

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"The whole of Puerto Rico is like this. I don't think we are the only ones like this... We will survive," Jose Torres, a resident of Puerto Rico, told an NPR reporter in late September. As a diabetic without access to medicine, he's been working hard to keep up his blood sugar levels. Not an easy task when his fridge and stove don't have power.
It has been almost a month since Maria devastated Puerto Rico. Since then, most of the island's 3.4 million residents have been without electricity or running water. The power grid was effectively destroyed, with only 7 percent back online to date. This means that the entire system, from generation to distribution, will need to be rebuilt. The question now is: how?
While the unfolding human catastrophe on the island takes precedence, in the longer-term Puerto Rico has the opportunity to revolutionize their electricity system. Powered by renewables, a resilient and sustainable system can be built that genuinely puts the Puerto Rican people in charge of their energy. But, instead, the government is threatening to privatize electricity and bring in mainland investor-owned utilities to do the job. Elon Musk's proposal for Tesla to power the island with renewables could be just the accelerant privatization needs.
Lackluster relief efforts in the wake of Maria are indicative of the United States' treatment of the commonwealth as a second-class citizen. In direct contrast with aid packages to Texas and Florida that got equally pummelled by recent storms, Puerto Rico's aid has been slow and relatively ineffectual so far. President Trump even blamed Puerto Rico for its inability to rebuild and threatened to cut off aid.
For one hundred years Puerto Ricans have had an uneasy relationship with the United States--while citizens, they lack any voting power in Congress and the US has effectively pushed the island into a state of economic depression through unfair trading rules, limited self-governance, and lack of access to the same benefits as other Americans. For decades, Puerto Rico mostly survived off tax breaks that brought American corporations onto the island to avoid federal corporate taxes. In the '90s, President Clinton got rid of those tax breaks. With it came the mass exodus of mainland corporations. This has contributed to a situation where the commonwealth is $70 billion dollars in debt and 45 percent of its residents live in poverty.
Trade rules effectively limit the island from buying goods not from the US mainland. During the New Deal, that meant 79 cents out of each dollar paid in wages was spent importing food, clothing, fuel, and other goods, effectively sending all the injected cash right back to the mainland corporations. During Maria, it meant other countries were stopped from shipping aid that the country so desperately needed for days. This included one of the major things they needed: fuel.
Puerto Rico relies almost totally on imported oil, which is one of the most polluting, least efficient fuel types. Only 2 percent of all electricity is generated from renewables. Electricity is also prohibitively expensive, costing 21.4 cents/kWh in comparison to 11 cents/kWh on the mainland. Much of this difference is because so much energy needs to be imported. It also means that when the island is cut off from shipments, it doesn't have access to its fuel source.
Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA) is the publicly-owned utility that runs the electricity system on the island. It serves the highest number of customers of any publicly-owned utility in the United States, but is hamstrung by under-the-table dealings, ineffective leadership, little to no transparency, and an old, fossil-fuel driven business model. Even before the grid was wiped out by the storm, power outages in 2016 were 4-5 times higher than those of other US customers because of the dilapidated grid. Making things worse, Puerto Ricans are leaving the country en masse in the wake of economic disrepair, which means that the utility has been bleeding employees. 30 percent of PREPA employees have left in the past five years.
In June of this year, PREPA filed for bankruptcy with $9 billion in debt. Prior to May, Puerto Rico had no way to file for bankruptcy and restructure its debt (like private corporations and even President Trump do regularly) because it doesn't have the same rights as states under US law. Recently, a federal oversight board, PROMESA, was created to handle the debt negotiations in the commonwealth.
There is currently a massive attempt to privatize PREPA in the wake of the island's debt crisis. Members of the Financial Oversight and Management Board, created under PROMESA, recently wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal titled Privatize Puerto Rico's Power. "We believe that only privatization will enable PREPA to attract the investments it needs to lower costs and provide more reliable power throughout the island," they maintained. "By shifting from a government entity to a well-regulated private utility, PREPA can modernize its power supply, depoliticize its management, reform pensions, and renegotiate labor and other contracts to operate more efficiently."
Enter Elon Musk.
In a tweet, Musk proposed to rebuild Puerto Rico's grid from the ground up to be 100 percent renewable using a combination of solar and batteries. He has been overwhelmingly applauded for his vision.
Rebuilding the grid to optimize renewables is exactly what we should do. The island could build integrated microgrids powered by renewables--cheaper, cleaner, and more resilient than the antiquated model destroyed by Maria.
