Search form

Valero

Hillary Clinton's Keystone XL Crony Lobbyists Problem

  • Posted on: 10 October 2011
  • By: Connor Gibson

Written by Brendan DeMelle, crossposted from DeSmogBlog.

Hillary Clinton and the State Department have the final word on whether to approve the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, unless President Obama intervenes. The influence of tar sands industry lobbyists connected to Hillary Clinton is finally getting some media attention, but there is still more to this story.

Clinton's State Department is finally complying with a FOIA request for documents, after a lawsuit filed in May by three watchdog groups over an alleged lack of transparency regarding contacts with TransCanada lobbyist Paul Elliott, a former staffer on Hillary Clinton's presidential run. Elliott has earned at least $310,000 as TransCanada Pipelines’ in-house lobbyist to influence Congress and several federal agencies, including the State Department, on the Keystone XL pipeline.

However, the tar sands industry’s use of former Clinton associates to lobby on the controversial project extends beyond Mr. Elliott. DeSmogBlog has uncovered seven other influencers or lobbyists with ties to Clinton and Obama who have lobbied on behalf of tar sands interests for approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.  

These lobbyists are spread out over three firms, including one that was the largest single source of funds of any corporate entity to Clinton’s 2008 presidential run. Included in their midst is a lobbyist with close ties to top Obama adviser David Plouffe, and a former Koch Industries operative now lobbying for the Koch-friendly Keystone XL project.


The extent of the contacts between these lobbyists and Secretary Clinton, or her political appointee-led staff, remains to be determined. Today, **Earthjustice, representing** Friends of the Earth, Corporate Ethics International and the Center for International Environmental Law, filed an amended FOIA request asking the State Department to release all contacts between this web of lobbying firms and her department. The groups credited DeSmogBlog's research as the impetus for the revised FOIA request. 


The presence of so many former Clinton associates on the lobbying roster for polluter clients on a high-profile controversy suggests a clash with the repeated campaign pledges of greater transparency and tougher dealings with lobbyists by Secretary Clinton’s boss, President Obama. 

On the campaign trail, Obama contrasted his view of lobbyists with the view of his opponent, Senator John McCain

“This is somebody who’s been in Congress for twenty-six years, who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign, and now he tells us that he’s the one who will take on the ol' boy network,”Obama said before a crowd in Elko, Nev. "The ol’ boy network? In the McCain campaign, that’s called a staff meeting," Obama said. 
TransCanada Corp's permit request for the Keystone XL network of long-distance pipes represents a clear test of those pledges of transparency and a less cozy relationship with corporate lobbyists. The proposed pipeline would shuttle what is described as the dirtiest oil on the planet – Canada’s tar sands crude – to petroleum refineries on the Gulf Coast. Ultimately, much of the oil will be shipped overseas to foreign markets, undermining claims that this project would boost U.S. energy security.

The lack of disclosure about contacts with lobbyists regarding the Keystone XL builds upon growing questions about the Obama Administration’s commitment to open government, particularly on environmental issues. DeSmogBlog has cataloged the Obama Administration’s failure to report contacts with lobbyists on several key climate and energy matters, including coal ash regulations and the BP disaster. Now let's take a closer look at tar sands lobbyists.

 

WEB OF TAR SANDS LOBBYISTS TIED TO CLINTON/OBAMA

Below is a description of the influence peddling firms and lobbyists that DeSmogBlog has identified as having close connections to Hillary Clinton and President Obama that are working to convince the State Department to approve Keystone XL.

McKenna Long & Aldridge is one of the key outside firms registered to lobby for TransCanada Pipelines, which paid the McKenna firm at least $190,000 over the last 5 years to lobby on their pipeline issues, including $40,000 in the first half of 2011. McKenna employees donated $41,650 in campaign contributions to Hillary Clinton in 2008, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

In addition, McKenna lobbies for the Canadian American Business Council, which has played a major public relations role on behalf of the Keystone XL project. McKenna lobbyist Maryscott “Scotty” Greenwood is Senior Advisor (and former Executive Director) at the CABC, which is now headed up by another McKenna associate. 
UPDATE Oct 6, noon EST: Guess who serves on the Board of Directors of the Canadian American Business Council? Paul Elliott. (Also, Susan Carter, the ExxonMobil executive on the recipient list of Scotty Greenwood's email referenced below. Small world.)

