Why the mainstream press avoids mentioning the contrast in positions is left to the reader.

Maybe because the general public didn't care. That may change, now that a failure of sufficient magnitude has brought the issue forward. We might even be lucky enough for the issue to remain in the public's awareness long enough to be included in the stated policies of the candidates and the actions of the incumbent administration.

But of course, you already realize the Big Question will be: "Who's gonna pay for it?" It's not a free market issue - unlike the service (i.e., the electricity itself), the infrastructure is owned outright by various regional power companies, read monopolies. There is no competition. Improvements and replacements must be paid for by a surcharge to the customers, disbursement of tax revenues, tax relief to the utilities (decreasing revenue needed for other purposes), or a combination of the above.

Nobody's going to like it; Joe and Jane Sixpack least of all, for the same reason that "they" can't see past their wallets for other investments in the future (like, for instance, school district budgets). In fact, I'd be willing to guess that's a large part of why the system is in the condition it's in now.