Tag Archives: political parties

Electricity Price Controls

Posted on by
Reply

New Jersey’s newly elected Progressive-Democratic Governor, Mikie Sherrill wants them.

Ms Sherrill used her maiden speech to lay out her plans to ease electric rates. “In short, you are sick of the status quo,” she said, “Well, guess what, guys, so am I.” Guess what: Her proposals are more of the same progressive policies that have fueled higher prices: Subsidies, mandates, and price controls.

Especially those price controls.

Her worst idea is a pause on utility “rate increases or cost recoveries to the extent permitted by law.” This is a price control that will reduce grid investment, including in new supply. ….
If utilities can’t pass on their costs, they will skimp on maintenance. It’s that simple.

Of course, those rate increases or cost recoveries permissions are specified by State laws, and Sherrill and her legislature can alter those laws at will. Her “extent permitted” is disingenuous.

Maintenance skimping is well-known to renters in rent-controlled apartments.

If the provider—landlord or utility (or any other)—can’t recoup his costs as those increase, whether they’re supply costs, regulatory compliance costs, or taxes, he has less money to spend on procuring the items he needs to produce electricity or rental housing or… and especially critically, he has less to spend on simply maintaining what he has. Rental homes/apartments and power generators deteriorate, those residences become badly substandard to the point of uninhabitable, and power generation becomes unreliable. That last is bad in a hot summer, and it’s deadly in a cold winter.

With unreliable power generation, we get rolling blackouts where broad areas in succession see the lights go out; oil, natural gas, and coal generators, all of which depend at bottom on electricity, stop; and electric heating (or cooling) systems stop. On-off cycling from those rolling blackouts, even if in longer intervals than shorter, adds to the wear and tear on the generators, and on the heating and cooling systems, requiring increased maintenance for which those price controls, and rent controls, severely limit the money available to pay.

But never mind. Progressive-Democrats want those price controls because that’s their exercise of political power.

Moderation in the Progressive-Democratic Party

Posted on by
2

Recall how the Progressive-Democratic Party candidate for Virginia governor, Abigail Spanberger, ran on a platform of moderation and left of center politics.

In the first weeks of her office, this is a small subset of what she and her Party allies, who have majorities in both houses of the State’s legislature, have on offer.

  • HB968: Requires the use of ballot scanning machines in elections and explicitly bans hand counts “for any reason or purpose not specifically authorized for by law”
  • HB82: Extends the deadline for receipt of absentee ballots until three days after the election
  • HB111: Bars the state registrar from removing voter registrations except by request of an individual voter or direct reports from the Department of Elections
  • HB965: Commits Virginia to an interstate compact requiring that its electoral votes go to the winner of the national popular vote
  • HB244: Limits and reduces criminal penalties for robbery
  • HB1070: Limits the ability of prosecutors to mention prior convictions of a defendant during trial
  • HB1359: Requires the issuance of a firearm permit for all purchases
  • HB217: Bans the sale, purchase, or transfer of so-called “assault weapons”
  • HB24: Allows state authorities to select which states to share concealed carry reciprocity with instead of all states
  • HB916: Imposes further restrictions on concealed carry permit acquisition
  • HB7: Bars law enforcement officers from wearing facial coverings

This is Party’s conception of “moderate.” Party has gone so far left that it no longer recognizes what moderation is; it has no idea where the center of our nation’s political spectrum is.

Progressive-Democratic Party Lawlessness

Posted on by
Reply

A typical example of this is taking hold in Virginia, a Blue State (for all that it had a successful Republican governor for one term) going even Bluer. As soon as the State’s Progressive-Democrat governor, Abigail Spanberger, took office, her Party cronies, who have majorities in both houses of the State legislature, have begun pushing laws that functionally excuse violent criminals.

House Bill 863 includes proposals to effectively eliminate minimum sentencing for manslaughter, rape, possession and distribution of child pornography, assaulting a law enforcement officer, and other repeat violent felonies.

This is how Progressive-Democrats act out their disrespect for law and for law enforcement.

What’s on tap for the State’s next legislative session? Removing jail terms altogether and sending social workers to talk to rapists about inappropriate behavior toward women? Sending pediatricians to talk to child pornographers about how to better interact with children? Defund all of the State’s police departments—after all, if there are no police, there can be no assaults on police? Eliminating the crime of manslaughter, that being just the unfortunate outcome of a loud argument?

Progressive-Democrat Delegate Rae Cousins, the bill’s sponsor, has rationalized his bill:

This change would give the experienced judges in our communities more discretion to make decisions based on the unique facts of each case.

Okay. How about, instead, giving experienced judges more discretion to make decisions based on the unique facts of each case by removing the upper bounds of sentencing for these crimes while keeping the lower bounds?

What’s the Deal with Little Liam?

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that little Liam Ramos was seized and held by ICE agents a few days ago. Or at least that’s the narrative an intrinsically dishonest “news” media has been peddling. Some facts, though, are coming to light despite the best efforts of the core of that guild, courtesy of some few news writers who have different ideas regarding reporting news.

The Department of Homeland Security said ICE was conducting an operation to arrest Liam’s father, who the department said was in the country illegally, when the father fled and left Liam alone in a vehicle.

This is a little boy’s father abandoning his son in his own attempt to escape to continue violating US laws.

And

Agency spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said an officer stayed with Liam while others apprehended his father.

Making sure the little boy wasn’t just left to wander.

Then,

Officers made several attempts to get his mother, who was inside the house, to take custody of him, saying she wouldn’t be detained if she did so, McLaughlin said.

Several attempts. Because the little boy’s mother was more worried about her own neck than she was about her son. Today, both the little boy and the man who may be his biological father but who has in no way acted in that role are being held in a Texas facility that’s set up to handle both adults and children. The boy is there because, ultimately, his biological mother refused to take him, despite those repeated ICE attempts.

Keep in mind that ICE is the agency that took care of a little boy who’d just been deserted by his parents and which a leading Minnesota candidate for the US Senate, along with incumbent Congressional Progressive-Democrats, want to completely defund and abolish.

This is how little Progressive-Democrats and their Leftist supporters—all of whom have become mainstream left, no longer being an extremist fringe—care about facts. This is how little those folks care about a little boy, all of five years old, mind you, who was deserted by his parents.

Wrong Answer

Posted on by
Reply

House and auto insurers’ profits and the rate increases they charge policy holders are coming under political scrutiny, but politicians’ proposed solutions are badly counterproductive.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) this month became the latest state lawmaker to advocate profits caps on insurers, to tackle escalating home- and “crushingly expensive” auto-insurance rates.
Her plan would require home insurers with “outsized profit margins” to lower or justify their rates, and review the profits threshold at which auto-insurers are required to refund customers.
Also this month, lawmakers in states including Oklahoma proposed profit caps targeting insurance.

No.

Government definitions of “outsized profit margins” have nothing to do with business imperatives or what happens in a free market. Those definitions serve only the personal political ambitions of the politicians doing the defining, and they’ll vary across politicians and their political parties.

Beyond that, all price caps do is limit the availability of the product being capped—whether oil and natural gas and gasoline, rental housing availability and quality…or insurance policies. The limit on supply, too, hurts those on the lower economic rungs of our economy first and hardest.

Requiring insurers to justify their rates and the profit levels at which policy holder refunds are paid is a good idea, but government is the wrong crowd that must be satisfied.

Better simply to require insurers to disclose their profit margins and the basis on which they arrive at their definitions of profit. Their policy rates already are publicly available; making both sides of that process public would let the public more effectively shop for policies that suit their individual needs.

Doing that within an increasingly deregulated (not unregulated) insurance market environment would move the industry closer to a truly competitive market within which insurers would reap fair profits and insurees would pay fair premium amounts for the policies they want. And the Critical Item: “fair” would be defined within that competitive market by those market participants, not by any government.