Mr Norlander has offered a good response to the central issue of Dr. Kashti article. The ball is now being carried by the states.
Regarding the side issues of energy efficiency, and demand response, I believe that the States will fumble the ball, unless they consider those two issues, in a broad problem formulation, together with the issues of real time metering, elimination of price controls, separation of competitive retail and monopoly transport leading to true (complete) retail deregulation. The meter becomes part of something larger under a new paradigm. The State of California is moving forward under such paradigm, but I believe they are still short of such broad formulation.
P.D.: The article An Alternative Business Case for Demand Response is on EnergyPulse, under my name. Since the meters are an integral part of the Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI), which in itself enables Demand Response, I believe the Energy Bill might not be, eventually, a waste of time.
Chris King comment is very welcome. It came in as I was writing.