Greenwire has the story:

Oil and gas companies spent at least $154 million on lobbying last year, potentially besting a field of rivals battling to shape climate and energy policies and setting a new record for the industry. Influence efforts by the oil and gas sector grew at least 16 percent in 2009 from the $132 million spent in 2008, according to an early analysis of new lobbying disclosures by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. The total reflects spending for the first nine months of 2009 plus 80 percent of reports filed for the past three months.

The electric utility industry, meanwhile, spent at least $134.7 million on lobbying last year. Combined, the two traditional energy sectors paid out nearly 10 times the $29 million that alternative energy companies allocated for lobbying efforts. Environmental organizations spent at least $21.3 million last year on lobbying.

Here are some additional resources on this.

This is what the oil and gas industry’s lobbying expenditures over the past 12 years looks like:

Of particular interest is the fact that the industry’s spending has nearly doubled in recent years, after remaining steady in the $50-$80 million range for the previous ten years. Pharmaceutical and health product lobbying on the other hand, while increasing steadily, has not experienced anything resembling the spikes we have seen in the oil and gas industry.

The $154 million in lobbying was handled by 776 lobbyists working on behalf of over 100 clients. You can view the full list of clients, with lobbying expenditures here.

54% of the $154 million worth of lobbying was paid for by just five corporations: ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP and Marathon ($83 million).

ExxonMobil spent more on lobbying ($27,430,000) than all environmental organizations combined ($21,300,000), and nearly as much as the entire alternative energy industry ($29,000,000).

I’ve created a few charts that give some additional perspective on just how easily big oil outspends environmental organizations and alternative energy companies on lobbying.

This chart compares 2009 lobbying expenditures by five oil and gas companies to 2009 lobbying expenditures by environmental organizations and the entire alternative energy industry.

This chart compares 2009 lobbying expenditures by the oil and gas industry as a whole to 2009 lobbying expenditures by environmental organizations and the entire alternative energy industry.

We Can Lead, a broad coalition of business owners, is on Capitol Hill today lobbying for clean energy and climate legislation.

Here is the letter they recently sent to Congress and President Obama:

jan2010 –

PolluterWatch:

PolluterWatch Director Kert Davies sent a letter to Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) urging him to release information about any conversations he may have had with lobbying firms or other potential employers regarding a job once he retires from the Senate early next year. In the letter Davies also calls on Dorgan to state unequivocally that he will refrain from engaging prospective employers and focus solely on his work as a Senator throughout the remainder of his term.

Here is the full letter:

Office of Senator Byron Dorgan
322 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-3405

Senator Dorgan,

It is no secret that Americans are increasingly cynical about their government. With influence peddling as a $4.5 billion a year “growth” industry, there are now 1,300 Washington lobbyists for every Senator. The revolving door between K Street and Capitol Hill does nothing to improve people’s faith in the independence of their elected leaders.

Throughout your public service career, you have been a strong leader on a wide range of issues including several key energy initiatives that are essential to America’s future. Given how much the nation’s clean energy future is at stake this year, I was disappointed when, earlier this month, you announced your decision to retire – and that you are considering several career options, including working “on energy policy in the private sector.”

As a longtime member of Congress I am sure you are aware that, regardless of your actual intentions, this language is often code for legislators who have begun trolling for an influence peddling job after they leave Congress. And, the path from public servant to influence peddler is a sadly well-worn one: Rep. Bob Livingston, Senator John Breaux, Rep. Billy Tauzin, and Senator Trent Lott.

I recall seeing you as a speaker at the oil industry’s controversial, pay-to-play forum on December 1st, just five weeks before you announced your retirement. As you will recall, this highly questionable exercise was one in which Newsweek was caught renting out its name, credibility and top pundit to big oil’s influence peddler, Jack Gerard. We were able to document Mr. Gerard’s unwillingness to answer basic questions about the purchase price of Newsweek’s credibility, and you can see the results at youtube.com/polluterwatch.

