Energy Reregulation: Letter To DeFazio

Dear Represenative DeFazio,

First, I commend you for introducing legislation to reregulate the energy industry, or H.R. 264. You are using your standing as a U.S. Representative in a liberal district to take a populist stand on an important public policy issue. The combination of deregulation legislation, like the Comprehensive Energy Policy Act of 1992, which you voted against, and the general drift towards a deregulated energy market on a continental scale, mandated by NAFTA, has left the Northwest vulnerable to getting its energy resources raided by the same out-of-state energy concerns who are fleecing California ratepayers. Fortunately for Washington state, a minor miracle happened here in 1997 when the state legislature failed to pass an energy deregulation bill. I call this a minor miracle because most policians here, or anywhere, fall to their collective knees the second the terms "deregulation" and the "free market" are mentioned. I commend you for denouncing the Oregon State Legislature's passage of an energy deregulation bill, which will become effective later this year.

I am sure that you are aware of the deleterious effects the deregulation of essential services like energy have on the poor. Most of the poor are tenants and a deregulated energy market will put an end to leases that include all utilities being covered by rent. Landlords will begin passing on utility bills to their already cash strapped tenants. Having to foot the bill for doubled and tripled utility bills will only force low-income residents in Seattle to either live in the dark and without power or to leave the city at a higher rate than they already are. The latter is the far more likely scenario that will unfold if energy deregulation is brought to its ultimate and dreary conclusion.

Unfortnately, here in Seattle our representation in the U.S. House of Representatives, Jim McDermott, leaves a lot to be desired on the energy deregulation issue. At a recent town hall meeting Representative McDermott said that he was against eneregy deregulation in California when it happened in 1996 and in Washington state when the state legislature attempted to do it in 1997. Representative McDermott characterized energy deregulaion as "crazy." Representative McDermott did not reveal that he voted in favor of energy deregulation in 1992, when he voted yea on the Comprehensive Eneregy Policy Act, which gave states the federally mandated authority to even consider, much less pass, energy deregulation legislation, which is what California did in 1996. Perhaps he was suffering from mental illness in 1992, thus, being robbed of his power of for rational observation voted in favor of energy deregulation. Then in 1996, having regained his mental faculties, Representative McDermott realized what a crazy idea utility deregulation was in California. A better explanation of Representative McDermott's vote on energy deregulation might be the oil industry PAC money he has taken to fund his election campaigns over the years.

Representative McDermott does not appear to be too eager to undo the damage he has helped cause with his vote in favor of energy industry deregulation in 1992. At the above mentioned town hall meeting, Representative McDermott said that it would be difficult to image undoing energy deregulation, as if energy deregulation were the equivalent of an 8.0 earthquake rocking Puget Sound. Please, consider paying Representative McDermott a visit in the near future for the purpose of showing him the text of H.R. 264. Perhaps is will stimulate his imagination.

Best,

Rick Giombetti