Daily Archives: 5 November 2026

Wealth Redistribution as a Condition for Doing Business

Posted on by
Reply

The Progressive-Democrat Abigail Spanberger ran as a centrist moderate for, and won, the governorship of Virginia. Then, in typical Progressive-Democrat duplicity, she began governing from the Far Left. (In truth, it’s also understandable and predictable, since the Far Left has become the Party’s center.) Spanberger’s latest example is her demand for NextEra and Dominion Energy to agree to redistribute their wealth as a condition for approving their proposed merger. The one is the world’s largest solar and wind producer and the other is a major electricity utility, and their merger would provide large synergies while spurring innovation.

Spanberger’s conditions:

  • freeze residential base electric rates for six years,
  • provide ratepayers a $29 monthly “credit” for four years
  • agree not to cut off customers who don’t pay their bills “due to financial hardship,” however that is defined
  • provide discounted rates to customers with electric vehicles and heat pumps
  • remove the cap on the state’s net-metering program

These, of course, eliminate those synergies of combination by forcing the new company to pay out all of those otherwise realizable cost reductions to those entities favored by the Progressive-Democrat, instead of committing those cost reductions to innovation and real future benefits to customers.

There is an obvious solution to Spanberger’s extremist demands: NextEra and Dominion should go through with the merger and go out from Virginia altogether. Since Spanberger isn’t serious about business in Virginia, there’s no reason for businesses to be serious about Virginia.

Time to Start Swatting Down Recalcitrant Judges

Posted on by
Reply

The house editorial opened with this:

This is getting old. Three times in the past decade the Supreme Court has vindicated religious schools excluded from state programs. Colorado still needs a remedial lesson.

The latest misbehavior is the State’s—through those State judges who think they’re above Federal law—position that Supreme Court rulings don’t apply to it, or them.  The state’s “universal” pre-K plan lets religious schools participate only if they agree to enroll families who oppose them on sex and gender.

The Supreme Court has an opportunity to deliver that lesson via St Mary Catholic Parish v Roy. Colorado’s pre-school program

pays for 15 hours of preschool a week, about $6,300 a year. Providers are subject to what the state calls “equal-opportunity requirements,” including enrollment without regard to religious affiliation, gender identity or sexual orientation. Two Catholic parishes, two parents, and the Denver archdiocese argue they’re being denied funds “solely on account of their religious exercise.”

Colorado’s argument that

it doesn’t target religion explicitly. Its program has included “more than forty faith-based providers,” and schools “may continue to teach and shape their curricula according to their faith.”

Nonsense. It doesn’t matter that the State is applying its demand for religious State-defined neutrality to all belief systems: it’s applying that demand and denying each of those systems, Catholicism in the present case, their right to select their students based on adherence to their religious strictures.

It’s time the Court reinforced the lesson with several sharp raps on the State judges’ knuckles with a ruler.