The problem here is privatization. Musk's entrance could trigger a larger corporate takeover. PROMESA officials are already chomping at the bit. UTIER, the labor union representing PREPA workers, denounced the utility's leadership for not sending its employees out to restore the grid after the storm in order to incentivize privatization. Officials also perplexingly declined to work with the national network of public utilities, the American Public Power Association (APPA), on restoration efforts. Instead they contracted with a new, unproven private corporation called Whitefish. Unless appropriate safeguards are in place for community ownership and control, Musk's investments could open a door for private companies to come and take advantage of a devastated and vulnerable island.
Bringing in private companies like Tesla, Whitefish, and others means that the fate of the Puerto Rican people is put in the hands of wealthy individuals and corporate shareholders nowhere near the island. Resources and wealth will be extracted from the island and deposited into Wall Street's pockets, continuing the long-standing dependent relationship between the Island and mainland business interests. Large for-profit companies have just one ultimate goal, their bottom line; so if Puerto Rico isn't making money for them they can and will ultimately leave.
Musk's companies, SolarCity and Tesla, are no different. They proved as much in Arizona, where a battle between a privately owned utility and SolarCity ended in SolarCity leaving the area--eliminating 550 Arizonan jobs. It was a battle over which corporation would benefit from renewables: Musk advocated for a competitive market that he could dominate, while the privately owned utility wanted to hold onto its monopoly and focus on utility-scale renewables.
Worker's rights and livelihoods are also at stake. It is likely privatization would lead to the end of UTIER, one of the strongest and most robust unions in Puerto Rico. Musk's labor practices have repeatedly come under fire and he is a well-known opponent of labor unions. A California based organization, Worksafe, recently conducted a study on Tesla and found that the rate of serious injuries at plants was two times that of the rest of the industry in 2015.
Even if Elon Musk helps to build a renewable grid, Puerto Ricans would in all likelihood still find themselves exploited by an extractive economy where outside corporations can maximize their profits on the back of high consumer costs, poor workplace conditions, and underinvestment in infrastructure and then leave.
Instead, an energy system could be created that puts decisions in the hands of all Puerto Ricans; one that invests in the community, creates local jobs, and builds resiliency. In short, Puerto Rico could become an island fueled by energy democracy.
Using renewables would lower dependence on imported fuel, stabilizing or lowering electricity bills for residents. By using Puerto Rican generated energy, it will be able to stop 4-6 percent of its GDP from "leaking" off the island. Eliminating fossil fuels from the mix also increases health and safety, potentially lowering healthcare costs (to say nothing of reducing the tremendous financial and human costs associated with climate change). Island residents could create democratically controlled community solar initiatives and renewable coops. Small scale ownership could flourish and increase local job opportunities. The Center for Social Inclusion's Energy Investment Districts (EID) provides one cogent policy model for such a renewable transformation. An EID is a geographic area that is eligible for financing and allows residents to plan their own energy projects at the community level.
Microgrids could also help to localize ownership and provide more resiliency. Microgrids are defined electrical boundaries that have the ability to both stand alone or interconnect with other grids. They allow energy to be utilized close to its source, increasing efficiency drastically. Microgrids could be particularly helpful in a landscape like Puerto Rico, and would limit the amount of the grid that goes offline during failures. The tropical habitat means that forests grow fast and get in the way of power lines and the salty air quickly erodes equipment. In the wake of a similar storm to Maria, a fate likely to increase with climate change, they can help fend off full grid outages like the one right now. Using microgrids also facilitates communities' ability to aggregate their renewable energy production and coordinate their energy savings.
PREPA is broken publicly owned utility. But it could be fixed to fit this new future. Public utilities are supposed to be to the benefit of their customer-owners. By instituting new processes and policies that bring democracy back into the public utility, PREPA could be transformed to genuinely serve its community. For instance, board member quotas for workers (perhaps through their union as is common in Germany and other countries), community members, such as EID representatives, and other stakeholders could be instated. In contrast to their reception in the wake of Maria, the Instituto Nacional de Energia y Sostenibilidad Islena (INESI) should be included in rebuilding discussions, drawing on a local knowledge base of the electricity system. New requirements for decision-making and financial transparency could be implemented. The utility could work alongside renewable coops and EIDs, facilitating long-standing relationships through collaborative planning processes and transformative power purchasing agreements. With effective engagement of workers and the community, PREPA could be democratized and reinvented, and the pitfalls of privatization prevented.
