Senior House Energy and Commerce Committee Democrats on Thursday said a major electric utility trade group is “actively misinforming” its members about federal climate change policy and taking a position that many of the members don’t support.
Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.) criticized the American Public Power Association (APPA), which represents publicly owned utilities, for supporting a Senate proposal to limit the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
Chairman Henry A. Waxman and Subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey today sent letters to eight oil and gas companies that use hydraulic fracturing to extract oil and natural gas from unconventional sources in the United States. The Committee is requesting information on the chemicals used in fracturing fluids and the potential impact of the practice on the environment and human health.
“Hydraulic fracturing could help us unlock vast domestic natural gas reserves once thought unattainable, strengthening America’s energy independence and reducing carbon emissions,” said Chairman Waxman. “As we use this technology in more parts of the country on a much larger scale, we must ensure that we are not creating new environmental and public health problems. This investigation will help us better understand the potential risks this technology poses to drinking water supplies and the environment, and whether Congress needs to act to minimize those risks.”
Here is the letter to Halliburton CEO David J. Lesar:
We’ll be talking about the climate change debate, and Sarah Palin’s op ed and Al Gore’s interview, and then we’ll also discuss press coverage of Obama’s Nobel.
I did a bit of research on something in particular – the claim by climate change denialists that some stolen emails from climate change scientists in Britain “prove” that climate change is a hoax. Well guess what – it doesn’t prove that it’s a hoax, and in fact both AP and FactCheck.org agree on this one. Climate change is real, and the emails do nothing to change that fact.
The hearing will be webcast at this link at 10am. Expect SwiftHack conspiracy theories from the Republicans on the committee.
With the international climate change talks in Copenhagen fast approaching, there is real urgency to reach diplomatic consensus on a planetary solution. In a hearing this Wednesday, the Select Committee will explore with climate scientists from the Obama administration the urgent, consensus view on our planetary problem: that global warming is real, and the science indicates that it is getting worse.
At the hearing, Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) will host two of America’s preeminent climate scientists, Dr. John Holdren and Dr. Jane Lubchenco.
Dr. Holdren is the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and was formerly a professor at Harvard University and the director of the acclaimed Woods Hole Research Center.
Dr. Lubchenco is the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the United States’ leading climate office.
The past decade has been the hottest in recorded history, with all of the years since 2001 being in the top 10 of hottest, according to NASA. This summer, the world’s oceans were the warmest in NOAA’s 130 years of record-keeping. Meanwhile, global heat-trapping pollution continues to rise.
WHAT: Select Committee hearing on the State of Climate Science
WHEN: 10 AM, Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009
WHERE: B-318 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC
WITNESSES:
Dr. John Holdren, Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy
Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
About a month ago, a strange email hit the inboxes of many congressional staffers. It was an invitation to an ‘Executive Forum’ on climate and energy policy hosted by the American Petroleum Institute. What was strange about this invitation was the sender of the email and the co-host of the policy forum: Newsweek magazine. The event is scheduled for today at 4pm.
Greenpeace’s Executive Director Phil Radford, understandably, took issue with this when the event was announced:
At present, the panel’s only member is American Petroleum Institute (API) President Jack Gerard.As you know, Mr. Gerard is the nation’s top registered lobbyist for Big Oil. API and its biggest member, ExxonMobil, have aggressively lobbied against global warming policy solutions that will inevitably limit global consumption of oil. API and its members have spent tens of millions of dollars over the past decade alone on propaganda efforts and front groups to undercut public confidence in the wide and deep global scientific consensus that global warming is real, that human consumption of fossil fuels is driving it, and that the problem is a serious threat to America and the rest of the world.
“You’re selling access,” said Edward Wasserman, Knight professor of journalism ethics at Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Va. “Newsweek is using its reputation as a great news organization to convene these officeholders to talk about public policy. Then it’s renting out a space at the table for one of its customers who would not be at the table if not for giving money to Newsweek.”
“Big Oil is buying access to our elected leaders by paying Newsweek to host this forum, and it must be called off,” Radford said. “Gerard and API will stop at nothing to stall progress on clean energy and climate solutions. I’m amazed Newsweek is endangering its reputation by renting its banner and top pundit to Big Oil. This forum is pay-to-play propaganda.”
