28 February 21
Final Day — We Surely Need a Good One
Barring a very big donation will not make our goal for February. But we have made up a lot of ground in the past few days and we do have a chance to keep it close.
Stop for just a moment and throw something in the hat.
In peace and solidarity.
Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News
If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611
28 February 21
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News
RSN: Marc Ash | Did Biden Throw the $15 Minimum Wage Under the Bus?
Marc Ash, Reader Supported News
Ash writes:
here are a lot of trap doors opening in the Biden White House right now. If you’re planning on staying up to speed it would probably be a good idea to read the fine print, carefully.
Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff campaigned in the Georgia runoff elections on a commitment to a stimulus package that would include relief checks of $2,000, not $1,400. Yes, most Americans had just received relief checks of $600 and $600 plus $1,400 does equal $2,000, but that’s not what Warnock and Ossoff ran on, they ran on $2,000.
What’s the big deal? After all, if the Republicans had retained control of the Senate, Mitch McConnell and the boys would have let the American people eat cake, right? And they would have, you can be sure. But just being better than the Republicans isn’t the same as doing what you said you were going to do. That may not matter much in the Beltway, but out in the country it matters a lot.
For Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough to all but derail a major economic legislative initiative backed by most of the Democratic Party members, not to mention most of the country, with an opinion based on Senate rules is as rare as a steak still walking around on the farm.
The US commercial press is painting her decision as reasonable. That’s inaccurate and misleading. The decision was extraordinary and remarkably consequential by any measure. It could shaft American workers for a generation. Rare, extraordinary, and dubious to be sure, but foreseeable given President Joe Biden’s open invitation for MacDonough to do it.
Biden said repeatedly over the past month that he doubted the $15 minimum wage hike would be allowed to remain in his stimulus package under Reconciliation and that he would understand if it were not allowed and that the Democrats would have to find another way to get it passed. It was an open invitation, a signal to MacDonough make the ruling she then made.
There’s a tendency to breathe a sigh of relief as Biden strikes a decent and compassionate tone in his addresses. A far cry from the acerbic, incendiary, and blatantly abusive style of his predecessor. But he’s still Joe Biden, and he still believes that the Democratic Party of the 1980s and 1990s had it right and big corporations that make big donations are our friends.
The news of the demise of the $15 minimum wage will be well received by the big corporate Congressional donors, many of whom are dependent on cheap labor to realize enormous profits.
Biden could have said, I want the $15 minimum wage hike in the stimulus bill. It’s important and I am willing to fight for it. That would have set a completely different tone not just for Senate Parliamentarian but for the entire Democratic Senate Caucus. By opening the door to failure, Biden invited failure. Is this the way of the strong leader or the paper tiger?
Which leads to a discussion of Biden’s entire stated agenda and all of his campaign promises in a Senate still paralyzed by the filibuster. Biden has been given a rare opportunity to make real change with a unified Congress having at least the capacity to act. But if the filibuster remains a sacred cow, then Biden and the Democrats may get the COVID stimulus package passed, but they won’t get a $15 wage hike or anything else accomplished. At this juncture, Biden seems more likely to punt than to seize the moment.
Biden must act and he must act now if his presidency is to have a lasting impact. If he delays waiting for the ghost of bipartisanship to reappear he risks the Democratic majorities, his agenda, and a return to Trumpism.
Marc Ash is the founder and former Executive Director of Truthout, and is now founder and Editor of Reader Supported News.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
Kamala Harris. (photo: Jacquelyn Martin/AP)
Kamala Harris Could Deliver $15 Minimum Wage if Democrats Really Wanted It
Tessa Stuart, Rolling Stone
Stuart writes:
Democrats have a choice between respecting arcane Senate guidelines and raising nearly a million people out of poverty
here’s a moment every four years when the polls are tight and certain Democrats shake their heads, marveling at the fact that so many Americans — particularly low-wage workers — still vote for the GOP. “Don’t they know we’re the working people’s party?” they say. “Republicans only care about giving tax cuts to the rich.” Next time you hear a variation on that theme, remember this moment, when Democrats had a majority in the Senate, the opportunity to raise the wage floor for millions of Americans and lift nearly a million workers out of poverty, and — faced with a minor road block — they threw their hands in the air and gave up.
