Was Cheney's Energy Task Force involved in California's Energy Crisis?

[ck4829]

We all know that the Energy Crisis in California was a primary cause of the Recall which made Ah-nuld Governor.

But, was the Bush Administration involved in it too?

"Between 2000 and 2001, the combined California utilities laid off 1,300 workers, from 56,000 to 54,700, in an effort to remain solvent. San Diego had worked through the stranded asset provision and was in a position to increase prices to reflect the spot market. Small businesses were badly affected.

Vice President Dick Cheney was appointed in January, 2001 to head the National Energy Development Task Force. In the Spring of that year, officials of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power met with the Task Force, asking for price controls to protect consumers. The Task Force refused, and insisted that deregulation must remain in place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

[seabeyond]

1. yes it was. we know it was. demanding to know what this is all about

and cheney refuses. one of the consistant questions i want answered by cheney. my right to know, as calif was fucked by texas enron. and now the nation for a couple years are fcking us. and a cold ass cold front on the way, and heat thrut house is pumping, thinking about the bill at end of dec. christmas, taxes...... gas bill. at the end of the year

happy f****** holidays, and merry christmas to yawl, cheney.

[leftofthedial]

2. until and unless information is disclosed proving otherwise

I am assuming that Cheney's energy taskforce WAS the California energy crisis perpetrators divvying up the loot

and the 9-11 "Pearl Harbor" planning meetings

and the "we can lie our way into a war with Iraq and divide up the oil and war profits" planning meetings

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[leftofthedial]

3. until and unless information is disclosed proving otherwise

I am assuming that Cheney's energy taskforce WAS the California energy crisis perpetrators divvying up the loot

and the 9-11 "Pearl Harbor" planning meetings

and the "we can lie our way into a war with Iraq and divide up the oil and war profits" planning meetings

[kevinmc]

4. YES n/t

[LunaC]

5. ABSOLUTELY!

DECEMBER 2000 - Cheney secretly assembled an advisory panel of oil and gas executives from Enron, Dynergy, Shell Oil, Chevron/Texaco and British Petroleum under the direction of James Baker (former Secretary of State under George Bush Sr.) to help shape our national energy policy and justify the PNAC's anticipated war with Iraq.

Contributing substantially to the task force discussions and recommendations was a shadowy group of unidentified observers who still remain unknown. Sheikh Saud Al Nasser Al Sabah, the former Kuwaiti oil minister, also made a contribution to the group's final report which was funded through Khalid Al-Turki (a Saudi Arabian oil and gas enterprise) and the Arthur Ross Foundation (a non-profit organization that - on the surface - appears to be a supporter of the Arts.)

http://www.yuricareport.com/PoliticalAnalysis/FraudinWhiteHouse.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/15/AR2005111501842.html

MARCH 2001 - Cheney closely guarded the details surrounding his energy task force but documents released through the Freedom of Information Act reveal a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as 2 charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts.”

http://www.judicialwatch.org/071703.c_.shtml

As one internet poster pointed out:

"The Iraq map is not a map, it's a plan

"There are several areas marked 'earmarked for production sharing' (look at the map legend), which means privatized oil fields. Iraq did not have privatized oil fields and
production sharing agreements before the US took it over.

"There are also parcels marked on the Iraq oil field and exploration map (numbered
'Block 1' through '9'). Iraq did not have an active, privatized oil exploration program
going on before it was conquered by the US.

"If you read the footnotes and entire contents of the other documents, there is a heavy emphasis on business concerns, such as contracts and vendors over items one might think would be more important in a government discussion, such as capacity, long term reserves, etc...

"One footnote (in UAEOilProj.pdf) even contains investment advice for the participants
at the meeting, suggesting opportunities in downstream projects, such as power
desalination and pipeline projects.


"These are not 'just maps'. Read them."

It can be argued that the spoils of war were being doled out two years before Iraq once again became a household word. Perhaps this explains why Cheney worked so hard and so long to keep this information suppressed until Iraq was under U.S. military control...by then it would be too late for the public to object to the invasion.

APRIL 200 - "Sanctions against oil-producing countries have discouraged oil resource investment in a number of key oil provinces, including Iraq, Iran, and Libya...the maintenance of continued oil sanctions is becoming increasingly difficult to implement." So said the Baker oil-interest advisory group in their report "Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century".

Strikingly similar in context and tone to the PNAC's "Rebuilding America’s Defenses" policy paper, the Baker report was noteworthy in several other ways:

The report urgently pointed to California's power woes as a sign of an impending national energy crisis of catastrophic proportions.

"Americans face long-term situations such as frequent sporadic shortages of energy,
energy price volatility, and higher energy prices....."

"As the 21st century opens, the energy sector is in critical condition. A crisis could
erupt at any time..."

"Electricity outages already have our most populous state in a vice and are
threatening to spread from California to other parts of the country."

"Price spikes and supply shortages could become widespread recurring events
making the United States appear more similar to a poor developing country."

It recommended an energy security policy with "near-term actions" to diversify "energy supply resources" as a viable solution to prevent a crisis.

"National solutions alone cannot work."

"The United States must stake out new paths...and reassess the role of energy in
American foreign policy"

The report also considered Saddam to be a trouble-maker.

"Iraq has been engaged in a clever public relations campaign to...stir up
anti-American sentiment inside and outside the Middle East.

"Iraq remains a destabilizing influence to U.S. allies in the Middle East, as
well as to regional and global order, and to the flow of oil to international
markets from the Middle East.

It complained that "Iraq has effectively become a swing producer" because Saddam turned the spigots to his oil fields on and off at his whim and he threatened to use his own export program to manipulate oil markets

"The United States should develop an integrated strategy ..... to restate
the goals with respect to Iraqi policy.....

"Iraqi reserves represent a major asset" but "Saddam Hussein could be
a greater security threat to U.S. allies in the region if weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) sanctions, weapons regimes, and the coalition against
him are not strengthened"

"Once an arms-control program is in place, the United States could
consider reducing restrictions on oil investments inside Iraq."

According to the Baker report, the U.S. national energy security was in the hands of an unruly and unpredictable adversary that jeopardized U.S. and PNAC financial and political interests. It is believed that the Bush Cabinet agreed to a military takeover of Iraq at this time.

MAY 2001 - The official National Energy Policy Report was finally released for public review but only after someone in the White House changed the final draft without the knowledge of the inter-agency government workgroup who drafted it - specifically, the Departments of Energy, Interior, Commerce, Treasury, and State as well as representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA.)

What ultimately became the official White House National Energy Policy Report was in reality a repackaged version of the Baker "Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century" report which in turn was just an eerie echo of the PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" Mideast agenda. Essentially, a bait and switch had occured, the PNAC's policy and the Bush Administration's policy had magically merged to become one and the same, but nobody knew whodunit (although Cheney is a likely suspect.)

Comparing the various position papers used in the sleight-of-hand shuffle, it's notable that the additions and revisions made to the final draft of the National Energy Policy Report included seventeen of Enron's energy recommendations, wildly exaggerated and oft-repeated claims of a national energy "crisis" based solely on California's energy issues and numerous urgings that energy "security" become a priority of U.S. trade and foreign policy. But there was one final act of misdirection yet to come...the official White House Energy Report didn't mention either Saddam or Iraq when both the other policy papers did....because the public wasn't supposed to know that a plan for a Mideast takeover existed and that war was imminent.

http://www.yuricareport.com/PoliticalAnalysis/FraudinWhiteHouse.htm

Later investigations revealed that Enron - with Cheney's knowledge and possibly at his direction - had intentionally manipulated the California energy market and created a manufactured "crisis" by exploiting regulatory rules that existed only in that State. The looming national energy "crisis" Cheney described at length in his White House National Energy Policy Report never really existed but it provided the groundwork to coalesce the military against Saddam to capture his kingdom for the PNAC.

[KansDem]

6. Ask Grandma Millie...

Attorney General Lockyer Announces Energy Crisis Settlement with Enron Valued at $1.52 Billion
Bankrupt Firm May Pay Less In Real Dollars To Resolve Gaming, Gouging Claims

July 15, 2005

05-055
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
[phone]

(SACRAMENTO) – Attorney General Bill Lockyer today announced a $1.52 billion settlement with Enron to resolve market manipulation and price gouging claims against the architect of gaming strategies that powered the plundering of California ratepayers during the Energy Crisis of 2000-01.

"After masterminding one of the largest ripoffs in history, Enron collapsed under the weight of its own greed and corruption," said Lockyer. "Still, with this settlement, Grandma Millie and the rest of California will squeeze justice from this corporate turnip. All things considered, this is a good resolution for the state's ratepayers."

Besides Lockyer, who represented the people, other California parties to the proposed settlement include: the California Department of Water Resources (CDWR), the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the Electricity Oversight Board (EOB), Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E). Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna and Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers also are parties to the settlement.

Before it becomes final, the settlement must be approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Enron bankruptcy court.

The proposed settlement calls for the California parties to receive an $875 million unsecured claim in the Enron bankruptcy proceeding, plus $47.5 million in cash. The California parties would provide the Washington and Oregon attorneys general $22.5 million each from the unsecured bankruptcy claim. Additionally, Lockyer and the other attorneys general would receive a combined $600 million penalty, which would be a subordinated claim in the bankruptcy proceeding.

http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/2005/05-055.htm

Don't forget, it was originally $9,000,000,000:

Arnold Unplugged - It's hasta la vista to $9 billion if the Governator is selected
Friday, October 3, 2003

It's not what Arnold Schwarzenegger did to the girls a decade back that should raise an eyebrow. According to a series of memoranda our office obtained today, it's his dalliance with the boys in a hotel room just two years ago that's the real scandal.

The wannabe governor has yet to deny that on May 17, 2001, at the Peninsula Hotel in Los Angeles, he had consensual political intercourse with Enron chieftain Kenneth Lay. Also frolicking with Arnold and Ken was convicted stock swindler Mike Milken.

Now, thirty-four pages of internal Enron memoranda have just come through this reporter's fax machine tell all about the tryst between Maria's husband and the corporate con men. It turns out that Schwarzenegger knowingly joined the hush-hush encounter as part of a campaign to sabotage a Davis-Bustamante plan to make Enron and other power pirates then ravaging California pay back the $9 billion in illicit profits they carried off.

Here's the story Arnold doesn't want you to hear. The biggest single threat to Ken Lay and the electricity lords is a private lawsuit filed last year under California's unique Civil Code provision 17200, the "Unfair Business Practices Act." This litigation, heading to trial now in Los Angeles, would make the power companies return the $9 billion they filched from California electricity and gas customers.

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=283&row=0

This is power and corruption on a huge scale; the kind only the Bushistas could pull off. Grandma Millie would probably say "yes."