am coalition clean coal ACCCE bak

=some confusion with coal ash acca =brown U CIC<a href="http://www.climatedevlab.brown.edu/uploads/2/8/4/0/28401609/covercountermovementcoalitions.2.2019.pdf">http://www.climatedevlab.brown.edu/uploads/2/8/4/0/28401609/covercountermovementcoalitions.2.2019.pd</a>f<div>the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) is another influential voice in climate obstructionism, ranked as Number 3 in Mother Jones’ “Dirty Dozen” series, which profiled the most prominent and influential denialist organizations. The Nation dubbed ACCCE “the driving force behind coal’s rebranding effort” in an article on the messaging of “clean coal.” The notoriety surrounding ACCCE is due in part to its deep ties to the lobbying firm Bonner & Associates, responsible for the forged 2009 letters to Congress, in which fake letters were sent to lawmakers that claimed to be from non-profit groups who opposed climate change legislation.</div><div>
</div><div> ACCCE is also the brainchild of Stephen Miller, who in 2008 consolidated two other organizations (Center for Energy and Economic Development (CEED) and Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC)) into ACCCE. The front group currently operates with an annual budget of more than $45 million, and claims to be “the only national trade organization whose sole mission is to advocate at the federal and state levels on behalf of coal-fueled electricity and the coal fleet.” Their main directive is the promotion of “clean coal” through aggressive public advertising campaigns and massive political lobbying and donations. Membership From their own Membership page: “Our membership is comprised of major industries — electricity generators, coal producers, railroads, barge operators, and equipment manufacturers — involved in generating electricity from coal.” Notable members include American Electric Power, Peabody Energy, the Carbon Utilization Research Council, the Western Fuels Association, and the Kentucky Coal Association....</div><div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2021/03/clean-coal/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.alternet.org/2021/03/clean-coal/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div>no lnx</div><div>A hilarious euphemism': US probe underway over 'clean coal' moniker that actually increases pollution</div><div>
</div><div>Kenny Stancil and Common Dreams March 15, 2021</div><div>   </div><div>Following the emergence of evidence that power plants using a chemically treated coal—purportedly designed to reduce smog—generated more smokestack pollution not less, the Government Accountability Office has reportedly launched a congressional probe of the "refined coal" tax credit program that yields at least $1 billion per year for U.S. corporations.</div><div>
</div><div>With the multibillion-dollar fossil fuel subsidy set to expire at the end of 2021, the outcome of the GAO investigation could influence whether federal lawmakers vote to renew it, Reuters reported Monday.</div><div>
</div><div>According to Reuters, Democratic Sens. Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) called for the probe in 2019 after the news outlet's December 2018 reporting "revealed that many power plants burning the fuel, which supporters call 'clean coal,' pumped out more pollution than previously."</div><div>
</div><div>A subsequent analysis conducted by the nonprofit group Resources for the Future showed that "power plants using refined coal were not cutting mercury, nitrogen oxide, and sulfur dioxide pollution to levels required by the tax credit program."</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>twt</div><div>
</div><div>As Reuters reported:</div><div>
</div><div>Over the past decade, a who's who of American companies have reaped at least several billion dollars in benefits from investing in refined coal operations.</div><div>
</div><div>Just last year, some 150 million tons of refined coal was burned in the United States, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Producers get a tax credit of $7.30 for each ton burned.</div><div>
</div><div>Beneficiaries include global insurance brokerage Arthur J. Gallagher & Co, Detroit utility DTE Energy Co, Boston-based Fidelity Investments, Goldman Sachs Group Inc, JPMorgan Chase & Co Inc, pharmaceutical giant Mylan NV and Waste Management Inc, according to disclosures reviewed by Reuters.</div><div>
</div><div>The Internal Revenue Service, which oversees the tax credit program, allows the companies to qualify by testing relatively small amounts of refined coal in a laboratory once a year, in lieu of real-world emissions measurements at power plants, the Reuters Special Report found.</div><div>
</div><div>Many wealthy beneficiaries of the "clean coal" boondoggle are hoping that Congress will vote to extend the tax credit.</div><div>
</div><div>Doug Howell, the chief financial officer of Arthur J. Gallagher, is one of them. His insurance firm, as Reuters noted, "has stockpiled about $1.5 billion in tax credits from investing in refined coal activities. Of that amount, about $1 billion remain to be used in future years to offset federal tax liabilities, according to the company's financial reports."</div><div>
</div><div>"We hope that there are some proposed legislative changes that would—that possibly could make the extension happen," he told a conference call with analysts and investors in late January.</div></div>= North Dakota Attorney General’s office coordinating conference call with the North American Coal Corporation legal counsel o In October 2015, North American Coal Corporation Government and Public Affairs Manager David J. Straley emailed North Dakota Assistant Attorney General Margaret I. Olson in order to organize a “30 min conf. call” between Olson, Straley, the NACoal Legal Counsel John Neumann, and NACoal outside counsel Chuck Wehland to “to hear directly from us on our legal thoughts about different CAA arguments that may make sense for your strategy in the upcoming litigation.” Straley assured Olson that, “This of course would obligate you to nothing other than your time.” Olson confirmed the conference call on the same day.  North Dakota Attorney General’s office coordination and conference calls with industry attorney Paul Seby o The North Dakota Attorney General’s office regularly corresponded with Attorney Paul M. Seby about the Clean Power Plan in a series of “confidential” emails, including setting up a “confidential call” to discuss the EPA’s proposed rule. Paul M. Seby is a Denver-based Natural Resource Attorney that has provided Counsel for American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.http://www.polluterwatch.com/stephen-miller peabody ties:<div class="views-field-body" style="margin-bottom: 25px; line-height: 13.503px; background-color: rgb(241, 241, 236);"><div class="field-content">As the CEO of the <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/american-coalition-clean-coal-electricity" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity</a>, Stephen Miller is a politically influential face of the coal industry.  Miller is a <a href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Steve_Miller" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">graduate of the University of Kentucky and the UK School of Law</a>.Miller has been involved in <a href="http://www.coalcandothat.com/content.php?view=126" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">politics, government and social policy for 30 years</a>.  He co-founded the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Energy_and_Economic_Development" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Center for Energy and Economic Development (CEED)</a> and was named President and CEO in 1994.  Miller also helped lead the creation of <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Americans_for_Balanced_Energy_Choices" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC)</a>. These organizations, which <a href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/1284/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">consolidated into ACCCE in 2008</a>, are coal industry astroturfing groups meant to convince lawmakers and lay people that clean coal is a viable and environmentally sound energy option. To accomplish this mission, ACCCE spends millions on advertising, public relations and political lobbying to promote the coal industry’s claims of climate-related solutions.  This money comes directly from the country's major coal-generated <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/dirt-clean-coal?page=0,0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">utilities, coal producers, and railroads</a>.</div></div><div class="views-field-field-quotes-value" style="margin-bottom: 25px; line-height: 13.503px; background-color: rgb(241, 241, 236);"><div class="field-content"><div class="polluter-subtitle" style="border: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 8px; font-weight: bold; text-transform: uppercase;">QUOTES</div><div class="polluter-body">Our strategy in dealing with mercury has been two-fold: prevent states from taking precipitous or unwarranted action to regulate mercury and engage in the federal rulemaking to protect the interests of coal-based electricity.
-<a href="http://www.arizonaenergy.org/Barriers/coal_industry_strategy_letter_to.htm" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Leaked CEED strategy letter to Peabody CEO</a>, June 18, 2004"Indeed, many scientists maintain that [greenhouse gas] emissions from electric power plants are not contributing significantly to overall warming trends."
-<a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/dirt-clean-coal" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">The Nation</a>, April 13, 2009
 “We know there has never been an environmental challenge to using coal to generate electricity for which technology has not provided the ultimate answer.  Climate change will not be an exception to that rule.”