On Thursday, Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled that a $15 dollar minimum wage could not be included in Democrats’ $1.9 trillion Covid-19 relief bill, because they intend to pass it through the budget reconciliation process, which only requires a simple majority, instead of trying to convince at least 10 Republicans to support the cause.
There was a bit of suspense in advance of MacDonough’s ruling, because, as my colleague Tim Dickinson explained, decisions like this one on the minimum wage are somewhat arbitrary: “reconciliation bills are subject to a thicket of arcane limitations… For each controversial provision, the Senate parliamentarian must find a path — as if with a divining rod — or announce, after a mysterious interlude of doleful contemplation, that the way is blocked. In this case, MacDonough found that the minimum wage hike was ‘merely incidental’ to the federal budget and therefore could not proceed.”
President Joe Biden’s press secretary said he was “disappointed” in the outcome, but he “respects the parliamentarian’s decision and the Senate’s process.” (Biden may having been breathing a sigh of relief though — MacDonough’s ruling offered cover to two Democratic senators who said they might not support the bill if it included the wage hike: Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.)
Now, Democrats have to choose between respecting some arcane Senate semi-rules and ensuring more than a million working Americans would no longer literally go hungry, and they seem, somehow, poised to pick the former.
There are multiple options available to Biden if he is truly committed to the idea that, as he said in his statement on the ruling, “no one in this country should work full time and live in poverty.”
For one thing, the president could just ask Kamala Harris, the president of the Senate, to overrule the parliamentarian. In fact, one former parliamentarian has said it’s entirely at the VP’s discretion to listen to MacDonough on a ruling like this one or not. And there is ample historical precedent for not listening to the parliamentarian — as Slate reports, “Vice President Hubert Humphrey routinely ignored his parliamentarian’s advice.”
A coalition of groups — including the Women’s March, UltraViolet, CASA, and the Urban League — sent a letter to Biden Thursday, urging him to do exactly that. But Biden’s chief of staff, Ron Klain threw cold water on the idea earlier this week, saying the administration would “honor the rules of the Senate.”
The other option that’s available to Biden? He could ask Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to have the parliamentarian fired. That’s what the GOP-controlled Senate did back in 2001, when the parliamentarian ruled the Bush tax cut could not be passed through a reconciliation process in circumstances nearly identical to this one. And that might be the redeeming quality some working class voters see in the party — the GOP may be primarily concerned with cutting taxes for the wealthy, but at least, when they say they’re going to do something, they actually get the job done.
Voters at the Dunbar neighborhood center in Atlanta. (photo: Tannen Maury/EPA)
Supreme Court to Again Consider Federal Protections for Minority Voters
Robert Barnes, The Washington Post
Barnes writes: "With one contentious election behind it, the Supreme Court this week will consider the rules for the next, and how federal law protects minority voters as states across the nation race to revamp their regulations."
READ MORE
New York governor Andrew Cuomo. (photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
2nd Former Aide Accuses Cuomo of Sexual Harassment
Associated Press
Excerpt: "A second former aide has come forward with sexual harassment allegations against New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who responded with a statement Saturday saying he never made advances toward her and never intended to be inappropriate."
READ MORE
Doctor giving a vaccine to a patient. (photo: INGIMAGE)
Biden Administration Plans Messaging Campaign to Stress Johnson & Johnson Vaccine's Benefits
Heidi Przybyla and Erika Edwards and Laura Strickler, NBC News
ith the first shipments of Johnson & Johnson's Covid-19 vaccine expected as early as next week, Biden administration officials are prepping a campaign to send the message that it provides good protection against the virus and that, just like the two other major vaccines, it will be distributed equally among all communities in the U.S.
"Next week will be a big moment," an official said, saying reaching herd immunity in the U.S. by the summer depends on the successful rollout of a third major vaccine.
"We want to be super, super clear about effectiveness and the fact that every community is going to have access to every vaccine to beat back on any misinformation that any community is going to get a lesser one," the official said.
