Sunday, August 31, 2008

The Erie Times-News finally catches up

In an AP story out of Harrisburg published in its
Sunday edition today,the Erie Times-News finally caught
up with Pennsylvania's pending energy catastrophe,
the deregulation of electricity rates, a story first
broken here (see below) more than a week ago.

Within the next two years, the deregulation of electricity
rates engineered 22 years ago by former Governor Tom Ridge
will cause them to skyrocket in northwestern Pa. by
50 percent.

____________________________________________________________

Ex-Gov. Tom Ridge's hidden legacy emerges
from the shadows, a ticking time bomb


The long-standing love affair which a majority of
Pennsylvanians have had with former Governor Tom Ridge
is likely to come to a screeching halt for many of
them in the next couple years.

That’s when one of Ridge’s hidden gubernatorial
legacies, a ticking time bomb, emerges after two
decades from the shadows.

A product of the law of unintended consequences,
it’s the impending reversal of the deregulation of
electrical rates throughout the commonwealth which
Ridge sponsored and championed as governor in the
mid-1990s.

The return to unregulated electricity rates
will complete the triple whammy of energy consumer cost
explosions, and exacerbate the adverse economic
impact which has followed the dramatic increases in
gasoline and heating fuels over the past year.

Depending upon location within the state, electric rates
are expected to jump anywhere from 12 percent to 72
percent in 2010 and 2011, with a statewide average of
more than 40 percent.

That’s when the rate caps imposed by the Electricity
Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act - signed
into law by Ridge in 1996 after a robust campaign
promoting it - will expire.

The catalyst for the concerns about a forthcoming crisis in the
skyrocketing consumer cost of electricity is a study recently
released by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC).

It found that if the rate caps were to come off today, electric
rates in Pennsylvania would rise virtually overnight by an average of 43
percent, and impose a calamitous burden on home, commercial and
industry users.

The spike in electric prices is expected to be highest in the western
part of the state, where they look to rise by as much as 67 percent
in Allegheny County, and 50 percent in northwestern Pa., according to
the PUC study.

Some experts believe impending deregulation will precipitate a mass
exodus of industry and commerce from Pennsylvania, cause thousands
of small businesses throughout the commonwealth to fail, result in
massive unemployment, and further impoverish low income residents,
all of which the 1996 deregulation act was designed,
over-optimistically as it turns out, to forestall.

After the fall, the act will allow electricity producers to charge
rates based upon their costs of production and delivery.
Previously, they could not recover those costs through proportional
rate increases because of the ceiling placed on rates by the 1996
act, signed by Ridge after a high visibility promotional campaign.

But with the caps due to come off at staggered intervals throughout
the state in 2010 and 2011, electricity producers will be able to
charge rates which putatively reflect their costs of acquiring the
fuels needed to generate electricity – primarily oil, natural gas
and coal. Those costs have risen exponentially since the electric
rate caps were first applied in 1997.

Normally, the powerful electricity-producing lobby would have been
able to thwart passage of legislation in 1996 regulating and
putting caps on electrical rates. But what gave deregulation its
impetus in the mid-90s was a disarming Faustian bargain between the
popular Ridge administration and the general assembly on one hand,
and the electric industry on the other, the unintended consequences
of which are only now beginning to appear.

It provided that in exchange for acquiescing to rate caps, the
industry would be allowed by the state through the PUC to bill and
recover from consumers the costs of constructing new electrical
generating plants, a practice previously disallowed.

Ridge’s rationale centered on the theory that lower electrical rates
than those in other states would attract new industry to
Pennsylvania, produce tens of thousand of new jobs, and give rank
and file Pennsylvania users more affordable electricity.

In the first years following deregulation, Pennsylvania surpassed
other states in electrical rate-lowering, ranking first in the
nation. In a February 7, 2001 press release Ridge said: “Once again
we were named the No. 1 state for electric deregulation. Why? We
have plenty of juice…we’re plugged in. Customers have greater
choices. And consumers and businesses have saved $3 billion. So if
any companies in California are listening,” Ridge gloated, “come on
over to Pennsylvania. We’ll leave the lights on for you.” Ridge said
at the time deregulation “will create more than 36,000 new jobs in
Pennsylvania by 2004.” That never happened.

Ridge’s theory was based on the optimistic premise that the capped
rates would bring new electric-producing competitors into the state
and lower rates overall through wider competition. The flaw in the
theory was that it self-destructed.

Newcomers couldn’t compete in Pennsylvania with the big existing
producers. Even with the rate caps, existing producers were able to
generate healthy profits since deregulation went into effect 20
years ago because of the absence of new competition.

With the unshackling of the rate caps two years hence, they will
make a killing of unprecedented proportions at the expense of
consumers unless the legislature and the PUC enact and devise
remedies to interdict them against what is expected to be a
powerful lobbying effort by the industry to make sure the rate caps
disappear forever.

How is retribution exacted from a former governor whose failed
vision 20 years after the fact results in punitive consequences on
an unprecedented scale for his onetime constituents?

By elevating him, apparently, to one of the nation’s leading
cabinet level positions and widespread celebrity.

1 comment:

Whitney Landon said...

Found this post via its placement also at US News http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/08/28/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-tom-ridge.html. I was following up on a radio interview that mentioned Secretary Ridge, and was surprised to find that a basic fact from the radio show -- that he was a board member of Exelon nuclear utility -- was not in Wikipedia. That's now rectified as follows, with links included:
===[[Exelon Corporation]]===
In April, 2005, Ridge's appointment to the board of the Illinois/Pennsylvania/New Jersey electric utility was announced, with starting director compensation of $35,000 annual retainer plus a $1,500 meeting fee or per diem fee. Directors were also granted $60,000 in deferred stock units each year at that time.[http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=16295 "Ex-Homeland Sec. joins Exelon board"] by Gregory Meyer, ''[[Crain's Chicago Business]]'', April 27, 2005. Retrieved 2010-02-19. In 2010, it was reported that Ridge had appeared on [[MSNBC]] ''Hardball With [[Chris Matthews]]'' promoting [[nuclear energy]] as part of a "green agenda [to] ... create jobs, create exports," without any revelation by him or the [[cable channel]] of his Exelon position. In the report, his cumulative Exelon-derived compensation was put at $530,659; and that, as of March 2009, he held an estimated $248,299 in Exelon stock, according to SEC filings. Exelon was described as "the nation's largest nuclear power company."[http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100301/jones/print "The Media-Lobbying Complex"] by Sebastian Jones, ''The Nation'', February 11, 2010 (March 1, 2010 edition of magazine). Retrieved 2010-02-19. Via [http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4017 Radio interview with SJones], ''[[CounterSpin]]'', February 19, 2010.
Seems relevant to ongoing efforts here.
Cheers