<a href="http://www.cleancoalusa.org/docs/media/videos/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">“Climate Policy” video</a>, ACCCE media room</div></div></div><div class="views-field-field-evidence-value" style="margin-bottom: 50px; padding-bottom: 1em; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(200, 202, 203); line-height: 13.503px; background-color: rgb(241, 241, 236);"><div class="field-content"><div class="polluter-subtitle" style="border: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 8px; font-weight: bold; text-transform: uppercase;">EVIDENCE</div><div class="polluter-body">Before becoming ACCCE, the Center for Energy and Economic Development (CEED) worked with the Western Fuels Association (a<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Western_Fuels_Association" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">coal utility coalition</a>) and Greening Earth Society (a <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greening_Earth_Society" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">publicity front group</a>) to adamantly deny that carbon dioxide is an atmospheric pollutant, <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/dirt-clean-coal?page=0,0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">lobbying against the Kyoto Protocol</a>.  The Western Fuels Association, then led by current <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/peabody-energy" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Peabody</a> CEO <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/fred-palmer" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Fred Palmer</a>, and the Greening Earth Society are known for non-scientific claims of supposed environmental <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greening_Earth_Society" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">benefits of carbon dioxide emissions</a>.  Additionally, Greening Earth Society’s “<a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/index.php?mapid=1610" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">scientific advisors</a>” have ties to <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/exxonmobil" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">ExxonMobil</a> through their <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/news-and-blogs/campaign-blog/exxon-continued-to-fund-climate-denial-in-200/blog/26100" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">institutions</a>.

ACCCE spent over <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?year=2010&lname=American+Cltn+for+Clean+Coal+Electricity&id=" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">$12 million from 2008-2010 on lobbying</a>, almost $10 million of which was spent in 2008 alone.

In the 2008 election year, ACCCE spent $40 million on television and radio advertising, profoundly <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#The_Hawthorn_Group.27s_work_for_ACCCE" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">influencing the political attention</a>that coal received.  At the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, ACCCE spent $1.7 million on advertising and outreach.  Additionally, direct lobbying from Miller effectively reversed a statement from Joe Biden suggesting the Obama/Biden platform would not be supportive of “clean coal” during the 2008 election season.
Source: <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122446094489848785.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">The Wall Street Journal</a>

A <a href="http://www.arizonaenergy.org/Barriers/coal_industry_strategy_letter_to.htm" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">leaked 2004 letter from Miller</a> (then with CEED) to former <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/peabody-energy" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Peabody</a> CEO Irl F. Engelhardt reveals CEED’s efforts to prevent greenhouse gas regulation on national, regional and state levels, stall EPA regulation of carbon dioxide through the Clean Air Act, and weaken standards for haze and mercury pollution control.  Concerning mercury regulation, Miller wrote:“Our strategy in dealing with mercury has been two-fold: prevent states from taking precipitous or unwarranted action to regulate mercury and engage in the federal rulemaking to protect the interests of coal-based electricity.”In August 2009, Select Committee on Global Warming Chairman Ed Markey (D-Mass.) investigated <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/04/04greenwire-coal-industry-group-linked-to-a-dozen-forged-ca-2624.html?pagewanted=1" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">forged letters sent by an ACCCE contractor to three House lawmakers</a>.  Miller admitted to the existence of the forgeries and <a href="http://www.americaspower.org/News/Press-Room/Press-Releases/ACCCE-Statement-Regarding-Falsified-Constituent-Contacts-Made-to-Congressional-Offices-by-Bonner-and-Associates" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">released a statement</a> on Aug. 3, 2009, which read, in part:“Because of Bonner and Associates’ misconduct, we apologize to the community groups and the Members of Congress involved. There is no place for this type of deception. We applaud efforts to ensure that everyone involved in the public policy dialogue lives up to the highest ethical standards.”While <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/29/accce-lies-underoath/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">testifying under oath about the forged letters</a> before Congress, Miller falsely claimed that his organization had only participated in direct federal lobbying since 2008.

On September 6, 2010, Miller wrote a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/opinion/lweb07acid.html?r=4" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">response letter to the editor of the New York Times</a>, expressing opposition to EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gases.</div></div></div><div class="views-field-field-links-resources-url" style="margin-bottom: 25px; line-height: 13.503px; background-color: rgb(241, 241, 236);"><div class="field-content"><div class="polluter-subtitle" style="border: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding: 8px; font-weight: bold; text-transform: uppercase; margin-bottom: 1em;">LINKS AND RESOURCES</div><div class="polluter-body"><div class="field-item field-item-0" style="display: list-item; margin-left: 20px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;"><a href="http://www.cleancoalusa.org/docs/about/" a:0="a:0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;" xmlns:a="a">ACCCE</a></div><div class="field-item field-item-1" style="display: list-item; margin-left: 20px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;"><a href="http://www.coalcandothat.com/content.php?view=126" a:0="a:0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;" xmlns:a="a">CoalCanDoThat</a></div><div class="field-item field-item-2" style="display: list-item; margin-left: 20px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;"><a href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Steve_Miller" a:0="a:0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;" xmlns:a="a">WhoRunsGov</a></div><div class="field-item field-item-3" style="display: list-item; margin-left: 20px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;"><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?lname=Miller%2C%20Stephen%20L&id=Y00000217210&year=2010" a:0="a:0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;" xmlns:a="a">OpenSecrets</a></div><div class="field-item field-item-4" style="display: list-item; margin-left: 20px; line-height: 1.4em; margin-bottom: 1em;"><a href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/1284/" a:0="a:0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;" xmlns:a="a">Center for Public Integrity</a></div></div></div></div>=<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">On Monday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is set to release its ambitious climate rule, one aimed at cutting the carbon pollution emitted by the nation’s fleet of existing fossil fuel-fired power plants. These emissions drive up the health problems that stem from dirty air and fuel climate change and taking action to address them, particularly in light of Congress’ refusal to do the same, is widely being regarded as one of President Obama’s key accomplishments.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">But the fight is far from over. While the EPA is required to regulate pollutants under the Clean Air Act, cries of overreach and unfair punishment of the coal industry have begun and will likely intensify as each state determines the best path to achieve the required reductions. <p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">While the rule itself hasn’t even been released, several groups have already begun to attack it, largely the same well-funded entities that have fought any attempt to address global warming for decades.<h3 style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px 10px; border: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 22.44px; vertical-align: baseline;">U.S. Chamber of Commerce</h3><p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The Chamber didn’t wait for the rule to come out, instead publishing their own speculative report Wednesday. The Chamber found that it would cost American industry $28.1 billion annually to comply with EPA’s new regulations and that as many as 224,000 jobs would be lost between now and 2030. However, as Climate Progress’ Jeff Spross <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/05/28/3442314/chamber-of-commerce-epa-carbon-study/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">points out</a>, the Chamber’s ‘analysis’ only counts up the negative side of the ledger — failing to account for the economic benefit that will come from cleaning up the air and creating new jobs in the clean energy sector. In its attempt to scare the country about the new plan, the Chamber “fails utterly,” <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/05/lobby-tries-fails-to-frighten-on-clean-energy.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">according</a> to Jonathan Chait. The report uses an inflated number for projected electricity demand and bases its analysis off of an ambitious proposal by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), rather than the EPA’s actual proposal, but “even the Chamber’s unrealistically dire number is still low enough that most people would barely notice it,” Chait writes.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The country’s largest business lobby, the Chamber has a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/09/05/2500831/chamber-carbon-tax/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">long history</a> of opposing action to address climate change. The group lobbied hard against the failed Waxman-Markey climate bill — spending a whopping $17 million in the early months of 2009 alone. The Chamber then created an entire subsidiary organization, the Institute for 21st Century Energy, to promote its view of climate and energy issues. <a href="http://chamber.350.org/poster/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">94 percent</a> of the $32 million the Chamber spent on the 2010 elections went to climate deniers.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In October, the Chamber <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/329671-us-chamber-kochs-join-social-cost-of-carbon-lobbying-battle" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">joined</a> Koch Industries, among others, to officially lobby against the use of the social cost of carbon — a calculation that takes into account all of the negative economic effects of carbon pollution.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The Chamber also helped create the Partnership for a Better Energy Future, a <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/196968-business-plans-major-pushback-on-energy-regulation" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">coalition</a> of 76 business groups that has vowed “to be present every step of the way” as the regulations are introduced and enforced.