From: steven.kean@enron.com
To: mark.schroeder@enron.com
Date: 2000-10-19 08:19:00+00:00
Subject: Enron Mentions

----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/19/2000 08:18 AM -----

	Ann M Schmidt
	10/19/2000 07:55 AM
		 
		 To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith 
Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth 
Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Laura 
Schwartz/Corp/Enron@Enron, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Enron Mentions





Oct. 18, 2000, 9:11PM
Briefs: City and state 
Enron strategy officer named vice chairman
Enron Corp. said Wednesday that J. Clifford Baxter, its chief strategy 
officer since June, has been promoted to vice chairman. 
Baxter is a key member of the team that built Enron's successful wholesale 
energy business, said Chairman and CEO Kenneth Lay. The promotion will help 
enhance that business. 
Baxter joined Enron in 1991. He was chairman and chief executive officer of 
Enron North America before being named chief strategy officer, a position 
that he keeps. Enron already has one vice chairman, Joseph Sutton, whose 
focus is operations. 






Oct. 18, 2000, 11:25PM
Houston Chronicle
Businesses feel strains of political 'shakedown' 
By KAREN MASTERSON 
Copyright 2000 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau 
WASHINGTON -- Business executives are being tapped for record amounts of 
money to support political campaigns and are tired of what one calls the 
"shakedown" by candidates and their parties, according to two studies 
released Wednesday. 
Nearly $256 million has been raised in so-called soft money -- unlimited 
contributions from corporations, unions and wealthy individuals to political 
action committees. 
That figure is five times the amount of soft money raised in the presidential 
election year of 1992, according to the Federal Election Commission. 
A poll of businesses released Wednesday shows that the pressure put on 
corporate executives to make large contributions is creating a backlash that 
could lead to reform next year in Congress. 
The study reveals that 75 percent of corporate heads feel pressure to give; 
half said they fear repercussions if they turn down requests for money; and, 
consequently, 60 percent support a ban on soft money. 
Overall contributions -- for spending on both campaigns and issue ads -- have 
surpassed those made during the 1996 campaigns for president, the House and 
the Senate by $430 million. This election cycle's total, now at $1.6 billion, 
reflects contributions made in the 18 months leading up to June 30. 
Those against the influence of money on politics worry most that much more is 
to come. Their estimates put total campaign contributions up to $3 billion -- 
more than the total budget of many small countries -- once the remaining 
months of this year are accounted for. 
"Even before this election season began, we knew that the 2000 election was 
going to be one for the record books," said Larry Makinson, executive 
director of Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit group that watches 
campaign contributions and their influence on policy. 
A lot is at stake this year, including the White House and control of the 
House, where Republicans hold a narrow majority. Democrats also hope to 
recover at least a few seats in the Senate. 
The center's analysis of FEC records shows that the computer industry leaped 
from a rank of 55 in campaign giving in 1990 to eighth place this year, 
providing $25 million in nearly equal amounts to Democrats and Republicans. 
"By splitting their money, the industry has gotten just about everything it's 
asked for from Congress," Makinson said. Among those requests are a 