McKenna Long & Aldridge lobbies for Nexen Inc., a company with present growth strategies that include “oil sands, including our 65% operated interest in the Long Lake project.” Nexen has paid McKenna over $1.8 million since 2007 in lobbying fees. Talisman, another major energy company in Canada, has paid McKenna $90,000 over the last two years for lobbying. 

Frank McKenna, the first-named principle of McKenna Long & Aldridge, served as Canadian ambassador to the U.S. from 2005-6. [Correction: Frank McKenna has no affiliation with McKenna Long & Aldridge. I regret the error.]

Gordon Giffin, a partner at McKenna Long & Aldridge, served as U.S. Ambassador to Canada during the Clinton administration (1997 to 2001), and was a key fundraiser and donor to Hillary Clinton’s Senate and White House campaigns. Giffin was one of 22 “Bundlers for Hillary Clinton who have registered as Federal Lobbyists” cataloged by Public Citizen. He’s also been a donor to Bill Clinton’s campaigns and the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation.  Giffin sits on the boards of four Canadian companies, including Canadian Natural Resources Limited, a major tar sands player.

Maryscott “Scotty” Greenwood, another McKenna lobbyist, was appointed by President Bill Clinton to serve as Chief of Staff to Gordon Giffin when he was U.S. ambassador to Canada.  Considered by The Hill Times as one of the “Top 100 Most Influential People in Government and Politics in 2010,” Greenwood is valued by McKenna for her ability to reach Secretary Clinton on the phone, according to a biography on the firm's principal Frank McKenna: “Because of her up attitude and the jobs she has held, [Scotty Greenwood] can get through on the phone to virtually anyone of influence within the US Democratic ranks, including the likes of U.S. secretary of the state Hillary Clinton.”

Greenwood was a member of the important Credentials Committee at the 2008 Democratic Convention - the committee appointed by Chairman Howard Dean that was responsible for deciding how to handle Hillary Clinton's delegate challenges. She was also the Executive Director of the Georgia Democratic Party, where she met Giffin.

Giffin lobbied officially on TransCanada’s behalf until 2008 on "U.S. pipeline permit policy," and
Greenwood lobbied officially for TransCanada from 2007 until as recently as Q1 2010 on the same issues. Since then, they seem to have handed the official lobbying reins to juniors and now serve as advisors. But their Clinton connections raise important questions about their possible influence over her decision regarding the Keystone XL pipeline. 

Indeed, one of the emails obtained by FOE et al in their FOIA request shows Scotty Greenwood emailing news that "Sen Lugar calls for approval of KXL" to Gordon Giffin, Paul Elliott, Marja Verloop and an ExxonMobil lobbyist. (See pg 137 of this PDF)

David Pollak joined McKenna as a “Senior Strategic Advisor” in August 2009. Pollack served as Co-Chairman of the New York State Democratic Party from 2006 – 2008, and was a Hillary Clinton Super-Delegate.

In May 2010, McKenna Long & Aldridge hired Alex McGee, who previously worked for Koch Industries as the Director of Federal Affairs for Koch Companies Public Sector (KCPS). Prior to that, he spent five years as the Department of Energy's (DOE) Principal Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs. McGee’s bio claims he was “a strategic player in the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.” McGee now lobbies on behalf of TransCanada.

Bryan Cave LLP reported earnings of $1.08 million between 2009-2011 lobbying on behalf of TransCanada, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Bryan Cave staff reported lobbying the State Department directly about the Keystone XL Pipeline. 

Broderick Johnson, a former Bryan Cave LLP lobbyist registered on the Keystone XL account, reported lobbying President Obama’s legislative affairs staff in 2010, a post he’s familiar with, having served in the Clinton administration in the White House Office of Legislative Affairs from 1998-2000. He was named deputy assistant to the president and House liaison, acting as the Clinton administration’s primary advocate before the U.S. House of Representatives in 1999 and 2000. 

