“Consumer Regulated Electric Utilities can act just like regulated utilities, but they cannot sell or supply power to residential consumers and they must be islanded from, or not connected to, regulated electric systems.”
The new year brings new opportunities to build upon the free market reforms of 2025 by scaling back statism. This is particularly important in the area of U.S. electricity policy, where the work of Travis Fisher and Glen Lyons (Advocates for Consumer Regulated Electricity) is particularly important. [1]
Draft legislation by the American Legislative Exchange Council–“America’s largest nonpartisan, voluntary membership organization of state legislators dedicated to the principles of limited government, free markets and federalism”–must be favorably voted on by ALEC’s board of directors before becoming model policy for state legislatures.
The draft Act to Allow for Consumer Regulated Electric Utilities, voted out of ALEC’s Task Force on Energy, Environment, and Agriculture (SNPA 2025), follows.…
“… one of the less well understood aspects of the damage Trump is doing is how long it will take to repair it after he’s gone, assuming that he is not succeeded by an equally anti-fact president. You can’t entirely recover from it.” (- John Holdren, below)
The bad news was really good in the New York Times stocktaking, “How Trump’s First Year Reshaped U.S. Energy and Climate Policy,” subtitled “The sweeping changes have affected everything from coal plant retirements to international diplomacy over shipping emissions.” Four Times reporters—Brad Plumer, Lisa Friedman, Maxine Joselow, and Scott Dance—summarized the Trump Administration’s ethics-driven course change. [1] Quotations follow:
…[Trump’s] changes have reverberated far beyond the United States, as the administration has pressured other countries to abandon their own efforts to tackle global warming.
“IREF concludes that the EU’s net-zero plan is effectively dead on arrival. Its internal coherence is unachievable at this scale, across member states moving at different speeds. Persisting regardless will damage prosperity and liberties, repeating the classic failure of grand central plans—what the Austrian economist Friedrich von Hayek once described as ‘fatal conceit’.” (Clintel, below)
“The irony is that the climatic impact [of EU Net Zero] would be negligible. Based on IPCC formulas, IREF deduces that for Europe, reaching net zero in 2100 rather than 2050 would alter global temperatures by only 0.02 to 0.06°C—below any meaningful measurement threshold.”
A recent report by the French think tank, Institut de Recherches Économiques et Fiscales (IREF), “Against All Rationality, the EU Persists in its Net-Zero Delusion,” challenges the false assumptions and erroneous conclusion of “Europe’s 2040 climate target and path to climate neutrality by 2050 building a sustainable, just and prosperous society.”…