The strategy is to blunt concern that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is slightly less effective than vaccines produced by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna and that because of that, it might be used more in underserved communities, officials said.
Some administration Covid-19 advisers are circulating talking points to medical surrogates and allies that include data tables demonstrating that all of the vaccines in the pipeline have shown "dramatic decrease in severe illness," according to a slide obtained by NBC News.
"Every vaccine that has published data shows NO cases of hospitalization among those who were vaccinated," the table says.
Documents released Wednesday by the Food and Drug Administration indicate that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is overall safe and highly effective against serious illness, at 86 percent. Globally, however, the vaccine's effectiveness against moderate to severe disease was less, 66 percent, because it was tested in areas where more variants of the virus were circulating. In the U.S., the vaccine was found to be 72 percent effective against moderate to severe illness.
Some state health officials are concerned that people will show up to mass vaccination sites demanding a certain vaccine over another, according to the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.
The challenge for the government will be to explain that people shouldn't feel cheated if they get the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, because, even though its trials demonstrated slightly less efficacy, it will still provide strong protection against severe disease, death and complications from the variants, said Dr. Kavita Patel, a primary care physician who was a policy aide in the Obama administration.
"They're really worried," she said. "The White House is trying to make sure we're not creating a false narrative about these efficacy rates — because the goal is to make clear anybody who's taken any of these vaccines has not been hospitalized, not died from Covid or from any of these vaccines," Patel said.
Dr. Mark McClellan, a former FDA commissioner who serves on the board of Johnson & Johnson, said there should be unified and consistent messaging about the breakthrough in preventing major illness and death. Marcus Plescia, chief medical officer of the health officials organization, even tweeted Wednesday that he prefers the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.
The Johnson & Johnson vaccine is administered as a single dose and can be stored at standard refrigerator temperatures for three months, compared to the vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna, which require two doses and ultracold storage.
It is also made differently. It uses an inactivated virus, called an adenovirus, to teach the body's immune system to recognize and fight off SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19. The vaccines made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna rely on a different technology, using genetic material called messenger RNA, or mRNA.
Before the favorable review, another official close to the administration said some local governments had been debating the ethics of distributing the vaccine in communities that might be less likely to show up for second doses.
McClellan said that whether it's because they're hard to reach, hard to track or just in need of quick immunity, certain populations could make better candidates for single-shot vaccines.
"There's been a lot of discussions about, because of the profile being single-dose, that the populations where it's directed might be different," he said, citing teachers; people who might be hard to track over time, including migrant workers and homeless people; and "younger people who might have a more difficult time coming back."
"There are lots of different groups where the different features might be advantageous. I do think there's going to be a lot of discussion of that," he said.
Patel said, "I actually think this is a great vaccine for young people who think they're invincible and tend to not use health care that much." The same goes for "populations that tend to fall off," like homeless people. "But I've warned you can't have it perceived the inferior vaccine is going to poor people," she said.
Johnson & Johnson said that, assuming the FDA authorizes its vaccine for emergency use, it would be able to provide 20 million shots by the end of next month and 100 million more doses over the summer.
The White House official stressed that the government plans, once the Johnson & Johnson vaccine gets final approval, to ship it in the "exact same way and proportionally" to the others. "What you will hear us say is 'every vaccine for every community,'" the official said.
According to experts, whether Johnson & Johnson is deployed differently from the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines is ultimately likely to be a state-level decision.
"It would be very hard to pinpoint this vaccine," said Dr. Josh Sharfstein, a former FDA deputy commissioner. "People will have the ability to say, 'We're setting up a clinic for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, and it offers milder side effects and pretty good protection,'" so come and get it, he said.
McClellan said that "if things go well," the U.S. could move past the pandemic "fairly quickly," possibly as early as summer.
Sunday Song: Neil Young | Southern Man
Neil Young, YouTube
Young writes: "Southern man, better keep your head. Don't forget what your good book said."
Neil Young in 1970. (photo: Gary Burden)
Southern man, better keep your head
Don't forget what your good book said
Southern change gonna come at last
Now your crosses are burning fast
Southern man
I saw cotton and I saw black
Tall white mansions and little shacks
Southern man, when will you pay them back?
