<<  <  >  >>

Page 26

51. Schuler, p. 30.

52. Ibid., p. 32.

53. Ibid.

54. See Jonathan Weisman, "Drive to Open Power Industry to

Competition Gains Steam," Congressional Quarterly, October

12, 1996, pp. 2911-17.

55. See comment by Tom Kuhn of the Edison Electric Institute

in "The Schaefer Legislation: Where the Stakeholders Stand,"

Electricity Daily, July 15, 1996, p. 2.

56. Mike Mills, "Holding the Line on Phone Rivalry: GTE

Keeps Potential Competitors, Regulators' Price Guidelines at

Bay," Washington Post, October 13, 1996, p. C14.

57. John DiIulio Jr., "How Bureaucrats Rewrite Laws," Wall

Street Journal, October 2, 1996.

58. "Will an ISO Bring the West Reliability?" Electricity

Daily, August 22, 1996, p. 1.

59. Houston, "The Case for Deregulating Electric Transmis-

sion," p. 5.

60. Quoted in "The Schaefer Legislation: Where the Stake-

holders Stand," Electricity Daily, July 15, 1996, p. 2.

61. See, for example, the SBSC advertisement titled "Beware

of Dog" on the back cover of the Weekly Standard, October

27, 1997.

62. David Keene et al., "Conservatives Warn Federal Govern-

ment: Don't Short Circuit the States," Washington Times,

September 17, 1996, p. 21.

63. Roger Pilon, "Freedom, Responsibility, and the Constitu-

tion: On Recovering Our Founding Principles," Notre Dame Law

Review 68, no. 3 (1993): 533-38.

64. Further evidence that some large utilities have no

philosophical objection to federal preemption of the states

may be found in the Edison Electric Institute's comments to

the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, in which the trade

group urges FERC to "serve as a 'backstop to the states'

should states fail to force customers to pay so-called