Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

VPM Reporter Digs Into Power For Tomorrow

—

by

Steve Haner
in , , , , ,

Ben Paviour at Virginia Public Media has fleshed out additional substantial details on the political activities of Power for Tomorrow, a utility advocacy group with major funding from Dominion Energy Virginia.

Questions asked and issues hinted at by this report on Bacon’s Rebellion now have more clarity.

Yes, Paviour found quite a few Virginia incumbent legislators are being supported by the group, not just Senators George Barker (D) and Siobahn Dunnavant (R).  Other beneficiaries include Senator Joe Morrissey (D), Senator Scott Surovell (D), Delegate Delores McQuinn (D), Delegate Buddy Fowler (R) and Delegate Emily Brewer (D).  Most but not all are involved in party nomination contests.

Yes, there is a strong correlation with the people receiving support from Power for Tomorrow not receiving support from Clean Virginia, with the exception of Surovell.  He has received help from both.  Along with the mailings mentioned before, Power For Tomorrow is also spending on digital advertising (as Clean Virginia also does.)

Paviour also found the group is active in South Carolina, another Dominion Energy state, attacking a proposal that South Carolina utilities be forced to join a regional transmission organization.  He turned up the 2021 IRS 990 report for “Power 4 Tomorrow,” but of course that is now out of date.  The IRS reports for these groups lag badly.

The key issue that somebody needs to keep watching is how all of this is reported – or not – in campaign finance disclosures.  No question now, these are political expenses intended to influence an election.  Period. Power for Tomorrow still only shows up as having a registered lobbyist on the Virginia Public Access Project database, with no mention of any campaign donations.  That is the point where this may be stretching Virginia law and should irritate voters who care about transparency.

— SDH

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

6 responses to “VPM Reporter Digs Into Power For Tomorrow”

  1. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    Can you help me with understanding the motivation?
    My guess is it is pro-Dominion, trying to sell the so-called savings, while allowing Dominion to build the stupid and failure to be windmills, while allowing Dominion to increase its base to generate more guaranteed returns.

    With D stock at $50, how far back to I have to go to see that? 2011?

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Dominion wants to help the people who voted for its bill behind a veil of deniability, as NN notes below. Dems in primaries in particular don’t want to show Dominion as a direct donor. And it isn’t the first time for games like these (which should be shut down by stronger reporting rules all around.)

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        And SCOTUS? Can’t elect them, eh?

        There is a certain humor in the reversal of party positions on the “benevolent monopoly” over the last 70 years, and the nearly 40 since Ma got axed.

  2. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Could be worse. Could be that the PGA Tour and LIV agreed to merge commercial operations. Saudis win, Trump monetized.

    So basically, the politicos get a layer of plausible deniability between them, getting money from Dominion, and backing legislation that provides more benefit to that wonderfully benevolent monopoly, Ma Bell, er, I mean Dominion.

  3. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Hey Steve… I was right! It could be worse. Or maybe it’s just easier than shuffling credits post billing.

    https://www.newser.com/story/336177/california-to-adjust-electric-bills-based-on-income.html?utm_source=dailyrundown&utm_medium=email&utm_content=17638216829566635675&utm_campaign=20230606

  4. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
    energyNOW_Fan

    I like the Pennsylvania free market system, now that I understand it better.

    You can buy power from many different suppliers and plans.

    Renewable power is cost-effective but with a BIG proviso: they give you average cost (8 cents/kWhr) for a certain period eg; 12-months, then (for my mother’s home) the renewable went to full cost at 14+cents! All you have to do though is change suppliers and get back to the lower tier cost.

    Being out-of-state I did not realize the price went up on my mother until she passed away. The only negative is hard for 94-yr old elderly to play the game.

Leave a Reply

Read More