Lawmakers override governor’s veto of electricity rate relief plan

Vote means Public Service Commission will be fired, but Ehrlich vows to continue fight in court

Friday, June 23, 2006

ANNAPOLIS — The General Assembly overturned Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.’s veto of a rate relief plan Friday, providing a possible climax to the ongoing saga affecting 1.1 million Baltimore Gas and Electric customers.

But Ehrlich (R) insisted the story merely moves out of the State House and into a courthouse.

“We’ll see them in court. We’ll see how this plays out in court,” Ehrlich said in a news conference following the override.

Unless a judge decides otherwise, BGE ratepayers face a 15 increase in their electric bills on July 1. Had no plan passed, their bills would have increased 72 percent.

The measure also fires the Public Service Commission, a five-member board that has been criticized for siding too often with utilities. The law calls on Ehrlich to appoint new members from a list of 10 provided by the legislature.

“I’m not interested in their list,” Ehrlich told reporters.

BGE customers also must pay $2.19 a month for 10 years to cover the deferred costs. The charge has been the center of a bitter party-line debate. Republicans see the charge as onerous interest. Democrats say the charge pays down the principal of the deferral.

Ehrlich has fought the measure, convening an unusual veto hearing Tuesday to debate the merits of the plan.

Even though Democrats had the votes to override the veto, Ehrlich said he thought the General Assembly could reconvene and create a “pro-consumer” plan.

But Sen. Robert J. Garagiola (D-Dist. 15) of Germantown said Ehrlich was more interested in “showmanship” than governance.

“He was Governor AWOL to try to work with the assembly,” he said. “You need to come to the table and try to solve the problems of the state. That’s why you’re governor.”

The Senate voted 34-11 to override the veto, five votes more than the three-fifths majority needed. The chamber’s Republicans chose not to mount any opposition, and the session was over in 10 minutes.

In the House of Delegates, members debated for about 45 minutes before they voted 87-37, two votes more than needed. Despite the close vote, Majority Leader Kumar P. Barve remained confident: “We’ve got on the big belt, like they do in the WWF.”

“Eighty-six is comfortable. Eight-seven is a landslide,” said Barve (D-Dist. 17) of Gaithersburg.

On the Senate side, Sen. Sandra B. Schrader voted for the bill, then voted to sustain the veto. She based her vote on hearing from constituents and from sitting through Ehrlich’s hearing.

Voters are not happy about the interest charge, she said.

Schrader (R-Dist. 13) of Columbia said her switch had nothing to do with the talk that she is on Ehrlich’s short list of potential running mates.

“That had nothing to do with it,” she said. “I’m the senator from District 13. What I understood about the bill then, and what I understand now is totally different.”

Fourteen delegates — all Republicans — had voted for the bill, then voted to sustain the veto.

“They put their party affiliation above the welfare of the constituents,” said House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Dist. 30) of Annapolis. “Thank goodness they weren’t at Valley Forge.”

House Republicans complained that politics — not sound utility regulation — drove the legislature in passing the bill and overriding Ehrlich’s veto. Republicans complained the bill benefited the utilities, not consumers.

House Minority Whip Anthony J. O’Donnell (R-Dist. 29C) of Lusby called the bill a “cruel hoax” on consumers who believe that the bill will save them money on their electricity bills.

Minority Leader George C. Edwards (R-Dist. 1C) of Grantsville said the only reason the legislature sprang into action was that the election is in November and the rate increase hit the hardest in the BGE service area — home of presumed Democratic gubernatorial nominee Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley.

House Democrats countered that the bill is the best product for consumers and blamed Republicans for lobbing political bombs instead of offering solutions.

Sen. E.J. Pipkin, an Eastern Shore Republican, has insisted that the bill is the best that has been considered since the issue exploded in March when the Public Service Commission approved the 72 percent rate hike.

“There are lot of things here that under close scrutiny the bill will stand up over time,” said Pipkin (Dist. 36) of Stevensville.

“We need to unite behind the plan to educate the public about its effects,” he said.

If the plan’s opponents are unsuccessful in fighting the plan in court, Friday’s vote means another Maryland policy debate was settled by a veto override that fell largely along party lines.

Since Ehrlich took office in 2003, he has vetoed about 20 measures that were subsequently overturned by the legislature, ranging from a minimum wage increase to an early voting plan, from speed cameras in Montgomery County to the so-called Wal-Mart bill that mandates a minimum health care expenditure for the state’s largest companies.

“I think the number of vetoes reflects the governor who is unwilling to find common ground and consensus on important issues in Maryland,” said House Majority Whip Anthony G. Brown. “A governor who time and time again has refused to work with the legislature to find balanced solutions.”

Brown (D-Dist. 25) of Mitchellville is running for lieutenant governor.

The special session represents a coda for Ehrlich’s term. In December 2004, he called lawmakers back to the state capital to avert a crisis in medical malpractice rates. The General Assembly passed a plan Ehrlich disagreed with. He vetoed the measure, and the legislators overturned that veto, too.

Staff Writer Thomas Dennison contributed to this report.