Here's a bit from NYT piece of today:
But there is growing recognition that a trip to bankruptcy court could give many parties in the current debacle "It may be the best thing that happens if this goes to bankruptcy court," said Donato J. Eassey, an analyst with Merrill Lynch in Houston. "I don't think there is room for gamesmanship. Somebody has to grab this snake by the head and strangle it."
[snip]
On Tuesday, the State Assembly passed legislation that would allow the state to step in and buy power at cheaper rates on behalf of the beleaguered utilities, a bill put together, in theory, to appease all parties, including the utilities and the power generators. So far, it has proved to do anything but that. The measure, Wall Street analysts say, does nothing to solve the most immediate crisis: the utilities are quickly running out of cash. And while Gov. Gray Davis still insists that bankruptcy is not an option, neither he nor the legislature has proposed a solution to pay past bills, the crux of the utilities' problems today.
Entire article at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/18/national/18ENER.html
Then here's a post from the ostensibly apolitical (that means everybody is assumed to be a right wing libertarian) North America Network Operators Group e-mail list:
<quote>
Welcome to the PRC, ... Peoples' Republic of China^WCalifornia.
I pointed out to a co-worker that the "state-mandated low-rate,low-supply,high-demand" power problem was tried in most parts of the former Soviet Union... and those citizens prepare for winters by stocking up on heating supplies as they "Expect" power to go out. This was a known-failed experiment before CA tried it.
But, California essentially tried the same thing... high-demand, low-rate, and (through AQMD and other fun things) low-supply. They (through doing this) convinced people that they have a "right" to expect power at below-market-value. Who can blame PG&E's suppliers for being on the "winning side" of a supply-side-economics issue? Who can blame PG&E for being handcuffed by the state's rules? The people of California can, for some reason that boggles this CA resident.
But maybe that's cuz I'm not a native. It seems that the natives are all upset, and the "non-native" folks I work with tend to blame California residents themselves for voting/etc. that put the price-fixes in place. "You wanted it, you got it, see how stupid it was? Now pay the price and move on instead of whining".
Seem to be in the minority here though. ;-)
</quote>
--
Joseph Noonan Houston, TX jfn1 at msc.com