Jeff Berman is listed as another Bryan Cave lobbyist on the Keystone XL account who reports lobbying the State Department and the President’s office. Berman, a friend of David Plouffe, has been referred to as the “unsung hero” of Barack Obama’s 2008 primary victory over Hillary Clinton. According to TalkingPointsMemo coverage, “Berman’s in-depth understanding of every state and every congressional district drove the campaigning strategy that Plouffe laid out.”

DLA PIPER employees and PACs contributed $480,150 to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 run, making it the largest single source of funds for a corporate entity to Clinton

DLA PIPER partner James Blanchard, a former Governor of Michigan, served as Michigan Chairman of Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign, and was rewarded by President Clinton with the post of U.S. ambassador to Canada (1993-96).  He also was a key fundraiser for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. According to Public Citizen, Blanchard was one of 22 “Bundlers for Hillary Clinton who have registered as Federal Lobbyists.”

The government of Alberta retained Blanchard to lobby Washington last year. According to lobbying disclosure records reviewed by Climate Action Network Canada (p. 9), Blanchard and other DLA Piper lobbyists had more than 80 interactions with U.S. officials and politicians in the year beginning March 1, 2009, on behalf of the Government of Alberta. Blanchard alone billed over $300,000 in fees.

Blanchard sits on the board of major tar sands pipeline company Enbridge, which spilled roughly 20,000 barrels of oil into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River last year, and tried to hide the fact that the spill involved tar sands crude. Enbridge's pipelines move the lion's share of tar sands crude into the U.S.

Conclusion
The web of tar sands lobbyist cronies with ties to Hillary Clinton pressuring the State Department to approve Keystone XL shows that President Obama must take personal responsibility for the transparency and objectivity of this permit decision. It appears that Secretary Clinton is too compromised by this web of polluter influence peddlers from her past to say no to Keystone XL.

Saying no to this filthy tar sands pipeline is the only viable option for President Obama, who campaigned not only on a platform of strong climate action and ending our oil addiction, but also for transparency and minimizing the role of corporate lobbyists in policy decisions.  

Right now, the State Department’s capitulation to lobbyists – and secrecy about Secretary Clinton’s contacts with lobbyists  – stinks to high heaven, as the recently released emails demonstrate. Hopefully this amended FOIA request will compel the State Department to reveal all the facts about lobbyist influence over Hillary Clinton’s position on Keystone XL.

 

DeSmogBlog's Emma Pullman contributed research to this report.
** Clarification added to note that Earthjustice, which represents the environmental groups, filed the amended FOIA today on their behalf.

The government the polluters paid for

  • Posted on: 26 April 2011
  • By: Connor Gibson

Written by Mark Floegel, crossposted from Greenpeace USA.

Happy Chernobyl Day. It was 25 years ago today Soviet engineers were conducting a systems test on that nuclear reactor when a sudden power surge led to a series of explosions, a fire and the worst nuclear reactor disaster in history… so far. The ongoing disaster in Fukushima, Japan may be worse by the time that situation is under control.

How are you celebrating Chernobyl Day? The folks in Texas City, Texas are celebrating by staying indoors and sealing their windows and door with duct tape. It’s called “shelter in place” and it’s not really a Chernobyl Day commemoration, it’s the citizens only defense against noxious fumes emanating from three refineries and a vinyl acetate facility that have experienced a power loss. Power loss, the same thing that kicked off the Fukushima disaster.

The three Texas City refineries are owned by Valero, Marathon and BP. The BP refinery is the most famous of the three, due to an explosion in 2005 that killed 15 workers and injured 180 others. The federal Occupation Safety and Health Administration found BP had ignored safeguards prior to that explosion. BP is trying to sell that refinery. So far, no takers.

According to wire reports, area residents report noxious fumes in the air, making breathing difficult. The refineries’ flares are still burning, so it’s unclear why people are choking. Other gaseous emissions may be occurring. Later reports say the power outage was caused not by the local utility, but by problems inside the industrial facilities.