<h3 style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px 10px; border: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 22.44px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)</h3><p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Funded by petrochemical billionaires Charles and David Koch, along with various corporate and fossil fuel interests, ALEC is a secretive organization designed to pass conservative legislation in states across the country. The group set its sights on attacking clean energy laws in multiple states but <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/08/08/2399121/corporations-clean-energy-standards/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">failed in every attempt</a> last year. This year, ALEC identified the coming restrictions on coal-fired power plants as a key area of focus and, according to internal documents obtained by the Guardian earlier this month, they have a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/05/02/3433615/alec-campaign-push/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">new strategy</a>. ALEC’s plan for attacking the regulations involves seeking out friendly state attorneys general and encouraging them to sue the EPA, a move reportedly spearheaded by Nebraska attorney general and ALEC member Jon Bruning, who has already filed a lawsuit against the agency.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ALEC has also “targeted a dozen state legislatures, including Kentucky and Ohio, to prevent certain states from implementing EPA carbon rules,” Reuters <a href="https://sg.news.yahoo.com/big-public-push-white-house-seeks-smooth-way-114229633--finance.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">reported</a> last week. Ohio has already <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/blog/ohio-energy-inc/2014/05/lawmakers-want-to-give-ohio-flexibility-with-epa.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">introduced</a> model legislation.<h3 style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px 10px; border: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 22.44px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Americans For Prosperity (AFP)</h3><p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Another Koch-funded organization, AFP reacted to proposed regulations by citing its concern over the impact it would have on low-income Americans. “Using the EPA to drive up electricity prices will have a negative impact on American families, their pocketbooks and their standard of living,” the group said in a 2013 <a href="http://americansforprosperity.org/minnesota/newsroom/afp-responds-to-obamas-epa-carbon-regulations/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">statement</a>. “The President claims to care about jobs and the economy, but his EPA regulations and resulting higher energy bills will hurt the little guy the most, the senior citizen, the single mom on a fixed income.”<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">AFP, however, has <a href="http://americansforprosperity.org/legislativealerts/minimum-wage-more-harm-than-good" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">fought against</a> raising the minimum wage, claiming that “it does more harm than good.” Last year they launched a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/10/19/2806521/billionaire-koch-brothers-spending-millions-deny-health-coverage-income-americans/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">massive campaign</a> pressuring states to deny health care coverage to lower income Americans through the Medicaid expansion contained in the Affordable Care Act.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">AFP has worked to protect fossil fuel interests and slander clean energy in multiple states — recently running ads attacking Kansas’ clean energy standard that former Senate President Dave Kerr, (R-Hutchinson) <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/24/3418060/koch-kansas-clean-energy-repeal/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">called</a> “provably false” and failing in their <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/09/2267051/koch-brothers-fund-effort-to-undermine-tea-party-support-of-solar-energy-in-georgia/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">attempt</a> to undermine Tea Party support for solar power in Georgia.<h3 style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px 10px; border: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 22.44px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE)</h3><p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In March, the group, which represents coal mining companies as well as owners of coal-fired plants like American Electric Power and Southern Co, released a <a href="http://www.betterenergyfuture.org/analysis-the-true-cost-of-proposed-epa-greenhouse-gas-regulations/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">report</a> claiming the EPA’s new rule would kill more than 2.85 million jobs and cause consumers’ electricity bills to rise in 29 states — a prediction even more dire than the Chamber’s. The position is in line with ACCCE’s long history of staunch opposition to any action to reduce carbon pollution. ACCCE has been a top lobbyist on climate change and energy, spending over <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000046880&year=2013" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">$20 million</a> since 2008. In 2010, they spent <a href="http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/green/news/2010/10/27/8530/interactive-big-polluters-big-ad-spending/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">$16.4 million</a> on misleading television ads and in 2012, the group launched a broad-based <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/07/31/611401/coal-front-group-helps-back-6-million-campaign-against-higher-renewable-energy-standard/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">$40 million</a> messaging and outreach campaign where one ad accused the EPA of attempting to raise electricity prices.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ACCCE’s tactics don’t stop with lobbying. In 2009, the group <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/green/2009/08/03/174394/accce-bonner-party/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">admitted</a> to hiring a firm to forge letters from civil rights organizations to Congress opposing climate legislation, going as far as to <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/09/10/60147/veterans-14th-letter/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">impersonate veterans</a>. While being investigated by Congress, the president and CEO <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/10/29/204883/forged-letter-hearing-coal-industry-accce-lies-under-oath-lobbying/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">lied under oath</a>, claiming the group never opposed climate legislation. Congressional investigations also discovered the group <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/10/30/204887/energy-and-global-warming-news-for-october-30-coal-industry-knew-of-fraudulent-letters-senate-gop-may-try-to-stall-climate-bill/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">knew of the fraudulent letters</a> but failed to disclose it until several weeks after a major House vote on climate legislation.<h3 style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px 10px; border: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 22.44px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">National Mining Association (NMA)</h3><p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The National Mining Association, which represents large coal companies such as Peabody Coal Co, Arch Coal Inc, Alpha Natural Resources and Cloud Peak Energy Inc., “has spent $1 million on a radio and digital campaign in five states depicting shocked consumers opening expensive electricity bills,” Reuters <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/28/us-usa-climatechange-industry-analysis-idUSKBN0E80CP20140528" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">reported</a>. The advertisements claim that electricity bills will jump by 80 percent as a result of the Obama administration’s proposal to limit carbon pollution from new coal and natural gas plants, something the Washington Post’s Fact Checker <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/05/23/a-bogus-claim-that-electricity-prices-will-nearly-double-because-of-clean-coal-technology/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">recently said</a> was “wholly unsupported” and reliant on “bogus, hyped evidence to make its claim.”<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The NMA has <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/22/3429463/final-coal-dust-rules-black-lung-disease/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">spoken out</a> against new coal dust regulations aimed at reducing cases of black lung disease in coal miners, claiming the administration’s long-awaited rule is unnecessary and <a href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/08/17/10712/gao-report-supports-science-behind-black-lung-rule" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">criticizing</a> multiple studies that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined were sound. The NMA also intervened in a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/22/3320911/mountaintop-removal-mining-stream-buffer-rule/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">recent court decision</a> to restore a law overturned by the Bush administration designed to keep toxic coal mining spoil from entering sensitive waterways, <a href="http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059994937" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">saying</a> they found the ruling “obviously very disappointing.”<h3 style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px 10px; border: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 22.44px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Heritage Foundation</h3><p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The conservative think tank, which has received funding from the Koch Family Foundations and ExxonMobil, has been staunchly opposed to the EPA’s move to cut carbon emissions since the rules were initially proposed. The group has called on Congress to intervene and stop the EPA (which it does not have the authority to do), citing far-reaching impacts like<a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/03/epas-climate-regulations-will-harm-american-manufacturing" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">damage</a> to manufacturing, constituting a “back-door energy tax,” and accomplishing <a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/12/epa-power-plant-regulations-a-backdoor-energy-tax" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">nothing more</a> than raising energy prices and killing jobs “with no noticeable climate impact.”<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Heritage has <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/28/meet-the-climate-denial-machine/191545" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">long sought</a> to cast doubt on the scientific consensus behind climate change and oppose cutting greenhouse gas emissions. A 2010 white paper asserts that “the only consensus over the threat of climate change that seems to exist these days is that there is no consensus.” (In reality, 97 percent of scientists agree climate change is happening and human activity is the root cause). The think tank also has a long history of opposing any initiative that might impede fossil fuel corporations. Heritage recently <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/11/20/2973431/heritage-koch-brothers-fracking/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">joined</a> Americans for Prosperity and the Chamber of Commerce in supporting a bill that would have prevented the federal government from regulating fracking operations.