I took a look at the DTE proposal. There wasn't much detail there but it looks like what Schwartenegger's academics are pushing in California.
I wrote a year ago that economists never learn -- but the proponents of deregulation actually have learned that free market they proposed has flopped. DTE sees this as well. But Schwartenegger and DTE now propose what is called "core and non-core." That is, let the industrial and other giant customers shop, and provide regulated service for the smaller customers.
In my view this is sure to fail, though its failure will not be obvious and the cost of the failure will be felt in the environment and in the pocketbooks of small businesses and residential customers.
DTE listed three alternatives -- completely de-regulate, completely re-regulate, and this core/non-core proposal. I think the choice should be to re-regulate. This is not to argue that regulation has worked well or will work well. But absent a strong move toward local ownership and control -- a movement yet aborning -- regulation is clearly the preferred route, IMHO.
Gene Coyle
I wonder if somebody on PEN-L might have some insight as to whether the "anti-deregulation" move by DTE, our local energy utility, is really anti- or not.
http://www.dteenergy.com/ <http://www.dteenergy.com/>
Charles Brown
