Perspective

Fortnightly Magazine - April 1 1998
This full article is only accessible by current license holders. Please login to view the full content.
Don't have a license yet? Click here to sign up for Public Utilities Fortnightly, and gain access to the entire Fortnightly article database online.

Cynicism is nothing to scoff at. Cartoonist Scott Adams of Dilbert( fame has made a good living at it. But cynicism has an Achilles' heel. It reflects a certain lack of objectivity. It may deflect serious debate.

Consider the securitization of electric utility stranded costs. Last summer, after Ken Rose had thrown down the gauntlet against securitization, %n1%n I heard him speak at the 1997 NASUCA mid-year meeting and was struck that his message might make mischief in state regulatory and legislative arenas. In California a recent court challenge against securitization was short-lived. In Pennsylvania, a court challenge is pending against retail competition issues including securitization. Of course, the Fortnightly later published a rebuttal from former California commissioner Dan Fessler, %n2%n but others, %n3%n like Ken Rose, have failed to consider the matter in an entirely objective manner. In my own view, as a former state consumer counsel and NASUCA committee chair, I feel the issue calls for a more exacting analysis: one that confronts such realities as the ban against any taking or confiscation of property without due process.

I believe that utilities, regulators and customers should consider securitization for working out stranded costs if it is properly included in state enabling legislation.

This full article is only accessible by current license holders. Please login to view the full content.
Don't have a license yet? Click here to sign up for Public Utilities Fortnightly, and gain access to the entire Fortnightly article database online.