8/29/99 -- 3:04 PM

Y2K expert says no major disruptions, but be prepared

------------------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House pointman on the Y2K computer glitch said Sunday that Americans shouldn't worry about accidental nuclear launches or erased bank records, but should prepare for some minor inconveniences.

John Koskinen, head of the White House panel on the year 2000 computer problem, emphasized that with four months left before the new year, federal government computers were ready and the national infrastructure was in good shape. People should know that it was safe to take planes or trains on Jan. 1, he said.

He said a report due out next month would find that 95 percent of the federal government's mission-critical computer systems were fixed. ``If there are any major problems, it won't come from a failure of a federal system,'' Koskinen said on CNN's ``Late Edition.''

But he said he was still concerned about utilities and phone systems in some communities and ``we are worried about some of the smaller or not so small educational facilities, some health care facilities.''

Koskinen said his office is encouraging people across the country to engage in conversations with local utilities and public services, to make sure they are taking action to correct Y2K problems.

The concern is that many computers that use only two digits to read dates will mistake the year 2000, or ``00,'' as 1900, causing computers to malfunction or break down.

Koskinen said that as a common-sense precaution Americans should have on hand at least battery-powered radios and flashlights and a three-day supply of water and food. ``It's going to be a long weekend in the middle of winter.''

The administration is satisfied, he said, that nuclear weapons around the world are safe because they can only be launched through human intervention.

The one concern with the Russians is a breakdown in their nuclear weapons early warning system. ``If it goes down and they go blind in effect, then the level of anxiety could increase so we are trying to make sure that doesn't happen.''

Koskinen said banks and financial firms are ready, and there is no chance of bank accounts being lost, although people should keep paper copies of recent financial transactions.

He also said that State Department, in future updates about the risks of visiting foreign nations, would offer advice about possible Y2K problems. While developed countries are generally making progress in fixing their computers, some developing countries are not coping as well.

======================================== End

Snip:

"But he said he was still concerned about utilities and phone systems in some communities and ``we are worried about some of the smaller or not so small educational facilities, some health care facilities.''

What can one say that hasn't already been said about this sorry excuse for a leader!!

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 29, 1999

Answers

(snip) <>

(snip)

<<"If there are any major problems, it won't come from a failure of a federal system,'' Koskinen said on CNN's ``Late Edition.''>>

Sounds to me that the government is unsure about Y2K. In one sentence they say "prepare for minor inconveniences" and a few sentences later eludes to possible major problems.

What a joke!

-- Boz (Boz_Inc@Yahoo.com), August 29, 1999.

To me, the most frustrating part of this report is the phrase "engage in conversations with local utilities and public services."

Even a computer-savvy person would have to do an enormous amount of detailed, time-consuming "engaging" with the utilities and public services (whatever they are) in order to have an informed, competent degree of confidence that the readiness/compliance statements are accurate. The likelihood of this happening -- or of the utilities even allowing it to happen -- is pretty close to zero.

And considering that computer-savvy people represent approx 1% of the populations (i.e., roughly 2-3 million people employed in the profession, out of a total population of 250+ million), it follows that 99% of the population don't even know what kind of detailed questions to ask during this "engagement" process, nor are they in a position to know whether the answers are accurate, consistent, or reasonable.

Hence, it seems to me that one can only conclude that "engage in conversations with local utilities and public services" means something like "have a friendly chat with your local utility company, and assume that whatever they tell you is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

Ed

-- Ed Yourdon (HumptyDumptyY2K@yourdon.com), August 29, 1999.

Ed, Exactly what I was thinking watching Janet Abrams this morning. She's telling people to call for the utilities' PR rap as if it were a serious suggestion. But the callers were sharp at least, so you know everyone is not buying their whole bill of goods.

My friend believes simply that by the time the administration realized the truth, it was too late. Their whole plan now, she feels, is to figure out how to clear the bodies to prevent plague.

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), August 29, 1999.

Had a friendly chat with a utility rep. His own words "On the outside every thing is smiley faces for the public consumption, but behind closed doors, everyone is scared to death."

This was less than a week ago. I have no reason to trust smiley faces!

-- Michael (mikeymac@uswest.net), August 29, 1999.

To Ed Yourdon:

Do you have any reason to believe the utilities aren't telling the truth?

If I am misinterpreting your comments, please let me know. But it certainly seems to me you are implying the utilities will not tell you the truth. Or at the least, one cannot assume they will tell you the truth.

