Electricity More Expensive for Tennesseans Thanks to Democrats
Posted by: Blue Collar Muse in 2008 election season, Blogroll, Business, Common Sense, Economics, Energy, Family, Liberal, Nashville Nuggets, Tennesee Tips, The EconomyThe invaluable Michael Silence gets the hat tip this morning! He links to a Knoxville News Sentinel story reporting that, effective October 1st, TVA is increasing rates. Remember this post when you vote this November!
‘20%: TVA Board Approves Largest Rate Hike in Decades’ not only tells us the hike is coming, it tells us what rising TVA expense is behind it.
Customers can expect a 20 percent rate increase on their October electric bills — the largest jump in more than 30 years.
TVA President and CEO Tom Kilgore announced a fuel adjustment rate increase of 17 percent at the agency’s board of director’s meeting this morning at its Knoxville headquarters. The increase will go into effect Oct. 1. The board also approved an additional 3 percent base rate increase, also to take take effect Oct. 1.
TVA’s quarterly fuel adjustment, a provision approved by the board of directors in 2003, passes along fluctuations in the price of coal, natural gas and other fuels to its customers.
When fuels cost more, it costs more to produce electricity with them. Which political party and its allies have consistently, over decades, refused to implement Energy policies that work to keep energy prices low? Which political party and its allies have abandoned Washington, DC for a 5 week vacation instead of working to reduce the price of Energy? Which political party and its allies are on record as desiring high Energy prices? If you answered Democrats, you get the prize!
As they say on late-night commercials, “But wait, there’s more!” I’d say this fell into the arena of “unintended consequences” for the Democrats and their Energy policy. However, if they are not sharp enough to have seen this sort of thing coming, then they aren’t smart enough to trust with taking out the trash. Anyone opposing their strategies has been warning about exactly this sort of thing for years. What thing?
KNS reports there were people at the TVA hearing that spoke in opposition to the increase. Among them was
Bobby Glenn, general manager of a Panasonic electronics facility at Forks of the River Industrial Park in East Knox County, said a recent pattern of increases in electric rates threaten the company’s continued local presence. Three Panasonic facilities employ 300 people. Glenn manages an aluminum foil division that operates a high voltage electroplating operation that supplies process foil for use in capacitors produced in Knoxville and at other plants worldwide.
Previous base rate and fuel-related increases this year have already added $3 million per year to the company’s electricity costs, Glenn said, making the plant less competitive among the Japanese company’s international operations.
“We, as an internationally headquartered company, have to give our top management some view of the future operational costs and profitability at this location, but TVA has not put forth a plan that gives a road map for the future or that gives us any hope that the situation will ever change,” Glen said at the hearing.
The Democrats badly flawed Energy policy now threatens industry and employment in addition to hammering consumer’s pocketbooks. A company acknowledges that higher energy costs may force relocation. That means lost jobs, wages, taxes and a host of other consequences that impact “the little guy”; the very people Democrats claim to be defending.
What is it that Democrats expect of the real world? Is TVA supposed to run in the red and lose money when their costs for producing energy skyrocket? They cannot continue to produce power indefinitely if they lose money. Is Business supposed to run in the red and lose money when their costs for consuming energy skyrocket? They cannot continue to produce goods and services indefinitely if they lose money. Are consumers supposed to simply smile and live with choosing between heating their homes and feeding their families as their costs for consuming energy skyrocket?
The media is filled with stories about Consumers, at every level and in every sector, dealing with the problems high energy prices produce. It’s time for that same media to add the ‘Why’ and the “Who’ of that debate to the other 3′Ws’. Why does Energy cost so much? Who is preventing common sense, sound Economic principles from being applied to the matter? It’s not an effect without an easily identifiable cause. Democrats won’t drill. Democrats won’t debate. Democrats just shill. They won’t even legislate. And you and I are left to pick up the pieces.
Lost in all of this is another question that also needs asking. When some common sense and practical Economics are finally brought to bear on the discussion and Energy prices come back down, will the TVA immediately lower their prices or will they operate under governmental practices which resemble nothing so much as the Ferengi 1st Law of Acquisition, “Once you have their money, you never give it back!”?
Blue Collar Muse
SEE ALSO:
TVA: Worth the Price? at Citizen NetMom
Popularity: 21% [?]
Tags: #Don't Go Movement, Americans for Prosperity, Democrats, Electricity Bill, Energy Policy, Rate Hike, TVA
Entries (RSS)
August 20th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Which party is stuck on importing more oil, burning more coal, and advocating for more nuclear power (though we don’t know what to do with the tremendously hazardous waste), all the while ignoring and/or mocking any initiative for better sources or efficiency? Keep burying our heads in the sand, and we will be in a lot more trouble than more expensive energy.
August 20th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
I dont know man. Bush and the Republicans had carte blanche for SIX years. Bush got every single thing he wanted except social security reform.
The R’s were in control. This didnt happen in one year.
Yes, we need government to ease restrictions in almost every market, but the R’s 6 years + the D’s 2 years did.
August 20th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Any sensible person, right or left, can easily determine that any means of generating more affordable energy is the course of action needed. We need more energy. We can’t just conserve our way out of this. I don’t think there is anyone Right-of-Center suggesting that we not invest in renewable energy. We just don’t want the Federal Government doing it for us.
There seems to be a mantra from many that we can’t drill our way out of this problem. I agree. But drilling will certainly lessen the impact of higher oil prices immediately until we can appropriately develop the technology, thru private investments, in solar, wind, nuclear and coal-to-oil technology.
Its like driving across the country in your Chevy Malibu and realizing that you are almost out of gas. And your buddy in the back seat says, “You can’t continue to burn fossil fuels or we’ll never get off of foreign oil”. “Well,” you reply, “my car takes gas, which is made from fossil fuels, so unless you have a hydrogen or fully electric car that I can have, I am stopping for gas.” Your buddy, forceful as ever says, “But you can’t… you’re ruining the environment”. “Ok”, you reply, “get out and walk then”. They just don’t get it.
It’s a great idea to stop burning fossil fuels, yet another to have an alternative. We currently don’t have an alternative. Battery, Solar and Hydrogen cars just don’t exist (at least not affordably). So for now, we will need to continue to burn fossil fuels until there IS an alternative. In the mean time, if we don’t drill for more oil, the price will rise so drastically as to bankrupt our economy and really hurt the poor.
Apparently the French have figured out what to do with the nuclear waste created by their nuclear power plants… I’m sure we can at least re-create if not improve upon something the French have figured out.
August 20th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Jerry,
Thanks for stopping by to comment. I always appreciate folks advocating for the other side of the questions asked and answered here.
I think perhaps you may be mistaken, or at least stuck in the past with your analysis of the situation.
The GOP cannot be accused of wanting to import more oil when they are the ones arguing for production of more domestic oil so that we reduce imports. If I’m missing something there, please illuminate.
It’s quite possible that the GOP would support using more coal, at least in the short term. Presumably your objection to that is the pollution. Still, decades of technology mean the amount of pollution released by such use is a mere fraction of what it used to be. Pollution from coal is becoming more and more of a non-starter. It is still a proven, inexpensive energy source while we transition. Further, your accusation that the GOP refuses to consider better or more efficient sources of energy is simply not true.
It was W in a SOTU address several years ago that announced funding for Hydrogen Cars. The GOP today is all about calling for alternative and more efficient Energy sources. The challenge, which the Left completely ignores, is what to do in the interim between now and the time we develop those sources. Refusing to utilize proven methods of production of inexpensive (and increasingly cleaner) Energy by tapping our own oil reserves means that Democrats argue for High Energy Prices until we develop alternatives. That could take years and cost billions. The GOP’s position is not to avoid developing alternatives. The GOP argues for exploiting our own resources to create Low Energy Prices while we develop alternatives. That is a superior strategy in that it provides the best of both worlds. We keep costs low and develop alternatives. How can that be a bad thing?
Nuclear? It’s true that there is a problem with disposing of waste. I’m not tied to it as an option but neither am I opposed to it. Dealing with the waste issue is simply another question to be asked in the process to develop alternative fuels. Answering the question is the same as answering “How will we create an infrastructure for electric cars that is national in scope and sufficient to meet the needs of 100 million+ vehicles?” when considering the alternative of electric cars. It’s neither an endorsement of or rejection of the energy source. It’s a practical evaluation of the merits of individual sources of Energy. It is quite possible the inability to effectively address the question means this or that energy source fails to make the cut. But if you’re going to fault me for at least exploring the option, I’ll take the criticism and note that you won’t even look at it yet you’re the one who says you’re for alternatives? Sounds a bit inconsistent.
In any event, I think you raise some good points. I’ve tried to address them from my perspective. I hope you come back and ask good and tough questions in the future. The one thing Truth should never be afraid of is a good question.
Ken
August 20th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
@Chuck,
You’re absolutely correct that the GOP had from 2000-2006 in control of the White House and the Congress. That and $5 and I can get a cup of burnt coffee at Starbucks (actually, I like SB - I’m being silly).
At issue is not what party was in the majority and when. At issue is what they were able to accomplish while in the majority. My point is not limited to 2000-2006. For 30 years the GOP has been trying to increase domestic production and refining capabilities. This effort predates the Reagan Administration.
The reason it has been unsuccessful is not because of GOP failure to try. It is because, as most people appreciate, it takes a bi-partisan effort to get most anything done in DC. And for 30 years, the Democrats have refused to participate in any discussion that involved increasing domestic drilling or refining. Zero, Zip, Nada, Nothing! It is only in the last month, with the Don’t Go Movement leading the way online and the Guerilla Congress staring down Pelosi and House Democrats that the Left is being forced to acknowledge the issue and answer some hard questions.
Summary? They’ve ignored and obfuscated on this issue until they were forced into the debate. And it may cost them dearly. But any objective analysis of the issue of drilling and domestic energy cannot even consider laying the blame for our current state at the feet of the GOP. It is 100% Democratic in sowing, maturation and now reaping. No way around it …
Ken
August 20th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Wow, a liberal and conservative disagreeing without insulting each other! I will have to visit here more often.
George Bush brought up the hydrogen car, imo, because he knew it would never happen. We are decades away from making that possible, and he threw it out there knowing he’d never have to do anything about it. My point is that for the past 7 yrs, the govt has sat on its hands and done close to nothing to get us off oil. They’ve done nothing to get us even close to having something to build toward. New drilling gets us nothing for many years, yet it’s held up as the solution.
In other words, the blame is not with the Democrats. Hopefully, Obama will do something (anything!) on this problem.
August 20th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
@Jerry,
Hehehe … I’m not really into the insulting those I disagree with meme. I’ve done it and I’m likely to do it again at some point. But I don’t live for it and try to avoid it. It’s pointless.
It’s OK to opine that you know what was in W’s heart when he suggested the Hydrogen car. As long as you don’t insist that I accept your opinion of another man’s motivations as factual and, therefore, valid for the debate at hand. Opinion in general, and opinion about inner motivations in particular, are too subjective to enter into evidence.
It may be so that the government as currently constituted has done little to wean us from oil. But the same can be said of government for the last 50 years. I don’t recall, for example, either the Carter or the Clinton administrations proposing bold, new alternative energy initiatives.
Other than nuclear, which we backed away from for both safety and environmental reasons, there hasn’t been much of a serious push by either party for development of alternative energy sources. Until now.
I’m unclear why the Left does not welcome the Right’s willingness to explore all manner of alternatives. The GOP and other Right of Center groups are all on record as supporting investing in alternative energy development. Why do so many on the Left continue to ignore and/or deny that? And why do they point fingers at the Right’s approach to the table of alternative energy as if they had been there all along fighting for Wind and Solar and Water and other forms. Neither side seriously pursued it until oil sprinted north of $125 a barrel. Then we all got Energy religion!
But the Right less so. Because they have always remembered the lessons learned in 1973 and the OPEC induced gas shortage. Since that time we have always been about a minimum threshold of Energy Independence regardless of how that is accomplished. For years, that Independence would have taken the form of more drilling for oil because that’s all that would have accomplished the task. No one, Democrat or Republican, would have signed on to billions in R&D for alternatives when there was inexpensive, abundant oil.
Fast forward 35 years and the conditions are quite different. We’re short on oil now for very different reasons than we were then. Different causes require different solutions. Everyone agrees that International Demand is driving the price of oil up or at least keeping it volatile.
Democrats have blocked our ability to produce oil and refine gasoline in this country almost since the ‘73 Oil Embargo. Thus, we have no way to immediately increase Domestic Supply to meet the price challenges on Foreign Supply brought about by recent increases in Foreign Demand.
We now have a choice. We can either invest in what we know works (increase drilling even though it may take a while to provide an impact) or invest in what we hope will work (alternative R&D even though it may take a while to provide an impact). Democrats reject the proven path of drilling in favor of the far less sure road of R&D in new technology - not to mention any new infrastructure needed to support any successful tech we may develop. But they reject drilling based on the premise it will take too long? If you want to rally around that premise, have at it, but don’t expect to be taken seriously.
The Right’s proposed solution is to do both. Drill so we have cheap energy while we pursue R&D. The Left, for reasons which escape me, cannot see the sense in that approach and insists on rejecting drilling depending totally on the promise of R&D. Without a doubt, that will eventually produce inexpensive energy - someday. No one knows when. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do the R&D. We just need to decide what to do in the meantime. Democratic insistence on no drilling just means they favor expensive energy for the nation until R&D pays off. But they don’t know when that will be.
Given the two solutions, the best of all possible worlds, regardless of how we got here, is the GOP solution. The Right, beholden to few, can effectively push that agenda and use it to their political advantage as well. The Left, beholden to environmentalists and Green industry and all the rest of their coalition of minority views, will have a far harder job of convincing their acolytes of the wisdom of drilling while developing. That puts them behind a political 8-ball where they can’t be seen as doing the right and common sense thing for the body politic because of political considerations.
That’s not going to play well in the Peorias. My hope is it will cost the Left politically in November. The Left got us into this mess and they should have to pay for their miscalculations. Denying it and pointing fingers at others, while effective when dealing with the base, will not work with the much more sophisticated electorate standing in the Middle and wondering which way to break.
Ken
August 21st, 2008 at 8:05 am
[…] Remember this post when you vote this November! ???20%: TVA Board Approves Largest Rate Hike http://conservablogs.com/bluecollarmuse/2008/08/20/electricity-more-expensive-for-tennesseans-thanks…Parents of US student at centre of Kercher murder inquiry vow to … - IndependentBy Peter Popham in […]