FERC's divide, conquer plan can't work

To the editor:

The state of Rhode Island roared at last Thursday's meeting before the Federal Regulatory Commission (FERC) in Washington.

The "burning" issue, of course, was the efforts of Amerada Hess, prime investor in Weavers Cove Fall River, and KeySpan/Providence to put major LNG onshore receiving terminals in the midst of major population centers. These companies, along with the four energy-related commissioners of FERC, thought that little Rhode Island could be rolled.

They are learning differently.

Before the commission, Rhode Island, a state not usually noted for a cooperative spirit among its senior leadership, spoke with one voice. If FERC commissioners learned anything new, besides from the eloquent graphical maps displaying overheads of the narrow, jam-packed water route for huge LNG tankers, it was that tiny Rhode Island would not be a pushover. The "full deck" of our senior leadership was present, from the Congress to the legislature to Providence. They all were on the same page with message.

The cavalier attitude of FERC was reflected in a comment to the group by Commissioner Suedeen Kelly: "You want us to put a terminal in a rural area instead of a city. Don't 30 lives in the countryside count?"

Rep. Patrick Kennedy was quick to reply: "Well, commissioner, it's simple math — 300,000 lives at risk instead of just 30."

There was another message in this Washington visit: The outcome of the struggle will have national importance. This battle is being waged on three fronts — the law, politics, and the media. Hess and KeySpan are buying top-flight Washington legal talent. Hess has hired Baker, Botts, perhaps the most influential law firm with the Bush Administration. Dickstein, Shapiro, renowned in Washington for its adversarial aggressiveness, is representing KeySpan.

Rhode Island's attorney general, Pat Lynch, good as he is, needs similar reinforcements in Washington — damn the expenses, full speed ahead. To make it more affordable, he must partner with Massachusetts next door, which is also under threat. FERC plays one state against the other. Without a united front, they will fold separately.

Should four absentee commissioners of FERC decide for Rhode Island and Massachusetts? Shouldn't the sovereign rights of states be respected, or should they be run over by the presumptive power of Washington? I thought that states' rights was once a sacred principle of the Republican Party. Not any more.

But if this LNG struggle is waged smartly, attorneys general Patrick Lynch of Rhode Island and Tom Riley of Massachusetts can partner the LNG crisis into a victory for people and property along the shoreline, and for the U.S. Constitution. Doesn't the 11th Amendment declare that the states shall not be "prosecuted" through use of law against them by the Federal government?

Should Washington serve as champion for two greedy commercial companies that show utter contempt for the people of Fall River and Providence? Check it out!

Jerry M. Landay

Bristol

Copyright © 2003, The East Bay Newspapers