Yes, I believe the utilities are run professionally. I've trusted them to supply heat, electricity, phone, water, etc. I trusted them running a nuclear power plant 5 miles from my home.

I believe they are addressing Y2k in much the same manner. And I do not believe they are part of some vast conspiracy to keep the "real" truth from the public.

If you have reason to believe they will not tell the truth, or have not told the truth, it would be nice to hear the actual reasons. Instead of casually implying the industry cannot be trusted to tell the truth.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 29, 1999.

Even a computer-savvy person would have to do an enormous amount of detailed, time-consuming "engaging" with the utilities and public services (whatever they are) in order to have an informed, competent degree of confidence that the readiness/compliance statements are accurate. The likelihood of this happening -- or of the utilities even allowing it to happen -- is pretty close to zero.

-ed yourdon

So, I wonder how ed manages to do so much consulting with these utilities and public services across the nation (whatever they are), beating all odds to get the companies to open up to him, and to make an informed decision and play smart guy to his group of y2k flunkies

I know, he consults the 'mystical flying pig of Namibia' and the enigmatic muse tells all to yourdon so that he might become a prophet to his people. Either that or he is full of bullsh*t.

Hmmm...

-- (ed@theflyingpig.yourdon), August 29, 1999.

Ray:

I've had a good relationship with the people that provide my power. I started contacting them last summer. They have, freely, provided a lot of specific information. They also agreed with my suggestion, last year, that the best course was to provide the maximum amount of information to the public. Yet, in other situations, if Senate Committees [and other government agencies] can't get information from a wide variety of service providers, why do they think that the general public can.

Best wishe

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 29, 1999.

To Hoffmeister:

Do you have any reason to believe the utilities are telling the truth?

Ray

PS here is the snip I originally had wanted to clip:

"Koskinen said his office is encouraging people across the country to engage in conversations with local utilities and public services, to make sure they are taking action to correct Y2K problems. "

This Man is sick. To make this statement in August of 1999 is truly disgusting. To lead folks to BELIEVE that they can have an effect on thier utility companies operations at this point in time is the height of AROGANCE!!

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 29, 1999.

-- Z1X4Y7,

I to have had a GREAT relationship with my utility company since the middle of last year. I have communicated with the head of their y2k program on a number of occassions. Unfortunately, I NEVER received answwers to most of my questions.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 29, 1999.

AROGANCE = ARROGANCE

Hoffmeister,

John Koskinen received his marching orders a long time ago.

1). Keep the American public dumbed down at all costs.

2).See to it that the Federal government takes NO BLAME for y2k.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@tottacc.com), August 29, 1999.

Ray:

Mine provided me with an absolute barrage of technical information. As an ex-engineer [not computer] I understood little. I was just impressed by the list of manufacturer/unit identification numbers that was supplied. I've found some of them on the IEEE site. In a normal year, I could survive a 6 m lack of power as nothing more than a BITR. I just liked the fact that they were so open.

Bes

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 29, 1999.

-- Z1X4Y7,

Your quite fortunate. I would imagine the the utility is in good shape. I think when they are less than forthcoming is when one must be concerned.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 29, 1999.

Hoffmeister-

You raised a very good question in your response to Ed Yourdon's post. I would be very interested in seeing his response. I see that for some reason he has not yet addressed your question on this thread. Perhaps you would consider creating a new thread specifically addressed to him, and in which he might provide an answer?

-- CD (not@here.com), August 29, 1999.

CD, did you notice that Hoffmeister has not answered my question??

Maybe we could create a new thread for Hoffmeister to answer this question!!

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 29, 1999.

Ray, it's one thing for you, Andy, et al to play a continuous game of "Conspiracy Theory" on this board.

To my mind, at least, it's a whole different matter when it's Ed Yourdon.

And specifically, I basically answered your question in my original post. Past performance is a large part of it. Just as I trust certain people on projects when they give me their assessments, without requesting detailed backup.

Beyond that, locally, I have contacts at the electric utility, whose SAP implementation was a large part of their Y2k effort.

So yes, Ray, I have reason to believe they are telling the truth.

More importantly, it would seem to me a charge of dishonesty requires the backup.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 29, 1999.

I believe ED.Most of the american public including myself do not know what to ask,we are not computer savvy,speaking for myself i do not have the time to research all the utilities,and koskien is aware of this,that is the plan.Thanks to people like ED and a handfull of others getting the word out,their expert advice will save lifes. The risk of doing this is having to deal with people like flyingpig,who are afraid to even put their real name on the words they speak.They know they are telling all of us lies,And it is not working.Thank you ed for a great forum and keep up the good work,this is one more family that thanks you.

