“The utility holding company with its present powers must go. If we could remake our financial history in the light of experience, certainly we would have none of this holding company business. It is a device which does not belong to our American traditions of law and business… And it offers too well demonstrated temptation to, and facility for, abuse to be tolerated as a recognized business institution.”

“Holding company artificial pool operations and subsidiary pool operator shell game artists, instead of using only 3 shells and 1 pea like old-time Wall Street fakers, have operated dozens of shells to lose 1 pea in a maze of manipulations with no semblance of stability or honesty.”

“The diversification of regulated utilities into unregulated markets raises significant concerns about competition, particularly the effect of this phenomenon on the ability of certain small firms to survive. In addition, utility diversification can affect utility rates as well as the supply and price of other goods and services available to consumers.”

“If a new entrant possesses a competitive advantage which is not based on its being more efficient-for example, if it can subsidize its new business with revenues from a government sanctioned monopoly-then consumers and efficient competitors will suffer.”

“The market power of utilities that are permitted to finance competitive activities with resources gained from regulated monopoly operations presents a daunting challenge to contractors. Utilities engaged in unregulated businesses enjoy unique advantages over competing unregulated private firms through their government-granted monopoly status. It is generally recognized that participation in unregulated markets by regulated entities, such as utilities, raise competition concerns, particularly with respect to the problem of cross-subsidies between regulated and unregulated ventures.”

“No captive ratepayers of a regulated entity—whether they be residential, small business, or large industrial consumers—should ever be forced to subsidize the unregulated, diversified investments of the regulated entity’s parent company or any unregulated affiliate.”

‘‘No costs associated with an off-system investment, or with regulating such an investment to protect captive customers, should be borne by rate- payers. “

“Some of the these abuses include utility company cross-subsidization of affiliate company transactions; diversification of utilities by investments in unrelated businesses, which could put their credit ratings at risk; improper use of utility company assets or revenue as collateral for affiliate loans; utilities and subsidiaries engaging in transfer pricing, potentially resulting in utilities being charged prices in excess of market prices for goods and services; and the use of utilities as “cash cows” to make excessive dividend payments.”

“Florida’s repeated and systemic failure to protect ratepayers is an embarrassment and should serve as a rallying cry for change...Ratepayer funds should only be used to ensure the efficient operation of public utilities and to allow them to build and maintain their infrastructure. They shouldn’t be used to line the pockets of utilities and to lobby for their special interests.”