Debunked Deregulation Since deregulation has worked so well in the past, the electric companies now want a piece of that action. Yes, monopolies want to see if other monopolies will compete with them, in the best interest of the consumer, of course. Here's the problem I have with that: does anybody remember cable television? Since probably more than 60% of the people who will read this are Falcon subscribers, there is little need for me to go into the details. But I will, because that's just the kind of guy that I am. Every time Congress has attempted to deregulate the cable industry, it has eventually led to higher prices for the consumer. There are always the carrots of expanded services and greater channel access to lure us along, but there's no such thing as a free lunch, and eventually they're going to sock it to us. The rules, written by people who received generous campaign contributions from the very industry they are regulating, allow cable companies to actually charge even more, by dividing up popular channels into packages the consumer must pay extra to receive. So they do. And the competition? Well, I have yet to be approached by one of the competitors' telemarketers (though I've been asked to change my long distance service, in the middle of dinner, 367 times). And I won't be. For the simple reason that smaller markets are not going to attract the kind of investment that is required to lay lines in miles upon miles of road. It would take so long to recover their money, they would have gone through at least three ownership changes by then. In areas where two cable companies abut, it may make some difference, but I doubt the consumers pay much less than we do with all that competition. I've had all the major long distance companies, and have never noticed much of a difference in my bill (although AT&T was kind enough to send me a check to persuade me to switch). And I have friends (yes, it's true) and family (that are not jackals) who have cable services in major cities, and the complaints are the same...as are the rates. I know I'm getting off the point of electricity here, but hopefully it will all make sense when I wrap it up. Here's my solution, if the government really wants to deregulate cable (also with the knowledge that smaller operators are not so willing to spend millions every few years to upgrade their systems, to meet viewers' changing and growing demands). First, wire the whole country with fiber optic cable. Charge each company, on a per capita customer basis, with a percentage of that cost of installation. Heck, you could even let 'em pay it back over time (with interest, of course...we are, after all, capitalists). And believe me, that's more than they would do for you. Then, make all the lines common carriers (just like phone lines). In other words, any company that could broadcast cable programming would be able to compete for your dollars. The box that sits on your television would determine whose service you chose. They could each sell their own descrambler - and you could change companies as often as you change underwear. Or, even subscribe to several companies at once. Just change which box the television was plugged into, and you're on another frequency, so to speak. Now that would be real competition! Would it work? Dammit, Jim, I'm a writer not an electrician! Anyway, if you see where this is going, I have similar thoughts on the deregulation of electricity. Really, it sounds good. But we have been down this path before. Again, there are likely to be areas where it will work. But with all the corporate downsizing we've experienced since the 1980s, I haven't noticed much of a decrease in the price of consumer goods - though I have noticed enormous increases in CEO salaries, and lavish benefits for the few at the top, that seldom seem to trickle down. With all the deregulation of cable, everyone still seems to have a lot of complaints (with the possible exception of satellite service providers - they're real happy with cable...and they are, in fact, the true competition). A deregulated electric industry is likely to go the same way. There may be short-term savings, but I doubt it. Either way, it seems likely that long-term effect will be, once again, higher rates for the smaller markets, where there is little competition. And even if the companies can buy cheaper electricity elsewhere, the likelihood of those savings being passed on to the consumer seems remote. Remember, electric companies have stockholders too. And that is who controls our country right now. I'm not too keen on giving them any more power...so to speak.