Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dennis Gets Well-Deserved Payback for Integrity from NE Blackout

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 02:11 PM
Original message
Dennis Gets Well-Deserved Payback for Integrity from NE Blackout
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/082103_kucinich.html

Dennis Kucinich Gets a Well-Deserved Payback for Integrity from the Northeast Blackout

© Copyright 2003, From The Wilderness Publications, www.copvcia.com. All Rights Reserved. May be reprinted, distributed or posted on an Internet web site for non-profit purposes only.


If anyone has earned the right to speak out on an issue that threatens the future of this country it is Dennis Kucinich. If anyone has earned a right to remind people of this history, it is Dennis Kucinich. Now, if he would just join with Texas investment banker and Bush energy advisor Matt Simmons in not only slamming deregulation but addressing Peak Oil and Gas issues and also take on the bubbling revelations that show that the administration held the door open on 9/11, lied about Iraq, and hold the government accountable for the money we need to fix things and develop alternative energy sources, we might just have a leader worth following to hell and back. We're going there anyway. - MCR]

----------

Lights Out on Deregulation

By Dennis Kucinich

With and estimated 50 million Americans and Canadians left without power and in some cases water, common sense requires us to reflect on the absurdity of deregulation of public utilities. In the first case, the right of utility franchise is vested in the people. We give utilities permission to operate, and enable them to set up a profit making business in exchange for the promise of affordable and reliable service. In 1992, investor owned utilities pushed the Democratic House to pass HR776 which granted electric utilities broad powers. The bill was supposed to restructure the electric utility industry to spur competition.

Utilities used deregulation to effect a series of mergers limiting competition. In order to accelerate profits, cost cutting ensued, involving the layoff of thousands of utility company employees, including some who were responsible for maintenance of generation, transmission, and distribution systems. A number of investor-owned utilities stopped investing in the maintenance and repair of their own equipment, and, instead, cut costs to enhance the value of their stock rather than spending money to enhance the value of their service.

A prime case in point is FirstEnergy Corp, late of Ohio. FirstEnergy formed through a merger of utility companies which owned nuclear power plants which often were neither used nor useful, and as a result incurred huge debt. FirstEnergy's predecessor, The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (CEI) in the 1950s and 60s was a high performing blue chip stock until they invested in nuclear power. FirstEnergy has tried without success to keep online a very troublesome nuclear power facility at Port Clinton, Ohio, the Davis-Besse plant. Davis-Besse is currently shut down and has been for some time. FirstEnergy and federal regulators failed to properly monitor the operations of the plant, resulting in conditions where the plant's reactor vessel was threatened with a breach when boric acid ate into the head of the reactor.

Millions of people in the Midwest and the water supply of our entire Great Lakes region were at risk because of First Energy's negligence, improper maintenance, and actual cover-up of the degradation of the reactor. Furthermore, federal regulators determined that notwithstanding the peril which was presented to one of the largest populated areas of the United States, FirstEnergy's financial condition necessitated the continued operation of the flawed reactor. The regulators put profit ahead of public interest.

If there was ever an example of an unholy alliance between government and industry, this is it. If there was ever an example of the failure of necessary regulation by the government of an investor-owned utility, it is found in the government's failure to regulate FirstEnergy, because now, according to published reports by the Associated Press, CNN, and ABC News, the blackout which affected an estimated 50 million people began in the FirstEnergy system.

I've been familiar with First Energy and the challenge of utility monopolies for over 30 years. Early in my career, in the 1970s, I watched FirstEnergy's predecessor, CEI, as they were hard at work trying to undermine the ability of the City of Cleveland to operate its own municipal electric system. CEI conducted a tireless crusade to attempt to put the city's publicly owned system, Muny Light, out of business. Muny Light competed against CEI in a third of the city and provided municipal power customers with savings on their electric bill of 20-30 percent. It also provided cheaper electricity for 76 city facilities and thousands of Cleveland street lights, saving taxpayers millions of dollars each year. In the 1970s, CEI applied for a license to operate a nuclear power plant. The license application triggered an antitrust review. The antitrust review revealed that CEI had committed numerous violations of federal antitrust law in its attempt to put Muny Light out of business. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in an extensive investigation, determined that CEI blocked Muny Light from making repairs to its generator by lobbying the Cleveland City Council to place special conditions on Muny Light Bonds which made the bonds more difficult to sell, thereby depriving the city of revenue it needed to repair its generators in order to provide its own power. The delay in repairs to the generators caused Muny Light to have to purchase power. CEI then worked behind the scenes to block Muny Light from purchasing power from other power companies. CEI became the only power company Muny Light could buy from. At that point, CEI sharply increased and sometimes tripled the cost of purchase power to Muny Light. And, as a result, Muny Light began to lose money. CEI used Muny Light's weakened operational and financial condition (which they created) as evidence of the public system's lack of viability and as proof that the only way the people of Cleveland could have reliable power was for the city to sell its electric system to CEI. The antitrust review cited one incident when during a period of inclement weather, Muny Light asked CEI for a special transfer of emergency power. The transfer of power was conducted in such a way so as to cause an outage on the Muny Light system. CEI used the incident as further proof of the city's inability to operate a municipal electric system. Throughout this period, the Cleveland media, which received substantial advertising revenues from CEI, crusaded against the city's ownership of a municipal electric system. When the federal government came to review CEI's practices, CEI executives appeared at a city council committee meeting to declare that they had no interest in the acquisition of Muny Light even as they worked behind the scenes to put Muny Light out of business.

