Near-Fatal Shock: 19 Minutes Less TV!

Of all the nerve.

How dare Gov. Gray Davis stand up there and ask Californians to conserve electricity?

And by 7%?

Is he kidding? What’s he trying to do, kill us? Break our spirit? Send us back to the Stone Age?

We give and give and give. Now he wants us to give some more. Make that “give up.” It’s bad enough we have to live in this hellhole known as California. Will the governor be happy when we’ve all moved to Nevada?

Does he have any idea what he’s asking?

Did he crunch the numbers? I did, and the potential impact on my life would be significant.

Consider: Like a lot of Californians, I come home from work, piddle around a bit and then park my dead fanny in front of the TV. With remote-control clicker at hand, I don’t move until moseying up to bed or rolling off the sofa in a stupor.

On a typical night, I start watching TV at 7:30 and continue until midnight. That’s 270 minutes of uninterrupted TV time and electricity usage.

Reducing that by 7% would represent 18.9 minutes. Nineteen minutes every night of Must-Miss TV? Rather draconian, isn’t it?

What about a frozen macaroni dinner that requires seven minutes of microwaving? Sure, let’s knock 7% off the cooking time. Doubtless, the governor has no idea what it’s like to have to microwave his own meal or what that macaroni will taste like without that precious last half-minute.

Hint: a little chunky, gov’nor.

This is so typical, isn’t it? Get into an energy crisis and sock it to the little guy.

There are still plenty of us who remember the energy crisis of the 1970s. We were told the United States literally was running out of oil. Get used to it, they told us.

So, what was the first thing they asked us to do: Keep our thermostats at 68 or lower. Or--get this--put on a sweater if we got chilly. Millions upon millions of loyal Americans did just that, happy to do their part.

Trial by Carpool

But that wasn’t enough. We were told to reduce our car trips to essential driving. Carpool, they told us. Buy more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Some wondered whether that particular generation of Americans was capable of making those sacrifices. We proved our mettle. Instead of driving around aimlessly, we sat in our homes, night after night, wearing sweaters and keeping the thermostat at 68.

The crisis, you’ll remember, proved somewhat trumped-up. All that sacrificing, and for what? To make the world safe 20 years later for Chevrolet Suburbans?

In the mid-’90s in California, they came to us again. Knowing how much we’d already given in our lifetimes, they wanted more.

That time, it was a drought. That time, we had to conserve water.

Once again, we stepped up to the plate. In my case, I reversed a lifelong habit and began turning off the water while brushing my teeth. In addition, I reduced my daily hot showers from 20 minutes to 18. I’m not saying I did any more than the next guy, but I did what I could.

And we got through it.

Now, they’re back again, with a new slate of requests.

They’ve tried oil and water. This time around, it’s electricity.

Already stretched as far as we can go (9% residential rate increase approved last week), they want more. They’re asking us to dig down one more time.

What especially bothers me is that, incredibly, the governor proposed his 7% solution with a straight face. Not even a nod to what it would mean in our daily lives--one less light on in the house for a few hours, an hour less in a computer chat room per day, 19 minutes of darkened TV at night.

Graceless, in my opinion. At least Bill Clinton would have had the decency to bite his lip when asking his fellow Americans for such a sacrifice.

Will I give again? Probably. That’s what we Americans do when powerful forces are aligned against us.

They ask, we give.

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. Readers may reach Parsons by calling (714) 966-7821, by writing to The Times, Orange County edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626, and by e-mail to dana.parsons@latimes.com.