As soon as the House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act last June, Republicans went on the offensive. Within days, they had launched radio and television ads targeting 14 Democrats who had voted for the measure. Other than the blatant falsehoods in the ads, I have no problem with Republicans attacking Democrats for voting for or against a particular piece of legislation.

But in the past few days, they’ve taken things a step further. West Virginia businessman Mac Warner, who is challenging Democratic Rep. Alan Mollohan, made his case to CQ Politics on Tuesday:

“I’m running because I’m frustrated with the way things are going,” Warner told CQ Politics Tuesday. “I see that we’re heading in the wrong direction with so many of the different components of the economy.”Warner opposes a Democratic-written health care bill as well as a “cap and trade” climate change bill that he said would be “devastating” to West Virginia’s coal-dependent economy.

“Cap-and-trade takes a direct aim at the heart of the West Virginia economy,” Warner said.

You wouldn’t realize from listening to Warner’s tough talk, but Mollohan voted against the legislation, explaining his rationale as follows:

“As currently drafted, this legislation is not in the best interests of my constituents, and it’s not in the best interests of West Virginia,” Mollohan said. “For the past several weeks, I have joined the electric utility industry, the coal industry, the United Mine Workers of America, and other coal state Representatives on negotiations to improve the legislation. We have made significant progress on a number of fronts that together would hold down the cost of electricity to residential and industrial consumers, that would help level the playing field for our steel and manufacturing industries that face international competition, and that would enable the electric power industry to continue to burn West Virginia coal. As a result of our efforts, the bill is much improved from the original draft, but it still falls short in several key areas, and I cannot support it.”

If this were a one time occurrence, it may not have been noteworthy. But Warner isn’t alone in this tactic. State Senator Gilbert Baker is running in the Republican primary for the opportunity to challenge Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln. Here is how a local paper characterized the criticisms Baker made of Lincoln at a campaign event on Monday:

He criticized Lincoln for voting for the health-care bill and favoring a climate bill that he said would raise utility bills by $100 a month.

Leaving aside the absurd claim that the bill would raise utility bills by $100 a month, Senator Lincoln has been very clear that she does not in fact support clean energy legislation:

“The legislation recently passed by the House of Representatives has done nothing to ease these Arkansans’ apprehensions. The House’s Waxman-Markey bill picks winners and losers and places a disproportionate share of the economic burden on families and businesses in rural America. It is a deeply flawed bill. I will not support similar legislation in the Senate.

I’m not here to defend Rep. Mollohan or Senator Lincoln. I think their opposition to clean energy legislation is extremely misguided. But Republican challengers in November’s Congressional elections should run against Democrats for their actual positions, not the boogie-man positions they imagine them to have.

Originally published at EnviroKnow.

After severely weakening the House climate bill in the spring, Collin Peterson has now reversed his position:

“First of all, this isn’t going anyplace in the Senate,” Peterson told a conservative talk radio show based in North Dakota, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. “But if it did and we ended up with a bill that was similar to what came out of the House and that was going to become law, I would vote no.”

Peterson, who prides himself on doing the bidding of industrial agriculture corporations, never intended to support climate legislation on final passage. He lended the measure his support in the House in order to weaken it as much as possible, only to turn around and oppose it when it counts.

Democrats should seriously consider taking his Chairmanship of the Agriculture Committee away, since he is not negotiating in good faith with leadership.

Kate Sheppard:

In an email to Bonner headed “Ready to Rumble,” Hawthorn lists seven key Democratic targets it believed could be pressured to vote against the bill. Hawthorn also named specific interest groups it hoped would write letters opposing the legislation—especially organizations “representing the interests of veterans, senior citizens, minorities, and other groups,” according to the documents. The email requests Bonner to produce five letters from such groups in the district of each targted lawmaker.

Here is the letter:

Friends of the Earth:

We’re excited to give you a first look at our new video, “Just the Energy Bill,” about the trials of the Waxman-Markey energy bill as it lost its teeth at the hands of greedy lobbyists. Click “START” in the above viewer to see the video. After watching, we hope you’ll use the player to ask your senators to fix the bill and to share our video with your friends.

For more information about how polluting special interests impacted the Waxman-Markey energy bill, and what senators need to do to fix it, click here.

Please distribute this widely.

Sierra Club:

“We are disappointed that Chairman Markey’s hearing on this scandal will have to wait, but we applaud his efforts to bring this important story to light. Today’s press reports confirm the close associations between ACCCE and the contractors they hired and the fact that ACCCE knew about the letters forged on their behalf well before Congress was alerted.

“This is another reminder of how far these polluting special interests are willing to go to keep the public in the dark and dependent on their dirty sources of energy. Big Oil, Big Coal and other special interests have already spent more than $100 million trying to defeat clean energy legislation, and in doing so have managed to mar the tradition of true public participation that has made our country great.

“We cannot let polluters get away with their dirty, business-as-usual tactics. Right now the Senate is working on a clean energy jobs bill that will ensure we have less pollution, more jobs and greater security. It will help America take charge and build a clean energy economy that works for everyone.