-- G Bailey (GBa6872290@aol.com), August 29, 1999.

I know this may seem too obvious, but ask the workers, not the office.

Being one, a worker that is, I find the information I glean from those I talk to much more believable. I help build the very systems that each of rely on to provide the amenities we all take for granted, or at least *used to* take for granted. When a man from the electric utility tells me something in passing, I tend to take it at face value, not spin/hype/BS. He has nothing to gain.

-- Michael (mikeymac@uswest.net), August 29, 1999.

I don't trust any PR BS, which will continue flowing freely until TSHTF.

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), August 29, 1999.

Michael, so what have you found out from talking with the utility workers? I'm interested in what you have to say.

-- Curious (curious@wondering.com), August 29, 1999.

I become VERY confused when I see threads like this. It seems that some of you have been following Y2k for at LEAST one year, right? You never thought to even send an E-mail to your local utility director?

I've already said this at least 10 times on this forum, but in the summer of 1998, my utility director did NOT have good news for me. He was QUITE frank in discussing the answers to any questions I had, including those wherein the situation looked dismal. I communicated with him throughout the year and now the situation is QUITE different.

Where were you folks last year when you COULD HAVE BEEN establishing a rapport with your utility director? I'm not talking to new lurkers here...I'm talking to those who state they have 1000+ hours studying Y2k and look to a Naval report for the state of their utilities. I'm talking to those who look FIRST at global problems before even finding out the progress in their own back yards.

A lack of remediation by Italy or Russia doesn't mean your water or sewage won't work....yet some tell folks that they should buy porta- potties and thousands of gallons of water...never even having established a relationship with their water director. Some don't even know HOW water gets to their home.

Y2k will NOT hit every community equally. THIS is why Koskinen has NOT come out with a formal policy stating that folks should stock up on X months of food/water, etc. For SOME communities, towns, cities, Y2k will NOT affect the folks in an obvious way. For others, it will. I suspect it's now too late to establish a rapport with the folks actually in charge in your town. I suspect that some of you were too busy looking at global problems to take the time when it counted.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), August 29, 1999.

Here Hoff - a whole thread on the matter, which you ignored:

GWU Y2K conference calls NRC's process to determine Y2K readiness of nuke plants "unreliable and insufficient"

-- a (a@a.a), August 29, 1999.

Anita said:

"I suspect that some of you were too busy looking at global problems to take the time when it counted"

Yes Anita, its called the "Big Picture". Full of nasty "conspiracies". Don't look honey, it'll make you dizzy. (ah, more dizzy..)

You are misguided if you think that an individual can make an accurate assessment of a utility and come away knowledgeable enough to not say there will be no problems. There are too many variables at play in the next six months and Murphy's Law goes haywire when you have too many variables. Heck Anita, the utilities themselves don't even know what will happen.

-- a (a@a.a), August 29, 1999.

-- a (a@a.a), August 29, 1999.

Anita commented:

"I become VERY confused when I see threads like this. It seems that some of you have been following Y2k for at LEAST one year, right? You never thought to even send an E-mail to your local utility director? "

Anita, you must be living in LaLa land. have you read most of the BS these utilities are spewing out??

This is called PROPAGANDA and it starts ot the TOP !!

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 29, 1999.

A, taking into the fact that I only read a few minutes of this piece, several items appeared almost instantly.

1. Do you realistically expect a PR person to be able to answer every single little question that comes to mind? Im guessing that if the answer was yes, then I got a great piece of property to sell ya.

PR departments do more than just talk to the public but rather are a integral part of tying many departments together. If a PR person is able to answer every single question on how stuff works, then I ask why they even do PR work.

2. Notice in the article that each *concerned* person is already on a platform against the NRC. If you agree with their stance though then it just once again proves Y2K to be a means to a end. That if shout enough about Y2K concerns then the plants will be shut down. Would not have been the initial goal anyway?

"Yours in stupidity...MrWayCool"

-- MrWayCool (gotabridge@tosell.com), August 29, 1999.

Hoff commented:

"So yes, Ray, I have reason to believe they are telling the truth. "

Hoff, how about talking to my utility company. I've been trying to get a straight answer out of them for a year now. They're SLICKER than the K-Man !!

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 29, 1999.

Here MrWayCool, see if you can keep deluding yourself after reading these:

Red China is testing electric grid better than we are??

Nuke may not test after all!