In response to this, Newsweek’s Howard Fineman provided EnviroKnow with the following statement via email:
Rep. Ed Markey, the chief sponsor of the House cap-and-trade bill and a leading environmental advocate, is a full participant in the open, on-the-record discussion with no control by API over the questions or flow. Dem Sen Byron Dorgan is also participating and will reflect various views in Dem caucus. Rep Fred Upton, who opposed the House bill, will also participate. I see nothing wrong with an open, on-the-record balanced discussion like this. Newsweek has a long tradition of enviro reporting, including our annual green issue.
“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.”
Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming announced today that he will be holding an investigative hearing into the fraudulent letters sent to Congress on clean energy and climate legislation. The Select Committee has now discovered more than a dozen fraudulent letters were sent to several members of Congress as part of an “Astroturf” campaign run by the firm, Bonner & Associates, and contracted by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. This campaign was designed to influence members of Congress on the House-passed Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill.
The hearing will feature some of the central figures in the controversy, including victims of the fraud. The fraudulent letters were staged to appear as if they were sent by groups representing senior citizens, minorities and veterans.
While the hearing will focus on the specific events surrounding this fraud on Congress, the practice of “Astroturf” — corporate-funded activities that create the false appearance of a true grassroots movement — has come to the fore in American political discourse surrounding the debates over health care and energy legislation.
WHAT: Select Committee hearing: “Fraudulent Letters Opposing Clean Energy Legislation.”
WHEN: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 9:30 AM
WHERE: 210 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC and online.
WHO: Witnesses to be announced
Late update.
WITNESSES:
Mr. Jack Bonner, Bonner & Associates
Mr. Steve Miller, President and CEO, American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity
Ms. Lisa M. Maatz, Director of Public Policy and Government Relations, American Association of University Women
Mr. Hilary O. Shelton, Director and Senior Vice President for Advocacy and Policy, NAACP Washington Bureau
The hits keep coming for the embattled United States Chamber of Commerce. On Saturday, I wrote about the Chamber’s overwhelming hypocrisy on climate legislation:
In the last few weeks a diverse group of activist, NGO and labor campaigns have launched to escalate the pressure on the Chamber and its member companies. Here is a brief summary of current efforts:
The Natural Resources Defense Council has been leading the fight. In addition to Pete Altman’s prolific coverage of the story as it develops, they have launched a website — whodoesthechamberrepresent.org — to ask the question: “Who Does the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Really Represent?”
Credo Mobile sent an email to their customers on Thursday with the subject line “Earth to Chamber of Commerce: You’re killing me”:
We can’t let this stand. Help us keep up the momentum and join us in asking every CEO serving on the Chamber of Commerce board to quit the Chamber and renounce its radical stance.
The science is clear. And the Chamber is feeling the heat.
Kevin Grandia applied pressure directly to Toyota two weeks ago, calling out the company’s inconsistency in a piece at DeSmogBlog:
If Toyota is genuinely committed to sustainability as they say they are, then they can can take their lead from Nike, Exelon and others and stop supporting the US Chamber and their attack on the Obama administration’s clean energy and climate change reforms. If they don’t leave the US Chamber, then we know where their motivations truly lie.
Move On followed up on Grandia’s pressure on Toyota, writing in an email blast to members on Friday:
If Toyota is as “green” as they claim, why are they supporting a massive effort to kill President Obama’s clean energy plans?
Toyota needs to know consumers won’t stand for this. Can you ask Toyota to quit the Chamber of Commerce? If you’ve owned a Toyota, be sure to mention it when you call.
If major companies like Toyota quit the Chamber, members of Congress will be less likely to listen to the Chamber’s lobbyists.
For years, the Chamber of Commerce has pursued a right-wing agenda out of step with the business interests of many of its members. This year, they’ve launched an all-out lobbying blitz to block all of Obama’s goals—from climate to health care to fixing the economy. If the Chamber has less influence in Washington, our country has a real chance for change.
Call on Toyota to quit the Chamber of Commerce:
Toyota
(212) 223-0303
The Service Employees International Union is also running a campaign against the Chamber, petitioning Senators to “Break Up with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce”:
There’s an exodus from the corporate front group over its extreme views. We must use this opportunity to further isolate the U.S. Chamber as an out-of-touch outfit that only serves the interest of a handful of greedy CEOs.
The U.S. Chamber can’t be taken seriously. Your senators need to know this – the corporate front group is in Congress every day, lobbying for its extremist positions. They need to be immediately discredited.
Sign the petition to the Senate now: don’t listen to the extremist U.S. Chamber of Commerce on any issue.
In addition to these newer campaigns, some small businesses have dealt with the U.S. Chamber’s extremism in more creative ways. The South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce offers an alternative for small businesses that want to be part of a business association but don’t agree with the U.S. Chamber’s anti-consumer policies. They have been fighting against coal plants and for federal climate legislation for years, and they applauded Senator Graham just yesterday for his newfound urgency to reach a bipartisan deal on climate change.
Frank Knapp, President of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber told me on Monday that the U.S. Chamber does not represent the best interests of most small businesses. “I co-founded The S.C. Small Business Chamber of Commerce because I didn’t believe that small business interests were being represented, specifically in South Carolina, by any other chamber,” Knapp said. “It is clear that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is driven, as most organizations are, by their largest contributors. That traditionally leaves small business interests not being considered.” Business Week asked a similar question last week.
In any large group, a few people do most of the work—usually those who are most ideologically committed or who have a direct stake in a particular outcome. So decisions often end up reflecting not the wishes of the group as a whole but those of its most engaged members. In the case of climate-change legislation like cap-and-trade, many of the companies on the Chamber’s board of directors actually support it. But among the few that publicly oppose it are coal companies, which have a huge stake in stopping any carbon-pricing system. So it’s not surprising that the Chamber’s general approach is closer to Massey Energy’s than to Nike’s.
We assume that lobbies always recognize what’s best for their members. But they don’t, and, in the case of climate change, they may very well be missing what the companies that have resigned in protest have seen: global warming isn’t just bad for the planet; it’s bad for business.
As if the Chamber’s anti-science stance on climate legislation wasn’t enough, they are a key player in other fights against other smart, popular, pro-consumer reforms. Their playbook is exactly the same for every single campaign: spend millions of dollars on misleading television commercials, trying to create fear that reform will destroy the American economy.
Here are a few of the other campaigns they’ve been involved in this year:
The Chamber has lead the fight against the Employee Free Choice Act. They ran millions of dollars worth of misleading ads in home states of key Senators, opposing the legislation. Here is one such ad:
Labor unions responded forcefully — pointing out that the Chamber used the same misleading arguments against the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act 20 years ago — but the damage was done.
On health care they are playing the same disingenuous game they play on climate change. While claiming to support reform, they continue doing everything in their power to protect the status quo. Here is the Chamber’s latest misleading health care ad, thanking Blanche Lincoln for “standing up against a government-run health care plan”:
The Chamber has used the same cynical tactics to oppose financial regulatory reform and the creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency. President Obama on Friday specifically called out the Chamber for “maintaining the status quo” at the “expense of American consumers” (emphasis mine):
“But all this hasn’t stopped the big financial firms and their lobbyists from mobilizing against change. They’re doing what they always do – descending on Congress and using every bit of influence they have to maintain a status quo that has maximized their profits at the expense of American consumers,” he said. “And since they’re worried they may not be able to kill this agency, they’re trying their hardest to weaken it – by asking for exemptions from this agency’s rules and enforcement; by fighting to keep open every gap and loophole they can find. And they’re very good at this, because that’s how business has been done in Washington for a very long time. In fact, over the last ten years, the Chamber of Commerce alone spent nearly half a billion dollars on lobbying – half a billion dollars.“
So while the bulk of media attention these past few weeks has focused on the Chamber’s stance on climate legislation, there should be no doubt that the group’s efforts are getting in the way of other key elements of the progressive agenda as well.
As Move On notes in their email, the Chamber’s ability to influence members of Congress decreases with each high-profile member company that departs. But the Chamber also relies on annual dues from their nearly 3 million member organizations to finance their misleading political campaigns. Small and large businesses nationwide should take a long hard look at the Chamber’s campaigns and track record, and those who don’t feel represented should end their memberships immediately. Those companies on the Chamber’s board of directors should be subject to additional pressure, since they contribute so heavily to the Chamber’s coffers for the pleasure.
Put another way, companies should only be members of the Chamber of Commerce if they support hyper-conservative anti-regulatory policies across the board, and aren’t afraid to show it. I suspect that hundreds of forward-thinking companies will jump ship in the next several months before their reputations are tarnished by association.
