Prop 16 - VOTE NO! on California's June, 2010 Ballot - Official Opposition Website - Taxpayers Against the PG&E Power Grab

Independent Journalism on PG&E's Monopolistic Efforts to Block Choice, Alternative Energy, Local Control

PG&E sold its monopoly to ratepayers in 1996 when it received over $10 Billion in ratepayer "stranded costs" bailouts for the privilege of customer choice. It received a second $11 Billion ratepayer bailout to take it out of bankruptcy in 2003. Given that PG&E's book value at the time was $23 Billion, ratepayers have literally paid the corporation its value in bailouts - not even including all the rate increases that continue to this day. Today, PG&E would have that monopoly back, free of charge. Faced by efforts of San Francisco, Marin County, and dozens of municipalities in Northern California to offer their residents and businesses energy choices to which they are entitled by state law, PG&E has spent tens of millions of dollars already to block them, and has recently committed $30 Million as the sole funder of Prop 16 - PG&E's so called "nuclear option." With $ Billions in ratepayer bailout funds to play with, the nation's ratepayer bailout king is using it to try and fool California voters by painting their Monopoly Protection Act in the rhetoric of taxpayer protection. Do you really think they care?

As the newpaper articles below discuss in detail, Prop 16 will test the raw power of money to buy the vote in California, and will also test the political power of one of America's largest energy corporations to block all competitors and alternative energy sources, and re-establish itself as a fossil/nuclear monopoly throughout Northern California - by literally re-enshrining its monopoly in the state constitution. Below are Links to Articles by national news media publications like the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Fast Company as well as local newspapers that have been observing PG&E's fight against green power, like San Jose Mercury News, the San Francisco Chronicle and the San Francisco Bay Guardian.

"Vote no on Proposition 16 - PG&E's attack on competition," Sierra Club Yodeler article by John Rizzo (March 6, 2010)

"Keep corporations out of government power choice," Sacramento State Hornet article by Julia Baum (March 3, 2010)

"PG&E alert: Join the campaign to fight the PG&E's Prop 16 attack on public power and community choice aggregation,"San Francisco Bay Guardian article by Bruce Brugman (February 25, 2010)

"PG&E has long history of battling competitors," Fresno Bee article by Dan Walters (February 25, 2010)

"Ballot initiative may alter power business - Public utilities critical of effort funded by PG&E," Stockton Record article by Daniel Thigpen (February 26, 2010)

"Peter Darbee's Dog of an Initiative: 3 Tapeworms Eating Away at the Internal Logic of Prop 16," PG&E Ballot Initiative Factsheet article by former California Energy Commissioner John Geesman (February 25, 2010)

"Editorial: Initiative process just as infected by money as the rest of politics," San Jose Mercury News (February 20, 2010)

"PG&E Expects to Spend Up to $35 Million on Ballot Initiative," Business Week article by Mark Chediak (February 19, 2010)

"Mayor Bates Shoves Protester During PG&E Prop 16 Advisory Meeting," Fog City Journal article by Luke Thomas (February 19, 2010)

"Prop 16: Worst Measure on June Ballot," Los Angeles City Watch article by Paul Hogarth (February 17, 2010)

"Public power backers cry foul over utility effort," Associated Press article by Jason Dearen (February 15, 2010)

"PG&E funding Prop. 16 to keep its stranglehold," Fresno Bee column by Bill McEwen (February 13, 2010)