We at Greenpeace have witnessed many industrial accidents. One sad feature of them all is that the industry in question always gives out incomplete or misleading information on day one. There always seems to be more concern for controlling the PR than for protecting the health of people who live nearby. There are 550,000 people who live in the “vulnerability zone” around the BP refinery. These are the folks who’ve been told to duct tape themselves into their homes.

The weather report says it’s 80 degrees and hazy in Texas City. Of course, you have to shut off your air conditioner when you “shelter in place.” What would you do if you lived there? Tape the windows, swelter, turn on the radio, pray? Or grab the kids and run for the car, risk being overcome by fumes, just try to get out of there? Where would you go?  These are not gated communities of McMansions.  People who live near refineries don’t have much money.

Dow Chemical owns the vinyl acetate facility. The plant was part of Union Carbide, which Dow purchased in 2001. In 1984, a Union Carbide facility in India leaked methyl isocyanate. The “vulnerability zone” around that plant had a half million poor people living in it, too. Twenty thousand of them died; another 150,000 were severely injured.

According to the material safety data sheet for vinyl acetate, it is immediately threatening to the eyes, skin and lungs and cancer-causing in the longer term.

We at Greenpeace have been working for a nearly a decade – since before the 9/11 attacks – to convert America’s industrial facilities from the use of hazardous feedstocks to available safer alternatives, ones that don’t require huge amounts of poison gasses in the communities where we live and raise out children.

In 2004, then-Congressman Jim Turner (D), who represented a nearby area, called such plants “pre-positioned toxic weapons of mass destruction.” Unfortunately, a decade of efforts by legislators like Mr. Turner has run into a wall of pre-positioned lobbyists from the chemical industry and the politicians whose campaigns they finance.

Our nation was attacked by terrorists and no measures were taken to protect us from distinct hazards nestled among a half million people. Our economy crashed and no effort was made to recoup the thieved billions or regulate our financial markets. Three reactors and four spent fuel pools in Japan have been in crisis for weeks and our government does nothing to examine the 23 similar reactors in this country.

You get what you pay for, except this isn’t the government you paid for. It’s the one the polluters paid for.

Industry: 
Company or Organization: 

Polluter Congress Ignores $53 billion in Offshore Drilling Handouts During Spending Cuts

  • Posted on: 20 February 2011
  • By: Connor Gibson

In a move that exposes the repeated and predictable habit of Congressional polluter allies, House Republicans have ignored a $53 billion handout over the next 25 years to oil companies that are not required to pay royalties when obtaining leases for offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. This year alone, according to House Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), $1.5 billion in absent lease royalties will benefit oil companies seeking to expand offshore drilling.

The leases, which give oil giants access to public property for their own profit, is another slap in the face to taxpayers who have already watched their land (and for many, their fragile livelihoods) become poisoned by industry abuse and maintained by federal incompetence.  As fiscal conservatives in the U.S. House selectively look for government spending to trim, the main targets seem to be social programs instead of unncecessary billions doled out to the world's largest oil companies.  As Congress scratches the back of Big Oil, fresh reports emerge of continued devestation on the ocean floor of the Gulf of Mexico, a direct result of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

Noting the twisted irony, Rep. Markey stated, "Republicans once again sided with BP, Exxon and the oil companies, not with the American taxpayer and the poorest Americans most in need of help. This legislation focuses on just the kind of special interest loophole that should be closed before we open attacks on programs for the poorest Americans.”

This failure to save wasted taxpayer money is but a small portion of the sickening annual handouts to the oil industry through subsidies. Oil Change International explains, "Estimates of the value of US federal subsidies to the domestic oil and gas industry alone (not coal) range from 'only' $4 billion a year, to an amazing $52 billion annually.  Coal subsidies are roughly another 10 billion annually."