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">A recent study published in the journal Climactic Change found that conservative think tanks like Heritage, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Cato Foundation are among the top recipients of the nearly <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/22/3099141/climate-denying-groups-funding/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">$1 billion a year</a> that funnels from conservative donors to organizations that oppose limits on carbon pollution.<h3 style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px 10px; border: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 22.44px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">American Energy Alliance/Institute For Energy Research</h3><p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The Institute for Energy Research and its political arm, the American Energy Alliance, are both<a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74643.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">funded</a> in part by the Koch brothers and their donor network and run by Tom Pyle, a former lobbyist for Koch Industries. The group was recently identified as a beneficiary of the Kochs’ vast political network, which raised at least <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2014/01/06/3121881/400-million-kochs/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">$407 million</a> in the last election alone, according to a recent analysis by the Washington Post and the Center for Responsive Politics. In January, an IER <a href="http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/obamas-war-on-coal-continues-while-global-demand-increases/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">blog post</a> said the plan to cut carbon pollution from existing power plants “will wreak havoc on our largest source of electricity.”<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> <p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Pyle <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/05/us/epa-staff-struggling-to-create-rule-limiting-carbon-emissions.html?hpw&rref=politics&r=1" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">told</a> the New York Times in February that the group was preparing to attack the proposal with television and radio ads. “That’s going to be a big fight, when they roll out the rule for existing plants,” Pyle said. “We’ll be ready for them.”<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">AEA has recently been <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/04/3017891/conservative-group-targets-carbon-tax/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">attacking</a> vulnerable Democrats in fossil-fuel friendly states — Rep. Nick Rahall (WV), Sen. Mark Begich (AK) — for supporting a carbon tax, even though they never did. In 2012, the group sought to make the Production Tax Credit for wind energy <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/10/19/1045661/koch-group-campaigns-to-make-wind-tax-credit-so-toxic-republicans-wont-back-it/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">“so toxic”</a> that Republicans wouldn’t back it.<p style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Tiffany Germain, Senior Researcher with the Center for American Progress Action Fund, contributed to this piece.<div class="tags" style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0px 1em; border: 0px; line-height: 22.44px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h4 style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: italic; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.15em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline;">Tags:</h4>   <ul style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0.5em 0px 0px; padding: 1em 0px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; list-style: none; display: inline;"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/alec/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(221, 221, 221);">ALEC</a></li> <li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/american-coalition-for-clean-coal-electricity/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(221, 221, 221);">American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity</a></li> <li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/american-energy-alliance/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(238, 238, 238);">American Energy Alliance</a></li> <li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/americans-for-prosperity/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(221, 221, 221);">Americans for Prosperity</a></li> <li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/carbon-emissions/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(221, 221, 221);">Carbon Emissions</a></li> <li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/chamber-of-commerce/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(221, 221, 221);">Chamber of Commerce</a></li> <li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/clean-air-act/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(221, 221, 221);">Clean Air Act</a></li> <li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/heritage-foundation/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(221, 221, 221);">Heritage Foundation</a></li> <li style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.33em; padding: 5px 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.6em; vertical-align: baseline; display: inline-block;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/tag/national-mining-association/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 1px 0.5em; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration-line: none; border-radius: 6px; background: rgb(221, 221, 221);">National Mining Association</a></li></ul></div>  = <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity</a> =<div class="blogheader clearfix" style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; line-height: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Thu, 2014-02-06 19:34Graham Readfearn</div><h2 style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; line-height: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Coal Industry Report On Social Cost Of Carbon Relies On Climate Science Denial</h2> <div class="print-content" style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; line-height: normal;"><div id="node-7829" class="node node-blog node-promoted node-odd"><div class="node-inner"><div class="content"><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">The <a href="http://www.cleancoalusa.org/" target="blank">American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity</a> [1] (ACCCE) seems a confusing and confused organisation of <a href="http://www.cleancoalusa.org/about-us/members" target="blank">major coal miners and burners</a> [2] - even if you only consider its oxymoronic title.When the industry group was <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/same-front-group-different-day" target="blank" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">launched in 2008</a> [3], the message was that coal — the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel burning globally — could be part of the future.“I believe we can limit greenhouse gases,” declared one of the wholesome American citizens depicted in the ACCCE television adverts.One can only presume that the ACCCE has now dropped its hopes of limiting greenhouse gases, given that its latest “<a href="http://www.americaspower.org/landmark-report-calculates-societal-benefits-fossil-energy-be-least-50-times-greater-perceived-costs" target="blank" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">landmark report</a> [4]” claims the benefits to society of putting extra carbon dioxide into the atmosphere massively outweigh the costs. Surely the message should be, "burn baby, burn"?<a href="http://www.americaspower.org/sites/default/files/Social-Benefits-of-Carbon.pdf" target="blank" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">The Social Costs Of Carbon? No, The Social Benefits Of Carbon</a> [5] report by ACCCE claims the benefits of adding extra CO2 to the atmosphere are between 50 and 500 times higher than the costs. But the report attacks climate change science using sources as ideologically tainted as the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute">Heartland Institute</a> [6] – an organisation which once <a href="http://desmogblog.com/heartland-billboard-most-prominent-advocates-global-warming-aren-t-scientists-they-are-murderers-tyrants-and-madmen" target="blank" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">ran a billboard campaign</a> [7] with a picture of Unabomber Ted Kaczynski to claim that the "most prominent advocates of global warming aren't scientists. They are murderers, tyrants, and madmen.”At its core, the ACCCE report is one long misrepresentation of the impact of coal on the planet, from its effects on growing food crops to raising sea levels to fuelling risk-laden climate change.<h4>Carbon Dioxide as “food for plants”</h4>One of the most popular debating points for <a href="http://desmogblog.com/global-warming-denier-database">climate science deniers</a> [8] is to tell you that carbon dioxide is simply food for plants.The ACCCE report takes this well worn and simplistic climate science denial talking point and pushes it to its extreme. While it’s true that some plants generally grow quicker when more carbon dioxide is available, this is grossly simplistic and ignores the impacts of human-caused climate change on flooding and prolonged drought.According to ACCCE, “the more CO2 there is in the air, the better plants grow” and that adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will only have positive benefits.Professor Arnold Bloom, of the Department of Plant Sciences at the University of California at Davis, told DeSmogBlog:<blockquote>The coal industry in the United States has repeatedly tried to make such claims, but the short-term stimulation of plant productivity and crop yields at elevated CO2 diminishes with longer exposures (weeks, months, years), a phenomenon known as CO2 acclimation. Moreover, longer exposures to elevated CO2 decrease food quality and increase pest problems because pests must consume more plant product to meet their nutritional needs. I have discovered that elevated CO2 inhibits the conversion of nitrate into protein in most plants.</blockquote>Several passages of the section of ACCCE report on plant growth are near identical to text from <a href="http://www.co2science.org/education/reports/co2benefits/MonetaryBenefitsofRisingCO2onGlobalFoodProduction.pdf" target="blank" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">a report produced by Craig Idso</a> [9], of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. Internal documents from the Heartland Institute have revealed that <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/craig-idso" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Craig Idso</a> [10] receives $11,600 a month from the climate denial group.Idso is also a former director at Peabody Energy — one of the world’s biggest coal companies and a member of the ACCCE.<h4>Social Cost of Carbon</h4>The report takes time to sully the concept of Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) that are a method used to work out how much each tonne of carbon dioxide costs society. This is known as the social cost of carbon (SCC) and the <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/11/01/refining-estimates-social-cost-carbon" target="blank" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">US administration currently has the figure</a> [11] at about $37 per metric tonne.The ACCCE report heavily cites the work of Robert Pindyck, a Professor at the Massachusets Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management.Pindyck has been critical of IAMs and the ACCCE report quotes a <a href="http://web.mit.edu/rpindyck/www/Papers/Climate-Change-Policy-What-Do-the-Models-Tell-Us.pdf" target="blank" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">working paper produced last year</a> [12] where he described IAMs as being “close to useless” as a tool for policy analysis. However, the ACCCE report did not choose to cite the very first sentence of Pindyck’s paper, which said:<blockquote>There is almost no disagreement among economists that the full cost to society of burning a ton of carbon is greater than its private cost.