I heard screamin' and bullwhips cracking
How long? How long? How?
Southern man, better keep your head
Don't forget what your good book said
Southern change gonna come at last
Now your crosses are burning fast
Southern man
Lily Belle, your hair is golden brown
I've seen your black man comin' round
Swear by God I'm gonna cut him down
I heard screamin' and bullwhips cracking
How long? How long? How?
Jacob Duran cooked his meals outside last week after his apartment lost power in Southeast Austin. (photo: Miguel Gutierrez Jr./The Texas Tribune)
Texas Repeatedly Failed to Protect Its Power Grid Against Extreme Weather
Jeremy Schwartz, Kiah Collier, and Vianna Davila, The Texas Tribune and ProPublica
n January 2014, power plants owned by Texas’ largest electricity producer buckled under frigid temperatures. Its generators failed more than a dozen times in 12 hours, helping to bring the state’s electric grid to the brink of collapse.
The incident was the second in three years for North Texas-based Luminant, whose equipment malfunctions during a more severe storm in 2011 resulted in a $750,000 fine from state energy regulators for failing to deliver promised power to the grid.
In the earlier cold snap, the grid was pushed to the limit and rolling blackouts swept the state, spurring an angry legislature to order a study of what went wrong.
Experts hired by the Texas Public Utility Commission, which oversees the state’s electric and water utilities, concluded that power-generating companies like Luminant had failed to understand the “critical failure points” that could cause equipment to stop working in cold weather.
In May 2014, the PUC sought changes that would require energy companies to identify and address all potential failure points, including any effects of “weather design limits.”
Luminant argued against the proposal.
In comments to the commission, the company said the requirement was unnecessary and “may or may not identify the ‘weak links’ in protections against extreme temperatures.”
“Each weather event [is] dynamic,” company representatives told regulators. “Any engineering analysis that attempted to identify a specific weather design limit would be rendered meaningless.”
By the end of the process, the PUC agreed to soften the proposed changes. Instead of identifying all possible failure points in their equipment, power companies would need only to address any that were previously known.
The change, which experts say has left Texas power plants more susceptible to the kind of extreme and deadly weather events that bore down on the state last week, is one in a series of cascading failures to shield the state’s electric grid from winter storms, ProPublica and The Texas Tribune found.
Lawmakers and regulators, including the PUC and the industry-friendly Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates the oil and gas industry, have repeatedly ignored, dismissed or watered down efforts to address weaknesses in the state’s sprawling electric grid, which is isolated from the rest of the country.
About 46,000 megawatts of power — enough to provide electricity to 9 million homes on a high-demand day — were taken off the grid last week due to power-generating failures stemming from winter storms that battered the state for nearly seven consecutive days. Dozens of deaths, including that of an 11-year-old boy, have been tied to the weather. At the height of the crisis, more than 4.5 million customers across the state were without power.
As millions of Texans endured days without power and water, experts and news organizations pointed to unheeded warnings in a federal report that examined the 2011 winter storm and offered recommendations for preventing future problems. The report by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation concluded, among other things, that power companies and natural gas producers hadn’t properly readied their facilities for cold weather, including failing to install extra insulation, wind breaks and heaters.
Another federal report released three years later made similar recommendations with few results. Lawmakers also failed to pass measures over the past two decades that would have required the operator of the state’s main power grid to ensure adequate reserves to shield against blackouts, provided better representation for residential and small commercial consumers on the board that oversees that agency and allowed the state’s top emergency-planning agency to make sure power plants were adequately “hardened” against disaster.
Experts and consumer advocates say the challenge to the 2014 proposal by Luminant and other companies, which hasn’t been previously reported, is an example of the industry’s outsize influence over the regulatory bodies that oversee them.
“Too often, power companies get exactly what they want out of the PUC,” said Tim Morstad, associate director of AARP Texas. “Even well-intentioned PUC staff are outgunned by armies of power company lawyers and their experts. The sad truth is that if power companies object to something, in this case simply providing information about the durability of certain equipment, they are extremely likely to get what they want.”
Luminant representatives declined to answer questions about the company’s opposition to the weatherization proposal. PUC officials also declined to comment.
