 |
| |
|
|
Sava
|
 |
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:30
|
|
In California, Ken Lay (largest Bush campaign contributor) and company gouged Californians. Enron held California hostage, hoarding energy while Californians suffered through rolling blackouts. They scammed California for BILLIONS. And, AFAIK, the energy crisis is the primary reason California is having such a huge budget shortfall. But yet Gray Davis (and I'm not a fan or supporter of him) is taking the blame even though he stood up to Enron and with Clinton's help, imposed price caps and restored some regulations. But before you guys harp on me about the recall, read the rest of my post.
Power de-regulation allowed Enron to fleece California. And then Enron screwed it's investors while the big kahunas ran off with billions. And only one person has gone to jail. But California isn't the only state to get screwed by deregulators and power companies. Montana got screwed by such deregulation as well. But this story is unknown to most. Former REPUBLICAN governor Marc Racicot signed the deregulation bill for the state, despite overwhelming public opposition.
That was 1997. By 2000, energy prices had become so inflated in the new "energy trading markets" that Montana heavy industry could not afford to buy power. So jobs were lost. Racicot was defeated in the next election, and went to work for Enron lobbyists and the Bush admin, who both lobby states for utility deregulation. In 2002, Montana had its own Enron collapse when Touch America's stock shares, the formerly regulated Montana Power Company, fell to under $1. Corporate executives received millions in bonuses despite this collapse. Investors and people lost money, and the company has sold to a South Dakota energy company.
These 21st robber barons have friends in high places... namely, President Bush. Power regulations go back to the FDR era. They were put in place for a reason. They keep prices low, safety and reliability high, and prevent abuses by companies. Why get rid of them? I have yet to hear one reasonable argument FOR power deregulation.
And now we have this mess in the Northeast. The causes are generally unknown as of now. There's mass conjecture, finger pointing, and people are scrambling to fix the problem. Despite the specific technical cause, I believe the culture of privitization is the ultimate problem here. Listening to Bill Richardson (governor of NM, IIRC), former Energy Secretary under Clinton, power deregulation has lead to cuts in staff, maintenance, and "modernization" in the industry. Despite what right-wing think-tanks will tell you, deregulation RAISES PRICES and DECREASES what little competition there is in the energy industry.
The culture in the energy industry, fueled by deregulation, is the primary culprit in this newest problem. Companies have cut corners on quality, and such a disaster was only a matter of time. In the coming months, we'll hear rhetoric from Bush, saying we need "modernization" of the system, and he'll probably sponsor an "Energy Modernization" bill which will include pork barrell clauses and deregulation clauses that will ultimately lead to more problems.
FDR banned utility companies from contributing in any way to political parties. No soft money, no hard money... no money at all. But in 1992, George Bush Sr., in the final days of his presidency, cut such regulations. And in 2000, power companies contributed $16 million to the Republican presidential campaigns. In 1998, power companies spent $39 million to defeat Ralph Nader's referendum which would have prevented the deregulation that led to Enron's theft from Californians. These companies spent an additional $37 million on lobbying and campaign contributions to get the deregulation passed. They promised deregulation would lead to 20% decreases in costs. This guarantee was even in the preamble of the legislation. This 20% decrease turned into 300% increases and rolling blackouts.
The problem in New York can be traced back to governor Pataki, who picked industry cronies to lead his utility commissions. Yes, that's right. He let the wolves guard the henhouse. These commissions scrapped the caps on power prices, and allowed Niagra Mohawk to NOT PERFORM MANDITORY MAINTENANCE AND UPGRADES previously dictated by regulations. After this, Pataki allowed a foreign company, National Grid of England, to buy Niagra Mohawk. The English owners then cut 800 jobs which gave executives $90 million in bonuses. And then... we get BLACKOUTS.
This trend isn't limited to the US. In Brazil, Houston based industries bought Brazilian power utilies. They then cut workers and maintenance costs... enjoyed millions in bonuses, and then boom... BLACKOUT in Brazil. Brazilians have dubbed the blackouts, "Rio Dark".
But Americans still haven't caught on yet. Deregulation leads to job cuts, bonuses for rich energy executives, then blackouts. But the media doesn't tell this story. Bush will get in front of the cameras and tell us he's going to fix things. There was a bill sponsored in 2001 in June that would have given $350 million in LOANS to power companies in the Northeast to upgrade and conduct maintenance, specifically, transmission grids. But Bush lobbied against legislation earlier in his administration. Republicans voted along party lines and such legislation never saw the light of day. Republicans defeated the legislation, voting it down 3 TIMES! California Congressman Sam Farr (D) sponsored the bills. In addition to defeating such legislation, Bush defeated Clinton's executive orders that prevented power companies from manipulating markets.
These issues: the recall in California, Enron, the blackouts... THEY ARE ALL RELATED. I'm sorry to beat the same dead horse here, but Republicans are the problem here. And Bush is King of them all.  But of course the swelling masses on 'Poly will dismiss what I say as just another Bush bash... and that's really what's sad.
Discuss
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:30
|
|
The Republicans aren't the problem here... We have the same **** in the EU that is coming, despite not having Republicans at power.
The real problem is the massive lobbying done by energy contractors. The real problem is to consider that energy is a ware just like any other. The real problem is not to see energy for what it is: something vital for the community, just like water and air, that should belong to the community.