</blockquote>Nor did the coal group’s report cite another concern Pindyck has with the use of IAMs, which was also outlined in the abstract of the report, and said:<blockquote>…the models can tell us nothing about the most important driver of the SCC, the possibility of a catastrophic climate outcome.</blockquote>Also cited in the report’s section looking at IAMs is James Risbey, a climatologist now at Australia’s government-funded science agency the CSIRO. The coal report cites a scientific paper written by Risbey 18 years ago and which warned that the use of IAMs came with several pitfalls. After viewing the coal report, Risbey told me:<blockquote>The ACCCE report questions a number of issues as if they were in dispute or subject to major uncertainties that have been resolved for decades.  The report appears to question the relative roles of natural and anthropogenic emissions in driving climate change.  It has long been known that anthropogenic emissions are driving the increase in CO2 concentration. </blockquote><blockquote>The ACCCE report appears to question whether greenhouse climate change will cause damages.  The methods of accounting and costing damages from climate change have been contentious and often questioned.  Much of that questioning has been based on a concern that the way damages are represented is too simple, leading to damage assessments that could grossly under-represent the true damages.  The uncertainties relate to the scale of the damages, not to the very likelihood of them happening as implied in the report.</blockquote>In other words, two key sources used by ACCCE in its criticisms of IAMs seem in reality to disagree with the key message of the report.><h4>Sea Level Rise</h4>The ACCCE paper claims that future damages caused by rising sea levels based on predictions from computer models "must be considered inflated and unreliable." The paper also claims that there has been no recent acceleration in sea level rise and that real world observations are showing a slowdown.Australia-based Dr John Hunter, of the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, has published extensively on sea level rise in leading peer-reviewed journals. After reviewing the ACCCE report on sea level rise, Dr Hunter told DeSmogBlog:<blockquote>If this was a review of the literature written by a student, then it would get a very poor fail - it ignores most of the scientific work that has been done, and instead relies on relatively obscure and carefully selected papers from a small number of authors.</blockquote>One of those authors is an Australia-based engineer called Alberto Boretti, who recently changed his name to Albert Parker. Dr Parker works on “green engines” at RMIT University in Melbourne. He is a member of a group known as <a href="http://www.principia-scientific.org/About/why-psi-is-proposed-as-a-cic.html" target="blank">Principia Scientific International</a> [13] whose head claims carbon dioxide is not a greenhouse gas and cannot warm the planet. PSI is on the very fringes of the climate science denial fringe.Dr Parker has published several papers with another Australian, Thomas Watson, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/04/28/ufos-sea-level-rise-and-magnetism-climate-science-denial" target="blank" style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">who believes CO2 cannot cause climate change</a> [14] and instead has blamed “magnetism” – a theory sparked in Watson’s mind after seeing a UFO while backstage at a rock concert. A claim in the ACCCE report that "observations reveal no acceleration of sea level rise over the past century" was, Hunter told DeSmogBlog, “both misleading and largely irrelevant.”He said observations of global sea levels were actually in line with the predictions of climate models. Dr Hunter said:<blockquote>The authors provide no quantitative estimate of what the acceleration "should" be if sea level were actually rising according to "AGW theory". The real test of the models is whether they reproduce observed sea level, and over the past half-century (when we have good observational data), they do appear to. The models in fact show that the present acceleration should be small.</blockquote><h5>A belief in themselves</h5>With reports like this, the coal industry in the US and <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/30/australian-report-trumpeted-coal-bosses-does-not-say-what-they-want-you-think-it-says" target="blank">Australia</a> [15] seems desperate to convince policy makers and the public that its position as the historically dominant source of the world’s electricity should continue.Yet an increasing number of global investors with an influence over billions of dollars in funds – including the World Bank – disagree.“I believe in the future,” said ACCCE in its original 2008 television advertisements.The self-interested ACCCE does not appear to believe in an honest appraisal of the science of climate change and seems happy to rely on denial, at the expense of society at large.Image credit: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLZ-hvVVGmY">Mark Fiore</a> [16]</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label" style="font-weight: bold;">Tags: </div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2931">ACCCE</a> [17]</div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/662">coal</a> [18]</div><div class="field-item even"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4149">Craig Idso</a> [19]</div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/12502">alberto boretti</a> [20]</div><div class="field-item even"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/12503">albert parker</a> [21]</div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2207">sea level rise</a> [22]</div><div class="field-item even"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2930">American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity</a> [23]</div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/tags/peabody-energy">Peabody Energy</a> [24]</div><div class="field-item even"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6467">Peabody</a> [25]</div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2540">desmogblog</a> [26]</div><div class="field-item even"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/12498">thomas watson</a> [27]</div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a> [28]</div><div class="field-item even"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/tags/climate-science">climate science</a> [29]</div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3062">climate denial</a> [30]</div></div></div></div><div class="blogreadmore">Read more: <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2014/02/06/coal-industry-report-social-cost-carbon-relies-climate-science-denial">Coal Industry Report On Social Cost Of Carbon Relies On Climate Science Denial</a> [31]</div></div></div></div><div class="print-footer" style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; text-align: center; line-height: normal;"><hr class="print-hr" style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; border: 0px; height: 1px; width: 1176px; line-height: normal; text-align: start; background-color: rgb(158, 158, 158);" /><div class="print-source_url" style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: start;">Source URL: <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2014/02/06/coal-industry-report-social-cost-carbon-relies-climate-science-denial">http://desmogblog.com/2014/02/06/coal-industry-report-social-cost-carbon-relies-climate-science-denial</a></div><div class="print-links" style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: start;">Links:
[1] http://www.cleancoalusa.org/
[2] http://www.cleancoalusa.org/about-us/members
[3] http://www.desmogblog.com/same-front-group-different-day
[4] http://www.americaspower.org/landmark-report-calculates-societal-benefits-fossil-energy-be-least-50-times-greater-perceived-costs
[5] http://www.americaspower.org/sites/default/files/Social-Benefits-of-Carbon.pdf
[6] http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute
[7] http://desmogblog.com/heartland-billboard-most-prominent-advocates-global-warming-aren-t-scientists-they-are-murderers-tyrants-and-madmen
[8] http://desmogblog.com/global-warming-denier-database
[9] http://www.co2science.org/education/reports/co2benefits/MonetaryBenefitsofRisingCO2onGlobalFoodProduction.pdf
[10] http://www.desmogblog.com/craig-idso
[11] http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/11/01/refining-estimates-social-cost-carbon
[12] http://web.mit.edu/rpindyck/www/Papers/Climate-Change-Policy-What-Do-the-Models-Tell-Us.pdf
[13] http://www.principia-scientific.org/About/why-psi-is-proposed-as-a-cic.html
[14] http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/04/28/ufos-sea-level-rise-and-magnetism-climate-science-denial
[15] http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/30/australian-report-trumpeted-coal-bosses-does-not-say-what-they-want-you-think-it-says
[16] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLZ-hvVVGmY
[17] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2931
[18] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/662
[19] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4149
[20] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/12502
[21] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/12503
[22] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2207
[23] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2930
[24] http://desmogblog.com/tags/peabody-energy
[25] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6467
[26] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2540
[27] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/12498
[28] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/939
[29] http://desmogblog.com/tags/climate-science
[30] http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3062
[31] http://desmogblog.com/2014/02/06/coal-industry-report-social-cost-carbon-relies-climate-science-denial</div>  On this Earth Day, we are three years out from the last window of opportunity to pass a climate bill in America. Harvard University’s Theda Skocpol has done the <a href="http://www.scholarsstrategynetwork.org/sites/default/files/skocpol_captrade_report_january_2013_0.pdf">best job</a> so far in diagnosing why, at the outset of the Obama administration with large Democratic majorities in Congress, progressives failed to enact a law regulating or pricing carbon pollution. Her conclusion is that reformers spent too much resources on an “inside game” of lobbyists and dealmakers and not enough on grassroots campaigning, and that reformers failed to make the case about the dangers of global warming. She’s right, but here’s another reason: The guys who managed the campaign were also secretly working alongside the opposition.Three years ago, reformers established a group called Clean Energy Works that would manage a coalition of more than sixty organization to develop advertising, field and lobbying to pass a climate bill. New disclosures not only show that Clean Energy Works and its <a href="http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870745629/870745629_200912_990.pdf">affiliates</a> spent about $37 million on advertising and less than <a href="http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/870/870745629/870745629_201012_990.pdf">$900,000</a> on grassroots organizing, but that the firm at the helm of the effort, then called Blue Line Strategic Communications, was in bed with the coal industry.In the summer of 2009, a consulting firm called Blue Line Strategic  Communications was picked to manage Clean Energy Works. The firm was run by David DiMartino and <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/meehan">Michael Meehan</a>, two former industry lobbyists and Democratic staffers. It was Blue Line, according to discussions with those involved in the process, which