AT ISSUE: ELECTRICITY

But there were other initiatives aimed at the energy industry, particularly electric utilities, on the ballots. Massachusetts rejected, by a whopping 85 to 15%, a state power authority to take over all gas and electricity generation and transmission; Portland, Oregon, defeated a similar attempt on a municipal scale; and Ohio rejected a "Consumer Council" meddling in utility affairs. "Flat rates" (see below) in Massachusetts and Ohio fared no better.

The Naderites scored their one and only success in Missouri, where they entrapped voters to prohibit charges for electricity based on the cost of construction work in progress. This will affect especially nuclear plants, whose capital costs are higher, but will also make the financing of fossil-fired plants more difficult. The prohibition is an economic absurdity which will backfire, first and foremost, on Missouri consumers. The tactic of the "consumer advocates" is to strangle non-government enterprise (utilities can hardly be called "free" enterprise any more) so that they can then say "You see? Free enterprise can't do the job" and bring about the socialization of the energy industry that was denied them at the ballot box.

The main thrust of this tactic is to raise the price of new construction and therefore of electricity - by endless litigations, delays and other guerilla tactics. It works far better for the saboteurs than the ballot box, where they only lose face, shirt and pants along with the vote.

One such issue, soundly defeated by voters in Massachusetts and Ohio, but bound to come up again in countless debates, is that of "flat rates," which would require utilities to charge the same (or even inverse) rates regardless of the quantity consumed, which is the same general idea as requiring paint to be sold at the same price per ounce, regardless of whether it is supplied to paint a girl's fingernails or Golden Gate Bridge.

There is, however, much more to it, and the subject has been very nicely analyzed in a booklet At Issue: Electricity published by Kaiser Corporation.

Kaiser Corporation? Don't they refine aluminum, using large quantities of electricity? No wonder they are against flat rates, then.

And no wonder that they know more about them, too. Truth to tell, we are sick and tired of the argument that experts are disqualified from debating an issue. It was used to the hilt in the nuclear campaigns and it would disqualify doctors from discussing disease, policemen discussing crime, teachers from discussing education, and nudists from discussing nudism.

We thought Kaiser's booklet was unusually good: fact-laden, cool and simple, illustrated with a multitude of impresssive charts, and to round it out, graphically pleasing. But judge for yourself: It is available free to AtE subscribers by writing to W.F. Nesbit, Kaiser Aluminum Corp., 300 Lakeside Drives 940 Kaiser Bldg., Oakland, CA 94643.