 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"Davis's lawyers point to a provision of the recall law in which it says a new election for governor will be held "if appropriate"."
Hmm... so is it really mandatory to have the recall combined with the election? Or could there be an election later on?
For the overall topic, I have to say banana.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Victor Galis
No, but I don't honestly expect any candidate to break 33%. The 1% claim just sounded so much more dramatic. |
that's a good thing
the whole 50% to one person thing is just a crappy fact of life that is fostered on us by the two party system
I would be much happier if there were 4 major parties and the president was often voted in with 25% of the vote
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
rev
|
 |
Boulder, CO USA
Apr 2001 time: 05:30
|
|
Davis needs to go.
California got scammed by the power companies (Enron, for example), who merely turned off the power to sell what power they had remaining at incredible prices. And, of course, this was used to justify the argument that there needed to be more deregulation, no price caps, and more publically-sponsored utilities built. Even the White House (after Mr. Cheney consulted with some energy industry-sponsored lobbyists and CEOs) came out against price caps, which would have fixed the whole problem.
Overall, the amount Californians got scammed for exceeds the current state deficit.
If Davis were interested in the interests of his people, he would have directed every lawyer under his command to go after the energy companies and even the White House to get Californians' money back. Hell, maybe it would have even helped our national economy a bit.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999 time: 21:30
|
|
California did put in price caps, and was outbid by other state's buyers (BPA and WAPA were also critically short in 2000 due to drought conditions and load growth), contributing further to the problem, not solving it.
If California had had some reasonable incentives for surplus capacity to be built, then you never would have had the problem. That lack of foresight preceded Davis, so he's not to blame for that component of the problem, just the parts he screwed up.
As far as "the amount California got scammed" why is it scamming in a bidirectional market where California utilities got wholesale power in prices from ZERO to 2.1 cents per kWh throughout most of the 1990's? Deregulation wasn't a problem, deregulation after two decades of ignoring resource needs and timed to coincide with peak demand and supply limitations was the problem.
BTW, everyone likes to ***** about Enron, but by price level, the two biggest vultures in the California power market was the California Dept. of Water Resources, and Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. So maybe the state needs to sue itself and the city of LA? 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jack_www
|
|
Rev:
The price caps in california is what caused part of the problem and caused Edison and the other power companies to go into billions of dollars of debt and the verge of bankruptcy. Also price caps dont make more power to apear, but increase power loads when supply is low.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
st_swithin
|
|
10069
Nov 2002 time: 05:30
|
|
When? In your dreams?
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30. Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|