decided to pass the bill without ever mentioning global warming or any of its effects. The firm ignored the science and the dramatic consequences of inaction and focused instead on stressing the secondary benefits of a clean energy economy, like energy independence and job creation.It was a novel approach. In nearly every Western industrialized country that has implemented economy-wide carbon controls, reformers have talked about the effects of climate change—crop failures, extreme weather events, desertification and rising sea levels—to get the public on its side. In California, the only state to pass a mandatory cap and trade law, environmentalists aired ads with a narrator discussing the dangers posed by climate change over scenes of devastation and an hourglass, which gave the viewer a sense of urgency. “Warnings couldn’t be clearer: this is the hottest summer on record, forest fires in the west caused by global warming can be seen from outer space,” <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT7_QD8HPpc">blared an ad</a> that paved the way for AB 32, the landmark climate change law signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2006. The strategy from Blue Line and its partners to ignore climate change played into the hands of polluters, which sought to suppress support for the bill by spreading doubt about the consensus over the science. “If we win the science argument, it’s game, set, and match,” Tim Phillips, the political operative hired by David Koch to fight the bill, later <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2010/11/27/174846/afp-pollution-plan/">told</a> a meeting at the Heritage Foundation. The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), a front group group financed by the biggest coal mining and coal-based utility companies in America, spent more than $92 million during the first two years of the Obama administration, much of it on lobbying and advertising against bills like Waxman Markey. The group gained infamy when one of its consulting firms was caught forging over a dozen letters from local NAACP groups and senior citizens to key lawmakers, asking them to oppose the bill. One of the recipients of the ACCCE’s largesse was none other than one of Blue Line’s two partners, Michael Meehan. While Meehan led Blue Line’s pro-cap and trade effort, he also served as <a href="http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_20/-37617-1.html">vice president</a> to an online marketing firm called Virilion. Disclosures show that Virilion, which also rented office space to Blue Line, helped ACCCE manage its anti–cap and trade marketing <a href="http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/521/521799853/521799853_200912_990O.pdf">budget</a> in <a href="http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/521/521799853/521799853_201012_990O.pdf">exchange</a> for $19 million during the two years in which the legislation was debated. The conflict was complicated by the fact that Meehan, and his partner, David DiMartino, had been employed by an infamous polluter lobbying firm only months prior to taking up the cap-and-trade job. The pair had worked for the BGR Group, a lobbying firm founded by former Republican National Committee chair Haley Barbour, up until the month they were hired by the coalition of environmental groups. While Blue Line worked closely with the Obama administration and its liberal allies, Blue Line maintained a “<a href="http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_20/-37617-1.html">strategic partnership</a>” with BGR, which at the time counted coal-fired utility giant Southern Company as a <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?id=D000021679&year=2010">major client</a>. Of course, this conflict of interest was not the only reason Waxman Markey failed. Senator Harry Reid could have written reconciliation rules into the January 2009 budget in order to pass it with fifty-one votes. President Obama could have been more forceful. The lazy traditional media that failed to report on climate crisis, pervasive corruption in Congress, Citizens United providing polluters a greater bludgeon to defeat reform politicians, the USCAP coalition that saddled legislation with industry giveaways and poison pills, the unprecedented lobbying by polluters, the collapse of moderates within the GOP—there are many, many reasons why a climate bill did not pass. But let’s be clear: reformers had issues from the inside as well.UPDATE: Someone close to the Waxman Markey reform efforts e-mailed to note that in addition to the coalition money spent on field, individual advocacy groups, including the Sierra Club and several other green groups, spent an undisclosed amount on their own grassroots organizing that would bring the total above the $900,000 referenced above. Still, disclosures show the coalition Clean Energy Works spent a disproportionate amount on advertising and media consultants. UPDATE: Meehan contacted The Nation to say that he is not a lobbyist but instead works to influence the media on public policy issues. He presents two arguments about conflicts of interest raised by this blog post: Meehan told The Nation that he left BGR because of the company's fossil fuel clients. However, he says he did not leave Virilion because he did not work directly on the coal industry account. Read Lee Fang on the <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/173931/austerity-deregulation-and-texas-fertilizer-plant-explosion">role deregulation played</a> in the West, Texas chemical plant explosion.<div style="text-align: left;">=</div><div style="text-align: left;"> </div>anti BO ads <a href="http://grist.org/news/new-coal-ads-industry-hits-obama-obama-hits-romney/">http://grist.org/news/new-coal-ads-industry-hits-obama-obama-hits-romney/</a>---2009 tea party ally to disrupt mtgs: <h1 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/08/06/174398/accce-town-halls/">Dirty Coal Group Joining Teabagger Effort To Disrupt Town Hall Meetings</a></h1>By Brad Johnson on Aug 6, 2009  <div class="post">The coal industry lobbying outfit now <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/08/03/accce-bonner-party/">mired in a forgery scandal</a> is planning to plant questioners at “town hall meetings” and “lawmakers’ offices,” Politico reports. The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), despite the revelation it was responsible for forged “grassroots” letters to members of the House of Representatives attacking the American Clean Energy and Security Act, is pressing forward with an <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/25798.html">aggressive Astroturfing campaign</a> going after U.S. Senators, who are now considering the legislation:<blockquote style="text-align: left;">The coalition also plans to deploy teams to question senators at town hall meetings, advertise at state fairs and other summer events and visit lawmakers’ offices back home.</blockquote><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity">ACCCE’s campaign</a>, representing coal interests from General Electric to Peabody Energy, requires the efforts of multiple Astroturfing companies, including primary contractor <a href="http://www.hawthorngroup.com/NewsReleases/8.3.09news_release.html">Hawthorn Group</a>, as well as known fraud shop <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/07/31/53830/bonner-forgery/">Bonner & Associates</a>, and marketing firm <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/ad-firm-touts-its-clean-coal-persuasion-work">R & R Partners</a>. The “<a href="http://www.rrpartners2.com/persuasion/experience-case-accce.html">ACCCE Army</a>” will be joining <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/30/oil-funding-everyone/">right-wing Astroturf efforts funded by the oil and gas industry</a> to disrupt Congressional town hall meetings across the nation. Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks, both bankrolled by oil and gas giant <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/tag/koch">Koch Industries</a>, are orchestrating the “tea party protests” and have hired dozens of field staff to spread misinformation about clean energy and health care reform. Yesterday, FreedomWorks released its “<a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/files/aug%20action%20kit.pdf">August Action Recess Packet</a>” for disrupting town hall meetings:<blockquote style="text-align: left;">It is essential that we don’t let the pressure up. While Senators and Representatives are home for their August recess they need to hear from you, regardless of party. Many hold town hall meetings that are open to the public, check our map to see if there is one nearby and take our questions to ask them on the record whether they can risk losing even more jobs under Cap and Trade or if they plan on raising taxes for government run health care. In addition to attending town hall meetings, please call and visit district offices asking the same questions.</blockquote>As Media Matters Action explains, the FreedomWorks energy talking points are <a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/200908060004">just as fraudulent</a> as ACCCE’s “clean coal” campaign.</div>  <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/08/06/174398/accce-town-halls/">http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/08/06/174398/accce-town-halls/</a>--- Obama may not say any of this out loud, but the coal industry is all too aware of it. That's why it's busy mounting a <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-07/coal-fights-obama-with-nascar-youtube-campaigns.html">frantic lobbying effort</a> <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-07/coal-fights-obama-with-nascar-youtube-campaigns.html">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-07/coal-fights-obama-with-nascar-youtube-campaigns.html</a>  to halt its slide into obsolescence.<blockquote style="text-align: left;">“We're fighting for coal,” said Lisa Camooso Miller, a spokeswoman for the American Coalition of Clean Coal Electricity, a trade group that has announced a $40 million campaign in defense of coal.</blockquote>Side bar: It's amusing that ACCCE doesn't even pretend to be promoting "clean" coal anymore, despite its name. It's just shilling for coal outright now.<blockquote style="text-align: left;">Last month [ACCCE] announced it would sponsor Dale Earnhardt Jr.'s JR Motorsports team. An 18-wheel, mobile classroom will also be featured at NASCAR events to showcase the benefits of the fossil fuel, said Miller, the group's spokeswoman, in an interview.</blockquote>That's a pure culture-war play right there. Go to the people who already hate Obama and try to convince them that coal is just like Christmas and marriage -- one more American thing the Kenyan socialist wants to destroy.Big Coal is doing <a href="http://grist.org/article/2010-08-17-big-coal-to-congress-save-us-from-epa-regulations/">everything it can</a> to blame the decline of coal -- which is now providing just <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table1_1.html">42 percent</a> of U.S. electricity, down from its once-lofty 50+ percent heyday -- on Obama and EPA regulations. But here's the thing that must haunt the dreams of coal executives: Even if they can do some political damage to Obama with this attack, it won't stop coal's <a href="http://grist.org/coal/u-s-government-downgrades-projections-for-coal-again-2/">descent</a>. Its descent is not primarily about EPA regs. It's primarily about <a href="http://grist.org/coal/2011-12-12-what-new-coal-plants/">cheap natural gas</a>. The election won't change that.U.S. coal's only hope at this point is <a href="http://grist.org/coal/fighting-coal-export-terminals-it-matters/">export to Asia</a>. Stoking the culture war won't do much to achieve that. As for the U.S., the trend here, as in most other developed democracies, is toward cleaner electricity. All this frantic lobbying gets attention in the media and the Beltway bubble, but in the end, the coal industry, like Dale Earnhardt Jr., is just driving in circles...