In 1976, after years of work to undermine Muny Light, CEI finally succeeded in getting the mayor and the council of Cleveland to agree to sell Muny Light, giving CEI a monopoly on electric power in the Cleveland area and enabling CEI to greatly expand its rate base to get more revenue to pay for its rapidly mounting expenses associated with building nuclear power plants. At that time, I was clerk of the Cleveland Municipal Court, a citywide elected office. I organized a civic campaign to save Muny Light. People gathered signatures in freezing rain to block the sale. I ran for mayor of Cleveland on a promise that if elected, my first act would be to cancel the sale of Muny Light. I won the election. I cancelled the sale. CEI immediately went to court to demand that the city pay 15 million dollars for power which it had purchased while CEI was running up charges to the city. The previous mayor had intended to pay that light bill by selling the light system and simultaneously disposing of a 325 million dollar antitrust damage suit. My election not only stopped the sale, but kept the lawsuit alive. CEI went to federal court to get an order attaching city equipment as a means of trying to destabilize city services as still another desperate effort to try to try to create a political climate to force the sale. I moved quickly to pay the bill by cutting city spending. The Muny Light issue came to a head on December 15, 1978, when Ohio's largest bank, Cleveland Trust, the 33rd largest bank in America at that time, told me that they would not renew the city's credit on 15 million dollars worth of loans taken out by the previous administration unless I would agree to sell Cleveland's municipally owned utility to CEI.

On that day, by that time, the sale of Muny Light was being promoted by both Cleveland newspapers, virtually all of the radio and TV stations in town, the entire business community, all the banks, both political parties, and several unions, as well as a majority of the Cleveland City Council. All I had to do was to sign my name to legislation and the system would have sold and the city credit "protected." The chairman of Cleveland Trust even offered 50 million dollars of new credit if I would agree to sell Muny Light.

Where I come from it matters how much people pay for electricity. I grew up in the inner city of Cleveland. The oldest of 7 children. My parents never owned a home, they lived in 21 different places by the time I was 17, including a couple of cars. I remember when there were 5 children and my parents living in a 3 room upstairs apartment on Cleveland's east side. My parents would sometimes sit in the kitchen at one of those old white enamel top tables, which, when the surface was chipped, was black underneath. When they counted their pennies, I could hear them clicking on the enamel top table. Click, Click, Click.

When I was in the board room with the Chairman of Cleveland Trust Bank, I was thinking about my parents counting their pennies and I could hear those pennies hitting the enamel top table. So, I said no to the sale of Muny Light to CEI. At Midnight, Cleveland Trust put the City of Cleveland into default. Later, it was revealed, that Cleveland Trust and CEI had four interlocking directors. Cleveland Trust was CEI's bank. Together with another bank, Cleveland Trust owned a substantial share of CEI stock and had numerous other mutual interests. Public power was saved in Cleveland. I lost the election in 1979 with default as the major issue. Cleveland Trust changed it name to AmeriTrust. The new mayor changed the name of Muny Light to Cleveland Public Power.

In 1993, the City of Cleveland announced that it was expanding Muny Light. It was the largest expansion of any municipal electric system in America. I had been long gone from major elected office. In fact, after the default, most political analysts considered my career over. I had been asked many times by other politicians why I just didn't make the deal and sell the light system, especially when my career was on the line. I believe that there are, in fact, some things more important than the next election.

When a reporter from the Cleveland Plain Dealer reached me to tell me about the expansion, I was on a beach in Malibu watching the dolphins play. Cleveland was the farthest thing from my mind. After I left City Hall, I couldn't get a job in Cleveland, I almost lost my home, and my marriage fell apart. But I had no real complaints, because, according to a US Senate Subcommittee studying organized crime in the Mid-Atlantic states, I had survived, through sheer luck, an assassination plot. There was something comforting looking out on the Pacific and watching the waves glisten in the sun.

