SPRINGFIELD, Ill. – Lawmakers are tossing around lots buzzwords – generation tax, procurement, power authority, competition – as they grapple with providing immediate relief from painful electric rates.

Obscured by all the jargon, however, is the fact that Illinois lawmakers could end up making decisions that will affect electricity bills for years.

Should Illinois change the process for how utilities buy power? Could the state get into the business of buying and selling or even producing electricity?

Would returning to the old system of regulating rates work, or is sticking with deregulation more practical?

With only a few days left in the scheduled spring session and no consensus on the immediate problem, some lawmakers predict the long-term questions could be put aside for now.

“We need to deal with what we can do as a Legislature for providing relief now,” said Senate Majority Leader Debbie Halvorson, D-Crete. “After that, we have to discuss how power is procured and how we go about it in the future.”

Some lawmakers want another rate freeze to bring rising costs back down. Others say that would be a costly mistake and want the utilities to give customers discounted rates and bill credits instead.

The long-term picture is murkier, with many options on the table and no clear path for success. That’s because of Illinois’ history on this issue and the fear some have of being burned again by policy decisions that don’t pan out as they hoped.

Legislators thought they were heading down the right path in 1997 by deregulating utilities, rolling back rates and freezing them for 10 years. But the long rate freeze stifled competition, and rates rose rapidly for millions of customers earlier this year when the freeze was lifted.

So they’re being extra cautious this time about a strategy that will determine consumers’ electric choices and prices for years to come, and mulling over a number of possibilities.

One is that they’ll try to scrap or at least change the so-called “reverse auction” system last fall that resulted in the higher prices. Lawmakers and consumer advocates say it was set up by the utilities to lock in artificially high prices for more than a year.

Attorney General Lisa Madigan has called for a federal investigation into whether electric companies manipulated the rate-setting process. Gov. Rod Blagojevich also has criticized the reverse auction.

A spokesman for House Speaker Michael Madigan called the auction “dead” but said he didn’t know yet what would replace it.

Speaker Madigan has proposed the most ambitious response to the electricity problem: creating a state-run authority that could do everything from buying power on the wholesale market to generating power, potentially providing it at lower cost to consumers.

“If we have a buyer that’s out there constantly seeking the lowest-priced contracts and the best long-term and short-term approach, then that should be to the benefit of consumers,” said Rep. Bob Flider, D-Mt. Zion.

Madigan also has discussed a tax on the unregulated power generators who sell electricity to the companies who then deliver it to homes. The tax proceeds, up to $2 billion, would go to power distributors Ameren and ComEd, allowing them to cut consumer rates now.

That tax could provide a long-term source of money to help soften the impact of sudden rate increases.

Another option is re-regulating the generators. Until the system was scrapped 10 years ago, state regulators determined how much power companies could charge customers. Regulators considered the companies’ legitimate expenses and then set a rate that would allow a fair profit.

Lawmakers also could require utilities to buy power more often to take advantage of dips in market prices, or they could try to drive down prices by encouraging large energy users to cut back or shut down when usage peaks statewide during a few hot summer weeks.

Each of those has a downside, however.

Re-regulating could bring high costs by forcing the utilities to buy back power plants. Ameren and ComEd no longer generate their own electricity and instead buy it from other producers, who control the price. Regulators couldn’t tell the companies what to charge their customers if the companies can’t control prices.

Returning to a fully regulated system also might discourage other companies from competing to do business here, which was the ultimate goal of deregulation in the first place.

A state-run power authority would require a new bureaucracy to make potentially tricky decisions in a new arena. And if the state were to get into the business of producing electricity, it might face major construction costs for power plants.

A new auction system or more regular power purchases could result in similar or even higher prices, depending on the volatility of the market, some lawmakers fear. They are backing the reverse auction unless a better idea emerges.

“Anytime that anyone has a better way to procure power, obviously we want to make sure that the consumers get the lowest possible rates,” said Sen. James Clayborne, D-Belleville.

The utilities say they’re willing to talk about other options for buying power.

“We’ll buy it from whoever as long as we can buy it for our customers at the lowest cost possible,” Ameren spokesman Shelley Epstein said.

Some lawmakers say policymakers might be wisest to resolve short-term issues first and then address long-term plans later this year or early next year, before the next power auction.

But others fear consumers will be outraged if legislators put off decisions that could result in a repeat of high rates in the not-too-distant future.

“Just having competition for competition’s sake isn’t necessarily good for the consumer,” said Sen. Dale Risinger, R-Peoria. “I think the people are going to demand a long-term solution.”