Condescending?

I spotted a recent letter in the Post-Dispatch, responding to David Stokes’ earlier article about the proposed repeal of the law banning contruction-work-in-progress (CWIP).

The letter’s author says it’s “condescending” when Stokes suggests that “the [anti-CWIP] proposition was not placed on the ballot because of a carefully considered economic objection to CWIP financing plans in general.” I don’t think David’s analysis is in any way condescending. Rather, it reflects his firm belief that the main reasons the ban was instituted were the general anti-nuclear bias prevalent during the 1970s and Missourians’ desire to keep their electric bills low.

Regardless of the motives for the ban on CWIP financing, I do believe that from a utilitarian point of view, the proposed new nuclear plant is needed now more than ever, and would serve the state’s energy needs well.