🚀 go-pugleaf

John Navas wrote:
> 1.  I don't think anti-trust laws would prevent such agreements among
> sovereign entities (states).

Immunity is waived when a soveriegn entity acts in concert with
non-soverign entities.  Since states are not the only buyers (indeed,
outside California, states are not significant buyers at all), a
meaningful "buyer's cartel" could not exist without involving
non-soveriegn entities.  

The kind of restructuring necessary for soverign states to take over all
power buying would require, at the very least, FERC approval under
federal energy law.  There is no chance of this happening.

> 2.  I don't think Congress needs to approve anything not preempted by
> Federal law.

Article I Section 10 Clause 3.  "No State shall, without the Consent of
Congress ... enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State."

> 3.  As a practical matter California could simply announce its cap, and
> other states could match it.  That would seem to be no more unlawful
> than airline ticket pricing.

Such an arrangement would not be very effective cartel.  Indeed, were
California to announce its cap, not only could sellers use it against
us, but other buyers could use it against us as well (and both would
likely be required by their fiduciary and public service duties to do
so).

And it could also be subject to antitrust enforcement, just as some
airline pricing practices have been.