If there is going to be a play come the first of the year to meld 
California's PX and ISO, Skilling may want to consider pre-empting that 
agenda (and most of this is not new; already included in previous messaging 
points we've developed internally):

It's the gas industry, stupid---for profit transcos is the answer.
California's big mistake was replacing one monopoly--the utility---with 
another--the PX.  PX's are not necessarily bad things.  But PXs with a 
monopoly is a very bad thing.
Forcing the IOUS to buy everything from the PX was irresponsible.
"Put everyone on a variable rate mortgage" story.
Decision makers openly admitted that they put in place a strucuture designed 
NOT to encourage retail choice and competition.
Decision makers actively urged families and businesses NOT to switch to 
providers offering an "insurance policy" (i.e., fixed price deals) against 
the volatile and risky power exchange price.
When you combine the supply shortage, the PX monopoly, the nonexistant retail 
market and decision makers' attempts to discourage choice, you get a 
debacle--that's what California set itself up for, and that's what it got.
Putting the PX inside the ISO will only infect the wound that's already been 
inflicted.
The real answer is....(we've developed these points already).


This is quick and dirty and can be made much more punchy and articulate, but 
wanted to get the notion out there given our time constraints.

Best,
Jeff