We are all confident that you will have no shortage of job options open to you at the end of this year. Why let dirty energy lobbyists, who are working overtime to imperil America’s clean energy interests, threaten your legacy as an independent advocate for what’s best for North Dakota and the people of this country?

To prevent that from happening, I call on you to:

· List the dirty energy lobbyists and their respective clients with whom you have had contact about your next job.

· Release all details of phone calls, emails or meetings you have had with prospective employers from energy interests who have lobbied you or your office. Of particular interest are Washington-area lobbying and public relations firms.

· Pledge that you will wait until after an energy bill is passed this year to engage in any further discussions about future employment with interests that lobby you.

This year the Senate is likely to debate and act on several key pieces of legislation that will shape the future of the American energy industry, our economy and our efforts to fight pollution. Regardless of your final positions on these bills, I am sure you agree that Americans deserve to be absolutely certain that your votes reflect your genuine view of what is best for them.

I am sure that you would not allow future career prospects to influence your legislative judgment. However, by releasing your records and pledging to refrain from any employment discussions, you can avoid creating any perception to the contrary.

Sincerely,

Kert Davies

PolluterWatch Director
Greenpeace

Following up on ads released today by the National Wildlife Federation Action Fund and Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace has now released a report applying pressure on the five Democratic Senators believed to be vulnerable to cosponsoring Senator Murkowski’s Dirty Air Act amendment to gut the Clean Air Act. The report details ‘campaign contributions that these five Democratic Senators have taken from the lobbying clients of Jeffrey Holmstead and Roger Martella, the DC influence-peddlers accused of funneling campaign cash to Senator Murkowski’:

Mary Landrieu of Louisiana — Since 1997, Senator Mary Landrieu has directly received $152,668 from these two lobbyists, their firms, their climate legislation clients, their PACs and employees.

Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas — Since 1997, Senator Blanche Lincoln, who is the Chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee and has jurisdiction over clean energy legislation moving through the Senate, has directly received $139,766 from these two lobbyists, their firms, their climate legislation clients, their PACs and employees.

Jim Webb of Virginia — Since 2005, Senator Jim Webb has directly received $25,700 from these two lobbyists, their firms, their climate legislation clients, their PACs and employees.

Byron Dorgan of North Dakota — Since 1997, Senator Byron Dorgan has directly received $119,446 from these two lobbyists, their firms, their climate legislation clients, their PACs and employees.

Ben Nelson of Nebraska — Since 1997, Senator Ben Nelson has directly received $65,770 from these two lobbyists, their firms, their climate legislation clients, their PACs and employees.

All told, these five Senators have directly received $503,350 from these two lobbyists, their firms, their climate legislation clients, their PACs and employees, since 1997.

Here is Greenpeace’s report on this:

peddling-influence –

Additionally, Greenpeace sent letters to the five Senators mentioned above, attempting to clarify their position on Murkowski’s Dirty Air Act amendment. Here is a copy of the letter they sent to Senator Webb:

Webb Murkowski Letter-1 –

Senator Dorgan, one of the five Senators who received a letter from Greenpeace, refused to say whether or not he supported the amendment in a conference call today with reporters:

Dorgan wouldn’t say whether he might support a possible amendment by Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, to stop the EPA from regulating carbon emissions. But, he said, his “preference is that Congress address this issue and not the EPA.” How the amendment is crafted — most notably whether it suspends the agency’s regulatory power or completely removes it — is crucial, the senator added.

American Rights at Work is tired of the Chamber of Commerce’s ridiculous anti-progressive tactics. So today, with a Twitter campaign using the #NotMyChamber hashtag and an Act.ly petition, they’re fighting back:

We’re fighting back. Our tweet-a-thon starts with a twitter “flash mob” at 10am Eastern/7 am Pacific on Friday, 11/20. And the tweets keep on going all day and beyond – so it’s never too late to join in!