-- a (a@a.a), August 29, 1999.

Just to throw this in : The McClocklin Group (terrible spelling, I know) discussed Y2K today. Surprised to see they rated it from 3 to 6. All thought it would have significant effects, but its still no big deal: the "disconnect effect" is alive and well. Similar to original article on this thread, they say a few true things but completely "miss" the logical ramifications.

-- Jon Johnson (narnia4@usa.net), August 29, 1999.

Hoff, Anita and any one else on this thread that is believes ALL of these folks, I have a question for you.

Do you believe that if a utility had a major y2k problem we would hear about it from that company??

Anxiously awaiting your brief answer.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 29, 1999.

My husband has 17 years experience in public water works, the last three years as a public works director. We studied *Y2K* and then bought a farm with a well. I also have spoken with our local electric provider on a number of occasions, they rely on four seperate sources. After checking on those, we bought solar.

Ever come home from a night out and asked the babysitter how it went? "Oh, just fine, no problems", only to find out the next morning from 'the informer' of the bunch, that all hell broke out for about an hour the night before? The PR spin is no different. They're going to tell you what you want to hear, IMHO. Lucky you if you know an 'informer'.

Too bad Anita didn't take Koskinen's job.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), August 29, 1999.

Anita:

Have you actually read my contributions. I think not. You are not listening. It could have been done, if it was.

Best,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 29, 1999.

I agree with Anita.

Y2K is not a monolithic problem. All areas will not be impacted equally. Some will experience much more severe impacts than others.

I have been in contact with my local power (Cinergy-Cincinnati) company's Y2K Project Manager on several occassions and have three friends I know working for Cinergy. I am confident that Cinergy will be fine if everything else is fine. Internally I believe they have done a superior job. Still, they plan to have every substation and every distribution point manned for 24x7 coverage starting in December. They feel that if they encounter an overlooked embedded chip that they have adequate workarounds and contingencies. They have stocked extra weeks of coal. So I expect to have some power - power may be shared to other areas that are down as a result of contracts or government directives. Still, I expect enough power that life will go on.

I remain more concerned about the economic consequences and the effect on the global import/export distribution system especially crude oil and pharmaceuticals but also raw materials for steelmaking (my employer).

-- Bill P (porterwn@one.net), August 29, 1999.

Unlike you I will instead answer the questions that you posed.

1. Think that maybe because China is state run that it allows for them to do so? Utilities do not have to do the test if they are having extended problems that are not everyday(Hurricane Dennis for example).

And I dont see much evidence(is none actually) that makes their testing procedures better? If that is a article convince someone that power is definately gone then Im sure to wear my tin foil hat at midnight on Jan 1st.

2. That was a nice editorial from someone with a polical stand against nuclear power. *It* was not balanced and just was the opinion of the writer. Why is that informative at all even to begin with my friend? A opposite view nor information against her was present.

If she felt wind from a storm would cause a nuclear blowup then she would write that as the reason to shut the plants down. She is critical of NRC and does not give the reason that NRC decided why to not require some plants to participate?

Could it be they are done to the satisfaction of NRC? I don't know, you don't know and by golly the writer of the piece wants you to walk away thinking that they are putting their lives in danger.

You see A, you have Cognitive Disonance. Which is "Buyers Remorse." You have Im sure spent very large sums of your income on Y2K and now you have to convince yourself that you never wasted that money. People go through it with a car purchase for example.

"Yours in idiocy...MrWayCool"

-- MrWayCool (doesitagain@aisrunning.com), August 29, 1999.

Hey Hoffmeister,

Why don't you please ask Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago whether or not Utility companies lie about their infrastructures and remediations..

He would be delighted to respond.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), August 29, 1999.

When Koskinen said "his office is encouraging people across the country to engage in conversations with local utilities and public services, to make sure they are taking action to correct Y2K problems", it is the same as when Janet Abrams replied to a caller that a nationwide ad campaign was not a good idea. Better to have those scantily attended Community Conversations and tell individuals to do their own investigating.

As Cory would say, that is just making flippy motions with the hanky and making the responsibility disappear from the Federal government and reappear in the lap of Joe Sixpack. It should have been DOE's responsibility to assure electric reliability, but they shifted that last year to a trade group with no regulatory power. And now they shift it further down the ladder to US. It is OUR responsibility to do the investigations and demand the answers.

