Know Your Ballot Carson City: Question 3, Energy

CARSON CITY — Question 3 seems to be the hot ticket item on the ballot this year. In short, if Question 3 is adopted, electricity monopolies would be prohibited by Nevada law, allowing energy customers the right to choose who their energy provider is, and generate their own energy for resale.

Currently, utility companies in Nevada are permitted to establish energy monopolies in their service areas.

That monopoly right now is held by NV Energy. In 2016, they controlled 90 percent of the state’s energy market.

The Nevada Public Utilities Commission is in charge of regulating utility prices and energy policies.

The state regulated and monopolization of energy was created originally to incentivize electrical infrastructure development.

If adopted, Question 3 would require the Nevada Legislature to pass laws by 2023 establishing an open, competitive retail electric energy market, giving people safe, reliable and competitively priced electricity, according to the proposed amendment.

“While energy technology has vastly improved in recent years, Nevada laws have not kept pace with innovation,” said Nevadans for Affordable Clean, Energy Choices. “The absence of a competitive energy market in the Silver State has denied Nevadans the freedom to lower their electricity costs, adopt clean energy, and even threatens the pursuit of innovation.

Nearly one-third of Americans already have the ability to choose their electricity suppliers and several states have successfully transitioned to open energy markets. Data from states with energy choice shows lower electricity costs across all sectors – residential, commercial, and industrial – with a nearly 20 percent cost savings for consumers.”

John Hanger, former head of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, said, “After 20 years of allowing customers to choose their generation supplier and competitive power markets with appropriate oversight, customers in the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh regions are paying much less for power generation than they were in 1996. In real or inflation-adjusted dollars, those residential customers are paying about 50 percent less. And Pennsylvania’s statewide average electricity price is at the national average as opposed to well above it.”

Those against the initiative argue it could lead to higher prices for energy, that the proposal is nothing but a hand out to billionaires, and would lead to layoffs.

In 2016, the campaign named No Handouts to Billionaires, argued, “Question 3 would deregulate Nevada’s electric utility system, removing all limits on what providers could charge. Customers would have to buy their power on the open market and energy prices could go sky high.

"1. Question 3 is just another handout to billionaires at our expense. Q3 is backed almost entirely by billionaires who would rather change the state Constitution than pay their fair share for electricity. It’s time to stop handing out funds to the people who need it least, and start investing in middle class kids and families.
2. Texas, New York, California and other states have tried similar plans with disastrous results. In California, market manipulation led to an 800 percent increase in electricity prices in just eight months – and to skyrocketing utility bills, rolling blackouts, and the Enron scandal. It cost ratepayers 45 billion dollars to fix. Prices have gone up in every state that tried deregulating, and Question 3 would create the same mess in Nevada.
3. Question 3 could lead to an immediate and severe increase in electrical rates for residential customers. It hurts everyone – but especially poor Nevadans and rural families by doing away with protections that currently guarantee their service.”

State Controller Ron Knecht said that while he agreed with the amendment’s intentions, to deregulate the energy market, the amendment did “not belong in the state constitution.”

“Constitutions should be limited to fundamental matters of government organization, the rights of citizens, and specifying and limiting the powers of government, etc.,” said Knecht.
"Under Nevada’s constitution, the legislature already has the power to do all the good things this measure would require. However, particular provisions of this measure may be found defective or in need of change. As long as such reforms are done legislatively, they can be remedied timely by the legislature. That’s not the case if they are enshrined in the constitution.”

For additional information on Question 3, please visit Ballotpedia.