I heard an argument that blamed Clinton for not addressing Power issues and SUV's for guzzling fuel. I found it unusual that Clinton was blamed for something political. Any other conspiracy theories about this problem out there? ------------------
The State Government of California is to blame for putting together such an odd regulation package that was destined to blow up in their faces somehow (And I'm tired of hearing about how this was a failure of deregulation. California did not deregulate the industry, they just regulated it in a different way than it had been before. They may have called it deregulation, but it wasn't). Now, there are some future potential problems with our power infrastructure (not enough transmission lines available to bring enough power to many large areas. Like New York City, for example) that may well need to be addressed (at least partially) by the Federal Government, but I can't see blaming Clinton for that, specifically. ------------------ Houston Sports Board Film Dallas.com AntiBud.com
"You guessed it, Frank Stallone." ------------------ Ceo of the Walt Williams and Lisa Malosky fan club. atheistalliance.org [This message has been edited by DEANBCURTIS (edited May 12, 2001).]
It kills me to say this aas a liberal, but I would blame it on the liberal Cali government. ------------------ "norm, would you like to buy an indian scalp ? This deal isn't gonna make or break me Norm, so don't jerk me around." Harry Carey "Norm, if I had a mohawk scalp, I wouldn't be sitting here talking to you."
For a great take on all this, go to www.HughHewitt.com. He has a very informative talk radio show and they are pounding on California governor Davis on a daily basis about his handling of the situation. See if it's on in your area. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
http://www.homepower.com/rogues.htm ------------------ visit: The Psychedelic Groove House of Rockets Basketball Love!
I would advise you to have all of your facts straight before making a blanket claim. FACT: Republican Pete Wilson was governor of California when deregulation passed. FACT: The bill to deregulate the industry was authored by Republican Assemblyman Jim Brulte. Deregulation passed the California State Assembly and Senate unanimously in 1996. Basically, the blame must fall on liberals and conservatives alike. But the fact of the matter is that California's state government looked a lot different (i.e. more conservative -- I believe Republicans had a majority in one of the chambers) in 1996 than it does now. So, to blame deregulation on liberals when conservatives had significant power (no pun intended) is ridiculous. It is worth pointing out, however, that California's current governor and Assmebly Speaker (Hertzberg) are moderate, pro-business Democrats. The State Senate Majority Leader, John Burton, is quite liberal. I'm not saying that liberals (who were part of the unanimous vote) are not partly to blame for the energy crisis, just that you can't blame it entirely on them. [This message has been edited by wrath_of_khan (edited May 13, 2001).]
Don't count Davis out quite yet. Good article in the LA Times today about how he's laying the groundwork for his re-election campaign and there's nobody on the horizon to take him out. (Unless State Treasurer Phil Angelides decides to make a run at him during the primary, but that's another story ...) I still wouldn't bet money on him to get the Dem nod in '04, though. Drawn-Out Crisis Could Dim Davis' Reelection Hopes Politics: The governor is a strong favorite to win a second term in 2002, but experts say a second summer of blackouts would hurt his chances. By MARK Z. BARABAK and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times SACRAMENTO--Even as he struggles with the electricity crisis, Gov. Gray Davis is busy laying the groundwork for his reelection bid, collecting cash, testing campaign themes and working to fend off challenges from the right and left. Two or three times a week, the governor stops by classrooms to hand out checks rewarding schools for improved student performance--and to remind voters of his pledge to make education his top priority. Other days, the governor surrounds himself with law enforcement officers--1,500 at a recent ceremony across from the Capitol--to burnish his tough-on-crime credentials. Most evenings, Davis attends big-dollar fund-raisers, working toward a goal of more than $50 million for next year’s campaign. While the electricity mess is Davis’ most immediate concern, the governor has two longer-range goals: avoiding a Democratic primary fight and ensuring that the 2002 election is about more than rolling blackouts and surging utility bills. "The Republicans hope to make this a plebiscite on how [Davis] handled electricity and have everyone buy into their criticism," said Garry South, the governor’s chief political strategist. "But it’s not going to be quite that simple." Indeed, Davis remains a strong favorite to win a second term, notwithstanding the state’s current mess. The California Republican Party is in deep distress, virtually no one expects a serious Democratic primary challenge to the governor and, perhaps most important, it is roughly 18 months until the November 2002 election--plenty of time for today’s voter anger to simmer down. But the next few months--which promise a long, hot summer of discontent and flickering lights--will be crucial to Davis’ reelection hopes. Surveys done by the governor as well as his political foes find the same thing: Few blame Davis for the electricity crisis, but voters express increasing doubts about his ability to handle the problem. And though fixes may take time, there are limits to the public’s patience. Most observers agree a second summer of rolling blackouts would place the governor in jeopardy. "Right now his numbers are very bad, but if the energy crisis goes away he’ll survive," said Gale Kaufman, a Democratic strategist who tracks public opinion for a variety of political clients. "If, on the other hand, it isn’t solved, then he’s vulnerable." Though he refuses to release details of his daily schedule, Davis appears to be spending much--if not most--of his time working on what he calls his least favorite subject. He jawbones power company executives to deliver more power to the state, cajoles skeptical lawmakers to back his plan to keep Southern California Edison from filing for bankruptcy and lobbies alternative energy producers to ignore $1 billion in outstanding bills and to restart their turbines. Critics who say Davis was slow in responding to the crisis now accuse him of being overly optimistic about finding a solution. Republican lawmakers point out Davis’ failure to meet even his most basic objectives of averting higher utility bills and keeping Pacific Gas & Electric Co. out of federal Bankruptcy Court. GOP state Sen. Tom McClintock of Northridge said, "The joke making the rounds in Republican circles is: ’What is the difference between Gray Davis and the Titanic? When the Titanic went down, the lights were still on.’ " Early in the crisis--or "challenge," as he preferred--the governor cast himself as a neutral broker, mediating among assorted interests. His bland public statements conveyed little sense of urgency, and he distanced himself from the problem when possible. Underlings were dispatched to deliver bad news and Davis, a notorious micromanager, professed ignorance when his appointees to the Public Utilities Commission announced steep rate hikes in March. But after his credibility was questioned, Davis took a more overtly partisan tack. He now lashes out at power generators, utility officials, federal regulators, the Bush administration and Republican lawmakers in Washington and Sacramento. "Republicans have chosen partisanship over partnership and ideological purity over problem solving," Davis charged Thursday, as he signed legislation authorizing a record $13.4-billion bond issue to pay for power purchases. Davis is holding out the possibility of embracing a controversial tax on "windfall profits" and other punitive steps aimed at out-of-state power suppliers. Aides make no secret of their frustration with the current state of political affairs. Since there is no clear-cut alternative to the governor, there is no rival with whom voters can compare the incumbent. "Next year people will have a choice, and when that happens, we can’t wait," said Paul Maslin, the governor’s pollster. "We’re licking our lips to get at [President] Bush, [Vice President] Cheney and whoever Republicans put on the ballot" to face Davis. The governor enjoys two big advantages heading into next year’s contest: money and political experience. Already Working on Campaign Ads As of January, the last time contribution reports were filed, Davis had $27 million in his campaign fund, compared to $118,000 for Secretary of State Bill Jones, his sole declared GOP rival. Wealthy Republican businessman William Simon Jr., who is exploring the race, might be able to pour millions into a self-funded candidacy, but he faces a steep political learning curve. Already, Davis is testing themes and rehearsing his case for reelection. In a series of recent sessions, groups of voters were shown a mock TV spot touting the crash building program the state has undertaken to bring new power plants online. The governor’s campaign strategists were delighted with the positive response, and Davis has taken to citing the statistics--13 new plants approved, eight under construction--to defend his handling of the power crunch. Meanwhile, the governor has started beefing up his political staff and intensifying organizational efforts around the state, a show of strength intended to dispel any sense of vulnerability during the hard months ahead. A series of high-profile endorsements is planned this summer to send a signal to any would-be opponents. "Anyone who decides they want to take on Gov. Davis, whether in a primary or a general election, better be ready for a hellacious fight," South said. All bluster aside, Davis has methodically moved to protect both his left and right political flanks. His endorsement of Antonio Villaraigosa in the Los Angeles mayor’s race, while rooted in their personal relationship, was seen as a way of ingratiating himself with the state’s growing and increasingly powerful Latino community. Davis’ vow to protect black lawmakers when political boundaries are redrawn later this year is another move that will help with his Democratic base. At the same time, Davis has poached on Republican turf by cultivating strong ties to law enforcement officials around the state, a carry-over from his 1998 campaign. He was rewarded with nearly straight A’s in a recent "midterm report card" from the California State Sheriff’s Assn., representing the top law officers in the state’s 58 counties. Last week, Davis signed legislation proclaiming California Peace Officers’ Memorial Day and staged a Capitol ceremony, complete with 21-gun salute, honoring those killed in the line of duty. He also pledged to sign a bill allowing the children of slain or disabled officers to receive student financial aid. The ceremony demonstrated one of the governor’s most potent powers: his ability to steer issues to the forefront of public discussion. "Whenever the governor signs or vetoes a bill, whenever the governor increases or eliminates spending for a particular program, he’s having a real-world impact that a candidate can’t match," said Dan Schnur, a communications advisor to former Gov. Pete Wilson. "A challenger can give a speech on being tough on crime. A governor can sign ’three strikes and you’re out.’ " http://www.latimes.com/news/state/updates/lat_davis010513.htm ------------------
California suffers from a "something for nothing attitude." Yes they want the conveniences that electricity provides them...no, they do not want to build new power plants. I blame that on environmentalists. As experts pointed out in this last Sunday's Chronicle editorial, you can not conserve your way out of this problem. The fact is, computers and new technologies require even more power than the other things in our offices and homes. Quite simply, we need more power to fuel our economy...and conserving isn't going to get us out of that mess. There is a place for conservation, but it's a smaller piece of the puzzle. California conserved more aggressively than any other state in the nation. They promulgated regulation after regulation that would require more conservation and no new power plants being built. Well, congratulations...you win....a summer's worth of blackouts!!! ------------------
I've been playing sim city LA, oops! 'do you want to play a game?' ------------------ humble, but hungry.
More like two years worth of blackouts. Even with the current waiver of many environmental laws in order to build new power plants in California, it will still take a couple of year (or more) to get them online. I think it's kind of interesting that California is going to end up having the first nuclear power plants built since the Three Mile Island incident. California is the last place you'd expect to see embracing nuclear power (of course, when you're desperate for power, a lot of objections fall by the wayside). ------------------ Houston Sports Board Film Dallas.com AntiBud.com
mr paige, There are four new power plants expected to come online this summer. It is amazing what a state can get done when it has an economy that rivals most countries. ------------------ You can't stick a porcupine in a barn, light it on fire, and expect to get licorice. [This message has been edited by Hydra (edited May 16, 2001).]