Well a lot of us HAVE taken on a lot more responsibility for our wellbeing as a result of Y2K. So if that's the way it is going to be, if we can't rely on the gov't to give use those answers and get the population prepared, how about if we just stop paying them. What the heck are we paying them for anyway? It seems to be John's job to tell us that it's our job to see that Y2K is fixed. Do we NEED this? I want a refund.

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), August 29, 1999.

Sorry Linda, the IRS lost it along with their last copy machine.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), August 29, 1999.

MrWayCool said:

You see A, you have Cognitive Disonance. Which is "Buyers Remorse." You have Im sure spent very large sums of your income on Y2K and now you have to convince yourself that you never wasted that money. People go through it with a car purchase for example.

Hmmm. Let's see.

- Cashed out of the stock market near the top of speculative bubble. MrWayCool says that was stupid - apparently I should have bought more amazon.com tulip bulbs.

- Bought a pre-ban AR-15 last year. Value has increased 30% since purchase. MrWayCool is scared of guns and thinks NASDAQ is the only way to make an honest buck.

- Now have a stockpile of inexpensive food and supplies that can carry my family through a six month disaster. MrWayCool thinks bad things can't happen.

- Spent the last six months making improvements to a mountain vacation property. I guess adding things like greenhouses, outbuildings, solar water heaters, hand pumped irrigation systems, buried propane hookups, woodstove, cutting 3 cords of wood, etc will cause the place to depreciate, huh WayCool?

- Bought numerous "how-to" books covering medical, food storage, gardening etc. in the last year and have learned new skills. Guess that's money down the drain aye old boy?

Next year, you will understand who is wiser, MrWayCool.

-- a (a@a.a), August 29, 1999.

Help me out here, INVAR.

Now, is Daly one of the politicians we can believe, as opposed to just spinning lies?

Is he in on the conspiracy, or not?

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 29, 1999.

Forget it friends... The government is NEVER going to admit to possible problems. The media is going to continue to put forth the normal PR spin. The reason is very simple: This country cannot and will not paint a target on itself for our enemies to focus on. To publicize Y2K weakness would be an invitation.

I attended a recent Y2K "Community Conversation" at which Koskinen was a speaker. And, true to form, he answered all the questions put to him in the expected manner. The thing that struck me was the message to the crowd, BEFORE he began answering questions. He emphasized the title of the meeting - "Community Conversations" - and stressed that was what he wanted people to do. Continue to have conversations about the Y2K problem... to take the information we got from the meeting and share it with our loved ones and friends. The subtle, but very clear message was WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN - BE PREPARED. I might also add, there were TONS of handouts from the Red Cross and other organizations on PREPAREDNESS.

I believe we are supposed to "listen between the words." The idea that facilities cannot afford to "publicize" their Y2K remediation was hammered further home when a representative of the chemical industry spoke. He said there was not much information being offered to the public because they did not want their vulnerabilities known. It made good sense to me.

I have done my homework. I've read the government testimony. I KNOW what the situation is. We are indeed in deep trouble, if not directly from our own systems, then from the global situation.

-- noway jose (lurkinghere@ho.me), August 29, 1999.

Remember the ComEd blackout in the South loop two weeks ago Hoff?

THAT is what set Daley off. The little Napolean 'aint part of the utility Conspiracy (if you want to call it that), he was a political victim of it.

Two Summer's ago, during a massive heat wave, ComEd had the power blinking on and off like a Christmas tree. The City didn't want to renew their contract, and go with another provider. But after much money and promises exchanged hands, ComEd had their contract resigned with the city.

Then we had two week's ago happen, on top of a string of outages there for the last several months.

ComEd's own exec said that HE was lied to by his own staff. He said this on WGN News at Nine. THAT was after Daley's temper tantrum before the press earlier that day.

So both Daley AND the exec of ComEd are spinning???

Get a grip on reality Hoff. You're losing your edge.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), August 30, 1999.

This may come as a shock, but I agree with Mr. Yourdon on this point.

Most people do not know the correct questions to ask, and this has fueled lots of misconceptions regarding Y2K. It has allowed less scrupulous persons to engage in fear-mongering and unfounded extrapolations and "under-estimations."

As more of these people fall-back to ever rosy (visible and independently verifiable) scenario predictions - migrating away from predictions of evident doom and towards conspiracies of concealed harm and threats - the fear loses it's edge.

It's good to see the prophets of doom finally "getting it" and stating that the power will remain on.

Cheers,
Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), August 30, 1999.

Yes, Anita, it's obvious that you're very confused.

Hoff says: I believe... I trust... I believe... I believe...

