George Cunningham (Democrat, Clean Elections Candidate, 2 Year Seat, http://www.cunningham2002.com/)
(about George Cunningham...)

I believe the Corporation Commission should be judged on how responsive it is to the public. A very good measure is to compare the level of public service provided by the Corporation Commission to its fellow state commissions. In this comparison, I would ask the following questions, in relation to similar services provided by other state commissions:

• Does the Commission provide useful, timely and easily available information to consumers about important public utility consumer issues, including how to file a complaint?
• Does the Commission have an adequate public assistance outreach program to inform consumers about Commission activities and consumer assistance programs?
• Does the Commission have a useful, up-to-date web site to enable the public electronic access to information and assistance relevant to consumer issues?
• Is it easy for the public to participate in the Commission's deliberations?
• Is the Commission's staff adequately trained to properly assist consumers with problems and issues?
• Are utility applications processed in an efficient and timely manner?

Mike (Lowell) Gleason (Republican, Clean Elections Candidate, 2 Year Seat)
(about Mike (Lowell) Gleason...)

The time to react to applications sent to the ACC should be analyzed to measure the performance of the ACC. A time frame for decisions in cases before the Commission should reflect the complication and the size of the case.

Jeff Hatch-Miller (Republican, Clean Elections Candidate, 2 Year Seat, http://www.hatch-miller.org/)
(about Jeff Hatch-Miller...)

Key factors are timeliness and accuracy of the service, information, and advice provided. Timelines should be established for all major services. Benchmarks should be established for improvement where problems are found. The length of time that the Commission's procedures take should not unnecessarily burden business operations nor be the primary reason for choosing alternative courses of action.

Jim Irvin (Republican, Clean Elections Candidate, 4 Year Seat, http://www.jimirvin.org/)
(about Jim Irvin...)

During the 6 years that I have been on the Commission, an enormous volume of companies have applied for, and received, CC&N's to provide telecommunications services to all or parts of Arizona. The process is not cumbersome, and is efficient as the parties make it. Because the Commission not only regulates telecommunications, but also regulates electricity, gas, water, railroad, securities, pipeline safety and, of course, corporations, resources are always strained, especially at times where large, complex issues are being considered (i.e. Qwest's 271 application, electric regulation restructuring, etc.). Of course the process needs to be as streamlined as possible. But, the Commission should not be judged on the volume of decisions it renders, nor the length of time it takes to process them, but instead on the quality of its decisions. The Commission's constitutionally mandated primary responsibility is to protect the citizens of this state and in doing so, some issues may take longer to resolve than others.

Roland James (Democrat, Clean Elections Candidate, 2 Year Seat, http://www.rolandjames.org/)
(about Roland James...)

How the Commission balances the public interest with corporate and individual interests. Ultimately, this determination is made by the citizens of Arizona. Arizona became a state in the Progressive era, and the Corporation Commission was put in the Arizona Constitution as the "fourth branch of government." The state of regulation nationwide 30 years ago was such that corporate-toady Alabama Commissioner Bull Conner was the most visible representative of regulation; you may remember Bull from his days as Birmingham Police Chief who set the dogs on civil rights marchers. I prefer Bob La Follette: "Which shall rule—wealth or man? Which shall lead—money or intellect? Who shall fill public stations—educated and patriotic free men and women, or the feudal serfs of corporate wealth."

Controlling the Internet so that it is open and free is one area where I will push for protection of the public interest. Lawrence Lessig, professor at Stanford Law School and author of "The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World" has noted that cable has a technological advantage in Internet with its broad band, but that cable has no mandate to be neutral and open, whereas the telephone companies have had such a mandate. The Internet has been relatively free and decentralized, but there is a danger that cable companies, as they have an increasing part of Internet traffic, will discriminate by attempting to control access, and thereby control content. This is especially troubling since Bush-appointed FCC Chair Michael Powell has questioned the historic mandate of his agency to act for citizens "in the public interest." In this time of deregulation fever, Powell has questioned this concept as being quaint and outmoded. The greatest good to policy makers like Powell now seems to be the maximum freedom to profit for everyone as consumers and/or providers. The fact that the Commission has no jurisdiction over cable now is especially troubling considering the enormous influence that moneyed interests like cable have at the federal level. [That is also the primary reason state commissions and attorney generals should not give up their securities regulation to uniform federal regulation. In light of Enron, Arthur Anderson, etc., the Congress can't seem to pass common sense reforms in stock options or in the separation of accounting from auditing and consulting. The power of contributions from investments banks, accounting firms, brokerage firms, etc. ...is indeed great.]

James Walsh (Democrat, Clean Elections Candidate, 4 Year Seat, http://www.jamespwalsh.com/)
(about James Walsh...)

Knowledge is power, so a measurement of the Commission's success is whether the public is informed about the myriad choices in public utilities. Competition assumes that consumers will be informed sufficiently to do "comparison" shopping. For example, in the area of long distance service, most of the comments I have heard are that consumers - even relatively sophisticated business consumers - cannot figure out how to compare the different products available to them in the competitive jungle that is long distance. The Commission should encourage utilities to develop public outreach programs to give consumers the tools they need to make informed decisions. The Commission must also expand the public's ability to participate more fully in Commission proceedings.

Ultimately, the best judge of the Commission's performance may be the consumer pocketbook. It's the Commission's job to strike a regulatory balance that encourages healthy competition, innovation, and reasonable prices for public services like energy, water, and phone service. If consumers are receiving quality services at competitive prices, the Commission is doing its job.