In his latest commentary, former mayoral candidate Jeff Kohut writes: “It’s well beyond time for Connecticut government — the people of Connecticut — to take back control of our future, starting with full ownership/control of our essential utilities/resources.”
Citizens/consumers in Connecticut should have expected outrage and action by Connecticut government and the Fourth Estate over the latest utility rate hikes and “bill adjustments” foisted upon Connecticut families and businesses by Connecticut’s electric-utility supply companies, but instead we received gratuitous “explanations”/rationales by both of these protectors-of-society sectors. We didn’t even get an “I feel your pain!”
Why is that? Could it be that both sectors are themselves part of the problem – too connected to the lucrative flow of money from share-ownership in these “safe-investment,” “controlled” monopolies?!
In the wake of the aforementioned, scandalous PROFITEERING and CONSUMER ABUSE (avoiding the use of the euphemistic descriptions/excuse making by the press and politicians) by Connecticut’s state-coddled “public” electric-utility companies (et al.), UI-Avangrid and Eversource, it is long past due for the government of the State of Connecticut to take a big-picture look at, and perform a forward-looking, big-picture analysis of ALL of Connecticut’s “public” utilities (a misnomer for these privately-held, monopolistic, state-statute-skirting/state-sanctioned corporations), in regard to indications for drastic policy changes by state government. Drastic changes are obviously necessary in order to mitigate the past, present, and future destructive economic/socioeconomic effects of Connecticut utility-company corporate profiteering/greed on the Connecticut economy/business and Connecticut families.
In this regard, the whole concept of state-sanctioned, private ownership/for-profit, monopolistic control of the basic necessities of life must be considered.
Considering electric energy first; is it possible for any Connecticut family to function effectively without access to electric power? Of course not! Electricity is a necessary aspect of virtually every aspect of modern, urban life, e.g., food-storage, cooking, heating, bathing, communication, spatial navigation, personal safety…. And it will soon be necessary for transportation for most families. Indeed, electricity in the modern world is as necessary as water.
And, speaking of water; can an urban family exist without connection to the “public” water supply? Not unless they have access to a miracle well that isn’t accessible in any way by the polluted ground water of essentially all urbanized land areas.
And what of the “public” supplies of natural gas that so many households depend upon as the main energy source for cooking, heating, and bathing? Well; the “gas company” is almost always a division of the “electric company” — per UI-Avangrid AND Eversource (the latter also being the “water company” for Aquarian customers…).
And, shouldn’t we speak of the communications suppliers — phone, Internet, cable television? Well; while these might not be as monopolistic as the other suppliers of modern-life essentials, they are nonetheless suppliers of modern-life essentials, and, especially in regard to Internet/cable television, they are, to a large degree, monopolistic, with only two suppliers of “reliable” services in most areas of Connecticut (and only one supplier in some…). Now; how about trying to communicate in a timely way for business or most other modern-urban-life situations without access to a cell phone. It can’t be done. Modern work-life, school-life, family life, and social life requires access to mobile communications….
So; where does this leave families/consumers and state government with respect to considerations regarding “public”-utility policy? Will more regulation work?
The answer to the above question is; more regulation for cellular and cable-TV providers can probably effectively protect consumers. But, much more than just “more-regulation” is indicated in the case of Internet services. State mandates for affordable Internet service in all urban and rural areas are indicated in regard to the latter. In the case of life-sustaining essentials, state ownership — true “public” ownership of electric-energy generation/supply, natural-gas supply, and water resources/supply – is the only logical way for the state/federal government to proceed toward a rational, sustainable future.
Our necessary long-term thinking and planning, given economic and environmental considerations, must be in terms of the creation of a non-grid-dependent/energy-self-sufficient populace/economy, via scale-sized usage of alternative energy equipment at the household level and all other levels of usage. This should have been a governmental/societal goal since the nearly coincident realization/prognostication about fossil-fuel-driven climate change and the first energy (oil) crisis. [(The far-sighted, brilliant (nuclear engineer/author/poet….) POTUS, Jimmy Carter, tried to do just that, but was thwarted by BIG OIL and their first POTUS, Ronald Reagan, over forty years ago….)]
The rationale for the above state/federal policies is not complicated and have precedent. The policy rationale is that years of economy-hobbling public-utility regulation has left Connecticut with a real, shrinking Gross State Economy (our manufacturing and other high-value business sectors that are highly-dependent on electric energy have been fleeing the state), as well as real, shrinking family income and a shrinking population. Regulation does not work — especially when attempted in a political environment controlled by the “investor class,” that reaps large financial rewards from investments in the “no-lose,” highly-lucrative, public-utility investment sector. [(The media needs to do its due-diligence and research the amount of money invested in Connecticut public-utilities by the Connecticut GA membership, Governor/Governor’s Office , and DEEP/PURA officials/staff — as the Connecticut Post (Ken Dixon) did when investigating the Governor’s income recently (albeit without mention of specific investments/public-utility investments…)].
Truly, it makes no economic, social, or moral sense for profit-focused entities to be given control/free-rein over commodities/resources describable as “the basic necessities of life” which are not freely accessible to the people, otherwise, in a rationally-fair, naturally-competitive economic arena.
Some notable examples of successful public (government) ownership of necessary resources (by countries/states/provinces) are: Germany, where a major portion of electric power generation/distribution is currently nationalized in the context of pursuit of full nationalization, including renewable energy generation/distribution; water ownership/distribution is fully nationalized; also in the process of nationalizing natural gas supply/distribution. Sweden, where electricity generation/distribution is fully nationalized. Netherlands, where water ownership/distribution, electricity generation/distribution, and natural gas distribution/supply are fully nationalized. Canada, where electricity generation/distribution is fully owned/controlled by the provincial government in the Province of Quebec, and where the rail transportation system for the entire country is owned and controlled by the Canadian government….
There are many other countries with varying degrees of national/public ownership of all utility sectors, including rail transportation…. There is abundant evidence that Connecticut should consider state/public ownership of essential utilities (water, electricity, natural gas, Internet access) and much stronger control over those utilities that might be considered very important but perhaps not absolutely essential.
And we certainly don’t want an energy future where corporations will own and control the sun, the wind, and the seas…. (Recall the recent Vinyard Wind/Avangrid giant wind-turbine blade failure/breakage off the shore of Nantucket that closed miles of Nantucket beaches –during the height of vacation season – because of dangerous fiberglass debris washing ashore….)
It’s well beyond time for Connecticut government — the people of Connecticut — to take back control of our future, starting with full ownership/control of our essential utilities/resources.
Water is a life requirement. Safe water that is easily accessible makes sense.
Energy of all types to provide heating and cooling, fuel for food preparation, communication equipment and lighting and for reliable, safe, reilient, and sustained sources to power multiple devices.
How have we gotten so far from public oversight that our expenses in CT continue to rise faster than inflation and place us near the top of any comparative list of states?
Where are the opportunities to learn about civic alternatives to consider at this time of climate and environmental concern and creating new and improving procedures, where public oversight by OPEN, ACCOUNTABLE, TRANSPARENT, and HONEST reporting is possible and regular? Time will tell.