So when a reporter told me that people were saying that the expansion could not have happened without my making a decision to save the system, I thought "that's nice." People in Cleveland began to say that I was right not to sell Muny Light and they asked me to come back. So I did. I ran for State Senate in 1994 on a slogan "because he was right" with little rays of yellow light shining behind my name on my campaign signs. I was one of the few Democrats to unseat a Republican incumbent that year in a state election.

Two years later, I was one of the few Democrats to unseat a Republican incumbent to gain election to Congress. My campaign signs had a light bulb behind my name with the words "Light up Congress." Today, I'm running for President of the United States and I want to light up America, and a good place to start will be to shed light on a deregulation process that has abandoned the public interest.

Dennis J. Kucinich
On the road to Davenport, Iowa

This entry and my personal blog are licensed under a Creative Commons License.

posted by < Dennis Kucinich > on < Aug 17 03 at 10:20 AM > to < >

http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/001424.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. If Davis had followed Kucinich's example, there wouldn't be a recall.
Dennis is the best candidate America has. Why would anyone settle for second best?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Sushi Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 06:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. thanks!
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. When will the public wake up?
This man needs to be heard. He really is brilliant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnKleeb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-03 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. soon I hope blm
I wasnt hear during the black out but I got emails from Dennis's campaign about it. He keeps on making great stands, god bless you Dennis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. Everyone is still ignoring the elephant in the living room
And that is the topic of PEAK OIL. This is a post I made recently on the topic of Peak Oil on another board:

Anyone who think the desire to control Iraq’s oil did not play a major part in the perceived need by the Bush gang of neo-con robber barons to invade Iraq needs to understand the theory of PEAK OIL (not saying that other factors like making Dicky Trickster Cheney’s buddies at Halliburton rich with the untendered rebuilding contracts etc. did not also play an important role).

Basically the theory behind peak oil is that world oil production will peak within the next 10 year or so (some believe we are seeing peak now) after which it will go into decline as all the easily accessible and relatively cheap sources of oil are depleted. At the same time as the decline in world oil production comes into effect we will still have an increasing demand from the industrialized West and an increasingly industrialized Asia. Those who control the remaining large sources of oil either directly or through proxies will wield a strong economic and strategic advantage.

The standard response to the theory of Peak Oil is that as oil becomes scarcer and more expensive alternative energy sources will become more competitive, enhanced extraction techniques will be developed to pump oil from what are now considered depleted fields, and Tar Sands will provide a higher proportion of the world’s crude oil supply. However, the Peak Oilers (for lack of a better term) do not believe that alternative energy resources (solar, biomass, wind etc) or enhanced extraction techniques to revive depleted oil fields and/or extract crude from Tar Sands will arrive in time to save the world economy from massive dislocations as energy demands start to outstrip supply.

The problem is alternative energy sources just cannot compete with the concentrated form of energy that exists in fossil fuels and to extract oil from depleted wells, Tar Sands etc, we could well end up expending more in the energy to extract and refine the oil than the energy attained from the extracted product itself.

One of the biggest proponents of the theory that Peak Oil is upon us or shortly to be upon us is a retired oil company executive and energy industry consultant , Colin Campbell PhD (a geologist by training). In December 2000 he presented a lecture at the University of Clausthal in Germany regarding the problems he saw coming down the pike with regards to world oil production. The presentation (in English) can be viewed on Real Player here:
Campbell Real Player Presentation If you problems with streaming, the lecture notes are available here:
Campbell Lecture Notes Transcript

Here’s a snip from a presentation given to a conference on Peak Oil by a Bush administration advisor, Matthew Simmons, formerly on the faculty of Harvard Business School, now an energy investment banker and an advisor on the Cheney’s 2001 Energy Task Force

Five years ago I barely had thought about the question of, "What does peaking mean and when might it occur?" I was intending at the time though to study the concept of depletion and the phenomenon that field after field was tending to peak fast and decline at rates that were unheard of before. The uh, uh, I think basically that now, that peaking of oil will never be accurately predicted until after the fact. But the event will occur, and my analysis is leaning me more by the month, the worry that peaking is at hand; not years away. If it turns out I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. But if I'm right, the unforeseen consequences are devastating.

But unfortunately the world has no Plan B if I'm right. The facts are too serious to ignore. Sadly the pessimist-optimist debate started too late. The Club of Rome humanists were right to raise the 'Limits to Growth' issues in the late 1960's. When they raised these issues they were actually talking about a time frame of 2050 to 2070. Then time was on the side of preparing Plan B. They like Dr. Hubbert got to be seen as Chicken Little or the Boy Who Cried Wolf...