BillP: Cinergy is fine if everything else is fine? Everything is fine if everything else is fine. Think a little bit more about the interconnectivities. Who do they depend on? They may be fine for a little while, until they run out of fuel, or are nationalized and distribution becomes a POLITICAL process. I know you are prepping, just dont become complacent. It could be a monolithic problem. It is systemic, it is global.

Think twice before agreeing with Anita.

Godspeed

-- Pinkrock (aphotonboy@aol.com), August 30, 1999.

Remember the ComEd blackout in the South loop two weeks ago Hoff?

THAT is what set Daley off. The little Napolean 'aint part of the utility Conspiracy (if you want to call it that), he was a political victim of it.

Political Victim? Right, INVAR. How did the Trib put it Daley used the problems to enter arbitration, arbitration even he acknowledges they probably would have lost. See this Trib

Then we had two week's ago happen, on top of a string of outages there for the last several months.

ComEd's own exec said that HE was lied to by his own staff. He said this on WGN News at Nine. THAT was after Daley's temper tantrum before the press earlier that day.

So both Daley AND the exec of ComEd are spinning???

Get a grip on reality Hoff. You're losing your edge.

No, INVAR. Daley is making as many points as he can. ComEd is in a no-win situation.

The important point here is even Daley himself acknowledged that the arbitration did little or nothing to help with this summer or next. In his own press release about the settlement, he states:

"Over the long term, this settlement will mean greater electrical capacity and more reliable service for the people and businesses of Chicago," Mayor Daley said.

"But the system's problems are serious and won't be solved overnight. The possibility of outages still exists, especially during the next two summers. Commonwealth Edison has assured us they are taking steps to deal with the city's short-term needs, and we will be monitoring them carefully."

Both Daley and ComEd warned that the possibility of outages would still exist for the next two summers. ComEd wasn't covering up the potential for problems, and acknowledged them beforehand.

It is truly amazing to watch y'all pick and choose just who can be trusted when.

I realize that the "lying" chant is the last resort, as actual information fills in the blanks.

Just that I expected more from some people.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 30, 1999.

Remember the ComEd blackout in the South loop two weeks ago Hoff?

THAT is what set Daley off. The little Napolean 'aint part of the utility Conspiracy (if you want to call it that), he was a political victim of it.

Political Victim? Right, INVAR. How did the Trib put it here?

Politically, the mayor found himself in a no-lose situation, playing to an angry audience and continuing his criticism of a utility whose unpopularity has grown among consumers.

Two Summer's ago, during a massive heat wave, ComEd had the power blinking on and off like a Christmas tree. The City didn't want to renew their contract, and go with another provider. But after much money and promises exchanged hands, ComEd had their contract resigned with the city.

It had nothing to do with "renewing" or "resigning" any contract, INVAR. ComEd has a 29 year franchise agreement that began in 1992.

Daley used the problems to enter arbitration, arbitration even he acknowledges they probably would have lost. See this Trib story.

But, in the era of deregulation, ComEd could have won the battle, and lost the war. As the Trib put it:

Being at loggerheads with Daley, the leader of the biggest chunk of the company's service area and "a man who got 72 percent of the bloody vote" in the Feb. 23 mayoral election, presented a no-win situation, he said in the interview with the Tribune.

Then we had two week's ago happen, on top of a string of outages there for the last several months.

ComEd's own exec said that HE was lied to by his own staff. He said this on WGN News at Nine. THAT was after Daley's temper tantrum before the press earlier that day.

So both Daley AND the exec of ComEd are spinning???

Get a grip on reality Hoff. You're losing your edge.

No, INVAR. Daley is making as many points as he can. ComEd is in a no-win situation.

The important point here is even Daley himself acknowledged that the arbitration did little or nothing to help with this summer or next. In his own press release about the settlement, he states:

"Over the long term, this settlement will mean greater electrical capacity and more reliable service for the people and businesses of Chicago," Mayor Daley said.

"But the system's problems are serious and won't be solved overnight. The possibility of outages still exists, especially during the next two summers. Commonwealth Edison has assured us they are taking steps to deal with the city's short-term needs, and we will be monitoring them carefully."

Both Daley and ComEd warned that the possibility of outages would still exist for the next two summers. ComEd wasn't covering up the potential for problems, and acknowledged them beforehand.

It is truly amazing to watch y'all pick and choose just who can be trusted when.

I realize that the "lying" chant is the last resort, as actual information fills in the blanks.

Just that I expected more from some people.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), August 30, 1999.