“But Big Coal and Oil are fighting against this progress, spending tens of millions of dollars in an attempt to drown out the calls for a clean energy economy that are coming from across the country. These polluters are fighting hard for billions in giveaways that would encourage the construction of more dirty coal-fired power plants and to weaken the authority of the Clean Air Act.

“The Senate must fight back against the old polluting industries and pass as strong clean energy jobs bill that will create jobs, boost the economy, switch to renewable sources like wind and solar, make America more secure, and fight global warming.

“We look forward to when the witnesses on both sides of this issue are able to publicly tell their stories.”

Via Email.

Below is the statement of Eben Burnham-Snyder, spokesman for the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming:

“Because all testimony was not received by the Select Committee two business days or more prior to the hearing, the Select Committee has decided to postpone the investigative hearing into fraudulent letters sent to Congress.

“The Majority Staff of the Select Committee forwarded all testimony to the Minority Staff immediately upon receipt. The Select Committee charter calls for all witnesses to file testimony ‘at least two working days in advance of his or her appearance.’ Unfortunately, that timeframe was not met for this hearing.

“Both Chairman Markey and Ranking Member Sensenbrenner take the rules of the Committee and the House seriously, and both agree postponing the hearing is the proper course of action.

“The Select Committee will re-schedule the hearing soon.”

Climatewire:

A new U.S. EPA analysis requested by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) is spawning a lobbying frenzy among Midwestern utilities that claim the document shows they will be treated unfairly under federal climate legislation.They say the assessment reveals that states like California will receive a financial windfall under a global warming bill, while states like Wisconsin will not get enough help and will have to spike electricity rates as a result.

…

Some environmentalists are counterattacking that the three-page report is flawed because its author relied on questionable methodology and analyzed only one part of a bill that passed the House earlier this year. They also say a Senate version of climate legislation is still being drafted and could make EPA’s statements moot.

“I have not been particularly impressed of certain aspects of EPA modeling,” said Joe Romm, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “It looks to me like they’ve done what is easy for them to do, but isn’t accurate.”

In his latest campaign ad, candidate for VA-Gov Bob McDonnell used the familiar $1,761 clean energy tax lie in the most creative way I’ve seen yet. First, the ad says “Deeds supports tax policies that will cost families $7,800 over four years.” The first $1,000 is for a 20 cent per gallon gas tax. Aside from pointing out that taxing gasoline is a good idea, I’ll let this one go. The additional $6,800 McDonnell’s ad cites is the $1,761 figure (roughly) multiplied by four, the length of a term as Virginia’s governor.

Watch it:

At the 18-second mark, where the $6,800 figure is shown, it specifically cites CBSNews.com 9/15/09. This is the piece in which conservative blogger Declan McCullagh arrived at the $1,761 figure by way of faulty math. Brad Johnson documented the process by which this meme spread. It is starting to look like the Republican party’s messaging shop for energy policy is a single libertarian blogger making up numbers for the CBS website.

Here is the full script of the ad:

Creigh Deeds has unequivocally committed himself to higher taxes.Deeds supports tax policies that will cost families $7,800 over four years.

His billion-dollar gas tax increase would add twenty cents to a gallon of gas.

Cost to families: $1,000

Deeds called for Washington’s mandatory cap and trade energy tax.

Cost to families $6,800.

Killing up to 56,000 Virginia jobs.

Creigh Deeds ‘ tax policies will cost $7,800

For his part, Deeds is staying true to the stereotype of a Democrat who repeatedly insists on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Despite being handed proof that his opponent is against working women, homosexuals and contraceptives, Deeds has trailed in the polls throughout the race.  To make matters worse, Deeds is running a new ad saying he “says no to any new energy taxes from Washington”, which is drawing the ire of environmentalists.  There has been some confusion over Deeds’ stance on cap and trade legislation, and as a result, he is being hit from both sides on an issue the Virginia Governor has absolutely no say in.

I’ve written several times in the past few weeks about the $1,761 energy tax lie Republicans have latched onto to oppose clean energy legislation. For those who haven’t been following, here is how this went down:

STEP ONE: “News” generated by right-wing think tank.

STEP TWO: Right-wing print journalists write “breaking news” story.

STEP THREE: Promoted by Drudge, story repeated endlessly on right-wing blogs, Twitter, and talk radio.

STEP FOUR: Republican politicians, right-wing think tanks, and polluter front groups release statements of shock and outrage.

STEP FIVE: On Fox News, Glenn Beck calls President Obama a liar/socialist/Marxist/communist/fascist/racist.

Here is how I characterized the willingness of Republican politicians to latch onto this lie at the time:

Despite immediate and forceful pushback from the Treasury Department, the Congressional Budget Office and environmental groups, solid reporting by the Wonk Room and the Washington Post, and thorough debunkings by Media Matters and Politifact, several leading GOP elected officials have begun citing the highly misleading figure.

Since I wrote that a few weeks ago, several Republican politicians have continued repeating the lie.

