Southern Maryland Online - Serving Calvert County, Charles County, St. Mary's County, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Naval Surface Warfare Center.  Click here to go to the Front Page of somd.com.
 
| Write Us | Help | Sponsors | Classifieds | Employment | Forums | MarketPlace | Calendar | Headlines | Announcements | Weather | More... |

Public Service Commission Catered to Power Companies Rather Than Consumers

[ Return To Senator Roy Dyson's Newsletter ]

Posted on April 21, 2006:

Senator Dyson I could not imagine a state agency (in this case, the Public Service Commission) charged with the responsibility of looking out for the consumer, approving electric rate hikes of 72 percent. But they did.

That is why I voted for Senate Bill 1102 this year. This legislation would have disbanded the present Public Service Commission and replace it with members who would work in the “public’s” best interests. I voted for this bill because I have little confidence in the current PSC.

The “crisis” brought about by the 72 percent rate hike was because of a bill passed in 1999 that approved deregulation of the electric industry. I didn’t think the concept was a good one then and voted against it. Unfortunately, I was proved right.

I was disappointed the governor vetoed Senate Bill 1102 and planned on voting for its override. However, the General Assembly Session ended before we were able to do so. Instead of addressing the issue of the outrageously high energy bills that will be mailed this summer to thousands of Maryland consumers, the PSC stood by its earlier decision to let the rates stay where they were. They caved in to the large energy corporations. That is not what the PSC’s mission is all about.

During the course of the General Assembly Session, the power companies told the legislature that they would "work with us on this issue." Leadership met constantly with members of the power companies. But the power companies' "demands" were not good enough for the consumers we are supposed to protect. They basically waited until the legislature left town to work with the very governor who refused to lead on this during the General Assembly Session.

The Governor, who called himself “a neutral arbiter” or an “honest broker” between the legislature and the power companies during the Session, cared so much about this issue that he missed one vital meeting all together with the power companies, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House. His reason? He didn't know where the meeting was! The meeting, by the way, was held in his office.

For these reasons and more, I did not support "an agreement" on the final day of the General Assembly that was to “solve” this problem. The “agreement” was apparently reached with Constellation Energy/BGE, the House of Delegates and the Governor. Why Constellation Energy/BGE were even at the bargaining table is a question all to its own.

The reason we did not take up this override during the regular 90-day General Assembly Session is because the legislature was told that the "deal" being worked out would fall through if the override were considered. So, time ran out on the 2006 General Assembly Session before we could address the override -- just as I expect the multi-million dollar companies wanted.

There has been talk of a Special Session to work out a better "deal" for the consumers facing exorbitant price increases by these electric conglomerates. I believe a Special Session to address this problem in greater detail, rather than doing it in the final hours of a General Assembly Session is necessary. If we have a Special Session, I will support an arrangement that is consumer-friendly, not conglomerate friendly.

The Governor is blaming the original deregulation bill on the previous administration and yes Governor Glendening did support it. But, the governor has continually neglected to include a few relevant facts about the 1999 deregulation bill. He conveniently forgets to note that the 1999 deregulation bill was supported by every Republican member of the General Assembly - including many who now serve in his cabinet as well as the PSC's chair who as a delegate in 1999 served on the conference committee to ensure the legislation passed.

Also in 1999, Ehrlich supported electric deregulation in the United States Congress.

There is enough blame to go around. Once again, I do not regret my no vote on this legislation. Hopefully we can all come together to work out an arrangement that will benefit all of the consumers of Maryland.

[ Return To Senator Roy Dyson's Newsletter ]

Search: Advanced Search
Search HELP

| Home | Help | Contact Us | About somd.com | Privacy | Advertising | Sponsors | Newsletter |

| What's New | What's Cool | Top Rated | Add A Link | Mod a Link |

| Announcements | Bookstore | Cafe | Calendar | Classifieds | Community |
| Culture | Dating | Dining | Education | Employment | Entertainment | Forums |
| Free E-Mail | Games | Gear! | Government | Guestbook | Health | Marketplace | News |
| Organizations | Photos | Real Estate | Relocation | Sports | Travel | Wiki | Weather | Worship |