|
|
Enron Mail |
Steve:
Here's our assessment of Wright's performance in California. On the plus side: He is generally pro-business, and has opposed bills that threaten economic growth, e.g., he opposed the windfall profits, and related, bills. He sided with the California Assembly Republicans to craft an alternative to the "MOU" for Edison that included direct access as a core feature of any MOU. His decision to work with the Republicans helped move the political "center of gravity"--albeit marginally--more favorably toward direct access in California. On the negative side: In each and every case that Rod has had to make a choice between the market, customers and competition on the one hand, and the utility on the other, he has never waivered in his decision--he always put the utility first. Here are three examples (and there are more): 1) During this extraordinary session, he sponsored a bill that would have explicitly created a "stranded cost charge" for utilities. Yet by most accounts, Californians have already paid off the utilties' stranded costs. How many times must Californians pay? We worked with consumer and business groups to oppose the bill. 2) In the "alternative MOU" that Rod worked on with Republicans, the Replicans told us that Rod insisted on suspending Direct Access until January 1, 2003--a demand that most believe originated with Edison. 3) Rod sponsored a bill two years ago that would prevent any market participant other than the utilities to provide metering and billing services. Today, this issue is less important to us, but it was very important to us at the time, and Rod remained unswervingly in the utilities' camp, despite our efforts. Hope this helps. If you need any other information, just let me know. Best, Jeff
|