Swampfox76, If you read the sentence where the $1 billion figure appears, it's identified as an "overrun."

The Mississippi Public Service Commission has not approved putting the entire bill on the backs of rate payers. Earlier this year, PSC approved a 15 percent rate increase for this year and another 3 percent next year. Supposedly, all other costs will be shouldered by the company or its shareholders.

From the Associated Press: "Commission staffers say a residential customer who uses 1,000 kilowatt hours per month will pay $16.50 to $17.50 more, after decreases are considered. The average Mississippi Power customer uses more electricity than 1,000 kwh per month."

Based on those figures, the average bill will go up by $198 to $210. While that's not insignificant to many people, it's not the $900 a year you're citing.

Time will tell what the increase will actually be for ratepayers.

I couldn't agree more, JustJess. These are real travelers talking, too, not some industry flacks.

Bubba, to say that Zimmerman's attorneys didn't specify Stand Your Ground in their defense and imply that it didn't have anything to do with the trial's outcome is--well, misleading. If Stand Your Ground wasn't the law in Florida, Zimmerman would probably have had a much tougher time with using self-defense as an argument for shooting an unarmed teenager.

SYG was part and parcel of the defense--even if the lawyers never used those words--and, as Todd pointed out, the jury considered the law in their deliberations -- as did the judge in his instructions.

From the story Todd linked: "... the jury instructions contained the law’s key provision and instructed jurors that self-defense meant Zimmerman was entitled to “stand his ground” with “no duty to retreat.”

Mississippi Power responded:

In this week's Stinker Quote of the Week Award, you presented a very inaccurate view of Mississippi Power's Kemper County energy facility. The plant is a technological marvel of which all Mississippians should be proud.

The amount our customers will pay for this environmentally responsible facility is far below the total cost of the project and not the unlimited ceiling that that you suggested. While you are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts.

We please ask that you consider publishing these five key points about this project:

1. Mississippi Power is investing in innovation for the future of Mississippi and America. By using the nation's most abundant fuel source in an environmentally responsible process, the facility will produce the electricity essential to create jobs and help families thrive.

2. Kemper's innovative clean-coal technology, price stability, and fuel diversity are better for the future of Mississippi than building another natural gas plant. The Kemper facility will use inexpensive lignite coal located right beneath our feet here in Mississippi in an innovative
process that converts the lignite to gas to produce electricity. Use of this abundant resource should give Mississippi families and businesses the assurance that fluctuations in the cost of fuel or fuel availability are not expected to affect their electricity supply for decades.

3. Mississippi's economy is benefiting today and should benefit for decades to come because of the Kemper County energy facility. In addition to providing what we expect to be affordable energy for our customers for decades, the project is creating thousands of jobs, employing more than 400 Mississippi companies, and providing millions of tax dollars to state and local governments.

4. Mississippi Power customers will not pay one penny of cost above the limit agreed to by the Public Service Commission and the Legislature. The shareholders of Southern Company will pay for every penny above this limit for the company's investment in innovation and advancement in
America's energy security, and Mississippi Power customers will benefit from it for decades to come. This technology represents coal’s future in energy production and our commitment to a diverse fuel mix.

5. Customer bills are going up less than projected to pay for Kemper construction. When the construction certificate was approved, Mississippi Power projected customer bills would increase by more than 30 percent. Today, we are projecting the increase to be approximately 22
percent for the average retail customer. This increase is well below the outlandish 60 percent predictions made by project opponents, which is an outright misrepresentation of the facts.

Amoi S. Geter
Manager, Media Relations
Mississippi Power

I wonder if Mr. Hosemann would have been as zealous about protecting voter rights without the VRA and the scrutiny of the Department of Justice and leading the way. Because of the VRA, Hosemann has put into place several expensive safeguards to limit disenfranchising legitimate voters--such as equipping clerks' office with cameras and offering transportation to voters who can't get to an office to obtain an ID.

Should we just "trust" that Hosemann would have done those things anyway, simply because they are the right thing to do--at the very least?

Of course, if voter ID were actually about curbing voter fraud at the polls, as Hosemann has claimed, he would have eagerly shown us all those cases that make this legislation necessary. He hasn't, though, which makes the whole endeavor suspect. Unnecessary legislation for a problem that doesn't exist.

