To the editor: Can anyone explain to me the nationwide obsession we, the people, have with corporate executives? Why do we frequently anoint them with superlatives concerning their mental acumen, moral compass, benevolence, righteousness, etc., when there is no evidence that the majority of them even know the meaning of those words?
State regulators via the Public Utilities Commission tried to force the removal of old transmission lines that had not been in use, nor were likely to be used in the near future (“‘This fire could have been prevented’: How utilities fought removal of old power lines,” Aug. 1). These were also lines that were known to be potentially dangerous. Sounds reasonable. But amid opposition from utility companies, the PUC allowed these old, unused lines to remain up until utility executives decided that they were to be permanently abandoned. Once again, appointed representatives in charge of overseeing public safety chose to kowtow to corporate executives.
Shame on the PUC for not having a spine. And more shame on corporate America for once again putting profit before public service. I am sure the corporate executives of the utility companies will receive their salary, stock options, bonuses and corporate pensions regardless of how many lives are lost. When will the average citizen of this country stop this absurd, unsubstantiated belief that most large company leaders care about anything except their personal bottom line?
Lee Baresi, Riverside
..
To the editor: So Southern California Edison has allegedly known that old transmission lines could cause fires for years and lobbied against being forced to remove them. Instead of allowing costs to be raised for those who installed solar panels, how about socializing the electrical power system? Make the SCE grid a public utility. The company doesn’t deserve to have the environmentally conscious pay for their greed and failures to do what is right.
Larry Severson, Fountain Valley
..
To the editor: The Aug. 1 Los Angeles Times includes an article about utilities fighting the removal of old power lines and another article about early concerns regarding helicopter traffic in Washington, D.C. (“Military chopper traffic over Washington was a worry leading up to fatal midair crash, NTSB hears,” July 31) Aren’t these both basically about the same thing: entrenched powers fighting change?
The utility companies don’t want to remove old equipment probably because of costs and a slim chance of reuse. And the Federal Aviation Administration, Army and Air Force have their own dubious reasons for slow-rolling change. In both cases, scientific and expert advice is given a backseat to safety.
The result is death, property loss and finger-pointing.
Richard Kelty, Santa Barbara