The full transcript of Simmons’ presentation is here: Simmons Presentation

There is also the transcript of an October 2002 interview with Colin Campbell here:
Campbell Interview

Quote (from interview at above link):

FTW How soon before we start to feel the effects of dwindling oil supplies?
Campbell: We already are -- in the form of the threatened U.S. invasion of the Middle East. The U.S. would be importing 90 percent of its oil by 2020 to hold even current demand and access to foreign oil has long been officially declared a vital national interest justifying military intervention. Probable actual physical shortage of all liquid hydrocarbons worldwide won't appear for about 20 years, especially if deepening recession holds down demand. But people are coming to appreciate that peak is imminent and what it means. Some places like the U.S. will face shortage sooner than others. The price is likely to soar as shortage looms, which itself may delay peak.
If the U.S. does invade there will likely be a repeat of Vietnam with many years of fruitless struggle in which the U.S. will be seen as a tyrant and an oppressor, killing all those Arabs. It can't hope to subjugate the place in perpetuity as the people don't surrender easily -- as the Palestinians have shown. So when the U.S. has finally gone, Russia and China will likely be welcomed there to produce whatever is left in the ruins.


For more info see also these web sites:
www.hubbertpeak.com , www.peakoil.net and www.dieoff.org

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
revcarol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I don't have the exact figures here,
but DK wants either 15% or 20% renewable energy by 2010. Someone help me out here.
He IS aware of this issue and mentioned it in Santa Fe at a speech I heard there. He mentioned that even if we invade ALL the oil producing nations, we STILL would not have enough oil in the future, and that the time to go to renewables, solar,etc. is NOW!!

Some of the other candidates have their heads stuck in the sand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I'm very glad to hear that.


I hope he keeps the energy issues high on his list of talking points.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hippywife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-03 05:42 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. I will gladly help you out here
when in OK a couple of weeks ago, Dennis stated his goal was 20% renewable energy by 2010. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
revcarol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
7. BTW, he is for re-regulation of the utilities industry.
AND not allowing the coal-using power plants to be grandfathered in as "clean air." He has proposed a kind of "man to the moon" initiative for alternative energy innovation and application, which will GROW industry here in the U. S. and make these technologies available to the third world, which cannot compete for oil.

Environmentally sensitive, jobs in innovative technologies, appropriate regulation....gee, what's not to love?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. bump before bed.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mairead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-03 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. I've not heard or read him say this, but
I'll be surprised if he's not for a large number of interlocking energy-related changes, including

- a complete, low-energy mass-transit web to reduce the need for POV transportation

- a complete, high-speed communications web to reduce the need for commuting

- alternate construction technologies that emphasise passive defence against temperature extremes

- more complete, energy-sparing, and mandatory recycling (most muni recycling progs, in Massachusetts at least, are bad jokes. This is true in large part because there are no disincentives to using virgin materiel)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FluxRostrum Donating Member (339 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-03 03:06 AM
Response to Original message
10. Dennis Redeamed
First Energy Found @ Fault

Top executives at FirstEnergy rank among the Bush campaign's top fundraisers. FirstEnergy President Anthony Alexander was a Bush Pioneer in 2000 - meaning he raised at least $100,000 - and then served on the Energy Department transition team. H. Peter Burg, the company's CEO and chairman of the board, hosted a June event that raised more than half a million dollars for Bush-Cheney '04.

Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, discussing the administration's plans for addressing the blackout, told CBS's Face the Nation that consumers should be responsible for paying the $50 billion he claims is needed to upgrade the transmission system. Abraham added: "Rate-payers, obviously, will pay the bill because they're the ones who benefit."

http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=8131
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
revcarol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-03 07:57 AM
Response to Original message
12. Did you hear Greg Palast on "First Energy" the other day?
Talk about HOT!!

(Think it was a re-run of ieamerica Amy Goodman, but not sure because I only caught part while channel-surfing.)

Time to get these corporate welfare slugs outta there!!

DK often called naive because he really believes there is such a thing as "public interest."

In that case, I am all for NAIVETE!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-03 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Greg Palast is a great writer.
His book, "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" is well worth reading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padme Amidala Donating Member (401 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
15. Next year Dennis will be able to unseat Bush
Then the country will belong to us again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dpbrown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-26-03 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
16. Dennis was absolutely right about energy
Deregulation means taking the profits out without improving the infrastructure, and creating monopolies and then charging people who have no choice more for power. Simple as that.

Deregulation caused the biggest power failure in North American history, and Dennis Kucinich could have told you it was going to happen that way.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-06-03 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. Californians wish he had handled their power problems
Pete Wilson's deregulation is responsible for the California deficit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-06-03 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. You got that right!
Are you a fellow Californian, genius?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-04-03 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
17. That's a great story
Edited on Thu Sep-04-03 12:56 PM by SpikeTrees
It is written from Dennis' point of view, but it is a great story. That man really knows what the public interest is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC