return to tranceaddict tranceaddict Forums Archive > Other > Political Discussion / Debate

Pages: [1] 2 3 
Bush and the Blackouts
View this Thread in Original format
Renegade
Bush immediately after the power-cuts:

quote:
President Bush said Friday the massive blackout that struck the Northeast and upper Midwest -- as well as parts of Canada -- is a "wake-up call" to modernize the electricity system.

[...]

Bush, taking questions from reporters while visiting the Santa Monica Mountains north of Los Angeles, described the delivery system as "old and antiquated"

"This is an indication that we need to modernize the electricity grid," said Bush, who repeated his call for lawmakers to pass a broad energy bill.


http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS...kout/index.html

Two days later:

quote:
The Bush administration intends to side with a Senate Republican attempt to freeze a disputed regulatory proposal meant to strengthen the nation's aging power transmission system, which was blamed in last week's massive blackout, a senior administration official said yesterday.


Well, that's quite a quick change in rhetoric. Only took two days to shift from "repeating his call for lawmakers to pass a broad energy bill" to attempting to freeze the passage of an energy proposal in the senate. Why would they want to freeze these proposals intended to "modernize the electricity grid" as Bush put it?

quote:
"The two villains are the utilities and the Congress," said Bill Richardson, who as energy secretary from 1998 to 2000 advocated free-market reforms. "The utilities don't want to change their monopoly status. And there are some strong lobbies that said to Congress, 'Don't vote for this legislation to modernize utilities because they aren't good for us.' "

[...]

With Congress's return, the battle resumes, pitting two sides in a divided electric-power industry backed by millions of dollars in lobbying and campaign contributions, which have succeeded until now in blocking passage of any energy legislation.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2003Aug16.html

So it's the lobbiers and campaign contributers helping prevent the passage of this bill then is it? Which companies would that include then?

quote:
The top two executives of FirstEnergy Corp. [...] are key financial supporters of President Bush, according to campaign records.

H. Peter Burg, chairman and chief executive, was one of three hosts of a $600,000 fundraiser for Bush's reelection campaign in Akron, Ohio, on June 30. Vice President Cheney was the featured speaker.

Anthony J. Alexander, FirstEnergy's president and chief operating officer, was a "Pioneer" for Bush's last campaign, meaning he raised at least $100,000. Alexander also contributed $100,000 to Bush's inaugural committee.

The Energy Department has dispatched teams of investigators to the Midwest and Northeast. Democrats have questioned whether Bush's administration coddled electric companies because of his long personal ties to the energy industry. FirstEnergy's ties could increase Capitol Hill scrutiny of the White House handling of the blackout aftermath.

Bush's campaign had no comment.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2003Aug18.html

Oh dear. Would it be worth pointing out, here, that FirstEnergy are under investiagtion for their part in the blackouts?:

quote:
The investigative arm of Congress is looking into the federal government's handling of problems at a nuclear plant owned by FirstEnergy -- the Ohio-based utility at the center of the investigation into last week's blackout.

[...]

The request came after criticism of the NRC's handling of the Davis-Besse plant owned by FirstEnergy Corp., the Akron based electric conglomerate that owns four of the five Ohio power lines that tripped, a major failure during last week's blackout.

Wells said the GAO investigation would look at "how the NRC is addressing these major issues and the adequacy of the NRC inspection process with respect to the Davis-Besse plant."


http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/18/bl...firstenergy.ap/

Now FirstEnergy would have a good reason to oppose the FERC proposal as it "shift(s) authority away from [...] major electric utilities" and is likely to infringe upon "their monopoly status" in the state of Ohio (as they currently own 4 of the 5 stations there). So what's the point of all this? The point is as follows:

The Republicans have monetary links to FirstEnergy, a company under investigation for its part in the recent US blackouts. Two days after saying defiantly that the power grid was in need of an overhaul and that legislation needed to be passed to overhaul it, the Republicans find themselves blocking an energy proposal in the senate - that would drastically modernize the system - which would also take authority away from companies such as FirstEnergy in "control[ing] the flow of power over state lines and oversee[ing] the upgrade of the transmission system" and challenge their virtual monopoly in the state of Ohio and elsewhere. This same company is under investigation for their part in the blackouts and questions are being raised about the US government's handling of the problems at these plants, dating back over a period of more than 18 months.

Could the scope of the blackouts have been minimised without Bush's connections to the big energy companies (would FirstEnergy have been forced to address these problems had they not been major GOP contributers)? Is Bush backing away from his initial "pro-modernization" stance on the insistance of companies like FirstEnergy? Could this errupt into another Enron type scandal for Bush and the Republican party at some point in the future?

Thoughts?

Edited to add:

Further evidence of FirstEnergy's role in the blackouts and the likelihood that the entire incident was actually triggered by faulty transmission lines owned by that company:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4140-2003Aug16.html
Yoepus
no one cares.. stop trying to make up stuff.
TuanAnh213
hey renegade just curious...you sound so sure of yourself in yoru posts...say you thrown into the presidential seat do you think you can do a better job than bush?
PeacefulWarrior
Bush's 2000 primary campaign took in a record $101 million, and officials project that this number will almost double in 2004. Central to Bush's success have been his "Pioneers," supporters who pledge to raise at least $100,000 in hard money for his primary bid.

Recently, through a lawsuit that challenged the new federal campaign- finance law filed by Texans for Public Justice, it had been discovered that there had been 538 of these so called "Pioneers", enough, if each fulfilled their pledge to account for more than half of Bush's campaign money. About 170 of these 538 Pioneers were business owners, presidents, or CEOs, including those of Enron, Dynegy, Staples, Shell, Occidental Chemical, Edison Electric, ect. (not sure about First Energy, although it's possible)

It's really no surprise then that Bush gives very strong support to the suggestions of these men. Infact, Bush's energy policy closely mirrors the demands made by "energy Pioneer" lobbyists. Although it has yet to pass Congress, MBNAs (a big credit card company in the US) project to try to pass a bill to make personal-bankruptcy laws much harder to enact has also enjoyed Bush's strong support. Does it surprise you then that Charles Cawley, a "Pioneer" and CEO of MBNA, gave Bush more than $240,000.

Is our democracy for sale to the highest bidder?

(source: Harper's Sept. 2003)
rizen
quote:
Originally posted by PeacefulWarrior
Is our democracy for sale to the highest bidder?
yes

let's not forget bush didnt want to help california during our energy crisis :mad:
daffodil
quote:
Originally posted by TuanAnh213
hey renegade just curious...you sound so sure of yourself in yoru posts...say you thrown into the presidential seat do you think you can do a better job than bush?


criticism and evaluation of political officials is not and should not be restricted to those capable of the job. public opinion and good investigative reporting (think woodward and bernstein with watergate) hold our politicians accountable for their actions and decisions, which is about the only thing keeping them from become term-elected dictators. if no one discusses what they due, regardless of how valid or invalid the discussion, politicians have no one and nothing to answer to.
fuct4less
[sarcasm] its soooooooo great to know that our country is in the good hands of our beloved corporate gods[/sarcasm]
DrUg_Tit0
quote:
Originally posted by Yoepus
no one cares.. stop trying to make up stuff.


Just because this post doesn't support your point of view doesn't mean that noone cares. And in case it is made up, you are free to expose the lie, but back up your claims.
Shakka
quote:
Originally posted by rizen
yes

let's not forget bush didnt want to help california during our energy crisis :mad:


Niether did Grey Davis. Too many fruits and nuts in California.:rolleyes:
LiquidX
quote:
Originally posted by Yoepus
no one cares.. stop trying to make up stuff.


All the people on the NORTHEAST cares!!!!!!!!!. And I heard that the same states are still vulnerable for more upcoming blackouts.

Renegade, great post, big props.. I actually read it, not like some peeps that just seem to post without even reading it. Everything done with facts and proofs, very well done.

What can I say.. everything thought about Bush and his friends, it dont surprise me at all.

ProDiGaL
quote:
Originally posted by Yoepus
no one cares.. stop trying to make up stuff.

"Few things are harder to put up with than a good example."
- Mark Twain (1835-1910)
Renegade
quote:
Originally posted by Yoepus
no one cares.. stop trying to make up stuff.


Ah Yoepus my old friend, welcome back. :cool:

You're welcome to think what you want obviously, but I'm just wondering why you thought I was making stuff up when every issue I raised was backed up by an article from a reputable news company? Which bits in particular do you think I made up?

quote:
hey renegade just curious...you sound so sure of yourself in yoru posts...say you thrown into the presidential seat do you think you can do a better job than bush?


Yes.

And take note of what daffodil said, because he pretty much hit the nail on the head there - political systems are dependant on criticism and scrutiny to evolve. If everyone just went around saying "things are fine" instead of objectively scrutinising the system, then we would be living in the same conditions we were 12,000 years ago. There would be no democracy, no liberty, no human rights or any other of the things that make up the political system you currently take for granted - the only reason they exist is because people over the ages have had the courage to say: "things could be better".
CLICK TO RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE
Pages: [1] 2 3 
Privacy Statement