Mercury News editorial: Legislature should ban PG&E's political advocacy

PG&E lost a lot more than an election earlier this month when voters saw through the company's $46 million attempt to buy constitutional protection for its monopoly and rejected Proposition 16. The company also lost the confidence of many customers and lawmakers.
In response to PG&E's dishonest campaign, state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, this week announced legislation to make it illegal for the utility to spend ratepayer money on political advocacy. The Legislature should quickly pass his proposal.
Proposition 16 would have required a two-thirds majority vote in any municipality seeking to defect from the utility. The threshold is so high that most cities wouldn't bother, even when they could provide cleaner, cheaper energy to their residents — meaning PG&E could avoid repeated costly battles to keep its customers.
PG&E claims Proposition 16 campaign funds came from shareholders, not ratepayers. But it's a silly assertion, since virtually all PG&E's revenue, and therefore all shareholder dividends, is from ratepayers. That money could have been used to lower rates.
Ideally, this humiliating defeat — or at least shareholders' wrath over CEO Peter Darbee's hubris and mismanagement — would be enough to stop the company from attempting another such boondoggle. But that doesn't seem likely.

Since angry customers can't just walk away from PG&E, it's up to state lawmakers to ensure ratepayers' money is never again used against them. Leno's proposal would do just that.

Mercury News Editorial
Posted: 06/15/2010 08:00:00 PM PDT