What is your Endorsement on Proposition 16

Background

Californians receive their electricity services from three types of providers: Investor-Owned Utilities, Local Publicly Owned Electric Services, or Electric Service Provider.

Investor-Owned Utilities (IOU’s) provide 68 percent of electric services in California. Major electric IOU’s include PG&E, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison. Each service providers by law must provide electricity to their designed area and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) control how they provide electricity and the rates in which they charge their customers for electricity use.

Public Owned Utilities, which provide 24 percent of electric services, work only for local businesses and residents in their area. Public Owned Utilities have their own terms of services because the CPUC don’t have control of them and they choose what their rates are going to be.

Electric Service Providers (ESP) provide 8 percent of electric services. ESP’s provide electricity to consumers that don’t want to receive electricity from IOU’s or Public Owned Utilities either because of a lack of trust or because they live in an area where they don’t provide electricity. Consumers sign a direct contract with ESP’s that provide electricity through their distribution system.

The government is creating more electric public providers and trying to expand its public owned utilities into territories served by IOU’s. In order for this to be achieved, voters in general need to approve of expansion of public owned utilities.

Proposition 16

The issue being argued in this proposition is to require a two-thirds voter approval before local governments can give electricity service to new customers or communities by using the publics funds (taxes paid by the public). Also this would not allow local governments establish a Community Choice Aggregation program (allows government to add more consumers to secure more energy contracts ), use the publics funding to create a plan to become a CCA provider, and expand electric service to new areas.

A Yes vote on propositions 16 would mean that local governments would have to recieve a two-thirds approval before they could begin a new electricity services or expand service to new territories. This will inform Californians what their tax money is used for and how the state government is using their funds to start up new electrical projects if a two-thirds vote is passed. How ever this limits their choices of who serves them their electricity.

A NO vote means that local governments will continue to create proposals to begin or expand electric services by majority of voters or by government decision. This becomes an issue because it leaves the government with complete control of the funds and allows them to spend freely without Californians knowing how it is being consumed. However this allows the government to create new electric services that will lead to future benefits by covering huge areas, which in return means big profits for the state. Also this means more choices for the people, and doesnt allow the electric company (PG&E) to have complete control and allow to raise prices. The reason they would be able to do this is because they would not have any competition and would try to protect their monopoly.

Why is it on the ballot?

This proposition is on the ballot because there is controversy in the issue of spending taxpayer’s money behind their backs. Taxpayer’s, if the proposition is approved, will have the right to vote whether there should be a two-thirds vote approval for the expansion and use of electric services.

Efrain's Vote on Proposition 16

As I can see from the perspectives and arguments that citizen’s make, I would vote no on proposition 16. Already the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) has given $30 million into passing prop 16. This action then pressures the local government into focusing into winning votes. By voting no this ensures low prices on electricity from the side of PG&E, which most homeowners would want. Having new creations of electric service providers would mean that there would be a high increase in competition and the monopoly of PG&E would be defeated. Voting yes would mean that it would be harder to create or expand electric services giving already existing companies to keep their power to raise bills.

There should be a choice where people can choose who they can receive electricity from. Companies like PG&E just want a monopoly.

Efrem's Vote on Prop 16 is....

I vote No on proposition 16 mainly because of the idea of one company being overpowered. From the information gathered, voting Yes would mean having to gain a two-thirds vote before they can consider starting a new electricity program in new territory (community). This means that it will be difficult to start new programs in different areas, which leads to less electric companies since there is not going to be many places to cover.

This is exactly what PG&E wants because that is less competition and this gives enough power for this company to make decisions such as raise prices and people wont be able to do nothing because they are the only electric company that supports that area. The reason why they support Yes is because it will mean more profits for them since they will be the main company and the two-thirds vote doesn't really affect them because in the plus side its less competition.

I believe that No vote will not take away the rights of the people and it will give them more options of companies for electricity, which doesn't give a lot of power to one company and also will allow to expand to other areas and this is one way not only to help certain community but also the economic crisis we are in. If there are more electric companies then there will be more jobs for people and will help the economy run again because more electric fields means more money coming in from different areas. I believe that a No vote will lead to better outcomes for our nation in the future because competition is what our economy needs and creating jobs for people who needs them. This also avoids any future conflicts of a company being overpowered and abusing their power on the community.

Major Donors (Supporters for Yes or No on Prop 16)

Yes on Prop 16:

The biggest supporter for the "Yes" vote is the electric company PG&E, which is Pacific Gas and Electric. They have given $34.5 million to the campaign for the “Yes” vote and are the only contributors to the “yes” campaign. Recently PG&E have announced that they expect to spend around $35 million on the campaign.

In fact, the reason why PG&E is very interested in supporting the “Yes” votes on Prop 16 is because this will help them gain more profits since they will be the main company that the state will rely on in getting their electric service from. They realize that it will bring less competition and the two-thirds vote doesn’t affect them because since the state government is not given the option of starting new electric service in different areas without majority accepting and that will allow them to raise prices or do any changes because they are the dependent company.

No on Prop 16:

There is not a major interest group that supports or donates money towards voting "No" on prop 16 campaign. Most of the support comes from small groups in the community and have low budgets compared to what PG&E has invested on the campaign for the "Yes" vote. How ever the points brought up in this video shows how even with a low budget to work with, community members are able to inform citizens on why to vote "No" for prop 16 and shows them why PG&E manipulates people by rewording words so it sounds better and gains support because it seems like its giving more power to the people, or the tax payers to be more exact.

In this video it shows how a citizen who supports "No" on prop 16 interviews a random individual and shows him how the word choice used by PG& E to describe the proposition as the "Taxpayer's Right to Vote" Act is only used so that it seems it is for the people, when really its for PG&E's interest. In this video its a success because they are able to show the citizen why to vote by making him realize the actual facts.