Angelides Proposes State Power Authority

* Re “Most Californians Think Electricity Crunch Is Artificial,” Times Poll, Jan. 7: Is the electricity crunch artificial? Maybe. Is it contrived and orchestrated by the investor-owned utilities? You bet! That a hopelessly bureaucratic entity like the L.A. Department of Water and Power can be light-years ahead of a part of the private sector that has virtual monopoly powers says only one thing: We are being manipulated.

KARL BAKER JR.

Desert Hot Springs

*

Re “$10-Billion Plan for Power Authority Would Reverse State Deregulation,” Jan. 6: The utility buyout solution proposed by state Treasurer Phil Angelides is a pleasant surprise, given the fact that he holds a political position. It is refreshing to see a proposal that is based on what is good for California rather than the benefits for big-spending campaign contributors. Given California’s surplus, buying failed private utility companies, rather than bailing them out by either the state government or consumers, would be a good investment for our state.

If California is to continue to be a leader in business we need to secure an affordable and reliable energy solution. Raising rates to unreasonable levels, as the utility-mongers have insisted upon, would be disastrous to our economy. If Gov. Gray Davis continues to pander to the utility executives he can kiss future budget surpluses goodbye, as well as his political career.

I propose a controversial idea Californians may benefit from. Throw out Gov. Davis and install Angelides in his place. At least he seems to have the reserves to suggest a creative, if controversial, plan that would benefit the people rather than the failed private utilities.

T. DEANNE LLOYD

Valencia

*

I read about Angelides’ proposal to buy out rather than bail out the utilities. It makes sense to me. It also makes sense to require the utilities to receive and pay for power generated by businesses and residences, many of which could feasibly install solar, wind or other sustainable and clean generators but could not feasibly store the power they generate. The state should provide financial incentives for such generators.

Both of the above would be a better investment than a bailout of the utilities. We cannot depend on federal regulators to limit price gouging by out-of-state power generators, and it would be unrealistic to believe that large new power plants will quickly be built to increase the supply of power and bring down prices.

AUGUST R. GERECKE JR.

Claremont

*

To understand how energy deregulation has backfired, your article about deregulation reversal provides a big clue. Duke Energy North America apparently is of the opinion, as indicated by the comments of spokesman Tom Williams, that it can raise wholesale rates to whatever it wishes and still maintain it is working with its “own nickel, not the taxpayers’.” Those of us who pay the bills know that whether our nickel goes directly to companies such as Duke or through a government agency in the form of taxes, it is still our nickel. If Duke feels otherwise, it will not have control of that nickel much longer.

TOM WALKER

Costa Mesa

*

Consumer groups and civic leaders urge us to conserve energy for the “public good.” Aren’t my needs part of that good? The solution is not vague pleas to the public but higher rates, so that people will be forced to make a genuine choice about how to allocate their resources. They can then choose among their conflicting desires which to fulfill. Power is not a “right” owed to us by anyone. It is a commodity generated by hard-working people like ourselves.

BRYAN STONE

Los Angeles

*

If Southern California Edison is in such dire straits financially, perhaps it should consider getting out of the sponsorship role at Edison Field. The Angels and Edison Field should be good citizens and let SCE out of the arrangement. Spending $1.5 million for advertising at this juncture is crazy. Edison is cutting its work force. Edison should trim its advertising budget to zero. It is getting enough free press at the moment.

BRETT HEMPHILL

Costa Mesa

*

Edison is planning to lay off 600 employees and 850 contractors. It would be interesting to know how many of these are executives who lobbied for deregulation.

JAMES E. OWENS

La Canada

*

The energy crisis that California is now facing has been impending for some years. I hold former Gov. Pete Wilson responsible for ignoring his duties in that field while the problem developed and Gov. Davis for marking time schmoozing with lobbyists and tinkering with so-called education reform while the problem galloped to current proportions.

There is nothing Californians can do about Wilson now, but they can do something about Davis. A state as important as California should never have to put up with a slacker as a chief executive. I am so sorry that I voted for Davis. I will never do so again. Is there a candidate out there who will promise to pay attention on behalf of the people?

DAVE MARESH

Yucca Valley

*

We don’t have an “electricity crisis.” We have a “deregulation crisis.” To call it an electricity crisis is a semantic trick to justify construction of more power plants.

TRAVIS LONGCORE

Los Angeles