Through its DirtyEnergyMoney tabulation website, Oil Change International reports that the 111th House of Representatives has some powerful allies to the oil industry across party lines. From 2009-2010, thirteen House members were each awarded over $100,000 by oil companies alone:

  • Roy Blunt (R-MO) -- $269,400
  • Dan Boren (D-OK) -- $205,750
  • Chet Edwards (D-TX) -- $176,130
  • Joe Barton (R-TX) -- $150,870
  • Mike Ross (D-AR) -- $135,350
  • K. Michael Conaway (R-TX) -- $132,600
  • John Sullivan (R-OK) -- $125,800
  • John Fleming (R-LA) -- $123,550
  • John Boehner (R-OH) -- $119,400
  • Jerry Moran (R-KS) -- $113,600
  • Eric Cantor (R-VA) -- $110,600
  • Charles Boustany (R-LA) -- $109,000
  • Harry Teague (D-NM) --$100,300

Top givers to the 111th Congressional Representatives of Oil were Koch Industries ($616,513), ExxonMobil ($553,950), Chevron ($373,100) and Valero Energy ($311,250).

More information on all of these companies can be found on our PolluterWatch profiles for each company, as well as in-depth looks at their Congressional funding through DirtyEnergyMoney.com

Industry: 

DeSmogBlog: Valero's Ties to Tar Sands Fueled Prop 23 Funding

  • Posted on: 12 November 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

The tar sands of northern Alberta, Canada can be seen from space.  Photo credit.

DeSmogBlog's Emma Pullman recently took a look at how Valero Energy's investments in the devastating tar sands of Alberta, Canada motivated their funding of Proposition 23. 

Tar sands mining has been credited as the largest industrial project on the planet, and comes with extreme costs to the region's people, forests, waterways, animal species, and the broader specter of global warming.  If you missed it, National Geographic published a great piece on the controversies of tar sand operations.

As noted by DeSmog, Valero faces declining oil sources from Mexico and a shifty political scene in Venezuela, turning to the tar sands craze in Canada to secure more access to oil.  The rapid development of tar sands extraction has helped secure Canada as the United States' top supplier of oil--we import almost twice as much oil from Canada as from Saudi Arabia, and half of Canada's oil is sourced from tar sands mining.

As the refining of bitumen from tar sands mines creates particularly dirty fuel, Valero and the other oil companies crawling around northern Alberta aren't happy to see California's Global Warming Solutions Act survive Proposition 23.  Pullman notes:

As tar sands oil has a much larger carbon footprint than conventional oil, climate change legislation targeted by Prop 23 would limit California's imports of high-carbon fuels -- fuels that would likely include toxic tar sands oil from Alberta.  Valero's Texas refineries may be halfway across the United States, but industry worries about the 'domino effect' of climate change legislative efforts and how they may be adopted elsewhere.

While Prop 23 flopped, Proposition 26 did pass, to the delight of some of its most philanthropic financiers.  Chevron spent almost $4 million on the initiative, and ConocoPhillips, Exxon, Shell, and Occidental Petroleum added another $1,125,000.  

All of these giants are involved in tar sands production, and have just as much motivation as Valero to roadblock a low carbon fuel standard.

Be sure to check out Pullman's full article on Valero's mischief.

Industry: 

Charles Koch Gives Concerned Student the Cold, Oily Shoulder

  • Posted on: 29 October 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

Charles Koch Refuses to Accept Debate Challenge In-Person, Responds with Security Team

Making good his promise to visit Charles Koch, Cal State LA Senior Joel Francis flew to Wichita, Kansas to the headquarters of Koch Industries and personally delivered a letter re-challenging the oil CEO to a public debate on the future of California's economy. 

Of particular concern for Francis is the $1 million that Koch funneled to support Proposition 23, the ballot measure to undermine California's greenhouse gas reduction targets and clean energy implementation.  The role of wholly-owned Koch subsidiary Flint Hills in funding Prop 23, as well as Texas refiners Valero and Tesoro, has tuned California voters in to the reality of what the ballot measure truly exists to do: protect the profits of fossil fools and prevent a rapidly growing clean energy sector from ever being able to compete with dirty energy providers.

