Plasma is everywhere, it's very much part of current cosmology. It is however predicted to be quasi-neutral just as any equilibrium plasma is. This means on scales much larger than the debye scale the plasma behaves like a gas, a fluid. There are charged particles travelling though space but they don't dominate the forces for larger objects like stars. You can measure current densities in space with synchrotron, you don't get great whacking great currents. The electric universe it not astronomy because it makes no quantified predictions about anything. They claim huge currents power everything, no mention of how we should be able to detect them or why they've been missed so far. It isn't testable, it isn't science.

You're misrepresenting the facts. IEEE had a plasma cosmology issue, not electric universe. This is a publication, not an endorsement, they do not have to agree to publish. Note they have far more publications on magnetic reconnection, something you EU people believe doesn't exist.

Scott's model presented in these papers is no better than dark matter, in fact worse. There was no attempt to show flat rotation curves formed on their own, the initial conditions were selected. It also doesn't explain why stellar rotation curves would be the same as the gas, as there would be no reason to have the same charge to mass ratio. That doesn't solve the problem, not to mention dark matter explains many more things that just that. It also has many other flaws. There is no tested plasma cosmology mechanism that even explains redshift so let's not claim you can remove dark energy. Modern "cosmology" does not break physics.

electromagnetism has an infinite range so a magnetic field never dies

A dipole falls off much faster than gravity though. Electric forces also fall off quickly in a plasma due to debye shielding.