The Blindingly Obvious Conclusion Goes Unnoted

What is the difference between 2001 and 2013 when it comes to California electricity?:

For the past year or so, the ISO has been engaged in a series of disputes with JPMorgan over the investment bank's trades and other business practices. The disputes are being refereed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which has generally sided with California in a series of preliminary rulings.

Among other things, FERC suspended JPMorgan's authority to trade electricity at a profit for allegedly lying to investigators about its California trades. The commission also ordered JPMorgan to stop obstructing the renovation of two Huntington Beach power plants; state officials said the renovations could prove critical in avoiding blackouts in Southern California this summer.

In March, FERC officially warned JPMorgan of a "possible enforcement action" over its trading methods, according to a regulatory filing.

After consistently denying any wrongdoing, JPMorgan appears ready to settle. The total settlement, covering the firm's operations in California and the Midwest, could reportedly surpass $500 million.

So, does the Sacramento Bee's Dale Kasler come to blindingly-obvious conclusion? No, he does not. When FERC is under the control of Republicans (as in 2001) efforts to recover damages are impossible to achieve. Only when Democrats have a dominant voice (like in 2013) is justice even possible.

That is the proper conclusion.