I posted some photos over on our facebook group for BfD - http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=35904710434

Looks like it was fun. Would have gone but I had imbibing to do.

I know that The federal elections are important and your concentration is on Obama and Martin. But please don't forget this important state wide race and a real chance for a huge body blow to a Republican who is a Big Monopoly Corporation Protectionist:

John Monds http://www.mondsforpsc.com/

* No democratic candidate in the PSC1 race, only an out of favor Republican incumbent.
* The guy currently in office get's most of his campaign donations from those associated with the BIG Utility Companies.
* John is a Morehouse graduate, president of his local NAACP branch and is on the board of his local Habitat for Humanity chapter.
* John is a true consumer advocate and promotes the introduction of green energy solutions to the market.

Mr Adams,

You say:

* John is a true consumer advocate and promotes the introduction of green energy solutions to the market.

But no where on Mr Londs website does he say anything about conservation, sustainability, or "green energy". Nothing about his stance on nuclear power, either.

It looks to me like all he does advocate for is deregulation - and you see where that has gotten us in the financial markets.

A little more info on where he stands on things would be helpful for us voters.

It is a shame that what they did was referred to as deregulation. It was not. All they did was introduce more middlemen selling from the same resource or supply. They "de-regulated" who could sell without bringing in new supply to the market. Of course it didn't work and many of us said it wouldn't at the time. You either open up the market or you don't, you can't do it half way or you'll create bottlenecks, which is what happened.
John wants to open up the market to allow for new suppliers, new innovative technologies, like Wind, Solar, et al. And yes that includes looking at nuclear. But here's the difference between him and his opponent when it comes to nuclear. His opponent wants to force it onto you and have you, the tax payer, fund the expansion.

John says let the consumer decide and let the company investors pay for it, if it is decided that is what they want. Investors will be the ones that reap the profits (if there are any), therefore, they should be the ones taking the risk, not the taxpayer.

I agree, his site needs more information on the subject.

Sorry for any confusion. I was referring to what was called "de-regulation" of the natural gas suppliers. Which is something the PSC over sees. I didn't see that you said "financial market" until after my comment posted. The PSC doesn't over see banking :)

Just know, John is one of the good guys. A lot of people in my area that have Obama and Martin signs in their yard also have a John Monds sign. He gave a speech at the state NAACP convention last week and they took signs home with them too.

Cute, Daniel. But I think Catherine was referring to something called analogical thinking.

You see, you have past cases of deregulation in electricity markets in California and in derivatives on Wall Street. Insiders manipulate information to send false signals into the market in order to generate spikes or peaks, or otherwise make it difficult to lock down pricing. You also tend to get an erosion of safety margins and hedges with the ability to take down everyone in the system.

Since natural gas markets have similar properties to electrical markets (a few chokepoints of information and control), there is reason to attempt to attribute behavior in one situation to future behavior in another. The analogy may fail, but similarities are grounds for making the attempt.

Thank you, Odin. As usual, you did a much better job of explaining my point.

I'd also like to add that, while I'm sure Mr Monds is a talented, intelligent, capable fellow, he seems to believe that competition and deregulation are the solutions to everything (if we're to believe what it says on his campaign website).

According to the PSC website their mission is:

"The mission of the Georgia Public Service Commission is to exercise its authority and influence to ensure that consumers receive safe, reliable and reasonably priced telecommunications, transportation, electric and natural gas services from financially viable and technically competent companies."

It seems that Mr Monds has neglected "safe" and "reliable" to focus on "reasonably priced". Consumers do want all three.

Understood, even though libertarians and democrats have a different governing philosophy of how to get to an end, we agree on that end, which is definitely different than the gop.

My only point in this race is you have a choice between 2 candidates:

Doug Everett(R)(I)
A person who believes it's OK to meet privately with monopoly utility companies, OK to receive the majority of his contributions from those associated with the ones he regulates, OK to "regulate" to keep out competition.

or

John Monds(L)
Wants to advocate to open up the market to new providers and innovative technologies (this would include minority and women owned businesses as well as green alternatives), will not take money from those he regulates, wants to keep the consumers informed of possible back room deals that have plagued the PSC.

It's your choice.

Yo.. Button Bee Virgins.. this is your last chance this cycle!