 — 2026 General Election

The 2026 general election for Montana Public Service Commission District 5 is shaping up as Annie Bukacek, Republican incumbent, vs. Kevin Hamm, Democrat. The general election is set for Tuesday, November 3, 2026. Montana Free Press lists District 5 as covering western Montana, including Missoula and Kalispell, while KTVH describes the redrawn district as including parts of Kalispell, Missoula, Great Falls, and Helena.

The matchup

Annie Bukacek, Republican

Bukacek enters the general election as the sitting commissioner, but she did not exactly run away with the Republican primary. According to the Montana Secretary of State’s June 16 results, Bukacek received 10,925 votes, Joe Dooling received 10,149, and David Sanders received 9,677. That means Bukacek won with only about 35.5% of the Republican primary vote.

That is the first big political fact of this race: the incumbent survived, but barely. In a three-way primary, nearly two-thirds of Republican voters picked someone else. That does not mean Republicans will abandon her in November, but it does show dissatisfaction inside her own lane.

Bukacek’s campaign argument is likely to be experience, caution, and procedure. She has emphasized that the PSC is a quasi-judicial agency, meaning commissioners must be careful about prejudging cases before evidence is formally presented. She says her focus is on adequate energy supply and making decisions objectively.

Her strongest issue position is probably on data centers and large power users. She says the PSC’s role is to scrutinize large-load tariffs so residential customers and small businesses are not stuck paying for data-center-related generation, transmission, or service costs. That is a pretty solid regulatory frame, and frankly, it is where the PSC ought to be spending serious time.

Her vulnerability is just as clear: PSC drama and public confidence. The Republican primary challengers hammered the commission over internal fighting, staff problems, and distractions from ratepayer work. Whether that criticism is fair or exaggerated, it gives Hamm an opening.

Kevin Hamm, Democrat

Kevin Hamm won the Democratic primary unopposed with 22,014 votes, according to the Montana Secretary of State.

Hamm is running as the sharper populist voice in the race. His message is not subtle: data centers are a threat, utility executives are getting too much benefit, and Montana ratepayers are getting stuck with the bill. On data centers, Hamm argues the PSC should make sure infrastructure upgrades are paid by the large customer, not Montana households.

On the proposed NorthWestern Energy / Black Hills Corp. merger, Hamm takes a hard-line consumer-first position. He argues the result should lower the cost per kilowatt and says he would press both companies on aging infrastructure, outdated equipment, and grid planning.

Hamm’s strength is message clarity. He sounds like a candidate who understands that voters do not care about regulatory vocabulary nearly as much as they care about the power bill sitting on the kitchen table. His weakness is the political math. Montana Free Press noted that no Democrat has been elected to the PSC since 2012, and that the redrawn PSC districts are majority Republican.

The key issues

1. Power bills

This race is really about utility bills. Montana Free Press reported that the PSC sets rates for electric and gas utilities paid by most Montanans and affects more than 524,000 metered electric utility customers, with power rates rising more than 25% in recent years.

That is not some far-off policy debate. That is grocery-money politics. Whoever explains ratepayer protection better has the better message.

2. Data centers

Data centers may become the sleeper issue of this race. Bukacek sounds more regulatory and procedural: examine tariffs and protect existing customers. Hamm sounds more aggressive: stop bad projects and make big customers pay their own way. Both are speaking to the same fear — that regular Montanans could subsidize huge electricity users.

My take: this issue favors the candidate who can explain it plainly. “Do not make grandma pay for Big Tech’s power line” is a stronger message than “large-load tariff scrutiny,” even if both point in the same direction.

3. NorthWestern / Black Hills merger

This could become the defining PSC issue of 2026. Bukacek is likely to say the commission must review the evidence carefully and follow the formal record. Hamm is likely to say Montanans have heard promises of corporate “synergy” before and should not trust utilities without hard guarantees.

That gives voters a clear contrast: process-minded incumbent vs. consumer-anger challenger.

4. PSC professionalism

This is Bukacek’s biggest political headache. Her Republican challengers made internal PSC conflict part of the primary campaign, and that issue does not vanish in November. Dooling and Sanders both criticized infighting at the commission, arguing it distracted from rate cases and agency work.

Hamm would be smart to keep this simple: “While they argued, your power bill went up.” That line would land.

Political outlook

Bukacek should be considered the favorite because District 5 leans Republican and PSC seats have been very hard for Democrats to win. But she is not walking into November from a position of overwhelming strength. A sitting Republican incumbent winning only about 35.5% in her own primary is not a victory parade; it is more like limping across the finish line with your boot half untied.

Hamm’s path is narrow but real. He needs to do three things: consolidate Democrats, win independents who are angry about utility bills, and peel off Republicans who voted for Dooling or Sanders because they wanted a change at the PSC.

Bottom line

This race is not glamorous, but it matters more than most voters realize. The PSC affects electric bills, gas bills, utility mergers, data-center power demand, and monopoly utility oversight. That is real pocketbook government.

Bukacek’s argument: experience, process, energy reliability, and protection from unfair data-center costs.

Hamm’s argument: ratepayer anger, anti-corporate utility oversight, and a tougher hand against big power users.

My read: Bukacek is favored, but Hamm has the better populist message. If 2026 voters are thinking mainly by party label, Bukacek likely wins. If voters are thinking about the utility bill on the refrigerator door, Hamm has something to work with.