I want to explain why I'm not so impressed with either the Strickland or Fingerhut answer to my questions about energy prices, but to do that I have to lay out some background. Bear with me, this is going to get wonky.
Let's start with last month's PUCO Ohio Utility Rate Survey:

To make this a little less abstract, here's a Google Map of one small area at the north end of North Canton, in Stark County. The blue line (not visible locally) is the boundary between the service territories of Ohio Edison and Ohio Power.

The homes above the blue line are in Ohio Edison territory, while those below the line are in Ohio Power's turf. So people living on Bretton, Amberley, Norriton, most of Chatham, Limington and points north are paying 11.4 cents per kilowatt-hour -- while their neighbors down the street and across the back yard on Brittany, Bridlewood and points south are paying only 7.5 cents. For a typical suburban household, the annual cost of being on the wrong side of the line is $350 to $400.
It's illegal for Ohio Power -- or any electric utility other than Ohio Edison -- to offer cheaper service to the neighbors north of the blue line. It's illegal for neighbors on Brittany to share their access to cheaper power with their backyard neighbors on Chatham. If a business on Cleveland Avenue installed a cogeneration system and had excess power, it would be illegal for that business to share it -- even for free -- with nearby residents or businesses; it could only be sold (at a lousy price) to Ohio Edison.
Under Ohio law (the "Certified Territories Act" of 1978), Ohio Edison owns those neighbors north of the blue line. Their only avenues of escape from the OE system are a) to move; b) to stop using electricity; c) to figure out how to make their own power, on their own individual premises; or d) to somehow convince North Canton to create a municipal electric system and then extend its lines to serve them (which would only be legal if their total consumption was less than 50% of the city's electricity sales inside its boundaries).
They don't call your electric company a "monopoly" for nothing.
This extraordinary legal status for electric and natural gas utility corporations is based on a theory of "natural monopoly" which this Wikipedia article explains at length, if you're interested. As Milton Friedman is quoted saying in the article, a natural monopoly in an essential industry can take three forms: a private unregulated monopoly, a private monopoly regulated by the state, or a government operation. Like most states, Ohio law allows only the second and third of these possibilities: Cities and villages can run their own electric or gas utilities within their borders if they want to, but otherwise we have to buy our electric or natural gas service from only one provider, in a fixed service territory, operating under the regulatory eye of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio.
For the captive customers of the corporations that dominate this market, PUCO regulation is supposed to ensure two things: reliable service and "fair and reasonable rates". For the regulated monopolies, the system is supposed to allow recovery of the costs, plus a reasonable return on the investment, that are required to provide that service.
The struggle to define "fair and reasonable rates" and "reasonable return" has been the Great Game of Ohio politics for many decades, consuming the careers (and making the fortunes) of tens of thousands of lawyers and lobbyists. As you would expect, the struggle has created an alternative universe of laws, regulations, precedents and deals which no ordinary citizen can hope to fathom.
But citizens can certainly ask how it can be "fair and reasonable" to compel Chatham Avenue residents to pay more than eleven cents for the same kilowatt-hour of electric service that costs less than eight cents on Brittany Drive, a couple of hundred feet away. Or, for that matter, to compel people and businesses in Akron and Cleveland to pay 40% to 50% more for the same service than they would down the road in Canton.
Why are the First Energy companies so much more expensive than other Ohio IOUs -- more expensive, in fact, than 80% of all electric utilities across the U.S.? The short answer is "their nuclear plants". The slightly longer answer is "their nuclear plants combined with lots of enablers in the General Assembly and the PUCO".
In the last five years these enablers, with great fanfare, have "deregulated" the portion of consumer rates that's supposed to pay for power generation, theoretically opening the door for other power generators to compete with the utilities' own high-cost plants for sales to the IOUs' captive customers. But the scheme also allows First Energy to charge its customers an extra 30% in "transition charges" (now renamed "rate stabilization charges") to keep us paying for those nuclear plants, no matter where our power comes from. So the actual impact of this "competition plan" on First Energy bills has been negligible, to put it mildly. (A good short history of the whole charade can be found here.)
The Ohio Republican Party owns this mess, having been in control of the PUCO and General Assembly for a decade and a half. A Democratic governor would have significant power, through his PUCO appointments and the bully pulpit, to push for remedies. Republican legislators from northern Ohio would have a very hard time resisting such a push if it actually promised lower electric bills for their districts. So northern Ohio voters have every reason to want to hear serious proposals from Ted Strickland and his rivals on this pocketbook issue.
What would my proposals be, if I were in Strickland or Fingerhut's shoes? Sure, I'd be talking about investments in fuel cells, clean coal and solar/wind generation -- for development and jobs, for the long haul. But millions of people and businesses on the wrong side of that blue line are being fleeced for hundreds of millions of dollars annually, right now. So I'd be talking about serious, immediate consumer relief measures, too. For example:
1) Appointing PUCO members who are committed to get rid of the extra "rate stabilization charges" on First Energy customers, as quickly as possible. And...
2) Creating real competitive pressure on the First Energy companies by opening some escape routes for their unhappy captive customers. Loosen the restrictions on municipal utility sales to customers outside their city lines. Let businesses and residents create local "mini-utility" coops to share locally generated power. Maybe even reform the Certified Territories Act to make it easier for communities to move their franchises from high-cost to lower-cost utilities.
Much has been said about Ted Strickland's electability advantage as a candidate from southern Ohio. I share that view, I admit. But every perspective has its blind spots. Maybe Rep. Strickland, coming from the land of coal-fired power plants, coal mining and modest electric bills, is a little slow to see why northern Ohio voters might still care about the PUCO and utility consumer issues. After all, politicians and voters in Cleveland aren't all that passionate about clean coal and biofuels, which are serious political business downstate. To some degree, the two regions are at opposite ends of the energy economy -- the employment end vs. the consumption end -- and can't help seeing it differently.
But that's why a candidate for governor has to make sure he's seeing it from both ends. It's why Strickland needs to make sure his energy platform is talking to people both north and south of that blue line.
Not long ago, telephone service was a "natural monopoly", too. Cellphones helped to destroy that assumption, but so did public officials and regulators who were determined -- in the holy names of competition, innovation and lower prices -- to make entrenched, expensive, technically mediocre telecom monopolies a thing of the past.
Is it the electric industry's turn? If so, the next governor of Ohio will have a lot to say about it. A good place to start that discussion would be some neighborhood like the one in our Google map, where Ohio's northern and southern energy economies divide at a backyard fence line.
A good time would be right now.