Michael Webber, an energy expert and mechanical engineering professor at the University of Texas at Austin, said the original proposal could have helped in identifying trouble spots within the state’s power plants.
“Good engineering requires detailed understanding of the performance limits of each individual component that goes into a system,” Webber said. “Even if 99.9 percent of the equipment is properly rated for the operational temperatures, that one part out of 1,000 can bring the whole thing down.”
Luminant defended its performance during last week’s deep freeze, saying it produced about 25 percent to 30 percent of the power on the grid Monday and Tuesday, compared with its typical market share of about 18 percent.
In a public statement, officials said the company executed a “significant winter preparedness strategy to keep the electricity flowing during this unprecedented, extended weather event.” They declined to disclose whether any of the company’s generating units failed during last week’s winter storms.
State officials are again promising reforms. Lawmakers have called on officials with the PUC and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which operates the power grid that spans most of the state, to testify at hearings later this week. Governor Greg Abbott has called on lawmakers to mandate the winterization of generators and power plants, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he was launching an investigation into ERCOT and almost a dozen power companies, including Luminant. Separately, the PUC announced its own investigation into ERCOT.
Texas is the only state in the contiguous U.S. that operates its own electric grid, making it difficult for other regions to send excess power in times of crisis, especially when they are facing their own shortages, as they were last week. All other states in the Lower 48, as well as peripheral areas of Texas, are connected to one of two grids that span the eastern and western halves of the country.
Because Texas operates its own grid, the state isn’t subject to federal oversight by FERC, which can investigate power outages but can’t mandate reforms. Many energy experts say the very nature of the state’s deregulated electric market is perhaps most to blame for last week’s power crisis.
In Texas, a handful of mega-utilities controlled the distribution and pricing of the power they produced until two decades ago, when the legislature shifted to a system where companies would compete for customers on the open market. Lawmakers said the change would result in lower power bills and better service, a promise that some experts and advocates say hasn’t been kept.
But under this system, power companies aren’t required to produce enough electricity to get the state through crises like the one last week. In fact, they are incentivized to ramp up generation only when dwindling power supplies have driven up prices.
Other states with deregulated power markets, including California, have made reforms and added additional safeguards after experiencing similar catastrophes.
“The fault on this one is at the feet of the legislature and the regulators for their failure to protect the people rather than profits, the utility companies, rather than investing millions of dollars in weatherization that had been recommended in review after review of these kinds of incidents,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, a longtime Texas consumer advocate and environmental activist. “They have chosen not to do that because it would be too expensive for the utilities and ultimately to the consumers.”
‘We’ll be opportunistic’
Three years after the 2011 storms, the Texas electric grid faced another major cold weather test when a polar vortex swept across the state. Freezing temperatures helped to knock out nearly 50 generating units at Texas power plants in the first week of 2014, bringing ERCOT perilously close to ordering rotating outages.
The event quickly faded from public attention because it was a near-miss that didn’t actually leave people without electricity or heat. But because the state had come so close to blackouts, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, which has some authority to regulate power companies in the country, launched an investigation. The probe found similar problems to those that dogged the state after the 2011 storms, primarily equipment that failed to stand up to the freezing temperatures.
Despite the equipment failures that brought the electric grid to the brink of disaster, the polar vortex was a financial windfall for power-generation companies. In the months that followed the storm, some of the companies stressed to investors the financial benefits of the two days of cold weather and accompanying high energy prices.
“This business benefited significantly from increased basis and storage spreads during the polar vortex earlier this year,” Joe McGoldrick, an executive with Houston-based CenterPoint Energy, said in a November 2014 earnings call. “To the extent that we get another polar vortex or whatever, absolutely, we’ll be opportunistic and take advantage of those conditions.”
A CenterPoint spokesperson said McGoldrick was the head of the company’s gas marketing division, but has since left the company. She said that division was sold last year and had no role in responding to last week’s storms.
“The remarks made in 2014 do not reflect the core values of CenterPoint Energy,” Natalie Hedde, communications director, said.
Texas has relied on the principle that higher prices will spur greater power generation when the state needs it most, a structure that helps explain the persistence of blackouts, said Ed Hirs, a University of Houston energy expert.