<a href="http://grist.org/climate-energy/">http://grist.org/climate-energy/</a> bloomberg: The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, whose members include <a topic_url="http://topics.bloomberg.com/peabody-energy-corp/" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/BTU:US" density="sparse" title="Get Quote" ticker="BTU:US" class="web_ticker">Peabody Energy Corp. (BTU)</a> in <a href="http://topics.bloomberg.com/st.-louis/" density="full">St. Louis</a> and <a topic_url="http://topics.bloomberg.com/southern-co/" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/SO:US" density="full" title="Get Quote" ticker="SO:US" class="web_ticker">Southern Co. (SO)</a> in Atlanta, is trying to reach voters with its campaign to promote coal and warn about the economic impact of the EPA’s rules.<h2 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Earnhardt Sponsorship</h2>Last month it announced it would sponsor Dale Earnhardt Jr.’s JR Motorsports team. An 18-wheel, mobile classroom will also be featured at NASCAR events to showcase the benefits of the <a href="http://topics.bloomberg.com/fossil-fuel/" density="full">fossil fuel</a>, said Miller, the group’s spokeswoman, in an interview.Meanwhile, the American Energy Alliance, which spent $3.6 million on a campaign targeting Obama on gasoline prices, produced a 4 1/2 minute long YouTube <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAglE5gfmYQ" title="Open Web Site" rel="external" density="full">video</a> describing the economic risks to Craig, <a href="http://topics.bloomberg.com/colorado/" density="full">Colorado</a>, presented by state and federal policies that would limit coal use.Coal’s complaints play into the Republican narrative that Obama administration regulations are hurting the economy.=pooley: defections; duke from ACCCE, 3 uscap utilities pulled out of US chamber:exelon, pg&e and PNM; USC called for skopes trial on GW  <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity</a> murray, peabody, western fuels, duke quit?  <h2 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Leaked memo on coal marketing strategies</h2>In January 2009, a 2004 leaked memo to then Peabody CEO Irl F. Engelhardt from Steve Miller, who was President of the Center for Energy and Economic Development (now called American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity), detailed the public relations and lobbying strategies being used to counteract issues including climate change, mercury, plant development, and EPA rulings. Miller details methods used to "sow discord" among regions seeking to limit greenhouse gas emissions.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-pdf-8">[9]</a><a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-grandia-9">[10]</a>Other strategies revealed in the memo include:<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-pdf-8">[9]</a><a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-grandia-9">[10]</a><ul><li style="text-align: left;">On climate change: "In the climate change arena, CEED focuses on three areas: opposing government-mandated controls of greenhouse gases (GHG), opposing 'regulation by litigation', and supporting sequestration and technology as the proper vehicles for addressing any reasonable concerns about greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere."</li><li style="text-align: left;">More on climate change: "Our belief is that, on climate change like other issues, you must be for something rather than against everything. The combination of carbon sequestration and technology is what we preach and we are looking for more members in the choir."</li><li style="text-align: left;">On regional cap and trade programs: "More than a year ago, New York Governor Pataki proposed an eleven-state regional CO2 cap and trade program. CEED has been engaged in this effort from its beginning. Persuading Pennsylvania and Maryland (as major coal-consuming states) to stay on the sidelines, rather than signing onto this initiative, has been one element of our strategy. The other element is to pose voluntary sequestration and technology as the correct policy, rather than mandatory controls."</li><li style="text-align: left;">On mercury: "Our strategy in dealing with mercury has been two-fold: prevent states from taking precipitous or unwarranted action to regulate mercury and engage in the federal rulemaking to protect the interests of coal-based electricity."</li><li style="text-align: left;">More on mercury: "In 2003, the Quicksilver Caucus with ECOS [Environmental Council of States] tried to pass a resolution calling for the "virtual elimination" of mercury. CEED worked in a coalition with other organizations and companies to convince many states that the Quicksilver strategy was not the right approach and the "virtual elimination" verbiage failed."</li><li style="text-align: left;">On proposed CO2 regulation by the EPA: "About a dozen states sued the EPA last year alleging that the agency must regulate CO2 under the Clean Air Act. CEED was the lead organization for outreach to the vast majority of state attorneys general who intervened on the Bush Administration's side in new litigation designed to force CO2 regulation under the Clean Air Act."</li></ul><a id="The_Hawthorn_Group.27s_work_for_ACCCE" name="The_Hawthorn_Group.27s_work_for_ACCCE"> </a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">The Hawthorn Group's work for ACCCE</h2>For their efforts<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-10">[11]</a> on behalf of ACCCE, Virginia-based public relations firm <a title="Hawthorn Group" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hawthorn_Group" class="mw-redirect">The Hawthorn Group</a> was Runner Up for The Showalter Group’s Annual Political Involvement Program Innovation Award For Accomplishments in PAC, Grassroots & Technology in 2008<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-11">[12]</a>, ...<h2 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">PR and lobbying</h2>According to the 2001 "O'Dwyer's Directory of Public Relations Firms," ABEC is listed as a client of the Denver-based <a title="MGA Communications" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=MGA_Communications">MGA Communications</a>. In its agency statement, MGA Communications specializes in "communications planning involving community involvement and education, sitings and compliance issues, public-private partnerships, 'green' product marketing, dispute resolution and crisis communications, media relations, primary research and marketing communications. MGA also has a substantial technology marketing and corporate reputation practice." <a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-14">[15]</a> ABEC's president Stephen Miller is a registered lobbyists for ABEC on energy and environmental issues, according to Lobbyist.info. CEED and the <a title="Willard Group (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Willard_Group&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Willard Group</a> have also lobbied on behalf of ABEC.In September 2008 O'Dwyers PR Daily reported that ACCCE "is a client of Las Vegas-based <a title="R&R Partners" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=R%26R_Partners">R&R Partners</a>.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-15">[16]</a> According to CQ Politics, between 2002 and 2007, <a title="Americans for Balanced Energy Choices" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Americans_for_Balanced_Energy_Choices" class="mw-redirect">Americans for Balanced Energy Choices</a>, the predecessor of ACCCE, spent an average of $93,000 each year on federal lobbying. In 2008, ACCCE spent $9.9 million on federal lobbying in addition to $38 million for an ad campaign promoting "<a title="Clean coal" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_coal" class="mw-redirect">clean coal</a>."<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-16">[17]</a>The <a title="Center for Public Integrity" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Public_Integrity">Center for Public Integrity</a> (CPI) estimated ACCCE's lobbying expenses at a somewhat higher amount: $10,465,276 in 2008.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-Mining_and_Coal-17">[18]</a>. CPI's "The Climate change Lobby" database lists ACCE's 2008 lobbyists, based on public records, as:<ul><li style="text-align: left;">ACCE staff spent $9,945,276 on in-house lobbying costs. The listed lobbyist was <a title="Stephen Miller (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stephen_Miller&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Stephen Miller</a><a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-18">[19]</a>;</li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Quinn Gillespie & Associates" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Quinn_Gillespie%26_Associates">Quinn Gillespie & Associates</a> who were paid $480,000 for lobbying services of <a title="Christopher McCannell (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Christopher_McCannell&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Christopher McCannell</a>, <a title="Jeff Connaughton (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jeff_Connaughton&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Jeff Connaughton</a>, <a title="Manuel Ortiz" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Manuel_Ortiz">Manuel Ortiz</a>, <a title="Mike Hussey (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mike_Hussey&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Mike Hussey</a>, <a title="Patrick Von Bargen (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patrick_Von_Bargen&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Patrick Von Bargen</a>, <a title="Dave Hoppe (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Dave_Hoppe&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Dave Hoppe</a>.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-19">[20]</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="The Keelen Group (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_Keelen_Group&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">The Keelen Group</a>, LLC which was paid $40,000 for the lobbying services of <a title="Paul Bailey (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_Bailey&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Paul Bailey</a>.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-20">[21]</a></li></ul><a id="ACCCE_lobbying_firm_forges_letters_to_U.S.Congressman" name="ACCCE_lobbying_firm_forges_letters_to_U.S.Congressman"> </a><h3 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">ACCCE lobbying firm forges letters to U.S. Congressman</h3>In July 2009, lobbying firm <a title="Bonner and Associates" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bonner_and_Associates" class="mw-redirect">Bonner and Associates</a> was caught forging letters to Representative <a title="Tom Perriello" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tom_Perriello">Tom Perriello</a> (Dem-VA) and two other congressmen. The letters were supposedly from Virginia-based minority groups, including the Jefferson Area Board for Aging, the Senior Center Inc., the Charlottesville NAACP, and <a title="Creciendo Juntas (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Creciendo_Juntas&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Creciendo Juntas</a> -- complete with their stationery -- and urged the congressmen to oppose the <a title="Waxman-Markey Climate Bill" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Waxman-Markey_Climate_Bill">Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</a>. Bonner & Associates apologized, saying the letters were sent by "mistake." <a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-21">[22]</a> Perriello is one of the co-sponsors of the <a title="Clean Water Protection Act" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_Water_Protection_Act">Clean Water Protection Act</a>, a bill aimed at slowing the practice of <a title="Mountaintop removal" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaintop_removal">mountaintop removal coal mining</a>. The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity later admitted that Bonner was working on its behalf, as a subcontractor for the <a title="Hawthorn Group" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hawthorn_Group" class="mw-redirect">Hawthorn Group</a>. ACCCE said it didn't know about the fake letters beforehand or condone them. In total, the House of Representatives has identified 14 fake letters sent by Bonner to three Democratic Representatives -- Tom Perriello, <a title="Kathy Dahlkemper" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kathy_Dahlkemper">Kathy Dahlkemper</a> (Dem-PA) and <a title="Chris Carney" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chris_Carney">Chris Carney</a> (Dem-PA). Carney and Dahlkemper voted against the Waxman-Markey bill.