Start the tweet-a-thon by signing our act.ly Twitter petition to the U.S. Chamber.

Go to http://act.ly/1cc or simply tweet this to sign the twitter petition:

petition @chamberpost: The US #Chamber doesn’t represent me. It’s Not My Chamber! http://act.ly/1cc RT to sign #p2 #NotMyChamber

All morning, and all day, and until the lies stop, we’ll keep tweeting about the U.S. Chamber. And whenever we do, we’ll include the hashtag #notmychamber. We hope you will tweet often about the Chamber today, and include #notmychamber in all your tweets.

Here are some sample tweets they’ve provided:

The US #Chamber thinks climate change is fake? Shame-ber of Commerce is more like it. Its #NotMyChamber http://act.ly/1cc

Apple, Nike, Johnson & Johnson rebuked the US #Chamber over global warming. I agree: they’re #NotMyChamber http://act.ly/1cc

Over 3000 businesses have joined with Apple, Nike, PG&E to speak against the #Chamber on climate change! http://act.ly/1cc #NotMyChamber

US #Chamber tops the charts at $34M in lobbying in ONE QUARTER! http://bit.ly/2RaJl3 http://act.ly/1cc #NotMyChamber

US #Chamber has 300k members. In September it was 3 million. Quite a difference! http://bit.ly/M3d3g http://act.ly/1cc #NotMyChamber

Here are a few more suggestions we’ve come up with:

NRDC blasts #Chamber of Commerce for misleading stance on climate change: http://su.pr/2hniF6 #NotMyChamber

Does Gore Agree with Apple’s Decision to Leave the Chamber? Absolutely: http://su.pr/4oeMei #NotMyChamber

#Chamber of Commerce Fights Commerce! http://getenergysmartnow.com/2008/05/09/chambering-a-round-against-future-commerce/ #NotMyChamber

Chamber of Commerce Shuts Down Websites of Hundreds of Businesses: http://su.pr/1d4xh5 #NotMyChamber

Hilarious Leaked Memo from the Chamber of Commerce to Its Advisory Group: http://su.pr/1hTLaw #NotMyChamber

US #Chamber of Commerce thinks we’re suckers http://getenergysmartnow.com/2009/09/29/us-coc-thinks-were-suckers/ #NotMyChamber

Please join us by using any of the tweets above or coming up with your own. It is beyond time to turn up the pressure on the Chamber of Commerce.

This seems awfully fishy:

When he was hauled before Congress last week for sending those forged letters to lawmakers on climate change, astroturf lobbyist Jack Bonner pledged to make sure that no similar event ever happened again. As a centerpiece of that effort, Bonner announced that his firm had hired James Thurber, an American University political science professor, to act as an “independent ethics adviser.”

Bonner assured lawmakers that the new adviser “is well-regarded as maintaining the highest ethical standards and independence,” and “will review our policies and work with us to continue to improve our internal quality control system to the highest standards.” All in all, it sounded like a good idea.

But it’s fair to ask how independent Thurber really is.

Today, Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper, ran an ad by the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies (CCPS), the American University program that Thurber directs.

Here is the ad (click here for full size):

Clean Air Watch:

Some offices on Capitol Hill are abuzz this week about an invitation they received from Newsweek magazine to participate in an “Executive Forum” on “Climate and Energy Policy” that is being “co-hosted” with the American Petroleum Institute — the oil industry lobby that is fighting an all-out war against climate change legislation on Capitol Hill.

They really couldn’t find someone better than the President of big oil’s front group to sit on this panel? Not cool, Newsweek.

The email sent to offices on Capitol Hill, also via Clean Air Watch can be read in full below.

Read the rest of this entry »

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:

Here is Chairman Markey’s testimony:

Here is Rep. Periello’s testimony:

Here is Jack Bonner’s Testimony:

Here is Steve Miller’s Testimony: