“Rob’s snide reference to my ‘chess pieces’ is a reference to my unwillingness to agree with his Utopian dismissal of ISO/RTO organized wholesale markets.” (Lynne Kiesling to Vernon Smith, below)

“Yes, playing with government chess pieces (on-grid solar, wind, batteries, ‘smart’ meters) and a centrally planned wholesale market is Statism writ large.” (Robert Bradley to Kiesling, below)

Electricity specialist Lynne Kiesling champions herself as a classical liberal, free-market advocate. But she is just the opposite and relies on obfuscation and charm to advocate and sell

1) government central planning of wholesale electricity and

2) government-enabled wind, solar, and batteries in place of least-cost (central-station) electricity.

It is her “synthetic regulation” or the highway, premised on a belief that there cannot be private property rights to grid electricity.

This woman of system will not forthrightly define what a free market is with electricity.…

Ed. Note: When I was in a bank training program in Houston in 1979 (age 24), I wrote a letter to Senator Phil Gramm very critical of his stance on federal railroad regulation. I picked up the ringing phone a few workdays later to the words ‘This is Phil Gramm…’ Shocking! So with adrenalin going, I answered his letter back to me with an in-depth explanation of my view, which Murray Rothbard published in The Libertarian Forum, July – August, 1980. This was one of my earliest publications and first thoughts on public utility regulation (which have changed little in the last 45 years).

Introduction: Murray N. Rothbard

When Professor Dr. W. Phillip Gramm, an eloquent and hard-hitting champion of free-market economics, was elected to Congress from the 6^th district of Texas, many people thought that Congressman “Phil” Gramm (as he was promptly renamed) would be a mighty force for liberty and the rollback of the State. …

“Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.”

– Milton Friedman

It was supposed to be a ten year window to allow commercial nuclear power to prove its economy and safety. But the Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act of 1957 (Price-Anderson Act), capping damage claims and establishing a fund “to protect the public and to encourage the development of the atomic energy industry,” is still with us today, some two-thirds of a century later.

The 1957 law’s limit of $60 million per plant (about 10x in today’s dollars) was supplemented by an up-to-$500 million indemnification guarantee per accident. [1] These provisions, vetted among the parties, was just enough to remove a major barrier to the commercialization of nuclear power for electric utilities and for Westinghouse, GE, and others to build.…

“The case of Guillermo Yeatts for subsoil privatization should eclipse ‘climate change’ as the number one policy initiative of the 21st century. This friend of private property, free markets, the rule of law, and civil society, a successful entrepreneur in his own right, a thinker and doer, has set up an excellent opportunity for a new political era in his beloved Argentina.”

Give me liberty, not corruption and poverty! The recent election of Javier Milei of La Libertad Avanza (Liberty Advances) in Argentina was a resounding vote for freedom and prosperity. And don’t let the mainstream media marginalize him (“frequent conservative provocateur” … “far-right libertarian rants” ….). He has a grand opportunity to enact a national “social justice” that could be a model for many other nations in Latin and South America and in other regions of the world.…