Ken Paxton supporters in denial about exact wording of law
that Ken Paxton passed: "The Commission (PUCT) SHALL establish
a nonbypassable surcharge for an electric utility or transmission and
distribution utility to use to recover reasonable and necessary costs incurred
in deploying advanced metering.” And it is the intent of the legislature that
net metering and advanced meter information networks be deployed as rapidly as
possible to allow customers to better manage energy use and control costs, and
to facilitate demand response initiatives."
The bottom line is
that Ken Paxton voted to mandate a Smart Meter fee that all Texans must pay
regardless of if they get or even want a Smart Meter. Go ahead, prove me wrong.
Show me that Paxton did not vote to create a “nonbypassable” Smart Meter
surcharge.
Supporters of Ken Paxton like to point out that Barry
Smitherman was the head of the PUC when the PUC was in charge of implementing
smart meters. They conveniently ignore that Paxton’s role in Smart Meters, so I wrote an article showing that it was actually the Texas Legislature
and Ken Paxton who voted to create and promote smart meters and even to
mandate a fee that all Texans must pay for the meters. This law told the PUC
and Smitherman to implement Smart Meters. Smitherman did not create Smart
Meters, he was just following the law and implementing them because the law
that Paxton voted for instructed Smitherman to implement them. Only Obama decides
what laws he is going to follow or toss out. After I revealed that information,
all Hell broke loose with Paxton supporters calling me names and saying I am a
liar. They say that Paxton and the legislature never intended for the meters to
be mandatory, but they conveniently ignore the actual wording of the law that
Paxton supported. At least I don’t call names and am actually trying to show
evidence about Paxton’s vote for Smart Meters. For the record, I do not
think Ken Paxton is a bad guy and I know he is conservative. I just also know
he is not as perfect as his supporters say he is and I believe 100% that Barry Smitherman is
more conservative and a better leader and the best man to be the next Texas
Attorney General
Let’s say that they are right and Paxton and the legislature
did not intend for Smart Meters to be mandatory. That only makes what Paxton
voted for EVEN WORSE because the law that Paxton voted for, HB 2129, Clearly
and Indisputably states "The
Commission (PUCT) SHALL establish a nonbypassable surcharge for an electric
utility or transmission and distribution utility to use to recover reasonable
and necessary costs incurred in deploying advanced metering.” So it is an
indisputable fact that Paxton voted to mandate a Smart Meter fee that all
Texans must pay. If Paxton and his supporters are denying that Smart Meters
were never intended to be mandatory, then Paxton is admitting that he voted to
force all Texans to pay for Smart Meters even if they do not want one and do
not get one. Voting to force someone to pay for something they do not want
and will not get is not a good thing and it is interesting to see the Paxton
supporters act like there is nothing wrong with that.
Smitherman
Implemented Smart Meters that Paxton and Legislature voted to create, at least
Smitherman tried to add an opt out in the law
The Texas legislature told the PUC to implement the meters
and to find ways to deploy them as rapidly as possible because the advanced
technology is good for Texas and consumers. So yes, Barry Smitherman did his
job and he implemented smart meters and promoted them. Only in Obamaland can
someone ignore a law. Smart meters were the law passed by the legislature and
the law required the PUC to implement them. So that is what Barry Smitherman
did. Smart meters are actually not all that bad and many people love them
because they do have many advantages. The issue that arose is that not everyone
likes them or wants them because there are many questions surrounding the
meters including privacy and health. Instead of ignoring the voice of the
people, Smitherman actually realized the flaw and requested the Texas
Legislature to amend the law to include an opt-out so that people who do not want
one do not have to get one. Ken Paxton, who voted on the law, never once made a
statement supporting opt outs and never once tried to amend the law or support
any bills to amend the law.
Debate over whether
or not Smart Meters are Mandatory
I admit, there certainly can be a difference of opinion over
whether or not the law that Paxton passed actually mandated that everyone has
to get a smart meter. The problem is that the law does not specifically say whether
or not people can opt out of it. If you look at the wording of the law that
requires everyone pay a mandatory fee for smart meters and also the part in the
law where the legislature calls for the meters to be deployed as rapidly as
possible, it sure would seem as though the law intended for all old meters to
be replaced with this new smart meter technology. That I admit can be debated.
NO Debate over the
FACT that law Paxton voted for FORCES ALL Texans to pay a nonbypassable fee to
pay for Smart Meters and called for the meters to be deployed as rapidly as
possible.
We can debate whether or not Paxton and the legislature
intended Smart Meters to be mandatory. People can try to say Smart Meters were
all the fault of the PUC who was only just following the law and implementing
the meters. We CANNOT debate the fact the Paxton and the legislature passed a
law that promotes Smart Meters as good, calls for them to be rapidly deployed,
and requires everyone to pay for Smart Meters. So do ahead, you can reasonable
deny that Paxton intended Smart Meters to be mandatory, but that does not make
what he voted for any better. Read the law yourself below. Paxton had to have
wanted to promote Smart Meters based on the wording of the law the voted to
approve. Does what you read below look like something that someone would vote
to approve if they did not want to push Smart Meters?
Exact Wording of Law
that Paxton Supporters Cannot Deny even if the Deny that Paxton intended Smart
Meters to be Mandatory:
In 2005 Ken Paxton and Dan Branch voted to approve HB 2129. Section 7(h) of HB 2129 states: "The Commission
(PUCT) SHALL establish a nonbypassable surcharge for an electric utility or
transmission and distribution utility to use to recover reasonable and
necessary costs incurred in deploying advanced metering and meter information
networks to residential customers…"
Section 8(a) of HB 2129 states: “In recognition that
advances in digital and communications equipment and technologies, including
new metering and meter information technologies, have the potential to increase
the reliability of the regional electrical network, encourage dynamic pricing
and demand response, make better use of generation assets and transmission and
generation assets, and provide more choice for consumers, the legislature
encourages the adoption of these technologies by electric utilities in this
state."
Section 8(b) of HB 2129 states: “The Public Utility
Commission of Texas shall study the efforts of electric utilities to benefit
from the use of advanced metering and metering information networks. The
commission SHALL present to the legislature on or before September 30 of each
even--‐numbered year a report detailing those efforts and identifying changes
in the state’s policies that may be necessary to remove barriers to the use of
advanced metering and metering information networks or of other advanced
transmission and distribution technologies.”
In 2007, the Texas Legislature passed HB 3693, again making
clear its intention that smart meters be deployed as rapidly as possible.
Again, Ken Paxton and Dan Branch voted for this legislation. Section 20(i) of
HB 3693 states: “Subject to the restrictions in Subsection (h), it is
the intent of the legislature that net metering and advanced meter information
networks be deployed as rapidly as possible to allow customers to better manage
energy use and control costs, and to facilitate demand response
initiatives."
Related articles:
Paxton
and Branch Missed Hundreds of Votes in Legislature – Texas Needs a Full Time
Attorney General
No comments:
Post a Comment