In extreme weather events like last week’s freeze, prices per megawatt hour jumped from an average of around $35 to ERCOT’s maximum of $9,000.
Hirs said it’s in the power generators’ interest to “push ERCOT into a tight situation where price goes up dramatically.”
“They are giving generators incentive to withdraw service,” he added. “How else do you get the price to go up?”
Texans have already been hit with sky-high bills since last week’s event, with some climbing as high as $16,000, according to The New York Times. At an emergency meeting Sunday, the three-member PUC ordered electric companies to suspend disconnections for nonpayment and delay sending invoices or bill estimates.
Power companies weren’t the only ones that saw the 2014 event more as a success story than a sign of weakness.
ERCOT concluded that operators “handled a difficult situation well” and took “prompt and decisive actions” that had prevented system wide blackouts. In the “lessons learned” section of its final report, the agency promoted the continuation of its winterization site visits, which are not mandatory.
Winterization efforts were paying dividends in the form of fewer generating units falling victim to cold weather, the report stated.
Federal regulators agreed. During a meeting of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners in February 2014, a month after the storm, a top-ranking official from NERC stated that the response showed “industry is learning [and] using the resources and tools available to improve their preparations and operations of the grid during a significant weather event.”
But NERC’s investigation exposed problems that would bring Texas to a crisis point last week.
In the 2014 report, NERC methodically laid out how power-generating equipment failed during the cold snap, detailing 62 examples that included frozen circulating water that caused a supply loss and moisture in the air causing valves to freeze. In all, those cold-related failures were responsible for the vast majority of lost power during the event, the agency found.
The incident also highlighted the need to improve winter performance of natural gas pipelines, which NERC found hampered the ability of gas-fired power plants to generate electricity. The agency declined to comment, saying it doesn’t discuss investigations.
Natural gas and power generation are highly dependent on each other: Natural gas processing requires electricity, which may be produced in turn by burning natural gas.
Citing preliminary figures from ERCOT that show natural-gas-fired power plants performed worse than those fueled by other types of energy during this year’s power crisis, energy experts say producers and distributors of that fossil fuel played a major role in the catastrophe.
Natural gas producers and pipeline companies in Texas are regulated by the Railroad Commission.
R.J. DeSilva, a spokesperson for the agency, declined to say whether it requires natural gas producers and pipeline companies to weatherize wellheads or pipelines. He noted that poor road conditions made it impossible for crews from natural gas companies to inspect wells and said some producers reported “the inability to produce gas because they did not have power.”
Because so many homes are heated with natural gas, fossil fuel plays a much more central role in the winter than it does in the hot summer months.
“When all this began, millions of Texans wrapped their pipes to keep them from freezing, and the Railroad Commission didn’t order — has never ordered — the gas companies, the gas producers and gas pipeline companies … to wrap their pipes to protect them from freezing,” said Smith, the consumer advocate.
Failed legislation
After days of scrambling to address the myriad crises that pummeled his city last week, former longtime state Representative Sylvester Turner — now mayor of Houston, the state’s largest city — had a message for his former colleagues.
“You need to dust off my bill, and you need to refile it,” the Democrat said during a press conference Friday, referring to legislation he filed in 2011 that would have required the PUC to ensure ERCOT maintained adequate reserve power to prevent blackouts. “Because it’s not about just holding hearings.”
The state’s deregulated market is to blame for the crisis, according to some experts who say the catastrophe shows that the system ultimately prizes profits over people. But some of the architects of the system are doubling down.
In a blog post published last week on the website of U.S. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, former Texas Governor Rick Perry suggested that the current disaster was worth it if it keeps rates low and federal regulators from requiring changes to the system.
“Texans would be without electricity for longer than three days to keep the federal government out of their business,” said Perry, who was governor from 2000-15 and presided over the early days of energy deregulation in Texas. “Try not to let whatever the crisis of the day is take your eye off of having a resilient grid that keeps America safe personally, economically, and strategically.”
