Read between the lines on deceptive anti-Question 3 ads
The Monday front-page article by Colton Lochhead about the politics and facts behind Question 3 — which would give Nevada consumers free choice of electrical suppliers — was well written. I will vote for Question 3, primarily because of the “No on Question 3” television commercials.
If you listen to them very carefully, they do not say that deregulation has caused higher electrical rates. They never put forth any example of something bad happening in any state with free choice.
What they say is that all of the states that have implemented choice of power suppliers have rates averaging 30 percent higher than Nevada. It is interesting to note that the opponents of Q3 don’t say free choice has caused these higher rates, and you know they would if they could because such a statement would be a much more convincing argument.
All that is left to conclude is those states used to have, say, 60 percent higher rates and, after implementing choice, rates dropped and now are only 30 percent higher.
So I am convinced by what they don’t say that the “No on Q3” arguments suggest average rates will go down if the proposal passes.