Francis certainly caught the CEO's attention with his initial challenge, as security guards and a Koch representative were ready to meet Francis once he arrived at the corporate campus.

Francis was promised--on camera--that his letter would be delivered to Charles Koch, but has not received a response, even under the condition that Charles himself could set the terms and location of the debate.  Apparently Charles doesn't feel the need to have any public accountability as he continues to work behind the scenes, pulling the strings of the tea party to upend the political system in favor of private corporate profit at the expense of human health, economic diversification and ecological integrity.

Known Associates: 
Industry: 
Company or Organization: 

Servants of Oil Increase Funding and Misinformation in Prop 23 Battle

  • Posted on: 25 October 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

Following voter opposition to Proposition 23 and the recent surge in funding to counter the oily measure, Texas refiners Valero and Tesoro (who "are not oil companies," by the way)  have respectively added $1 million and $500,000 to the fight.  The dirty energy proposition would victimize clean energy jobs and development, not to mention legislative innovation and an already struggling climate.

There has been a lot of confusion about how Prop 23 relates to jobs, as the oil industry has cultivated fears of job loss through some questionable studies.  The Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, which is funded by the likes of Art Pope and the Koch brothers, has crafted a report designed to create hysteria among economically-wary Californians (read: most Californians), claiming formidable implications on jobs and state economic output. 

The funny thing, and by funny I mean dishonest, is that this report conveniently avoids looking at the economic benefits of the climate law that Prop 23 would cripple.  It also fails to mention that by the end of the decade, Proposition 23 will make California electricity cost 33% more.  And it also doesn't note that the report's author has worked for the Cato Institute, which Charles Koch founded and David Koch remains a Board member, and the Manhattan Institute, yet another think tank funded by the likes of Koch Industries and ExxonMobil.  For a deeper look, check out what Rebecca Lefton has to say about the Pacific Research Institute's selective look at California's climate law.

Beyond publishing their own flawed report, the Pacific Research Institute is also promoting another attack-study to help sell Prop 23.  This publication has been heavily scrutinized--to the point of invalidity--by California's Legislative Analyst's Office, the Business Alliance for a Green Economy, and two professors from Standford University and UCLA.

This is not the first time that the Pacific Research Institute has used flawed studies to attack clean energy progress, as they continue to do with the heavily-touted, heavily-debunked "Spanish study."  Pretty typical for one of the Kochtopus' many tentacles.

For an excellent map of the oil money fueling Proposition 23, refer to Dirty Energy Money.

Industry: 
Company or Organization: 

Koch and Fiorina: Champion Climate Obstructionists and Employment Outsourcers

  • Posted on: 28 September 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

Check out the L.A. Times' comparison of the business practices of Senate-hopeful Carly Fiorina, Barbara Boxer's challenger, and Koch Industries, whose PAC donated to Fiorina at a fundraiser last week.  Koch, Valero and Tesoro are heavily invested in Proposition 23, the effort to suspend California's climate law, desperate to stall the  transition away from polluting fossil fuels to clean energy.

Fiorina has also come out in support of Proposition 23, which would freeze the state's legal power to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and implement clean energy until the state's unemployment rate drops drastically and remains so for a full year.  Such low and prolonged unemployment has only been seen three times in the last 40 years.

Perhaps if Fiorina hadn't fired 30,000 people and outsourced thousands of more jobs as the CEO of HP, the unemployment rate is California wouldn't be so high.

Be sure to also check out the video footage of Greenpeace (and a few other protestors) at the National Republican Senatorial Committee Headquarters last week, asking Fiorina if she will stop accepting campaign donations from major polluters.

 

Picture Source

Known Associates: 
Industry: 
Company or Organization: 

The Koch brothers' dirty money in California

  • Posted on: 23 September 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

The New York Times editorial "The Brothers Koch and AB 32" takes on efforts by oil billionaires Charles and David Koch to block California's signature climate law by pouring money into Proposition 23:

Four years ago, bipartisan majorities in the California Legislature approved a landmark clean energy bill that many hoped would serve as a template for a national effort to reduce dependence on foreign oil and mitigate the threat of climate change.

