Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: RevDisk on May 19, 2010, 01:22:37 AM
-
http://www.azcc.gov/commissioners/Pierce/Documents/5-18-10.pdf
Dear Mayor Villaraigosa,
I was dismayed to learn that the Los Angeles City Council voted to boycott Arizona and Arizona-based companies — a vote you strongly supported — to show opposition to SB 1070 (Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act).
You explained your support of the boycott as follows: “While we recognize that as neighbors, we share resources and ties with the State of Arizona that may be difficult to sever, our goal is not to hurt the local economy of Los Angeles, but to impact the economy of Arizona. Our intent is to use our dollars — or the withholding of our dollars — to send a message.” (emphasis added)
I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the “resources and ties” we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.
If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.
People of goodwill can disagree over the merits of SB 1070. A state-wide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill.
Sincerely,
Commissioner Gary Pierce
Gee, who thought that threatening the folks who supplied you with 25% of your power grid, plenty of tourist dollars, etc would be a bad idea? Way to go, LA!
Wish my state had utility commissioners with a sense of humor.
-
WOOHOO! That's awesome, truly.
That's just.... "Your move, sir!" =D
-
Can Arizona legally do that? As I understand it, it's usually illegal for a gas company to shut off service to a residence when it's 20 below outdoors. Could there be similar laws at this level?
-
Can Arizona legally do that? As I understand it, it's usually illegal for a gas company to shut off service to a residence when it's 20 below outdoors. Could there be similar laws at this level?
Doesn't often get below 20 degrees in LA...particularly during this time of year.
-
Can Arizona legally do that? As I understand it, it's usually illegal for a gas company to shut off service to a residence when it's 20 below outdoors. Could there be similar laws at this level?
Uh-huh, and a law in CA matters to AZ... why, exactly? :)
-
It would be very cool if AZ did stop selling power to CA, but I think we all know that is not going to happen.
-
I'd wish they'd do it for just one day......when it's like over 100F in LA.... >:D >:D >:D >:D
Oh, and shut off the water (Colorado River) too......
-
Oh, and shut off the water (Colorado River) too......
They probably couldn't get away with shutting off the water. Water rights in the West is...complicated, to say the least, and usually favors those downstream over those upstream.
-
I'd wish they'd do it for just one day......when it's like over 100F in LA.... >:D >:D >:D >:D
Oh, and shut off the water (Colorado River) too......
Naaa. The nooz would be full of stories of old folks keeling over dead from the heat.
-
Obama would be all over the AZCC like stink on scat for some sort of "Interstate Commerce" issue if they even fluctuated CA power rates by a hundredth of a percent over this issue. Let alone actually cut power transfer on the grid.
It's a good stinging letter... but it has no teeth.
-
I don't think they would shut off the utilities, but they would probably cooperate fully in renegotiating or terminating the contracts. Either that, or they would demand a lump sum to terminate the long term contracts.
-
Obama would be all over the AZCC like stink on scat for some sort of "Interstate Commerce" issue if they even fluctuated CA power rates by a hundredth of a percent over this issue. Let alone actually cut power transfer on the grid.
It's a good stinging letter... but it has no teeth.
Don't bet on it!
-
What if AZ power triples the rate for LA?
-
Be a shame if someone accidentally took out a tower or two...
-
We have a child-mayor, what can I tell you?
-
Obama would be all over the AZCC like stink on scat for some sort of "Interstate Commerce" issue if they even fluctuated CA power rates by a hundredth of a percent over this issue. Let alone actually cut power transfer on the grid.
It's a good stinging letter... but it has no teeth.
Actually, I'm thinking that the city of Los Angeles has wrapped itself up in a major Interstate Commerce faux pas of Constitutional dimensions. Seems to me the Mayor has clearly stated the intent to mess with the economy of the soverign State of Arizona. Start with this http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec10.html , then this http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A4Sec4.html , and then this http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am5.html .
Round up the National Guard and the attorneys. March the first group westward to arrest Hizzoner and assorted minions while the second group wends their way eastwards to the Supreme Court with petitions in hand. In the meantime, keep a very accurate audit of the difference between income from sources in LA prior to and post boycott announcement. Add any other dip in revenues from any and all sources as collateral damage directly related to LA's actions. Be sure to include the extra expense of auditing, which was directly caused by LA's boycott move.
Wish they had the fortitude to move on it.
stay safe.
-
I'm pretty sure the National Guard of one state marching on another state in force would overshadow the economic wrangling between said states.
