Unfortunately, the claim of discrimination is often used only as a shield by regulators and other ratepayers to stop income-based programs designed to protect the poor. Moreover, the claim of discrimination has often been confined to rates while discrimination in the provision of service has been largely ignored. Anti-discrimination regulations should be applied particularly in the evaluation of the service practices of public utilities. State utility statutes should forbid not only overt discrimination in rates, but also the more subtle forms of discrimination, inadvertent or otherwise, in the areas of disconnections, deposits, payment plans, and late charges and the like. The same principles that are used to evaluate claims of discrimination in ratemaking should be used to evaluate claims of service discrimination.
Some households simply lack the money to pay for their necessities, including energy.
Clearly, households at the lowest ranges of income, by definition, need fuel assistance the most. Texas, where this burden would arise, has almost 75,000 households more than 16 percent of its total fuel assistance population who fall into this income range. Cash assistance serves a purpose, and a population, that no amount of energy efficiency investment, or winter protections, or regulatory protections, and the like, would be able to serve. These households simply need additional resources to pay their home heating bills. Winter Moratorium Finally, low-income households should be protected by utility commission regulations against cold weather induced death and illness.