One of the major barriers is financing. Puerto Rico is strapped by debt and the US doesn't have a good track record with providing the commonwealth with the aid or powers it needs. The Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) calculates that it will take about $2.2 billion dollars in annual investments for the next thirty years to reach an equitable, decentralized energy grid in Puerto Rico. This is a significant investment, but having an unsound grid actually was expensive. Wiping out or radically restructuring Puerto Rico's debt--as President Trump and others have suggested--is an obvious first step. This would open up space for Island to borrow the money it needs to rebuild. Beyond that, PERI proposes a carbon tax to help fund public projects and provide rebates and subsidies for the energy transition into the future.
The other barrier is time. "There is no time to redesign the system or apply new technologies at a large scale now," Carlos Reyes from EcoElectrica told FiveThirtyEight. The Governor has set a quick timeline for recovery--one that doesn't allow for a complete overhaul of the grid to optimize for renewables. This urgency is understandable. Weeks after the storm, hospitals don't have access to life-saving electricity and food is scarce. The problem is that the groups brought in are rebuilding the same failing system and locking Puerto Rico into an unsustainable grid for the next 70 years. By doing so, they also failing to change the exact system that is vulnerable to storms like Maria--storms that are only going to intensify as climate change accelerates.
Instead of funneling money into a grid that will be obsolete in the near future, we should look to alternative short-term solutions that are already on the ground like Resilient Power Puerto Rico. They have developed a three-part plan to "bring as much energy to as many people as possible as quickly as possible, using a proven, mobile solar electric system that targets the hardest-hit and most remote communities first." Such a renewal from disaster is not unprecedented. Higashi Matsushima in Japan, devastated in the wake of the 2011 tsunami, turned to a renewable-based microgrid system to create a safe, clean energy reality. Greensburg, Kansas is now powered by 100 percent renewable energy after being levelled by a devastating Tornado in 2007.
While Elon Musk and others could be a part of this vision-- helping to set up community solar projects with panels and laying town microgrids in coordination with coops and EIDs-- the relationship would have to be managed with intention, ensuring that the island isn't preyed upon by companies in the urgency of getting the grid up and running. Any deal should ensure that those benefitting ultimately are the Puerto Rican people, both in the short and long term.
A political system haunted by racial violence and terror. An economy delivering great wealth for the few amid stagnation and indebtedness for the many. A rising millennial generation with deteriorating prospects increasingly willing to put their bodies on the line for something better. A climate catastrophe already beginning to unfold on the flooded streets of our largest cities. With the profoundly troubling events in Charlottesville--and before that in Ferguson, Berkeley, Baltimore, and elsewhere--the ghosts of America's past have come crowding in. And the ghosts of our future made landfall with Hurricanes Harvey and Irma. Like all such ghosts, these demand a response. We must now produce one that is both deeply moral and capable of getting at the heart of our difficulties. We must overcome the nightmares of fear, hatred, and isolation that have seized our politics with a strategy that can deliver solutions commensurate with the scale of the problems we face.
Three challenges stand out against a backdrop of crisis and malaise. The first is the need to confront squarely, and on an ongoing basis, America's deep history of racism that has led to armed white supremacists marching openly in the streets and a Neo-Nazi sympathizer sitting in the White House. The second is the imperative to get off the defensive and, coming together, put forward a much more powerful, transformative alternative to Trumpism--real, practicable solutions to the deep economic and ecological problems we are facing as a nation, building from the bottom up, as all serious movements must. The third calls for a political strategy capable of uniting a broad coalition around a shared agenda for building power, mobilizing the potential mass movement for fundamental transformation that is in the making if we develop the tools and alliances to bring about lasting change.
Our first commitment, as Cornel West has urged, has to be moral and political. We must mount an all-out attack on racism, racist leadership, and the so-called "alt-right"--including those who currently lead the country. America is not the only nation in the world in which the populist right has captured state power. Hungary and Poland each have right-wing authoritarian governments. Narendra Modi, India's Hindu nationalist prime minister, once incited a massacre, while Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu have each presided over one. But the presidency of the United States is unique in the extraordinary political, economic, and military resources it commands. It's time to face up to the fact that racism has been central not incidental to this power, with deep roots extending all the way back to the origins of the nation.
"The United States was founded on white supremacy."