Today, Representative Ed Markey pushed this story back to the forefront with a Huffington Post piece. After setting the record straight on Romney’s falsehood and explaining the urgency of clean energy legislation, Markey finishes strong:

So the next time you hear Mitt Romney or other opponents of clean energy and climate legislation railing about the costs of action, you should multiply your suspicion by whatever number they are attempting to sell. Odds are, it is far from even-handed.

While this is a solid piece, and Representative Markey makes his case well, he barely mentions the other Republican politicians who have repeated this lie.  I understand the value of pegging this on a potential 2012 Presidential candidate, but there are over a dozen current elected officials in the Republican party who have repeated this lie as well.

Since I last updated the count a few weeks ago, eight additional Republican politicians and party organizations have repeated the lie, bringing the total to 20.

• Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) released a statement claiming that “The Obama administration’s own estimate found a cap-and-trade scheme could cost American families an extra $1,761 per year.”
• Rep. Cynthia Lummis’ Chief of Staff told a local Chamber of Commerce that Democrats’ cap-and-trade bill “could cost individual households an extra $1,761 a year.”
• The Oregon GOP sent a fundraising email claiming that Democrats in Congress “Passed a huge energy tax that adds an estimated $1,761 to every family’s yearly budget.”
• Joel Pollack, Republican candidate for Congrss in IL-9 told the Cook Country Republican party that “The House passed a cap-and-trade bill that will cost each family in America $1,761 per year.”
• Rep. Blaine Leutkemeyer issued a press release lamenting the “Majority’s obvious disregard for the plight of American families who would have to shell out at least $1,700 a year in additional taxes…” (h/t Fired Up Missouri)
• Rep. John Culberson blogged that “Treasury also estimates the cost per household would be $1,761 a year, while American families are struggling to make ends meet.”
• MN State Rep. Mike Beard blogged that “We are gaining some more perspective as to how much cap-and-trade proposals at the federal and state levels would cost the average Minnesota family: $1,761 and $575 per year, respectively.”

Finally, here is one I missed as this lie was just beginning to take hold:

• On September 16th, the National Republican Congressional Committee issued dozens of press releases with the headline “National Energy Tax Could Cost Families $1,761 A Year.”

Here is the full list of 20 Republican politicians and local party organizations who have parroted some version of this widely debunked $1,761 lie:

Read the rest of this entry »

On Monday, Apple left the U.S. Chamber of Commerce over their backwards position on climate change legislation. Then yesterday, the Chamber of Commerce responded, attacking Apple for not understanding their 21 century approach to climate change.

Here is the letter the Chamber’s Tom Donohue sent to Apple’s Steve Jobs yesterday, via The Wonk Room.

Mr. Steven P. Jobs
Chief Executive Officer
Apple Inc.
One Infinite Loop
Cupertino, CA 95014

Dear Mr. Jobs:

I am sorry to learn of Apple’s resignation from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. It is unfortunate that your company didn’t take the time to understand the Chamber’s position on climate and forfeited the opportunity to advance a 21st century approach to climate change.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce continues to support strong federal legislation and a binding international agreement to reduce carbon emissions and address climate change. Furthermore, we believe that Congress should set climate change policy through legislation, rather than having the EPA apply existing environmental statutes that were not created to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. This is also the stated position of the President and Congressional leaders.

Your letter states that “Apple is committed to the environment and the communities in which we operate around the world.” So is the Chamber but we are also committed to preserving the competitiveness and prosperity of the communities and businesses in our nation.

While we do support legislation to address climate change, we oppose legislation such as the Waxman-Markey bill that numerous studies show will cause Americans to lose their jobs and shift greenhouse gas emissions overseas, negating potential climate benefits. An effective climate change response must include all major CO2 emitting economies, promote new technologies, emphasize efficiency, ensure affordable energy for families and businesses, and defend American jobs while returning our economy to prosperity.

The American business community that we proudly represent is the single largest investor and innovator in clean energy solutions and remains committed to a strong economy and clean environment. We continue to remind the public and policymakers that it has been the private sector that has developed the innovations that we now take for granted, from the personal computer to the medicines that keep us healthy. The Chamber believes that the business community will continue to be the catalyst for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and we support efforts to tackle climate change in a way that will strengthen our economy, protect American jobs, and benefit our environment.

Climate change is a global problem that requires a global solution. The Chamber supports an international agreement that will set realistic and achievable goals, ensure global participation, protect intellectual property rights and remove trade barriers to environmental goods and services.

I would have hoped that Apple would have supported our efforts to improve environmental stewardship and keep Americans at work and our economy competitive. As the world’s largest business federation representing more than 3 million businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region, the Chamber is leading the way to support the innovation needed to transition to a lower carbon future, including the elimination of barriers to the deployment of clean energy technologies. Supporting innovation and technology is at the very heart of our efforts to combat climate change, and we will continue to fight for an approach that embraces their merits.

It is a shame that Apple will not be part of our efforts.

Sincerely,

Tom Donohue