Now a well-financed coalition of right-wing ideologues, out-of-state oil and gas companies and climate-change skeptics is seeking to effectively kill that law with an initiative on the November state ballot. The money men include Charles and David Koch, the Kansas oil and gas billionaires who have played a prominent role in financing the Tea Party movement.

Flint Hills, a wholly-owned subsidiary of oil giant Koch Industries based in Kansas, has joined with Texas oil companies Valero and Tesoro in trying to block California's landmark climate legislation by funding the campaign to pass Proposition 23. As the second largest private company in the US, Koch Industries has plenty of money to pour into this fight. Greenpeace: Koch Industries: Secretly funding the climate denial machine

In fact, the $1 million from the oil billionaires is only one tentacle of the oily Kochtopus. As we detailed in our report "Koch Industries: Secretly Funding the Climate Denial Machine," oil billionaires David and Charles Koch have become kingpins of climate denial, funneling tens of millions of dollars to front groups and think tanks that oppose climate and clean energy policies. In recent years, they have even surpassed ExxonMobil in contributions to climate denial organizations.

Those front-group-tentacles have also reached California. David Koch's favorite front group, "Americans for Prosperity," is running TV ads promoting Proposition 23, and AFP's California director has said that the Prop 23 is the group's "top priority." Although AFP purports to be a 'grassroots' organization, in fact it was founded and is co-chaired by David Koch, and, as our report shows, Koch Foundations have poured more than $5 million into this front group. As David Axelrod told Jane Mayer of The New Yorker in her extraordinary investigative article exposing the Koch brothers, "What they don’t say is that, in part, this is a grassroots citizens’ movement brought to you by a bunch of oil billionaires.”

The Kochs are also directly funding political candidates who will support their agenda — including California senate candidate Carly Fiorina, who supports Proposition 23. KochPAC gave her $5,000 earlier this year, and is even co-hosting a fundraiser for her in Washington DC to give thousands more.

The fight over clean energy and climate policy in California is dripping with out-of-state oil money because the oil billionaires want to stamp out the progress that has been made to move toward clean energy and energy efficiency, and keep us addicted to their fossil fuels. That's how they became oil billionaires, after all. The NYT editorial concludes:

Who wins if this law is repudiated? The Koch brothers, maybe, but the biggest winners will be the Chinese, who are already moving briskly ahead in the clean technology race. And the losers? The people of California, surely. But the biggest loser will be the planet.

Known Associates: 
Industry: 
Company or Organization: 

After Valero and Koch donate millions, NPRA president begs for more money to fight Prop 23

  • Posted on: 17 September 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

Despite obtaining over $4 million from Valero, $1.5 million from Tesoro and $1 million from Koch Industries subsidiary Flint Hills Resources, the president of the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association sent out a plea, literally, for more money to undermine California's legislative effort to curb greenhouse gas emissions and implement more clean energy.

In an email to members of the NPRA, president Charles Drevna wrote, "I am pleading with each of you—for our nation's best interest and for your company's own self-interest."

More can be found at the Wall Street Journal online.

Known Associates: 
Industry: 
Company or Organization: 

Valero, Koch Industries fund fight against California clean energy and climate legislation

  • Posted on: 16 September 2010
  • By: Connor Gibson

Valero Energy and Koch Industries subsidiary Flint Hills, neither of which are based in California, have invested millions in the industry attempt to suspend California's Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32).  Texas-based Tesoro Corporation, another oil refiner, is also heavily invested in the fight.

As dirty energy influence peddlars are pulling the usual economic apocalypse arguments, a recently-released assessment concluded that not following California's plans to curb greenhouse gas emissions and implement clean energy would be the worse economic option. 

Passing Proposition 23 would simply leave California more polluted and less prosperous, while oil executives and lobbyists would continue to rejoice at their personal profit at the expense of a healthy planet and healthy people.

 

The full story can be found on the L.A. Times blog, and more at DeSmogBlog.

 

Picture source here

Known Associates: 
Industry: 
Company or Organization: