{"id":11844,"date":"2010-06-09T21:05:20","date_gmt":"2010-06-09T21:05:20","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2010-06-09T21:05:20","modified_gmt":"2010-06-09T21:05:20","slug":"despite-spending-46-million-california-rejects-pge","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/2010\/06\/09\/despite-spending-46-million-california-rejects-pge\/","title":{"rendered":"Despite Spending $46 Million, California Rejects PG&#038;E"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I&#8217;ve been a political campaign junkie for years. &nbsp;And the frustrating part about this job is that after going to Election Night parties, I have to go home and write about it for readers to view the next morning. &nbsp;So if a particular race takes the whole night to resolve, I could be up very late. &nbsp;But I had no problem sticking around the &#8220;No on 16&#8221; campaign party last night until 1:00 a.m. &#8211; monitoring the results with Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, State Senator Mark Leno and our good friends at TURN. &nbsp;Because last night&#8217;s defeat of Prop 16 was one of the most historic victories in California history. &nbsp;Outspent over 1,000-to-one by a monster utility company, consumer advocates defeated by a 52-47 margin an odious measure that would have cemented PG&#038;E&#8217;s monopoly. To call this a David &#038; Goliath victory does not give it justice. &nbsp;As my friend Robert Cruickshank wrote at Calitics, it&#8217;s like &#8220;an ant taking down an elephant.&#8221; &nbsp;Oh, and Prop 17 failed too.<\/p>\n<p>PG&#038;E is desperate to stop community choice aggregation &#8211; where local governments can purchase energy to offer their constituents a &#8220;public option&#8221; to the company&#8217;s monopoly. &nbsp;Proposition 16 would have required a two-thirds vote of the electorate before cities can do community choice aggregation, and cynically dubbed it the Taxpayer&#8217;s Right to Vote.<\/p>\n<p>Never mind that taxpayers already have the right to vote out their elected officials &#8211; if they don&#8217;t support community choice aggregation. &nbsp;Never mind that ratepayers were not given the chance on voting for PG&#038;E as their energy provider. &nbsp;Public power is not even one of my top &#8220;issues,&#8221; but I was outraged that PG&#038;E would try something like Prop 16.<\/p>\n<p>PG&#038;E shattered campaign spending records with $46 million to pass Prop 16 &#8211; ratepayer money that we give them every month when we pay our energy bills. &nbsp;The only organized opposition was TURN (the Utility Reform Network), who only raised $90,000. &nbsp;Bloggers <a href=http:\/\/www.beyondchron.org\/news\/index.php?itemid=8131>got creative<\/a> by making &#8220;No on 16&#8221; videos, and a hilarious <a href=http:\/\/twitter.com\/pgecares>Twitter feed<\/a>. &nbsp;But the campaign often seemed like a rag-tag army tilting at the windmills.<\/p>\n<p>When I arrived at the &#8220;No on 16&#8221; party at Otis Lounge around 9:30 p.m., the results were looking bad. &nbsp;We were down by about three points, but the night was still young. &nbsp;Having watched statewide campaigns for years, I knew it would ultimately come down to Los Angeles County &#8211; so I quickly went online to check how we were doing down there.<\/p>\n<p>Not good. &nbsp;The early absentees had Prop 16 winning L.A. County by 13 points, far worse than where we were statewide. &nbsp;If this kept on during the night, it was going to be painful. &nbsp;The public power entity in Los Angeles had just raised rates, and folks at the party said it may be why Prop 16 was doing so well. &nbsp;Small comfort for the largest county in the state.<\/p>\n<p>Mark Toney of TURN was saying we should be proud that we held PG&#038;E to such a close margin, after having been outspent nearly 1,000-to-one &#8211; but I cringed when I heard that. &nbsp;We were losing. &nbsp;Sure, we were doing pretty well in Northern California &#8211; where people know and hate PG&#038;E, but we were getting creamed down south. &nbsp;Where the votes are.<\/p>\n<p>But as the night wore on, some folks pointed out how well we were doing in counties like Fresno, Madera, and Mariposa. &nbsp;These are conservative places in the Central Valley, but PG&#038;E had alienated these customers with &#8220;smart meters.&#8221; &nbsp;I checked how we were doing in San Benito County &#8211; which political junkies often say is the bellwether of California state politics. &nbsp;We were slightly ahead in San Benito County, but only by about 50 votes.<\/p>\n<p>And the L.A. County numbers were trickling in &#8211; slowly, but surely. &nbsp;We were still losing there, but the margin was noticeably trending in our favor. &nbsp;By now, everyone at the party was huddled around a small number of laptops &#8211; while I double-checked the Secretary of State&#8217;s website with what individual counties were saying. &nbsp;Places like San Diego and Orange County were coming in where we were behind, but we were not losing ground.<\/p>\n<p>Pretty soon, our three-point loss became a one-point lead &#8211; and there was a palpable sense in the air that we could win it. &nbsp;I wasn&#8217;t convinced yet &#8211; scouring the L.A. County numbers to see if this positive trend in our favor was not going to start reversing itself.<\/p>\n<p>When 58% of L.A. County had been counted, we were ahead there. &nbsp;I got up, and boldly shouted that we had won. &nbsp;It reminded me of the scene in <i>Milk<\/i>, when Jim Rivaldo tells Harvey Milk not to worry about the Briggs Initiative. &nbsp;L.A. County had just come in, and we were going to win. &nbsp;By now, I was sure that we had slain the Prop 16 dragon.<\/p>\n<p>During that whole time, Proposition 17 &#8211; Mercury Insurance&#8217;s scam to rip off consumers &#8211; had been ahead by a wider margin than Prop 16. &nbsp;As we were all fixated on the Prop 16 results, it became apparent that Prop 17 results were following similar trends. &nbsp;By the end of the evening, Prop 17 had likewise had the same fate &#8211; it also lost by about five points.<\/p>\n<p>As of 4:00 this morning, Prop 16 is losing 47-53 &#8211; with 91.6% of all precincts reporting. &nbsp;Not only is this a stunning rebuke of PG&#038;E, but it is a strong mandate for public power. &nbsp;Californians want a choice in the energy marketplace, and are ready for a &#8220;public option&#8221; that provides them with competitive rates and renewable energy sources.<\/p>\n<p>And PG&#038;E will deserve every share of anger, rebuke and humiliation coming at it.<\/p>\n<p><i>Paul Hogarth is the Managing Editor of Beyond Chron, San Francisco&#8217;s Alternative Online Daily, where this piece <a href=\"http:\/\/www.beyondchron.org\/news\/index.php?itemid=8203\">was first published<\/a>.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I&#8217;ve been a political campaign junkie for years. &nbsp;And the frustrating part about this job is that after going to Election Night parties, I have to go home and write about it for readers to view the next morning. &nbsp;So if a particular race takes the whole night to resolve, I could be up very late. &nbsp;But I had no problem sticking around the &#8220;No on 16&#8221; campaign party last night until 1:00 a.m. &#8211; monitoring the results with Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, State Senator Mark Leno and our good friends at TURN. &nbsp;Because last night&#8217;s defeat of Prop 16 was one of the most historic victories in California history. &nbsp;Outspent over 1,000-to-one by a monster utility company, consumer advocates defeated by a 52-47 margin an odious measure that would have cemented PG&#038;E&#8217;s monopoly. To call this a David &#038; Goliath victory does not give it justice. &nbsp;As my friend Robert Cruickshank wrote at Calitics, it&#8217;s like &#8220;an ant taking down an elephant.&#8221; &nbsp;Oh, and Prop 17 failed too.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":125,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[],"tags":[4966,8880,8878,8879,5745,8405,7464,8307],"class_list":["post-11844","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-4966","tag-8880","tag-8878","tag-8879","tag-5745","tag-8405","tag-7464","tag-8307"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6Pvhz-352","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11844","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/125"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11844"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11844\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11844"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11844"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11844"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}