The Dems, like any other capitalist party, would have allowed energy deregulation in the end, too. The lobbying exerted by the private companies is way too strong, and they'd have financed the Dems just like they financed the Reps to get it anyway.
The problem is the absolute belief, shared by almost all the political elite, that private contractors do everything better than public companies. This belief ignores that private companies aren't in the business of making power - they're in the business of making money.
Only a strong regulation could prevent these sharky companies to abuse from their dominance. These regulations would get lifted as soon as utility companies are allowed to make lobbying, and to pay big bucks for it.
The problem is not the Republican party. The problem is to have a crappy political system that allows private companies to lobby, that allow them to be judge and party at the same time, and that basically allows them to legally justify and keep their huge power
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
one thing is easily true. we need to send massive fraud thieves to jail for long sentences.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
and put our utilities in the hands of the public rather than a few corporations... |
u have a plethora of problems. it is probably wise for the time being to simply kneejerk back to the old moderately less abused system of simply letting the gov't do it.
don't forget though that the tech bubble burst. all those corporate taxes coming from silicon valley went kaput.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
yavoon: kneejerk? I've been advocating this ever since I can remember... And how does the tech bubble burst relate to this? Those abuses related to that economic bubble burst came from a deregulated corporate America. THANKS CLINTON! |
u mentioned that enron was the main reason for california deficit. I simply named another valid one.
and what I meant by kneejerk is not in the specific of u. but in the public's eyes. they tried it, it felt like putting ur hand on a stove. so its best to just jerk it back for now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
well next time be sure to specify what the hell you are talking about...
I'm sorry, but it's getting harder to understand you. |
so much antagonism, so lil time. I feel ur pain.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sava
|
|
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
Sava, how do the blackouts of '65 and '77 fit into your little theory? Btw, energy wasn't de-regulated, the pols just replaced one set of regulations with another. Try to understand that when you go off on one of your anti-free market diatribes. Blaming the marketplace ("de-regulation") for the failures of government intervention in the marketplace is downright deceitful (or ignorant, take your pick). |
If '65 and '77 blackouts were at all similar to this blackout, then I'd be concerned. But they aren't, so I won't.
And this rant of mine isn't "anti-free market" or whatever little ignorant catch phrase you want to make up. Power shouldn't be a market. At this point in our society, it's a necessity. Power should be provided WITHOUT PROFIT by whoever can do it for the highest quality at the lowest cost. But instead, you get rich corporations seizing control of energy production... they cut jobs, they reap huge bonuses, they cut quality, they reap huge bonuses. Now how in God's green earth could you be in support of such a stupid policy?
You don't know what you are talking about Berz, stick to marijuana debates and leave such discussion to people who ARE INFORMED.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adam Smith
|
 |
Maryland, USA
Jan 1970
time: 00:30
|
|
I was waiting for this thread to show up...and it took almost an entire day...you folks are slipping.
The economic predictions for electric deregulation were that all prices would fall as local monopolies were broken up, and high cost, inefficient firms were subjected to competition. Prices would fall a bit more in higher cost areas (Northeast, Midwest), and a bit less in lower cost areas (South, West).
So what actually did happen? I am at home now, so I don't have access to specific studies. But there is data from the Consumer Price Index.. IIRC electric deregulation got rolling about 1996, so lets use that date. Prices index values in various regions of the country since then:
Northeast: 1996 136.8 2003 134.2
South: 1996 123.7 2003 124.0
Midwest: 1996 122.2 2003 123.6
West: 1996 144.0 2003 184.3
The West is obviously affected by California, where state regulators explicitly ignored economists recommendations for how to deregulate the electricity market. These data show that, aside from California, consumers are clearly benefitting. How many other commodities can you name (aside from computers) where the price today is the same or less than the price seven years ago?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sava
|
|
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:30
|
|
Adam Smith: I agree with the general notion that deregulation can be beneficial in theory. But that's no different than Communism being good in theory. The fact is, corporations are run by greedy *******s whose sole purpose is to make money. All other concerns, reliability, safety, quality, low prices, etc... are second fiddle to MONEY.
In reality, your free-market wet dream of deregulation (in terms of energy) turns into less jobs, less maintenance, higher prices, and obscene corporate profits. There isn't just one instance of precedence for this reality. There are many; as I listed above. California, Brazil, Montana, and now New York.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Elok
|
 |
Land of Ramen Dragons
Mar 2003
time: 00:30
|
|
Y'know, I was just thinking: "If only I knew what Sava thought about our energy problems! Wouldn't that be wonderful?" I bet I wasn't the only one either.
Seriously, though, while I'm not familiar personally with the problems of deregulating power, it stands to reason that there would be piggies there just like every other trough in the nation. It's only a matter of time before the fit hits the shan big-time, though. Bush is cleverly, if unethically, leaving hell for the next administration to pay by soothing and delaying. Problem is, while Bush isn't too great of a president, the only alternatives are:
A. apparently incompetent,
B. fighting each other for votes, and
C. dividing the democratic caucus eight ways.
This is why the Mandate of Heaven is a superior form of government to democracy. People don't screw around when they know they'll die together with their families if they get the people mad. It's a more impressive penalty than embarassment.
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-08-2003 01:26
|