Perry, who returned to his job on the board of Dallas-based pipeline giant Energy Transfer LP after serving as energy secretary in the Trump administration, received at least $141,000 in campaign contributions from Luminant’s former parent company, TXU Corp., between 2002 and 2009, when he was governor.
On Saturday, Turner warned about the soaring residential utility bills that Texans would be getting in the coming weeks. In 2012, when Turner was still a state representative, he wrote a letter to the then-chairman of the House State Affairs Committee, raising concerns about PUC rule changes that increased the price caps companies could charge for power to $9,000 per megawatt hour.
Those price caps remain the same today.
This time, Turner called on lawmakers to pursue substantive reforms that don’t simply “scapegoat” ERCOT, referring to the increasing calls for an investigation into the council, including by Abbott. “You must include the Public Utility Commission in these reforms because they provide direct oversight over ERCOT, and all of those commissioners are appointed by the governor,” Turner said.
In 2013, Turner attempted, unsuccessfully, to pass a measure that would have replaced the governor’s appointees on the PUC with an elected commissioner. The same year, he tried to salvage a measure that would have increased the administrative penalty for electric industry participants that violate state law or PUC rules.
The Texas Sunset Advisory Commission, which audits state agencies every 12 years to determine how they can better function or if they should be abolished, recommended in 2013 that the PUC exercise additional oversight of ERCOT, including a review and approval of annual budgets and annual review of “PUC-approved performance measures tracking ERCOT’s operations.”
One of the recommendations called on the PUC to increase the administrative penalty to $100,000 a day per violation, stating that the $25,000 daily penalty “may not be sufficient for violations that affect grid reliability, which can cause serious grid failures, such as blackouts.”
Lawmakers passed a bill during that year’s legislative session that adopted many of those recommendations, but the change in penalties was left out. An amendment by Turner to restore the higher fee in the bill failed.
Another former Democratic lawmaker who now leads a major Texas city similarly tried and failed to pass legislation that would bring greater accountability to the state.
In 2015, Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson, then a state representative, authored a bill that would have required state agencies, including the PUC, to plan and budget for severe weather using state climatologist data.
“It would have forced state agencies to prepare for an event like what just happened and to account for that in their agency plans,” Johnson said during a Thursday press conference addressing the crisis. “It was quite unfortunate, because we can’t say that it would have prevented this situation but certainly may have.”
Then, two years ago, facilities owned or controlled by utilities regulated by the PUC were exempted from legislation that requires the Texas Division of Emergency Management to “identify methods for hardening utility facilities and critical infrastructure in order to maintain essential services during disasters.”
The bill’s author, Republican state Representative Dennis Paul, declined to comment. State Senator Eddie Lucio Jr., who co-sponsored the measure, said he did not know why the PUC was exempted.
‘Demanding answers’
For the past two decades, consumer groups have fought without success for a larger role in how the state manages its power grid. Giving residents a stronger presence on the ERCOT board would have forced the agency to take the lessons of extreme winter storms in 2011 and 2014 more seriously, said Randall Chapman, a ratepayer attorney and longtime consumer advocate.
“It would have changed things entirely,” Chapman said. “Residential consumers are the ones who have been through outages before. They are the ones with the broken water pipes, the ones freezing in their homes. They would be demanding answers.”
Chapman said the groups were stymied when the legislature agreed to reserve only a single seat on the ERCOT board for a representative of residential consumers. In comparison, eight seats, including alternates, are filled by representatives of energy retailers, power generators and investor-owned utility companies.
“Residential consumers need a stronger voice over at ERCOT,” Morstad of AARP Texas said. “Decisions are made every week that affect the health and safety of millions of Texans. You need a strong voice there to call B.S. when companies aren’t following through on winterizing or other things that are critical to reliability of the electric system.”
In 2011, Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar co-authored a bill while serving in the state legislature that would have increased the size of the ERCOT board and allowed for more consumer representation. It didn’t pass.
Hegar said the failures displayed in the last week once again bring the significance of representation to the forefront.
“As a result of this extremely unfortunate event where so many people were out of power and now have damage to their homes and their businesses, there needs to be a broader range of representation on the board and to bring those voices as we move forward in trying to decide what we want our electric grid to be,” Hegar said.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.