New Ameren bill passes Senate committee; faces floor fight
JEFFERSON CITY – Several weeks of behind-the-scenes negotiations on the proposal that would pave the way for a new AmerenUE nuclear plant produced a new bill that narrowly passed out of the Senate commerce committee Tuesday.
But it did little to quell the opposition to repeal of the construction work in progress, or CWIP, law, which would allow Ameren and other utilities to charge customers for certain costs of large utility plants before they ever produce any electricity.
“I think Ameren got exactly what they wanted,” said Sen. Joan Bray, D-University City, after the bill passed 6-4. “They moved some words around and ended up with basically the original bill.”
Others who voted no were Sen. Jolie Justus, D-Kansas City, Sen. Jim Lembke, R-Lemay, and Sen. LuAnn Ridgway, R-Smithville.
The new bill, written by Sen. Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, gives the Public Service Commission more time to decide on whether or not to approve a new nuclear plant. The original bill allowed three months for the process — the new bill makes it 12 months for initial approval and another 11 months for the facility review process.
The new bill also requires the utility to obtain the necessary permits before applying for the facility review.
That provision is in response to criticism by Gov. Jay Nixon, who has said that he doesn’t believe there is any reason to repeal the current law until Ameren has a nuclear permit in hand. The bill also adds a provision that should Ameren obtain a nuclear permit and then sell it, that ratepayers will be paid back for their investment.
Critics of the bill say the new language still tilts the regulatory process in favor of the utility companies at the expense of consumers.
Schaefer said he knew his bill wasn’t perfect, but he thought it deserved to get to the Senate floor for debate. But once it gets there, it might not go anywhere.
“If this bill hits the Senate floor as it is now, it’s dead on arrival,” said Sen. John Griesheimer, R-Washington. Griesheimer voted for the bill anyway, but he took an opportunity in the hearing to slam both proponents and opponents of the bill for how contentious the debate has become.
Last weekend, Ameren went to federal court to try to stop an opposition group from airing television ads against the proposal. The judge ruled against the utility company and the ads ran during the NCAA tournament.
Griesheimer criticized Ameren for trying to force a bad bill on senators and he targeted opponents for an ad which he claimed included “lies and distortions.”
“The whole thing has been a fiasco from Day One,” Griesheimer said.
Ameren gets what Ameren wants and the House and Senate will get sex trips and bottomless expense accounts. The days of Wine and Roses haven’t ended for Politicians and Monopolies, only for the Common Man.
Wow, the most telling part of this whole article is this: “Ameren went to federal court to try to stop an opposition group from airing television ads against the proposal.” WOW…what nerve. I’m completely speechless. There is NOTHING good about this bill for ratepayers OR taxpayers who would subsidize this wildly expensive plant. Power usage in the state went DOWN last year. It is no time to be bringing all this new power online at such horrific expense and with nobody to buy it
the circus of d-bags continues…the sad thing is that most citizens won’t pay attention to how their elected officials vote(d) on this.
And yes–the fact that Ameren tried to squash the absolute right of a citizen’s group to run an ad against it is sickening–Karen Foss must be so proud to work for such a stellar company that is focused on their community and the welfare of their customers (vomit).
Business at usual…the government looking out for big business instead of the taxpayers of this state.
Anyone paying attention? Is everyone too busy watching Dancing With The Stars to notice what is going on? Do you know where your Representatives stand on this issue? Do you care? Sheep…
It is always amazing to read a slanted Post Dispatch “news” account that reflects the editorial page position despite protestations that the news and editorial pages never meet.
Reading the Post Dispatch account by Tony Messenger, you would think the proponents and the opponents were scolded equally. Missourinet reporter Steve Walsh covered the same hearing, and he reports that the opponents of the bill took by far the harhest criticism from senators. The bill was approved on a six to four vote - but all Tony Messenger reports is the criticism of the bill even though the majority favored it.
Read the report from Missourinet, and you will wonder if Mr. Walsh and Mr. Messenger covered the same hearing.
http://www.missourinet.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=5E30F4F7-5056-B82A-37ED2625CA3F7CF0
Hey leeward, even the student reporter for the Columbia Missourian got it right in reporting that the opponents of the bill were lambasted. Read this story and you will really wonder whether Mr. Messenger was so caught up in his twittering that he missed the real news.
http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2009/04/01/senators-say-commercial-causing-hundreds-missouri-residents-call-and-email/
Yes, I hope that people are paying attention to how their Senator votes on this, as well as how their state Rep voted on their version of the bill.
This bill plainly stinks to high heaven, for numerous reasons–many of which I have posted before and will not burden with a repeat.
Speaking of numerous, this bill seems to cover a lot of territory. What happened to the Missouri constitutional provision about one bill/one subject?
If you want to see what really went down, go to the video. You will not have to rely on slanted reporting that way.
http://jasonrosenbaum.typepad.com/capitol_calling/2009/03/griesheimer-raps-anticwip-campaign.html