Prop 16 – PG&E’s Monoploy Protection Act

Funny, I never got a chance to vote on whether I wanted PG&E to monopolize my power options.

Pretending to be a “Tax-Payers Right to Vote Act” PG&E has launched a California initiative (Prop 16) in the June election that will further $olidify their monopoly control, disingenuously calling it a “right to vote act” that raises the bar upon entry, and allows them to u$e divide-and-conquer tactic$ to prevent any local municipality from competing with them. It’s a Trojan Horse operation by the people who are bringing you – whether you like it or not  – “Smart Meters” that aren’t smart or even the slightest bit secure from hacking. “Smart Meters” that can increase their revenue at the touch of a button. From the Fresno Bee:

How badly does PG&E want you and 15 million other Californians as customers?

Not badly enough to roll back its rates — which are among the highest in the nation — by cutting bureaucracy and trimming its chief executive’s $5 million annual compensation.

Not badly enough to do something about the frequent blackouts endured by ratepayers.

But PG&E is willing to spend tens of millions of dollars, skirt fair-play regulations and deceive voters. And it created Proposition 16 in the hope of using a constitutional hammer to nail you down once and for all.

They hate the fact that some cities (Palo Alto famously did this years ago with both electric and water) buy energy in bulk at discounted rates and re-sell it to residents without a markup, so PG&E is sending $25 million to $35 million this year to convince voters to have fewer choices – and if it passes the initiative would require two-thirds of the voters in an area to approve an alternative energy option, raising the threshold for cities and municipalities to compete against them.

It’s already causing Berkeley Leftists to become violent and display their latent racist tendencies!

Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates used physical force yesterday to remove Mark Toney, Executive Director of The Utility Reform Network, who interrupted a PG&;E-sponsored meeting at the David Brower Center to protest Proposition 16, a PG&E-sponsored statewide measure on the June ballot.
(Photos by Luke Thomas)

Why are Leftists always so violent and deranged?


About NotClauswitz

The semi-sprawling adventures of a culturally hegemonic former flat-lander and anti-idiotarian individualist, fleeing the toxic cultural smug emitted by self-satisfied lotus-eating low-land Tesla-driving floppy-hat wearing lizadroid-Leftbat Califorganic eco-tofuistas ~

6 thoughts on “Prop 16 – PG&E’s Monoploy Protection Act

  1. This Proposition is an example of corporate money investing in the initiative process and buying California votes for something that benefits them which they could not otherwise get passed in Sacramento (surprisingly) – and not for the first time the voters will get scammed, AND nobody in the Legislature is speaking up against it because they're bought off already and they have paid-off the Eco-weenies and Unions to get it through.

  2. Our little borough does that – buying the electricity in bulk and then we pay borough hall for it. Something happened recently that raised the cost substantially though – I'm not sure what. I had never heard of this kind of deal before we moved here.

    The lefties are terribly violent. It's something I learned the hard way when we went to DC to counter protest them with Protest Warrior a few years back. They will knock a pregnant lady to the ground – it doesn't matter to them.

  3. IMO PG&E likes regulatory capture, that's how they keep their customers – it benefits them and they just pass it on. The smart-meters are just a new-toy mechanism, like some people play with choo-choo trains and advocate for and light-rail, for PG&E it's smart-meters as electronic tethering. Less work keeping track of the inmates, and they can reduce expensive office staffing levels.

  4. There's a much better ROI from Regulatory Capture than from upgrading their generation or distribution capacity.

    It's just dollars and cents, the way the Game is played in California. Adding more to the regulatory infrastructure to combat this simply makes the problem worse.

Comments are closed.