The United States was founded on white supremacy. Our early economic development rested on the theft of Native land, expropriation of African labor, and expansion into Mexican territory. By 1860, Yale historian David W. Blight reminds us, slaves were still worth more than the entire productive capacity of the country taken together. This history--encompassing Jim Crow, systematic discrimination in local, state, and federal programs, and a continuing racialized regime of mass incarceration--is deeply interwoven in our social fabric. The University of Virginia Rotunda, at which white nationalists, their faces twisted with hate, held their infamous torch-lit rally, was erected and maintained by slaves. The City Council's decision to remove the statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee--proximate cause of the far right's invasion of Charlottesville--was accompanied by a $4 million reparations plan for the city's historically marginalized black neighborhoods. Even as we mobilize to defend minority communities under assault from Trumpism, we must now massively expand our efforts to repair the terrible legacy of harm we as a nation have inflicted upon them.
"The present crisis long pre-dates Donald Trump."
Our second challenge is to distinguish between symptoms and causes in order to confront the underlying problems. He may stand at the head of some of the most sinister forces in American political life, but the present crisis long pre-dates Donald Trump. Exploding economic inequality, wage stagnation, poverty, deindustrialization, economic and political disenfranchisement, disinvestment--for decades, under Clinton and Obama no less than Reagan and the Bushes, most of the gains from the richest economy in the history of the world have gone only to the very top. Real wages for the vast majority of American workers have been stagnant for at least three decades, while the income share taken by the top one percent has jumped from ten percent in 1980 to more than 22 percent today. In terms of wealth, the top ten percent now command around three quarters of the total, with the richest four hundred individuals amassing more wealth than approximately the bottom 190 million Americans combined. There are also growing disparities between black and Hispanic Americans, on the one hand, and white Americans on the other. Over the past thirty years, for instance, the average wealth of white Americans has grown a fifth faster than that of Hispanic Americans and by more than three times that of black Americans. And all of this inequity has been driven by an economic system addicted to growth, all too happy to "externalize" the consequences for our ecological future.
We are now living the consequences of these dangerous patterns. Many communities are falling into decay, their social bonds dissolving. Violence remains endemic (including shocking levels of violence against women). Civil liberties are eroding. The lives of millions are compromised by economic and social pain. Health inequality is on the rise, with the life expectancy gap between rich and poor people born in 1950 up significantly over those born in 1920. The labor force participation rate has declined for two decades--and is projected to decrease still further. Young people are saddled with ever-growing debt, including (but by no means limited to) a staggering $1.3 trillion in student loans. The incarceration rate has more than quintupled since the 1970s, and remains among the very highest in the world with people of color incarcerated at dramatically higher rates than their white counterparts. Polling on everything from Congress to the media shows a significant fall in public trust. At some point something had to give. This is the context that permitted the monstrous rise of Trump.
At the same time, traditional liberal strategies to achieve equitable and sustainable outcomes simply no longer work to alter most of the big trends. The government lacks both will and capacity to use taxation and "after the fact" redistribution to achieve equity goals or to regulate corporations effectively. Puttering around on the edge of the climate crisis, we fail to understand that we face a system-wide crisis, not simply an economic and political crisis. It is time to get serious about taking on the underlying economic institutions and relationships--capital markets, private credit creation by big banks, footloose multinational corporations--that corrupt the political system and drive current economic and ecological outcomes. It's time to face up to the profound institutional and systemic nature of our difficulties.
"Traditional liberal strategies to achieve equitable and sustainable outcomes simply no longer work to alter most of the big trends."
The good news is that the failure of traditional politics and policies to address fundamental challenges has fueled an extraordinary amount of experimentation in communities across the United States and around the world. Practical precedents, models, and strategies already exist that build from the bottom and begin to suggest radical new possibilities. Cooperatives, worker-owned companies, social enterprises, public banks, community land trusts, neighborhood corporations, municipal enterprises, anchor institution approaches, participatory budgeting, local food systems--in a thousand different places, ordinary people have been at work creating solutions, building knowledge and power and solidarity from the bottom up. A massive escalation of this activity must now be a major priority--in civil society, in philanthropy, in communities, in workplaces, locally, regionally, and nationally.
It is time both to resist and to go on the offensive. A comprehensive plan for the economic reconstruction of our communities--connected to the urgent imperative of a large scale transition in our energy and transit systems--can define the first key element in a compelling political program around which to organize to defeat Trumpism. Such a plan would increase city and state revenues, build the tax base, add new democratized businesses to the economy that are anchored and will not leave, and increase jobs and local multipliers. It requires integrating into a coherent whole many things that we know can be done and are already being done in diverse but isolated ways in many communities across the country.
"It is time both to resist and to go on the offensive."
There is also an urgent need to adapt such strategies to rural areas and Rustbelt states, where they could work to re-build economies through the creation of value chains and sustainable local production. Trump shows that we write off these communities at our peril. From upstate New York through Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin, community after community has been destabilized by waves of deindustrialization. Once-great cities have been thrown away, whole regions left behind, and around five million manufacturing jobs lost since the mid-1990s. From Appalachia to the Gulf Coast, communities denied any alternative path cling tenuously to the false promises of the extractive economy, fueling our planetary carbon nightmare. The terrible political consequences of all this are now coming home to roost.
Trump himself ran hard against neoliberal finance and trade, striking a chord in the abandoned towns of the Rustbelt and rural Appalachia, which proved willing to give him a chance. These are not all the racists of Charlottesville who--clad in golf shirts and khakis or military-surplus gear--resemble more the traditional fascist mix of bourgeois and "lumpen" elements. Rather they include ordinary working families whose anger is understandably boiling over at a system they know is stacked against them. An election-day poll found 72 percent of Americans--a supermajority--in agreement that "the American economy is rigged to advantage the rich and powerful." Trump flipped a third of counties that had previously voted twice for Obama. We urgently need to rise to the challenge of this profoundly dangerous era of pain and difficulty.
To do so means adopting a multi-pronged strategy for building community wealth and transforming our economies, thereby defusing some of the pressures currently being exploited by right-wing forces. Examples of the power of such strategies can already be found in places where they might least be expected. Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, for example, organized for participatory planning around a post-coal future in Appalachia, fighting for the Clean Power Plan when it was blocked at state level--a prefiguration of the kind of intransigence and indifference we now face at the national level. Greensburg, Kansas became--in a deep red state, under a Republican mayor--one of the greenest towns in the country when the government acted as partner and catalyst to rebuild the town after it was leveled by a tornado. Chattanooga, Tennessee has one of the fastest internet connections in America--thanks to a municipal fiber broadband network whereby public ownership of digital infrastructure is driving local economic revitalization. Such approaches point in the direction, ultimately, of rebuilding a power base--in both red states and blue cities--for a transformative new politics capable of standing on its own feet, operating within ecological limits, and managing our economy for the benefit of the many and not the few.
"We urgently need to rise to the challenge of this profoundly dangerous era of pain and difficulty."
New strategies of democratic ownership within a community framework could function as the linchpin of an approach capable of uniting economic justice organizers, progressives, labor, and environmental and conservation activists while at the same time presenting an attractive economic development option to municipal officials. Moreover, such an approach can also help build economic power in communities struggling against concentrated poverty. On the basis of such a strategy, "rebel cities" at the forefront of resistance to Trump can begin to address the fiscal crisis locally no matter what the political conditions at the federal and state level. By leveraging their purchasing power, and that of large nonprofit anchor institutions, cities can act to keep dollars circulating locally and get them into the hands of disadvantaged communities--and at the same time reducing the carbon footprint associated with far-flung globalized supply chains.
Building from the bottom is inevitably the beginning step, but it is not the last. It is only through the building of a new power base resting on a renewal of local agency and new democratic ownership forms that the larger trajectory of systemic power can be addressed. A build-up of cooperative, worker- and community-owned firms points in the direction of larger regional and national structural possibilities. When large corporations go down, as General Motors and Chrysler did in the last major crisis, what new directions in public and community/worker ownership, and new forms of transportation, may be possible? Next time the giant Wall Street banks come to the government asking for a bailout, what form of local, regional, or national publicly owned banks might be demanded? As we edge closer and closer to losing our first city to climate change's deadly onset, what new demands could find a ready base of support? New models are needed, building up from real-world experience, projecting national models forward on the basis of local learning and the lessons of other nations. It is in a new coming together of progressive politics and institutional development around innovative community-based models and a powerful and bold larger national democratizing vision that we will find our answers to Trumpism.
Prior to the 1930s, key elements of what became the New Deal were developed slowly, step by step, in America's state and local "laboratories of democracy." This hard work laid the groundwork both for new national institutions and programs and a new national politics--a progressive liberal vision that, at the time, offered something to hope for, work for, which could counter the traditional corporate power that dominated the preceding decades. We're in a related but much more challenging historical moment today, and must get to work building our own new models that both deliver real benefits on the ground and can also lead to much larger transformative forms of democratic institution-changing impact nationally as new political power develops. In dark times such as the present, the possibility of hope--at the level of community and the nation as a whole--depends on being able to envision and deliver an economy and a future that people can believe in.
The answer to Charlottesville, to ever-intensifying racism, to the accelerating climate crisis, and to Donald Trump himself is first, to resist, and then to get serious about changing the system that has created them, from the bottom up and in a radically decentralized way.