Who’s protecting us ratepayers?

Regulated monopolies are sinister enterprises, created to grant special privilege.

Posted 3/12/20

The federal lawsuit against corrupt SCANA executives is the latest indictment of regulated monopolies.

Retired SCANA CEO Kevin Marsh and his nuclear VP Stephen Byrne lied to investors and …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Subscribe to continue reading. Already a subscriber? Sign in

Get 50% of all subscriptions for a limited time. Subscribe today.

You can cancel anytime.
 

Please log in to continue

Log in

Who’s protecting us ratepayers?

Regulated monopolies are sinister enterprises, created to grant special privilege.

Posted

The federal lawsuit against corrupt SCANA executives is the latest indictment of regulated monopolies.

Retired SCANA CEO Kevin Marsh and his nuclear VP Stephen Byrne lied to investors and regulators to rob their ratepayers of more than $2 billion.

For devious performances, Marsh got a $7.3 million and Byrne $3.4 million in bonuses.

Now the government wants to claw it back. How much of that will come back to ratepayers is not yet known. You can bet it won’t be much by the time the lawyers get through with it.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is protecting only investors, not us ratepayers.

Ratepayers may get some money back in a $520 million class-action lawsuit settlement.

What’s wrong with this is the regulated monopolies, says energy expert Jim Clarkson.

Utilities make billion-dollar mistakes but are spared the consequences by passing the cost on to captive ratepayers.

The crony capitalism practiced in the utility industry has made regulated companies like SCANA and Dominion Energy into distorted images of real businesses. Yet there are lawmakers who wish to use this to promote green powei carry out forced conservation and line their own campaign coffers.

Disaster is sure to follow.

The myth of utility regulation’s necessity is partially based on the theory that a large provider of electricity with high fixed costs can produce lower costs than many producers.

Then, the theory goes, once competitors are driven out of business, the monopoly company will charge high prices in the absence of competition.

There is no historical example of that scenario ever happening anywhere, anytime.

The whole confused rationalization is just the use of economic lingo to justify sinister government grants of special privilege, Clarkson says.

Monopolies are unnatural enterprises, created by governments, not markets.

If you agree with us, please let your legislators know.

- JerryBellune@ yahoo.com

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here