MORE: Clearly, JS, your "government housing" example is a horrible failure of a "hand out" system. In most cases, it amounts to little more than warehousing of "undesirables" in parts of town the "givers" don't really want to live in anyway. "Urban renewal" programs of that kind helped rip the heart out of many thriving minority communities, isolating people from the larger community and stigmatizing them as unworthy of anything better.

In contrast, a "hand up" provides empowerment to allow the recipient to accomplish something through their own sweat and blood, thus infusing the end result--and the recipient--with worth and pride. I see Habitat for Humanity in that category; people have to work to build the house they'll eventually live in. Knowing what it takes to build a house, recipients (who are carefully vetted and must also make regular mortgage payments; the houses aren't "free") are much more inclined to care for their property and make improvements.

I put affirmative action into the "hand up" category. It doesn't guarantee anything--not scholarships, not getting into a preferred college, not good grades, and certainly not a degree or a job after graduation. Beyond giving a student a hand to get into a school, all of the other accomplishments must be worked for and accomplished by the student. And as nearly anyone who has earned a college degree knows, it's not a walk in park. Unless you can throw a football ;-)

Again, I'm not saying that it's a perfect solution (or reparation) for systemic racism, but it does allow some disadvantaged individuals a modicum of a boost.

JS, reparations for the wrongfully imprisoned is only a terrible example if you have a narrow view of what reparations are. I've never said that we "owe" anyone's ancestors cash in perpetuity; however, paying someone to rebuild a life stolen by wrongful imprisonment is appropriate.

Donna pretty clearly explained how I think of reparations up thread: "It is simply a way for the government to repair harm it's done. ... Reparations also means investing in cities and neighborhoods and schools that the government itself (along with the business community) decimated due to discrimination, redlining, urban "renewal," less investment than in white communities, etc."

Bottom line for me on the reparations conversation is that they come in many forms and in many sizes. They are not "one size fits all" solutions.

I also see a distinct difference between a "hand out" and a "hand up." Free handouts may provide a short-term solution to a problem, but rarely bring long-term relief. As you alluded, handouts often create antagonism for both the giver and the receiver: the giver because they eventually resent having to give and give and give while seeing (naturally) diminished returns; the receiver because they eventually will see themselves as "charity cases," without any intrinsic worth (thus the handout has no worth) and as "less than" the givers. The givers eventually see themselves as better than the receivers, too.

That's a classic "hero with good intentions" scenario so often portrayed in books and films such as "Mississippi Burning" and "The Help," with their white heroes swooping in to save black people (who can't do it for themselves, obviously). "Handout" thinking is why just throwing money at a problem rarely works.

Wow, JS, it's frightening how narrow your responses are on this thread. Do you not see any shades of gray?

By your "merit" definition, no one under any circumstance, regardless of hardship, color of skin, gender, etc., would ever get a break from you--and by extension, society--at all, ever. By the same token, no wrongdoing warrants any kind of reparation, regardless of the heinousness of the "crime." You didn't get a break, so screw everyone else.

End of conversation.

So, for example, the people Mississippi wrongly imprisoned for decades (some despite all evidence pointing to their innocence) shouldn't get anything for the lost years of their lives, right? F**k 'em. Let up claw their own way up the hill. That seems to be your attitude.

Is it really that difficult to understand that regardless of the amount of determination you have, that being a white male gives you a better shot at success than, say, being a black woman? Really?

The only way that belittles your accomplishments is if you see every opportunity as a zero-sum proposition--which they are not. Someone else's accomplishments aren't a judgment on yours, neither does one preclude the other. Be happy and satisfied with what you've done, absolutely. But please, don't let that stop you from reaching a hand to others who may need it.

No need to be snotty, Bill Jackson. The JFP didn't hand the guy a rifle as a photo prop.

I suspect it's a reminder of what kind of weapon is allowable under the state's new open carry law, Bill Jackson, but ultimately, I suppose you'll have to ask him. Per the photo caption: "Legislative Black Caucus Chairman Sen. Kenneth Wayne Jones, D-Canton, displayed a semi-automatic weapon at the June 27 press conference."