moratorium on an Internet sales tax and an increase in immigration visas for 
high-tech job applicants. 
Efforts to ban soft money have been made on Capitol Hill, but have gone 
nowhere. And the two presidential candidates who made a soft-money ban 
central to their campaigns -- Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and former Sen. Bill 
Bradley, D-N.J. -- lost their primary election bids. 
Advocates of a total ban hope the business survey means executives are ready 
to act against the status quo. 
"I remember $5,000 and $10,000 contributions in soft money," said Harry 
Freeman, a former executive vice president of American Express Co., a 
position he held until 1990. Now he said executives are asked for $100,000 
and $200,000. 
And some executives see the practice as anti-competitive, Freeman said, 
because significant resources are going into political campaigns instead of 
being reinvested in a company's ability to compete in the marketplace. 
"Some are fascinated by politicians and think it's a big ideological thing to 
contribute. But the poll shows most people see it as a shakedown," said 
Freeman, who is currently a trustee of the Committee for Economic 
Development, a pro-business public policy institute that favors campaign 
finance overhaul and is supported by officials at Hasbro, Genesco, PP&L Inc. 
and other companies. 
The center commissioned the business survey, which included a random sample 
of 300 corporate executives. 
Soft money allows politicians and political committees to ask for huge sums 
of money, way beyond the limits placed on so-called hard money, which is 
capped and controlled by the Federal Election Commission. 
Because of soft money, "the message to donors is forget the limits," Makinson 
said Wednesday at a Center for Responsive Politics news conference. 
He said the ballooning of campaign contributions is backed by a recent 
federal court order that found the FEC limits on issue-ad spending were 
applicable if the advertisement blatantly promoted one candidate and included 
the term "vote for ... " 
But Makinson said only 3 percent of television ads fall into that narrowly 
defined category. This is a "messy area" that Congress sooner or later will 
have to deal with, he said. 
Both hard and soft money raised for the presidential campaign, including 
individual and party contributions, is up 45 percent, from $230.9 million in 
1996 to $335.1 million in 2000. Congressional campaign contributions have 
increased 45 percent in the same time period, from $271.8 million to $393 
million. And Senate campaigns have gone up 64 percent, from $158 million to 
$259.7 million, mainly because of hugely expensive races in New York and New 
Jersey. 
Texans alone gave more than $71 million in campaign contributions, with 73 
percent going to Republicans. Texas ranks fourth in campaign contributions, 
behind California, New York and the District of Columbia, according to the 
center's analysis. 
Among those to make the center's list of top 50 individual donors is 
Houstonian Kenneth Lay, who runs Enron and is a longtime supporter and family 
friend of former President George Bush. He gave more than $361,000, almost 
exclusively to Republicans. 
Sam Wyly, another Texan, gave Republicans more than $327,000. He is an 
investor who ran a special interest group that criticized McCain during the 
primaries. 
Two Texas congressmen raised among the largest pools of money for use in 
boosting other candidates' campaigns. House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, R-Sugar 
Land, distributed $640,462. House Majority Leader Dick Armey,R-Irving, gave 
away $521,099, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. 


