Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Hurst who wrote (4708)	7/12/2001 1:06:05 PM
From: Patricia Trinchero	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

I get the impression from this article that Enron may attempt to hide behind the apronstrings of Scalia's Supreme Court. Power company disputes state's authority to investigate prices BY DION NISSENBAUM Mercury News Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO -- A Texas-based power company moved to thwart an investigation of alleged price gouging in the electric industry by taking its case Wednesday from the Capitol to the courthouse. The legal action prompted angry lawmakers to accuse Enron of escalating its dispute with the state. ``You just went to war with the state of California,'' a seething state Sen. Steve Peace, D-La Mesa, told Enron's attorney at a hearing. Enron's lawsuit forced the legislative investigation of alleged price gouging into uncertain territory with some legal experts predicting that the issue might have to be settled by the U.S. Supreme Court. The lawsuit was the latest salvo in an ongoing political and economic battle over billions of dollars companies such as Enron have made during the energy crisis. Enron filed its lawsuit in Sacramento Superior Court an hour before its attorney was scheduled to appear before a Senate committee that two weeks ago declared them in contempt for refusing to turn over thousands of pages of documents. The power company argued in its lawsuit that the committee had no authority to subpoena out-of-state records or examine highly confidential trade secrets. Lawyers also argued that the Legislature was treading on federal oversight powers. In a letter to committee chairman Joe Dunn, an Enron executive suggested the probe had unfairly singled out his company to be vilified. ``It is exceedingly difficult to discern whether the committee's actions are designed to uncover the facts underlying the price spikes in California's wholesale electric power market, or to create a convenient political scapegoat to shoulder the blame for California's policy mistakes,'' wrote Steven J. Kean, Enron's executive vice president. Dunn, a Democrat from Garden Grove, suggested Enron was trying to undermine his investigation and spark a constitutional crisis by asking the courts to overrule the Legislature. ``This first step into the litigation arena may be the first of many in an effort to intimidate us out of completing the investigation,'' said Dunn. ``This raises the stakes dramatically.'' A few hours after Enron filed the suit, Dunn and his committee unanimously reaffirmed a contempt finding and voted to send a report to the full Senate next week. At that point, the Senate would have broad authority to decide how to penalize Enron. It could vote to throw company executives in jail, as the Senate did in 1929 during a price fixing investigation of the cement industry. It could vote to fine Enron. Or it could decide on some other penalty. But Dunn and the other lawmakers gave Enron another chance to turn over the kinds of documents other companies have given to the committee. So far, a half dozen other companies have managed to avoid similar threats by turning over, or agreeing to turn over, thousands of pages of confidential papers. On Wednesday, the committee withdrew a contempt finding against Mirant, which turned over more than 100,000 documents. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact