AS I KEEP TELLING YOU, I’m no conspiracy theorist.
But if I were, this is how I might consider the current electric-shortage mania:
I. Certain entrepreneurs, hustlers, and speculators successfully muscle their way into the generating side of the power biz; thanks to bought-and-paid-for politicians who push “deregulation” legislation in several big states.
Many of these hustlers just so happen to be among the biggest and earliest contributors to G.W. Bush’s Presidential campaign, which wrapped up the GOP nomination early in 2000 thanks to its having vastly outspent the competition.
2. Once it’s clear that Bush has indeed attained the White House, these suppliers suddenly start exorbitantly hiking the price, and limiting the supply, of power to Calif. (a state which voted for the other guy).
The instant crisis (which oddly didn’t happen last summer, when much of Calif. uses much more power) spreads to those states with contracted supply-swapping arrangements with the Fool’s-Golden State, including Ore. and Wash. (which also voted for the other guy).
3. Bush’s official response, as you might expect, is that the “crisis” can best be “solved” by giving his power-generation hustler pals everything they want, and to just make us ordinary consumers pay through the you-know-what.
4. But unofficial spokespeople (and this is where the real conspiratorial stuff starts) offer another long-term suggestion. They start suggesting that office parks, aluminum plants, etc. get the heck outta the shortage-stricken states and into regions where the juice is still plentiful and comparatively cheap. These just happen to be Texas, Utah, Oklahoma, and other Republican strongholds.
You see, the onward march of U.S. population growth used to flow in an almost-constant direction away from traditionally Demo-controlled areas (northeastern cities) toward traditionally Repo-controlled areas (the ex-rural south and west).
But the Clinton crowd’s pursuit of suburban “soccer mom” votes, the trend toward office-based jobs instead of those in heavy industry and farming, and the comebacks of many once-moribund central cities have changed that pattern. Now, the population growth is concentrating in cities and suburbs that either have been traditionally Demo-voting or have become that way (or at least less solidly Republican).
Many of the strongest regions for Republicans last November either have limited population growth or are actually losing people (such as much of the rural inland west). Bush supporters sometimes like to claim their guy was the clear favorite in a majority of America’s counties, but a lot of those counties are losing people and clout.
So, this particular theory would continue, you could expect more such falderal from Republicans and Republican-leaning business “leaders” in the months to come. Incentive programs to lure developers inland might be combined with traditional Repo indifference toward urban concerns in new and extreme ways.
But since I’m not really a conspiracy theorist, I’ll wait to believe it until I see it.
NEXT: The more-or-less annual “I Love Snow” article.
ELSEWHERE:
