12.13.2005

STRICKLAND RESPONDS ON HIGH UTILITY COSTS... KIND OF

Last Friday I posted this comment on Rep. Ted Strickland's campaign blog about his energy and jobs program:
One of the things the governor does is appoint the Public Utilities Commission. Northern Ohio, for as long as anybody can remember, has had the highest total energy costs on both businesses and consumers outside of a couple of spots on the two coasts, particularly electricity costs. We’ve gone through now over a decade of so-called deregulation and that has not changed. That’s obviously a competitive issue for businesses.

What is your plan, if any, to deal with energy costs (as distinct from sources or jobs) particularly for this part of the state?
Today there's a response posted by Strickland campaign staffer Jesse Taylor (who also sent it to me by email):
You are absolutely right that electricity rates in Northeast Ohio are very high, and present a competitive challenge. The situation is bound to be uncertain as we approach the end of our deregulation transition period, in which energy prices are still somewhat controlled. At this point, any changes in the regulatory structure will require not only PUCO action, but also legislative changes. Ted believes that its important to monitor the current transition period closely. Ted will appoint people to PUCO that will look out for the best interests of Ohioans and our businesses.

In approaching this issue, there are two things Ted thinks we need to be concerned about (1) the ability of the deregulated enterprise to generate the capital needed to invest in new technologies that can generate Ohio jobs and clean up air emissions and (2) the system’s ability to keep energy prices at a low enough level to keep Ohio energy prices competitive.

Clearly, this is a complex issue that will require informed input from all the stakeholders. Ted really values input and ideas from everyone on this issue.

In the long term, Ted’s Friday announcement addresses part of the problem by laying out a specific plan to increase supply, and, hopefully positively affect prices.

As you know, Ted’s plan is to marshal at least $1 billion in public private partnership to develop new sources of energy production : ethanol, clean coal, solar and wind – all of which will not only create jobs but help reduce high energy prices.
Here's Eric Fingerhut's response to the same question.

It's striking that both candidates, when asked about energy prices (i.e. high utility bills), mostly want to talk about big investment in new energy sources, which they say will lead, in some unspecified way, to lower consumer costs. Speaking as an old utility consumer activist from back in the 70s and 80s, when we were hearing the same story about nuclear plants, I'm not at all sure I buy this. And I'm really not sure it's going to impress voters, whose outrage about this winter's utility bills will still be fresh when the primary rolls around in May.

"Ted really values input and ideas from everyone on this issue." Okay, I'll give it a try in my next post.