	

	






Oct. 18, 2000, 11:28PM
Renaming the Dome? Rely on it 
By ERIC BERGER 
Copyright 2000 Houston Chronicle 
Reliant Energy is expected to pay about $300 million to splash its name 
across the new football stadium and Astrodome complex, by far the most ever 
for a sports facility's name. 
Although negotiators said Wednesday that the naming rights agreement was not 
yet signed, they said talks were "feverish" and that a formal announcement is 
likely next week. 
Under the proposed agreement, outlined by sources close to the talks, Reliant 
would pay about $9 million a year to name the $367 million football stadium 
being built for the Houston Texans. The energy company would pay an 
additional $750,000 to secure naming rights for the entire Astrodome complex, 
including the Dome, the AstroArena and a new exposition center. 
The deal, expected to include a stadium suite for Reliant, extensive 
advertising throughout the facility and rides on the team plane for company 
executives, would run for 30 years. 
Reliant's bid comes the same year that Enron Field opened in downtown Houston 
bearing the name of a chief local competitor, Enron Corp. 
Both energy utilities have eyed naming rights as valuable promotional tools 
to boost their profiles as electricity deregulation looms in Texas and around 
the country. 
The Reliant deal also comes on the heels of an 11 percent rate increase by 
the company's HL&P unit in August and a proposed 11 percent increase by 
December to offset rising fuel costs. 
If signed, the agreement would be the most lucrative naming rights deal ever, 
both in total dollars and number of years. 
About a year ago, FedEx agreed to pay $205 million over 27 years to name the 
Washington Redskins' football stadium, the largest deal to date in total 
dollars. And in February 1999, Royal Philips Electronics agreed to pay about 
$9 million a year for 20 years to name the home of the Atlanta Hawks 
basketball team and Thrashers hockey team -- the largest annual sum to date. 
Officials with the Houston Texans, owned by Bob McNair, steadfastly denied a 
deal had been signed. 
"A deal is not in place. We continue to have discussions," said Jamey Rootes, 
senior vice president of marketing for the Texans. 
However, another team source -- speaking on condition of anonymity -- 
confirmed that the $10 million annual figure was accurate and that Reliant 
had beat out Dynegy, whose chairman, Chuck Watson, owns a minority share of 
the football team. 
The Houston stadium is particularly valuable because of its rodeo ties and 
the likelihood it will host multiple Super Bowls, said Jeff Knapple, 
president and chief executive officer of Envision, a Los Angeles-based 
consulting company. Houston is all but guaranteed to host the 2004 Super 
Bowl. 
The Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo draws 2 million visitors a year, and the 
name of a stadium hosting a Super Bowl is heard by an estimated 1 billion 
people around the world on Super Bowl Sunday. 
As part of the stadium financing deal, the Texans will receive 83 percent of 
the money paid for the stadium's naming rights, with the facility's other 
main tenant, the rodeo, receiving 12 percent. 
Harris County, which owns the Astrodome complex, will receive the remaining 5 
percent of the stadium naming rights fee, and all of the $750,000 yearly 
payment for the rights to the rest of the complex. If Reliant is chosen, the 
county also would receive $400,000 a year for giving the energy company the 
exclusive right to provide power. 
The football stadium is scheduled to open in August 2002, at which time the 
Astrodome would have no tenants. Although Harris County Judge Robert Eckels 
has ruled out tearing down the Dome, the county has not decided what to do 
with the building. 
Although the naming rights deal encompasses the Astrodome and AstroArena, the 
rights to those buildings could be resold if they are refurbished for 
different purposes, two county sources said. 
If the county were to build a new arena at the complex, Reliant would be 
given the first option to bid on the name. 
It was only three years ago that Compaq Computer Corp. scored what now 
appears a bargain, spending $5.4 million to rename The Summit for eight 
years. 
Since then the value of naming rights has skyrocketed as dotcoms, technology 
companies, insurance vendors and utilities have scrambled to achieve name 
recognition in an increasingly cluttered media world. 
Only a couple of years after Compaq's deal, Enron paid $100 million over 30 
years to name the downtown ballpark. 
During negotiations with the Houston Rockets to build a downtown arena 
earlier this year, the city also sought to cash in on the escalating value of 
naming rights. If voters approved the agreement Nov. 7, the city would 
receive 5 percent of the arena's naming rights, to be capped at $200,000 a 
year. 


	

Enron Considering India Oil, Gas Assets Sale

10/19/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

SINGAPORE -(Dow Jones)- Enron India, a unit of U.S.-based Enron Corp. (ENE)., 
is considering selling its oil and gas assets in the country, a spokesman for 
the company said Thursday. 
Enron India operates three offshore oil and gas fields in a joint venture 
with Oil & Natural Gas Co. (P.ONG) and Reliance Petroleum Ltd. (R.RPT). The 
Tapti, Panna and Mukta fields are located off the coast of Gujerat and 
Maharastra.
It holds a 30% stake in each field, while ONGC and Reliance hold 40% and 30% 
stakes respectively. 
"Enron India is considering the sale of these oil and gas fields," said the 
spokesman. He declined to say how soon the company would arrive at a 
decision. 
He stressed that there would be no disruptions in the operations while the 
company was mulling the sale. 
He added that there would also be no disruptions in the runup to any 
withdrawal should the company opt to sell their stakes in the fields. 
A spokesman for JV partner ONGC said the company would be keen to buy Enron's 
stake if it went up for sale. "Our company will take a look at it. There's no 
reason why ONGC shouldn't be keen," he said. 

Analysts said Enron may be seeking to divest its oil and gas assets to focus 
instead on "new economy" sectors such as telecommunications. "This could be a 
reshuffle as to where they focus their exposure. There's a big push in the 
telecom space," said a Hong Kong-based oil and gas analyst with an 
international merchant bank. 
The analyst said Enron's possible divestment of its oil and gas assets wasn't 
overly negative for India's foreign investment program. 
"Oil companies are always pruning and tweaking their portfolios even in core 
areas. This isn't the beginning of the end of Enron's participation in 
India," he said. 
Sanjeev Prasad, an oil and gas research analyst, with Bombay-based Kotak 
Securities, said Enron India's proposal to shed its oil and gas operation was 
indicative of a broader plan by parent company, Enron Corp., to slim down its 
global operations. 
"Globally, they have been doing it (divesting itself of global assets), and I 
am not too surprised they have done it here," Prasad said. 
If Enron India did proceed with its oil and gas sale, Prasad didn't expect it 
to have any major repercussions in the energy sector as a whole. "It (Enron) 
doesn't have much exposure in oil and gas in India," he said. 
He added that Reliance Petroleum could emerge as a likely buyer of Enron's 
stake. "They're very likely candidates," he said. The Hong Kong-based analyst 
also said Reliance Petroleum could emerge as a prospective buyer if Enron 
sold its oil and gas stake. 
Reliance Petroleum officials were unavailable for comment when contacted by 
Dow Jones Newswires. 
Current production in Enron India's three west coast offshore fields is 
approximately 290 million cubic feet a day of gas and 25,500 barrels a day of 
oil. 
Enron's oil, gas and power holdings in India are estimated to be worth around 
US$3 billion. 
The company's Dabhol power project, due to be completed in the fourth quarter 
of 2001, will generate 2,184 megawatts of power to become the world's largest 
independent natural gas-fired power plant. 
Enron closed the US$1.87 billion financing of the second phase of the Dabhol 
project in May 1999. The financing includes a liquefied natural gas terminal 
and regasification plant, allowing India to import natural gas for the first 
time. 
Enron contracts to purchase 2.1 million tons of LNG from Oman and Abu Dhabi 
to supply Dabhol when the second phase is completed end-2001. 
-By Sri Jegarajah, Dow Jones Newswires; 65-421-4831; 
sri.jegarajah@dowjones.com


Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 


Former Minn. Legislator Eyes Huge Wind Project In Plains
By Jon Kamp
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

10/19/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

CHICAGO -(Dow Jones)- Minnesota farmer Jim Nichols has a healthy soybean and 
corn crop this year. 
But it never hurts to have a little business on the side, or big ideas. So 
Nichols, a former Minnesota legislator, is trying to set up a 3,000-megawatt, 
$7 billion wind power project in South Dakota, Iowa and Minnesota.
"This is a giant step forward," Nichols said. "This one project more than 
doubles all the wind power in the country now." 
Few U.S. companies truly sell wind power competitively. But with natural gas 
prices soaring and environmental laws becoming tougher, the renewable energy 
source is poised to become a real option for developers, Nichols said. You 
just have to build on the right scale. 
Nichols' project, expected to be completed in 2006, is truly enormous. It 
would require 2,000 wind turbines, priced at about $1 million each. The 
turbines would stretch for 500 miles across three states and generate close 
to half the power of the Grand Coulee Dam. 
Nichols is planning to develop the wind farms with Clipper LLC, a recently 
formed Santa Barbara, Calif.-based wind development firm. 
Nichols and Ken Hach, Clipper's new project developer and a former employee 
of Enron Corp.'s (ENE) wind development unit, hope to support the project by 
inking long-term power contracts with Midwestern utilities like Chicago's 
Commonwealth Edison Co. 
The wind project isn't Nichols' first foray into the wind business. In 1994, 
he helped broker a deal that requires Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy Inc. 
(XEL) to buy 425 megawatts of wind power by 2002 in exchange for permission 
to build new storage space for spent nuclear fuel. 
This new project, however, is considerably more complex and faces plenty of 
potential stumbling blocks. First is the massive price tag. 
"The problem with this concept is you're asking big bucks," said Linda Byus, 
a utilities analyst at Dresdner Kleinwort Bensen in Chicago. 
Land will have to be acquired to site the turbines. And new transmission 
lines will have to be strung, something few utilities have been able to 
accomplish on any scale in recent years. 
In addition - brace yourselves, environmentalists - the project isn't 
entirely green. 
Since wind turbines can only be expected to turn about a third of the time, 
Nichols and Hach will have to line up a backup source of power to ensure that 
the long-term supply contracts they sign with utilities don't go unfulfilled. 
Although the developers could look to existing plants in the region, the 
back-up they're eying is new coal. According to Nichols, some coal companies 
in Wyoming are ready and willing to build six 500-megawatt plants to support 
the wind power contracts. Northern Plains A Welcome Site 

On the plus side, natural gas prices have soared to record highs, and many 
companies are looking for ways to soften their dependence on the fuel and its 
volatile wholesale markets, said John Dunlop, regional manager for the 
American Wind Energy Association. 
"There's a huge load that people are salivating to satisfy," he said. 
The northern Plains - flat, sparsely populated and home to steady winds - is 
the place to build. The industry, said Bob Gates, senior vice president of 
Enron Wind, calls the region "the Saudi Arabia of wind." 
South Dakota, at least, is actively soliciting developers of wind power. 
South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Chairman Jim Burg, who is hosting a 
meeting on the state's wind-power prospects Wednesday and Thursday, said many 
communities are vying for the chance to host wind-power projects. 
Fees provide some incentive - landowners may be offered 2% of the sale price 
of power generated on their land - as does the prospect of adding hundreds of 
new jobs. 
"I have a hard time not being a major proponent," Burg said. "We haven't had 
that kind of economic impact for a long time." 
Florida's FPL Group, (FPL), the largest wind-power operator in the U.S., is 
already looking at acquiring land in South Dakota, Burg said. 
"We definitely see (South Dakota) as a place to be in the future," said FPL 
spokeswoman Cathy Scott. 
Enron is also interested in the northern Plains. 
"We've done some development work in the area," Gates said. "And we've been 
talking with Clipper and other developers on a variety of projects in the 
area." 
Gates, citing confidentiality agreements, declined to comment on whether the 
company is directly involved in Nichols' projects. But he did say Enron has 
worked with Nichols before and has the capability to develop every aspect of 
a wind generating project. 
Hach, while acknowledging the difficulties of raising financing for wind 
projects, said funds could probably be found. 
"The level of interest on Wall Street is probably not as high as it should 
be," he said. But, "If the economics work, the financing will come." -By Jon 
Kamp, Dow Jones Newswires; 312-750-4129; jon.kamp@dowjones.com

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 


Fuel Cell Developer Dais-Analytic Announces Investment By Enron North America

10/18/2000
PR Newswire
(Copyright (c) 2000, PR Newswire)

ODESSA, Fla., Oct. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- Fuel cell developer Dais-Analytic Corp. 
of Odessa, FL announced today an alliance with Enron North America, a wholly 
owned subsidiary of Enron Corp. 
As part of the alliance, Enron has made an equity investment in Dais-Analytic 
and will support market development, distribution and other field services 
for Dais-Analytic's fuel cell, humidity control and related products. 
Financial details of the agreement were not released.
"Our partnership with Enron provides needed capital to accelerate the 
commercialization of our products," said Timothy Tangredi, Dais-Analytic's 
chairman and chief executive officer. "More importantly, it creates worldwide 
opportunities for the distribution, sales and service of our fuel cell power 
systems and membrane-based humidity control products." 
Dais-Analytic, created last year from the merger of Dais Corp. of Odessa, FL 
and Analytic Power Corp. of Boston, MA, is a privately held developer of 
distributed generation fuel cell systems for homes and small businesses as 
well as portable fuel cells for backup and standby generators, 
uninterruptible power supplies, and hybrid fuel cell/battery electric utility 
vehicles. Its patented technologies include low cost fuel cell membranes that 
are also being developed for dehumidification applications.


/CONTACT: Glenn Doell of Dais-Analytic Corp.,727-375-8484, ext. 202, or 
gjd@daisanalytic.com/ 22:01 EDT 

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 


Enron Names J. Clifford Baxter Vice Chairman

10/18/2000
Dow Jones News Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

HOUSTON -(Dow Jones)- Enron Corp. (ENE) named J. Clifford Baxter, the chief 
strategy officer, vice chairman. 
A company spokeswoman said Baxter will retain his role as chief strategy 
officer.
In a press release Wednesday, the company said Baxter joined Enron in 1991 
and was chairman and chief executive of Enron North America prior to being 
named Enron's chief strategy officer in June. 
An Enron spokeswoman said Baxter will relinquish his role as chief strategy 
officer. The company hasn't determined whether it intends to fill the 
position. 
The spokeswoman added that Joseph Sutton remains vice chairman with duties 
focused on Enron's operations. 
-Eamon Beltran; Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5400 

(CORRECTED 06:31 PM)


Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 


CORRECT: Enron Vice Chairman Baxter To Remain Chief Strategy

10/18/2000
Dow Jones News Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

Enron Corp. (ENE) named J. Clifford Baxter, the chief strategy officer, vice 
chairman. 
A company spokeswoman said Baxter will retain his role as chief strategy 
officer.
(An item that ran at 4:08 p.m. EDT stated that Baxter will relinquish this 
role. A company spokesman has since said Baxter will remain chief strategy 
officer).


Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.