EDITORIAL: A Thousand Times ‘No’!

This column may seem a bit redundant to some of our readers. That’s because only a couple of months ago, our Editorial column recommended a ‘No’ vote on ALL ballot initiatives except, perhaps, in the case that one should arise banning all future ballot initiatives. Clearly, that position assumes a ‘No’ recommendation on all questions in this year’s ballot. But since we have had requests for specific information on Ballot Question #6, we will lay out our position on that subject here, in this final edition before the election.

Question 6 would double an already proposed increase to the state’s renewable portfolio standard (RPS). The RPS is a mandate for all electric utilities to keep a minimal threshhold of their energy portfolio in renewable sources like solar, wind or geothermal. The Nevada RPS was already set by the State Legislature at 25 percent renewables by the year 2025. Question 6 would increase that to 50 percent by 2030.

Of course, it is always helpful to see who is behind a ballot initiative, just to get an idea what is the real motivation behind it. In the case of Question 6, it is the national environmental activist group Next Gen Climate Action that is pulling the strings. This group, founded and funded by California business leader Tom Steyer, has poured more than $6 million behind Question 6 in Nevada. And the focus is not only on the Silver State. The group has proposed a similar initiative in Arizona as well. These initiatives are an attempt to put the two states on par with neighboring California’s aggressive RPS track.

Steyer has said, “It turns out that Nevada is the Saudi Arabia of solar energy in the U.S.; and Arizona is number 2. Between the two of them, they could actually produce enough energy to (supply) the whole United States.”

Hmm, why is that statement so disquieting? Maybe because it raises visions of a denuded Nevada landscape filled with nothing but unsightly solar panels as far as the eye can see? Meanwhile the bulk of the energy, money and benefits all flow away from Nevada, following the great sucking sound, back to Mr. Steyer’s California.

To be brief, Question 6 is a very bad idea for Nevada.
Nevada currently enjoys energy rates far below the national average. There is no crisis here like may be looming for California. So why would we ever vote to follow the lead of a state where ratepayers are paying far ABOVE the national average for their power?

As sure as the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, Question 6 will bring increases to rates – big ones! Face it, if renewable energy was actually competitive in price to more traditional sources, there would be no need for market manipulations like Question 6. Unfortunately, it is just not competitive. So a vote for

Question 6 amounts to signing up for a series of extravagant power bill increases over many years to come.
Question 6 would also be bad for business in Nevada. In recent years, we have seen a trend of businesses jumping ship from California to Nevada, expressly to get away from madness like Question 6. Why would we ever vote to follow California into that? Question 6 would discourage new industries from locating in Nevada. Furthermore, it would send many existing employers packing in search of a semblance of sanity elsewhere. That would be an incalculable loss in economic growth and tax revenues to the state.

Finally, it is inconceivable why energy policy should ever become canonized into the State Constitution as Question 6 is proposing. Changes to the Constitution should be reserved only for overarching principles and general concepts. Something as specific and changeable as energy policy should be kept within the wheelhouse of the State Legislature where it can be more easily updated and adapted to market trends and changing realities. Putting it into the Constitution is lunacy!

That brings us around full circle, back to where we started. Ballot measures, so often used by activist groups to circumvent the state legislature and reach nefarious political goals, are usually a bad idea. That is why it is the Progress’ policy to recommend a ‘No’ vote on ALL ballot measures. And that ESPECIALLY includes Question 6!

If Mr. Steyer, his California millions and his Nevada minions want a new law passed in Nevada, they should go to Carson City and do it in the broad daylight, the way it was meant to be done.