-
How about when the AZ LEO finds an illegal, give them the choice of being returned to their home country, or a bus ticket to LA?
-
Can Arizona legally do that? As I understand it, it's usually illegal for a gas company to shut off service to a residence when it's 20 below outdoors. Could there be similar laws at this level?
Can the fed.gov "legally" ignore their own immigration laws?
(shrug)
Guess so.
Interesting times indeed. Has there ever been a period with as much inter-state and state/fed.gov acrimony since the buildup to the Civil War?
-
Can the fed.gov "legally" ignore their own immigration laws?
Fed.gov routinely ignores the Constitution, doesn't it?
-
How about when the AZ LEO finds an illegal, give them the choice of being returned to their home country, or a bus ticket to LA?
That's actually a pretty good idea =D
-
That was amazing. Almost makes me wish I still lived in AZ.
-
Isn't it unconstitutional for states to engage in trade wars?
-
Villaraigosa had a
crony underling spokesman make a brief response to the letter:
"We're not going to respond to threats from a state which has isolated itself from the America that values freedom, liberty and basic human rights."
-
"We're not going to respond to threats from a state which has isolated itself from the America that values freedom, liberty and basic human rights."
Then what is the above statement?
"This mind intentionally left blank."
-
I've often wished I was an FBI agent who was independently wealthy. It would be glorious to walk into the office of some high end, Constitutional trampling politician and arrest him/her, cuff 'em and stuff 'em.
-
Where would you get the warrant?
-
Where would you get the warrant?
Standard operating procedure: judge shop. Sooner or later, you'll find a judge that will sign just about anything.
-
Can the fed.gov "legally" ignore their own immigration laws?
Who the hell's going to call them on it? And by call them own it, I mean have the means to actually do something about it (and playing musical chairs with representatives and senators doesn't seem to be doing anything)
-
Who the hell's going to call them on it? And by call them own it, I mean have the means to actually do something about it (and playing musical chairs with representatives and senators doesn't seem to be doing anything)
If you have nearly unlimited funds you could shower them with petitions for a Writ of Mandamus.
I know I would be amused sitting there listening to the Solicitor General (junior flunky grade) telling the court that while, yes, there are laws against coming into the country without first touching all the bases and collecting the required signatures/stamps, the fed.gov just does not have the money to prosecute, but has more than sufficient funds to pay the costs of catch&release.
stay safe.
-
Isn't it unconstitutional for states to engage in trade wars?
I think so based on some federal case law. State governments (and perhaps local governments within a state) can't screw around with interstate commence or some such thing.
I could be wrong though not being a lawyer and all that. =)
-
I think so based on some federal case law. State governments (and perhaps local governments within a state) can't screw around with interstate commence or some such thing.
I could be wrong though not being a lawyer and all that. =)
It seems to me that states/cities/individuals can CHOOSE not to do business with anyone they want . . . and I don't see how the Feds can come in and dictate that someone WILL do business with someone they don't want to. (We'll see how the mandated purchase of health insurance in Obamacare fares in court.)
The wrinkle comes in if there's a law on the books that requires government contracts and such to be awarded via a competitive bidding process. To exclude a legal entity from bidding, or to refuse to award a bid to the lowest legitimate bidder, would appear to be unlawful.
I also suspect that L.A.'s local government would run into problems if they tried to prohibit individuals and private companies from doing business with Arizona . . . they're probably smart enough to realize that themselves.
As far as cutting off LA's power ( =D ) as good an idea as it seems, that may be a problem since various California individuals and companies own pieces of Arizona's power utilities.
-
>Where would you get the warrant?<
Can't police detain on probable cause that a crime is being committed?
Isn't passage of an unconstitutional law criminal?
>:D
-
Isn't it unconstitutional for states to engage in trade wars?
I believe you've hit on the main purpose of the "Commerce Clause". It would be historic to actually see it used as originally intended, instead of all the bastardized ways it's been twisted to suit the gov's need for power.
-
Misdemeanors need to commited in the presence of the officer of the law in order for a warrantless arrest. Felonies do not. Probable cause us sufficient. Last time I looked treason is defined as betrayal of one's country. If violating the precepts of the Constitution is not a betrayal, then I don't know what it might be, thus treason.
-
Villaraigosa had a crony underling spokesman make a brief response to the letter:
And this is the way its going to break down this time around. The forces of light, righteousness and progress against the evil, backward, racist Tea Party dominated states.
Get used to the name calling because its a long slide to the bottom.