You know, I thought I'd seen just about everything there was to see in the stable of recycled bad energy policy ideas fluffed up and re-introduced as the solution to today's energy "problems."
But wait... there's always more to see!
But wait... there's always more to see!
Asked if the federal government needed to preempt the states to overcome opposition to the siting of transmission lines, Manchin said the solution is to “follow the money.”
“If the utility companies would share some of the revenue [resulting from] that project with the states and counties they go through, you’d cure that problem like that,” he said.
Oh, c'mon, Joe! You already know how this goes... or are you developing memory issues?
Back in 2009, when he was Governor of West Virginia, Joe Manchin came up with the idea of a "transmission tax" levied on high-voltage lines built through the state. In exchange for Joe directing the PSC to approve the controversial TrAIL and PATH electric transmission projects across the state, the utilities involved eagerly agreed to be "taxed" by West Virginia. Apparently Joe hasn't forgotten that part.
But it looks like he did forget that West Virginia doesn't have a transmission tax. His bill died a quiet, suffocated death... but not after one all-night drive to Charleston in order to testify at a legislative hearing for the bill. After driving all night, catching a couple hours of sleep, and hustling over to the state house, we were met with an almost empty chamber. None of the elected officials even cared to listen to citizen comments on the hastily arranged hearing. But still, it failed.
Why did it fail? West Virginia cannot tax interstate commerce, essentially running a toll booth for electricity to cross the state. That runs afoul of the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Second of all, utilities don't pay taxes, state or otherwise. Utilities add any taxes they pay to the rates they charge to their electric customers. Basically, the electric customers of West Virginia would pay for the bribe to the state in exchange for approving a transmission project that may be detrimental to their interests. The utilities wouldn't be out a dime... so why not agree to let West Virginians pay to bribe their own Public Service Commission for benefit of the utility company?
Next let's examine electric rates. States have jurisdiction over retail electric service. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has jurisdiction over interstate wholesale transmission. FERC is the entity who would determine the rates charged by the transmission companies Joe wanted to tax. A state cannot alter or block a federal transmission rate but must pass it through in the rates charged to retail customers unscathed. There's no way for a state to stop the transmission utility from charging the tax back to electric customers in the state. As well, states have no say in how transmission rates are developed and cannot demand that FERC remove the tax or bribe costs from the utility's rate. FERC's rates allow utilities to add all taxes paid to their rates. This isn't going to change.
And then Joe had issues with how the proceeds of his transmission tax were going to be distributed.
Back in 2009, when he was Governor of West Virginia, Joe Manchin came up with the idea of a "transmission tax" levied on high-voltage lines built through the state. In exchange for Joe directing the PSC to approve the controversial TrAIL and PATH electric transmission projects across the state, the utilities involved eagerly agreed to be "taxed" by West Virginia. Apparently Joe hasn't forgotten that part.
But it looks like he did forget that West Virginia doesn't have a transmission tax. His bill died a quiet, suffocated death... but not after one all-night drive to Charleston in order to testify at a legislative hearing for the bill. After driving all night, catching a couple hours of sleep, and hustling over to the state house, we were met with an almost empty chamber. None of the elected officials even cared to listen to citizen comments on the hastily arranged hearing. But still, it failed.
Why did it fail? West Virginia cannot tax interstate commerce, essentially running a toll booth for electricity to cross the state. That runs afoul of the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Second of all, utilities don't pay taxes, state or otherwise. Utilities add any taxes they pay to the rates they charge to their electric customers. Basically, the electric customers of West Virginia would pay for the bribe to the state in exchange for approving a transmission project that may be detrimental to their interests. The utilities wouldn't be out a dime... so why not agree to let West Virginians pay to bribe their own Public Service Commission for benefit of the utility company?
Next let's examine electric rates. States have jurisdiction over retail electric service. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has jurisdiction over interstate wholesale transmission. FERC is the entity who would determine the rates charged by the transmission companies Joe wanted to tax. A state cannot alter or block a federal transmission rate but must pass it through in the rates charged to retail customers unscathed. There's no way for a state to stop the transmission utility from charging the tax back to electric customers in the state. As well, states have no say in how transmission rates are developed and cannot demand that FERC remove the tax or bribe costs from the utility's rate. FERC's rates allow utilities to add all taxes paid to their rates. This isn't going to change.
And then Joe had issues with how the proceeds of his transmission tax were going to be distributed.
The House Finance Committee passed HB 3000 on Friday, following an early morning Public Hearing on the bill in the House Chamber, and a marathon Judiciary Committee meeting earlier in the week. Both committees made significant changes to the original bill, primarily dealing with how the tax monies would be used. As it stands now,the utility companies will pass on the tax to West Virginia rate payers, and the rate payers will get none of the relief that governor Manchin first promised. Instead,all the monies will go to fund state and county block grants and infrastructure projects.
Create a pool of imaginary cash... and then watch people fight over it.
Of course, Joe's idea was that 1/3 of the money would go to provide "electric rate relief" to all WV electric consumers; 1/3 would go to county governments in counties crossed by the new transmission lines; and 1/3 would go to the West Virginia Infrastructure and Jobs Development Council (WVIJDC) to be pissed away on "economic development" schemes to bring new industry to West Virginia (whether that industry was beneficial or not). The WVIJDC pays to build things and gives away tax breaks for super rich corporations in exchange for locating in West Virginia. West Virginians roll out the red carpet and pay for everything in exchange for some promised future "jobs."
Here's who didn't get 1/3 of the money, or any share at all: landowners. That's right, hundreds of private landowners were subject to condemnation of an easement across their property and threatened with eminent domain suits if they didn't sign voluntarily, in order to make way for the transmission line's path (or trail, if you will). In exchange for the permanent devaluation of their property, the burden of living and maybe working underneath a high-voltage transmission line, a landowner would be paid a "market value" pittance for just the new right-of-way (not the whole property). These landowners were asked to sacrifice their own home, well-being and economic future so that someone else could turn on their lights (but let's be real here, none of these projects were actually needed). They would pay for the project, just like everyone else, and maybe get a portion of the same electric rate relief credit everyone else was getting. They'd get the same county services and WVIJDC "benefits" as everyone else. But they actually had to sacrifice something personal for it. Nobody else did. They all received the "benefits" without any skin in the game!
So, you'd have thought that Joe would have learned this lesson back in 2009. States cannot demand a ransom in exchange for approving a transmission project. State utility commissions are actually directed by statute to consider certain things when ruling on a transmission application. Ransoming a portion of the transmission utility's earnings is not one of them... in any state. There's no way for a state to appropriate a portion of a federally regulated utility's earnings. And don't you think if utilities gave away part of their regulated earnings to states that they wouldn't go back to FERC and ask for more? A transmission utility's rate of return is set through a rather complicated process whereby the utility is allowed to earn a just and reasonable return on its investment. There's no room in there to pay bribes to states in exchange for transmission permits.
Good old Joe. He sure is getting older. He may not be getting smarter.
Of course, Joe's idea was that 1/3 of the money would go to provide "electric rate relief" to all WV electric consumers; 1/3 would go to county governments in counties crossed by the new transmission lines; and 1/3 would go to the West Virginia Infrastructure and Jobs Development Council (WVIJDC) to be pissed away on "economic development" schemes to bring new industry to West Virginia (whether that industry was beneficial or not). The WVIJDC pays to build things and gives away tax breaks for super rich corporations in exchange for locating in West Virginia. West Virginians roll out the red carpet and pay for everything in exchange for some promised future "jobs."
Here's who didn't get 1/3 of the money, or any share at all: landowners. That's right, hundreds of private landowners were subject to condemnation of an easement across their property and threatened with eminent domain suits if they didn't sign voluntarily, in order to make way for the transmission line's path (or trail, if you will). In exchange for the permanent devaluation of their property, the burden of living and maybe working underneath a high-voltage transmission line, a landowner would be paid a "market value" pittance for just the new right-of-way (not the whole property). These landowners were asked to sacrifice their own home, well-being and economic future so that someone else could turn on their lights (but let's be real here, none of these projects were actually needed). They would pay for the project, just like everyone else, and maybe get a portion of the same electric rate relief credit everyone else was getting. They'd get the same county services and WVIJDC "benefits" as everyone else. But they actually had to sacrifice something personal for it. Nobody else did. They all received the "benefits" without any skin in the game!
So, you'd have thought that Joe would have learned this lesson back in 2009. States cannot demand a ransom in exchange for approving a transmission project. State utility commissions are actually directed by statute to consider certain things when ruling on a transmission application. Ransoming a portion of the transmission utility's earnings is not one of them... in any state. There's no way for a state to appropriate a portion of a federally regulated utility's earnings. And don't you think if utilities gave away part of their regulated earnings to states that they wouldn't go back to FERC and ask for more? A transmission utility's rate of return is set through a rather complicated process whereby the utility is allowed to earn a just and reasonable return on its investment. There's no room in there to pay bribes to states in exchange for transmission permits.
Good old Joe. He sure is getting older. He may not be getting smarter.
RSS Feed