From Lachowski's weight change petition posted on AMA Site:

"here is currently a very limited number of choices of internal combustion motors available for pattern use. Increasing the weight limit by 200 grams will allow for the inclusion of various gasoline motors with the added impact of reduced operational costs that gasoline affords over methanol based fuels. In addition, the increased weight allowance will give electric flyers increased choices in available battery technology and motors. The trend in battery technology is a higher “C” rating with heavier weight. There is a very limited number of choices available in lighter battery technology that meets current needs. Increasing the weight limit will allow for the use of the heavier higher “C” rated batteries. This too will have the added impact of reduced operational costs. The weight restriction for Sportsman should be removed since it is a provisional class where most Contest Directors opt to eliminate or modify the weight requirement to encourage participation. These changes will allow flyers the ability to have a broader choice of airframes if they choose. With these changes, airframe choices will no longer be limited to pattern specific designs at all levels except F3A. In addition, the need for expensive carbon fiber spinners and props will be at the pilots option instead of being an expensive requirement with airframes that are marginal in making weight under the current rules. Gasoline engines have been proven to be a viable option by some people already ,but it requires some creativity(machining, etc,) to get the weight under the current rules."

My understanding is that

1. 20c 5s 5000mah packs have been on market at least for 5 years and the pricing trend is steady and even downward. The choice and availabilitybof of such batteries are plenty;
2. Carbon fiber spinners at knock-off price are available on the market;
3. Expensive F3A spinners, whether carbon fiber or aluminum, are built with extra features, such as cutouts for forced ventilations, or short in height thus help meet the 2m rule;
4. Other than being lighter, carbon fiber props are much more rigid and durable than those made with traditional material. There is actually a cost saving using a carbon fiber prop over long run for extra benefits;
5. Techniques/tricks exist to trim off extra weight to meet the current weight rule, from existing planes WITHOUT $$$, as documented in this and other threads.

Seems that the reasons to have a weight increase, at least from E-power perspective, are not adequate?