Transmission lines and GOP politics: It’s all local, and it’s impenetrable, too

The power of eminent domain to site transmission lines isn’t going to be make-or-break in the 2012 US presidential race. It could play a tiny role in the always-critical New Hampshire primary, though, where a power line is a big issue right now. Since CNN’s Monday night Republican candidate debate was in that state, the subject did come up for two mystifying minutes.

It showed that if Ron Paul and Mitt Romney were New Hampshire lawmakers, they would probably have voted for a bill (though one can’t be sure) that would block a big new transmission line proposed to run through the state from Quebec to Massachusetts. But mainly it reminded us how empty and frustrating candidate Q&A sessions can be.

The question to Representative Ron Paul was about a bill the New Hampshire legislature is considering (it ultimately put it off to next year) to block seizure of land by eminent domain to build a power plant or transmission line.

The reason for it is the 1,200-MW, 180-mile line called Northern Pass, proposed by utilities to bring hydropower from Quebec to the New England market. It would just run through New Hampshire, not delivering power directly to the Granite State.

A number of issues are involved in the question as a whole: the desire for more “green” power in the region (and whether New England should count Quebec’s hydro in its green requirements); worry about the possible shutdown of the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, meaning a need for new supply (though there is a supply surplus right now); the environmental impacts of running the line through forests and other such areas; and more.

More than 2,500 protesters showed up at public hearings in the state this spring as the Environmental Protection Agency started examining impacts of the line. Power generators don’t want the line because it would flood the market with hydro, blocking out local renewable power projects. It would also increase New England’s reliance on Quebec hydro.

The state House passed the anti-eminent domain bill overwhelmingly. The Senate shelved it in the end because of concern that it could inadvertently affect more things than intended.

Anyway … Ron Paul was asked whether governments should be able to “use eminent domain for major projects that will reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil.” Of course, there’s a problem with the question. Bringing hydro in from Canada doesn’t have much to do with foreign oil. (Unless … it has something to do with electric vehicles replacing gasoline vehicles. But there’s only so much extrapolation one can do.)

Paul replied that “we shouldn’t have that power given to the government where they can take private land and transfer it to a private industry. … [Eminent domain law] was never meant to take it from some people, private owners, and then take it and give it to a corporation because it’s going to help that locality.”

But that’s not what the land taking would do in this case. The purpose is not to help that locality, though local taxes are, of course, a benefit. The purpose is to build a line that purportedly would benefit a large region.

Then, “Property and free society should be owned by the people, and it shouldn’t be regulated to death by the governments, whether it’s Washington, DC, or local governments.”

Well, OK.  What?

Romney said land should not be taken to give to a private corporation. “And so the right of eminent domain is a right which is used to foster a public purpose and public ownership for a road, highways, and so forth. And so my view is, if land is going to be taken for purposes of a private enterprise, that’s the wrong way to go.”

This does get complicated. Transmission lines are indeed privately owned, at least most of them, and this one would be, too, by Northeast Utilities with partners NStar and Hydro-Quebec. But if it is built, it would be because some regional interests decided there was a public need for it. Whether this line should or shouldn’t be built is a good question. But if it were, yes, it would be private. Would Paul and Romney prefer a government to build and own it? One is led to believe they prefer capitalism.