Dear Gov. Kaine:
Dear Gov. Kaine:
Duck! - there's very bad legislation coming your way. You're already (rightly) focused on the lousy transportation bill, but there's an equally egregious bill now landing on your desk - HB 3068/SB1416. This bill, mostly written by Dominion Virginia Power, replaces the state's failed deregulation experiment (also written by Dominion) with a joke of a "regulatory" system, in which a neutered watchdog agency is required to reward Dominion with enormous profits, at the expense of consumers and the environment.
Governor, it's so important for you to veto this bill that I am devoting a series of three diaries to explaining all the problems with it - its impact on the environment, its cost to consumers, and why this is a textbook case of crooked, money-soaked government at its worst.
Today, the environment. Around the world and across the country, leaders are waking up to the need to conserve energy and fight climate change - everywhere, it seems, except Virginia. Just this week, Washington, Oregon, California, Arizona, and New Mexico formed a regional partnership to fight climate change. This follows the creation of a similar coalition in 2001 among Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island.
Meanwhile, according to state environmental groups, "Virginia ranks last in energy conservation and Dominion has no programs in place." (Daily Press, 2/2/07)
The purpose of the Dominion bill, according to company officials, is to "give them the financial stability to build a generation of coal and nuclear power plants to meet the growing demand for power, especially in Northern Virginia." (Washington Post, 2/23/07) -- moving the state, in other words, in the wrong direction at the wrong time.
Just the other day, James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies told the National Press Club: "There should be a moratorium on building any more coal-fired power plants," because they're going to need to be replaced promptly in order to halt catastrophic climate change. So why pay to build more plants now just to bulldoze them later?
Sen. Whipple had introduced a bill to require Dominion to use a small percentage of renewable energy sources, as half the states in the U.S. now mandate. Of course, Dominion wouldn't go for that - instead, the Dominion bill only allows the company to increase rates if it increases renewables use.
And what about energy efficiency to reduce our surging demand? California figured it out 30 years ago - "Since 1974, California has held its per capita energy consumption essentially constant, while energy use per person for the United States overall has jumped 50 percent." (Washington Post, 2/17/07) If California can do it, why can't Virginia even try?
Why? Because our legislature is owned by a powerful corporation that has given $3.8 million to state lawmakers over the past decade. And therefore, the environment has been forced to take a back seat to the interests of Dominion.
Gov. Kaine, the time to meet the challenge of global warming is now. I urge you to veto this bill - the solutions to our energy and environmental problems will come through increased investment in energy efficiency and renewables, not by showering Dominion with cash to build more coal and nuclear plants.
Next - The cost to consumers
(You can e-mail Gov. Kaine here.)
"One of the reasons I voted against the re-reg bill was because of the diminishing powers of the SCC. There are a few other reason but one other one was I can't see giving a guaranteed profit to a utility. I also want to make sure that there are more consumer protections on price increases. There are a few other reasons but I won't bore you with them."
I doubt that there are more than a handful of legislators who understood the economics behind what they were voting for.
They need to slow down.
When California reregulated last century (I love saying "last century") I attended a lecture from a brilliant, public interest type, UCLA economist our agency was using on another matter, during which he highly praised California's efforts, and predicted the rate problems we were just hearing about were minor matters.
Well.
The Governor must veto this bill.
And the Governor needs to hire about 5 consultants from different universities, pay them about $100,000 each, and have them exhaustively vet this bill. $500,000 is a tiny investment. And I would not listen to any economists/scientists hired by the industry or any employed by the state. The former will be nothing but hired guns, and the latter -- well, there are lots of problems with government employee experts I won't get into.
I thought I'd attach the link for the article.
That sounds like a wise decision on their part. However, deciding not to sue the government to protect your "right to pollute", while praiseworthy, is nonetheless somewhat short of heroic. It just means that in this instance, Dominion didn't take the low road that some other companies did.
That doesn't excuse any of their high-handed tactics in Richmond or their efforts to punish consumers and the environment with very bad legislation.
Athey (R)
Dudley (R)
Fralin (R)
Frederick (R)
Griffith (R)
Iaquinto (R)
Lingamfelter (R)
Bob Marshall (R)
Morgan (R)
Nutter (R)
Ed Scott (R)
Sherwood (R)
Tata (R)
Welch (R)
Wittman (R)
Wright (R)
The Senators who voted no:
Houck (D)
Puckett (D)
Reynolds (D)
Of the legislators who were Virginia LCV "legislative heroes" in 2006 (http://www.raisingka...)
Senator Patcy Ticer (D) -- voted for
Senator Toddy Puller (D) -- voted for
Senator Janet Howell (D) -- voted for
Delegate Adam Ebbin (D) -- voted for
Delegate David Englin (D) -- voted for
Delegate Jenn McClellan (D) -- voted for
Delegate Ken Plum (D) -- voted for
Delegate Jim Scott (D) -- voted for
Why do you think the most environmentally minded legislators supported this while those who opposed it were among the most conservative members of the House?