Consumers Energy’s Actions Speak Much Louder Than It’s Words

While publicly Consumers Energy is claiming victory for the passage of the House version of SB612, its actions tell a different story. On April 13 Consumers Energy Company along with The Detroit Edison Company and the Michigan Electric Cooperatives Association asked the Supreme Court to overturn the Code of Conduct.

Specifically the utilities have asked the Michigan Supreme Court to review the decision of the Michigan Court of Appeals which totally supported the Michigan Public Service Commission’s Code of Conduct. If the Supreme Court agrees to take the case utilities will seek to have the Court of Appeals decision reversed.

How SB612 Went From ‘Absolutely Horrible’ To ‘Just Bad’ In The House

After SB612 passed the Senate all the momemtum was on the side of Consumers Energy. (Click here to review the details).

The tremendous volume of support that Consumers Energy had generated for SB612 continued over into the House and was not matched by the opposition.

Representative Ken Bradstreet, the chair of the House Energy & Technology Committee, working with Senator Bruce Patterson (his Senate counterpart), House and Senate leadership and in conjunction with MAFC had delayed the measure until after the winter break. Hearings for SB612 began in the House on January 21.  Bradstreet’s intention was that supporters of SB612 would be given opportunity to testify the first week and opponents to give their side the following week.

The supporters were heard on the 21st but the meeting for the 28th was postponed due to weather. Although rescheduled for the following week, February 4, this hearing was also postponed indefinitely by Chairman Bradstreet in response to political shenanigans that prevented a substantial number of committee members from hearing the opposing testimony.

When hearings were resumed over a month later, a lot of behind the scenes lobbying had taken place. In the interim progress had been made on a majority of key issues in SB612 that the MAFC had targeted to eliminate.

Unfortunately, the utilities also made progress during this time. Seeking for a compromise Chairman Bradstreet became persuaded that functional separation was unfair to utilities. Functional separation was an important part of the Code of Conduct that the MAFC sought to defend.

Two weeks were allowed for further testimony. The testimony was strong and made an impact in refuting several bad parts of SB612, however the committee could not be budged on the functional separation issue. Regardless, Chairman Bradstreet was able to hammer out a bill that got rid of the worst parts in SB612 (see box below) although the committee felt that Consumers Energy had to be given the separation issue in order to achieve a compromise that would pass.

The Compromise Bill was voted out of committee and quickly was passed by both houses and signed into law.

Not Enough For Consumers Energy

As the companion story "Governor Granholm Signs Compromise Bill" relates, in spite of eliminating functional separation from the Code of Conduct, Consumers came up short in a lot of areas. Evidently dissatisfied, it filed the appeal to the Supreme Court along with the other electric utilities.  While it would have been better had the Code of Conduct been left untouched, at this point there still is a lot of substance to the Code of Conduct that make of vital importance to defend it. Otherwise all of the progress that has been made will be jeopardized.

Therefore, the Michigan Alliance for Fair Competition will intervene in any activity before the Supreme Court in this fight to maintain the Code of Conduct.

In the past 12 months the Alliance has successfully defended the Code of Conduct before the Court of Appeals, weathered the legislative assault of SB612, and now must defend the Code of Conduct at the Michigan Supreme Court.

This all costs money. And lots of it.  Besides the lobbying expenses regarding SB612, there are also tremendous legal expenses from defending the Code of Conduct and its enforcement.

Consider: what is the value of ending accounting practices that allowed electric utilities to compete with you without any overhead costs because of incremental accounting?  Or what is it worth that you no longer face competition that gets free advertising from electric utilities? This is a huge unfair advantage that has been eliminated. 

After 20 years of struggle these goals have been accomplished. Now the fight is to defend these gains. And the expense will require all Michigan contractors to step up and help.

If this is of value to you it is vital that you respond with a financial contribution. If you are not a member of the Michigan Alliance for Fair Competition or have not sent in your dues yet please use the form to the side to do so.

If you have already paid this years dues consider an above and beyond contribution to help pay for these gains. Make plans to attend the golf outing and bring other golfers. Also, pass this information on to other contractors who may not have gotten this. We need to have as many people as possible understand the issues and be able to help.

Additional financial help can come from Michigan wholesale suppliers. You can help the cause by asking your suppliers to join the MAFC and make a donation.  Check regularly on this site for updates.

Your continued involvement and financial support is critical as the MAFC continues the fight in both the political and legal battlegrounds. 

Click Here for details - download May 2004 Newsletter.