PUF editorial in 1966 shows what a dramatically different culture it was then.
Check out this editorial from 50 years ago, in the April 14, 1966 issue of Public Utilities Fortnightly. In this criticism of the notion of a utility consumer advocate, the rhetoric reveals a gigantic gulf between American society of then and of now.
Utility consumer advocates and NASUCA became a part of our world in the next decade, the seventies. But in the sixties, it was culturally alien to facilitate citizen complaints.
The very next year, the film "Cool Hand Luke" was typical in glorifying speaking up against authority. Remember Paul Newman rebelling at a prison camp after being told: "What we've got here ... is a failure to communicate."
So, read on, and count the number of times you say wow:
"It was interesting to read, but not so easy to understand, the recent proposal before a U.S. Senate group to have an 'ombudsman.' This strange name is said to be Swedish for a public official who listens to all complaints from citizens about what is wrong with government or other public service organizations. He is then supposed to try to do something about it.
So far, the Russians have not claimed that they (and not the decadent capitalists) have invented this particular institution - which is understandable in the light of what recently happened to two Soviet writers who complained in print about some flaws and shortcomings in the Russian government system.
The ombudsman ... would champion the citizens who have (or claim to have) a grievance ... Sample complaint: Why are people allowed to tune up rock-and-roll music real loud on their transistor radios to the annoyance of others while riding in a bus or other public conveyance?
As the example just given indicates, it is likely that the public utilities would be on the receiving end of a lot of ombudsman complaints - human nature being what it is, and the public utility business being what it is.
In fact, the idea of a public ombudsman just for public utilities alone is far from new. Back in the twenties and thirties, a number of proposals that public utility customers be specially represented by government-paid officials were kicked around quite a bit. It was the subject of law review articles and eventually of some legislation.
Yet, the idea never did really catch on very well. Indiana, Maryland, and the District of Columbia enacted laws for an official variously called "people's counsel" or "public defender" to function as a sort of special district attorney to represent customers in regulatory disputes with their utilities.
Such a law was actually passed in New York state in 1931, only to be vetoed by then Governor Franklin D. Roosevelt. He took the position that such an office was unnecessary because it was a job which the public service commission, itself, ought to do.
When Roosevelt moved to the White House in Washington, he brought his dislike for a "people's counsel" along with him. He knocked the District of Columbia job in the head, by simply refusing to appoint a successor when a vacancy occurred there.
Since that time, the idea has languished, although periodically revived in bills proposed but not passed in some state legislatures. Perhaps this indicates that, on the whole, the state and federal regulatory commissions are taking care of customer grievances against utilities through their informal and formal complaint procedures."
As the magazine for commentary, opinion and debate on utility regulation and policy since 1929, Public Utilities Fortnightly fosters vigorous arguments on the hottest issues of our day, and occasionally reflects on the arguments and issues of our past.
Steve Mitnick, Editor-in-Chief, Public Utilities Fortnightly
E-mail me: mitnick@fortnightly.com
