Electric reform II
Although it may seem as though nothing is happening on electric reform, it's not yet on the back burner....
“Advocates of placing a windfall profits tax on energy companies (are)… pressuring a reluctant General Assembly into adopting their proposal.” (NHR, by Gregory B. Hladky)
Speaker Jim Amann doesn’t agree with the windfall profits tax. He says, “While sounding attractive in the short term, this approach could have a disastrous impact on our costs and energy supply in the future.” (CGA website)
On the other hand, State Rep. Vickie Nardello is a leading advocate for a “windfall profits tax” on Connecticut electric utilities. She says it’s "the only thing you could do immediately to help consumers." (WRA, Dec 7, 2006)
But is it? After all, in April 2006 she seemed to suggest that cutting the electric tax made sense. When the General Assembly deliberated an amendment (LCO 3769) to cut the electric tax, she said "… I will have to vote against this because I do believe that further on in this particular Session (2006), we are going to get the opportunity to address this issue, other issues that will turn the ship around, as I would put it, going forward and change things for our businesses and for our residential customers" (cga.ct.gov, April 11, 2006).
It seems to me as though she opposed cutting the electric tax out of a desire for comprehensive reform… something I can understand. Apparently though, she doesn't believe that cutting electric taxes would provide immediate relief to you and me.
I disagree. I believe doing this could still give some immediate relief to consumers.
Regardless, by the time this session is done in June, I just hope we aren’t sitting in the same boat we were sitting in last year… more empty promises of reform from another do-nothing legislature.
Tim White
9 comments:
Rep. Nardello can’t seem to think outside the box of “more taxes": the electric tax on consumers last year, and imposing a profits tax this year which will only be passed on to consumers.
Isn't Rep. Nardello the Vice-Chair of the legislature's Energy Committee? That makes her one of the top energy policy makers in Hartford.
What did her leadership team do for electric reform last year? Nothing. What have they done so far in this session? More of nothing. And we keep paying some of the highest electric bills in the nation.
The Democrats in Hartford can;t screw in a light bulb unless they get to tax it first
To paraphrase Winston Churchill in writing about one of his predecessors --
"If you wanted nothing done, Vickie Nardello was the best one for the task. There was no equal to her."
I like Vickie and I am very glad she is representing me. She works hard and keeps up with the issues.
The State is not going to do anything to regulate or reduce costs of the utilities, UTC, CL&P and UI are the largest employers. What will reduce rates is reduced consumption. The basic law of supply and demand. Use less and we will pay less. Without any effort every household could reduce electrical demand by 10% literally overnight. If that happened the utility folks would be scared. It has nothing to do with our State reps, because they all pay politics and really do not care about the average folks.
Why does she get elected?
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." (Lincoln)
Plus she's been lucky that national issues have drawn more of her party's voters. I doubt she'd survive an election if only State Rep (and her record) were on the ballot.
all that is bs. If you can do better than run and show the rest of the world how much of an awesome candidate you are-other wise clam up
Lincoln's observation is full of BS ?
I see that our state rep, Vickie Nardello, held public office hours in Prospect four weeks ago on March 24. But she hasn't held any office hours in Cheshire or Bethany. http://www.cga.ct.gov/hdo/089/pr089.html
Doesn't she want to hear our concerns too? Or does she only talk to Cheshire and Bethany voters when she's running for re-election?
Post a Comment