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-NYTlet-22">[23]</a><a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-23">[24]</a> Congressman <a title="Ed Markey" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ed_Markey">Ed Markey</a>, the co-author of the <a title="Waxman-Markey Climate Bill" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Waxman-Markey_Climate_Bill">Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</a> and the Chair of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, opened an investigation into the faked letters. He wrote the lobbying firm's founder, <a title="Jack Bonner" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jack_Bonner">Jack Bonner</a>, "asking a dozen lengthy questions about the letters," reported the New York Times, including "who hired it to lobby on their behalf, how much it was paid, in which congressional districts it operates in, the extent of its activities in those districts as well as information about the employee that was responsible for the mailing of the letters." Markey gave Bonner August 12, 2009 as the deadline to respond. <a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-NYTlet-22">[23]</a> The <a title="Sierra Club" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sierra_Club">Sierra Club</a> asked Attorney General <a title="Eric Holder" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Eric_Holder" class="mw-redirect">Eric Holder</a> to open a separate <a title="Justice Department" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Justice_Department" class="mw-redirect">Justice Department</a> investigation into the matter. <a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-24">[25]</a><a id="Head_of_ACCCE_testifies_before_Congress" name="Head_of_ACCCE_testifies_before_Congress"> </a><h4 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Head of ACCCE testifies before Congress</h4>On October 29, 2009, ACCCE president and CEO Joe Miller testified before the House Energy Independence and Global Warming Committee about the forged letters sent by subcontractor <a title="Bonner & Associates" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bonner%26_Associates">Bonner & Associates</a>. In his testimony, Miller claimed that his organization had never opposed the <a title="Waxman-Markey Climate Bill" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Waxman-Markey_Climate_Bill">Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</a>. However, an official June 2009 press release specifically stated, "ACCCE cannot support this bill, as it is written, because the legislation still does not adequately protect consumers and the domestic economy or ensure that the American people can continue to enjoy the benefits of affordable, reliable electricity, which has been so important to our nation."<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-del-25">[26]</a> Miller also said that ACCCE has only lobbied Congress since April 2008, despite extensive records of the group's lobbying efforts for many years prior. The comments sparked accusations that Miller lied under oath and suggestions that the Justice Department may open a criminal perjury probe.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-26">[27]</a><a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-del-25">[26]</a><a id="ACCCE_launches.241_million_campaign_to_lobby_Senate_Democrats" name="ACCCE_launches.241_million_campaign_to_lobby_Senate_Democrats"> </a><h3 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">ACCCE launches $1 million campaign to lobby Senate Democrats</h3>Despite the growing scandal over forged letters sent by a subcontractor of the <a title="Hawthorn Group" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hawthorn_Group" class="mw-redirect">Hawthorn Group</a>, ACCCE started hired the lobbying firm again to launch a $1 million campaign to gain support from Senate Democrats. Joe Lucas, an ACCCE spokesman, described the falsified letters as an "isolated incident," and said the coal lobbying group was not going to "throw the baby out with the bath water here."<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-gw-27">[28]</a>The new campaign will target Senators at home over the August recess using online, radio, billboard, and television advertising to convey the message that coal plants can be clean and are needed to produce low-cost energy.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-28">[29]</a> The lobbying effort that purports to rely on over 200,000 individuals dubbed <a title="America's Power Army" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=America%27s_Power_Army">America's Power Army</a>, who will attend public events such as town hall meetings to address questions about U.S. energy policy to members of Congress. Watchdog group <a title="Public Citizen" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Public_Citizen">Public Citizen</a> expressed concerns about the new campaign, saying that the identity of the volunteers and information about how they operate is not revealed to the public. Tyson Slocum of Public Citizen also said it is problematic that legislators will not know whether concerns they are hearing in their districts are organic or instead are being "orchestrated by hired guns working for the coal industry."<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-gw-27">[28]</a>In March 2010 it was announced that ACCCE spent $350,000 in the fourth quarter to lobby Congress and federal agencies on energy and environmental issues. The coalition spent $1.5 million on lobbying efforts in the fourth quarter of 2008 and $246,093 in July through September period of 2009.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-29">[30]</a><a id="Duke_Energy_and_Alstom_Power_leave_ACCCE_over_climage_change_legislation" name="Duke_Energy_and_Alstom_Power_leave_ACCCE_over_climage_change_legislation"> </a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Duke Energy and Alstom Power leave ACCCE over climage change legislation</h2>In September 2009, both <a title="Duke Energy" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Duke_Energy">Duke Energy</a> and Alstom Power, a French company that makes parts for power plants, announced they were resigning from ACCCE. Both companies cited concerns about alliance's opposition of the <a title="Waxman-Markey Climate Bill" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Waxman-Markey_Climate_Bill">Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</a>, which is attempting to cap greenhouse gas emissions. Tim Brown, a spokesman for Alstom, said the company wanted to remove any doubt about its full support for the legislation.<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-30">[31]</a><a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-31">[32]</a><a id="NRDC_parody_of_America.27s_Power_website" name="NRDC_parody_of_America.27s_Power_website"> </a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">NRDC parody of America's Power website</h2>In 2008, the environmental group <a title="NRDC" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=NRDC" class="mw-redirect">NRDC</a> created a website, <a title="http://www.americascoalpower.org/" href="http://www.americascoalpower.org/" rel="nofollow" class="external text">COAL POWER: Warming America, Warming the Planet</a>, parodying the "America's Power" campaign sponsored by ABEC, the predecessor to ACCCE. The parody website (which is clearly labelled as a project of NRDC), mimics the America's Power website design. It is sponsored by an organization called "Americans for Burning Every Chunk of Coal" (ABECC). On the site are "facts," an "ask the experts" section, and "news."<a id="Membership" name="Membership"> </a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Membership</h2>Membership in ACCCE is heavily weighted toward coal mining and transportation companies; i.e., enterprises that are heavily wedded to coal. <a title="Rural Electric Cooperatives and Coal" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rural_Electric_Cooperatives_and_Coal">Rural electric cooperatives</a>, among the heaviest users of coal in the utility sector, are also well represented. In contrast, investor-owned electric utilities are fairly lightly represented, a reflection of the fact that most electric utilites are no longer seeking to build new coal-fired power plants. As of March 2010, the following organizations were members in ACCCE:<a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-32">[33]</a><a id="Coal_mining_and_mining_services" name="Coal_mining_and_mining_services"> </a><h3 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Coal mining and mining services</h3><ul><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Alliance Coal (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alliance_Coal&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Alliance Coal</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Alpha Natural Resources (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alpha_Natural_Resources&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Alpha Natural Resources</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Arch Coal" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arch_Coal">Arch Coal</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Berwind Natural Resources Corporation (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Berwind_Natural_Resources_Corporation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Berwind Natural Resources Corporation</a> (coal leasing)</li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Buckeye Industrial Mining Company (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Buckeye_Industrial_Mining_Company&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Buckeye Industrial Mining Company</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Bucyrus (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bucyrus&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Bucyrus</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Caterpillar" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Caterpillar">Caterpillar</a> (mining equipment)</li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="CONSOL Energy" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=CONSOL_Energy">CONSOL Energy</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Drummond Company" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Drummond_Company" class="mw-redirect">Drummond Company</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="International Coal Group" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Coal_Group">International Coal Group</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Jennmar Corporation (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jennmar_Corporation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Jennmar Corporation</a> (mining services)</li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Joy Global Mining (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Joy_Global_Mining&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Joy Global Mining</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Murray Energy Corporation" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Murray_Energy_Corporation">Murray Energy Corporation</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Natural Resource Partners L.P. (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Natural_Resource_Partners_L.P.&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Natural Resource Partners L.P.</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Peabody Energy" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Peabody_Energy">Peabody Energy</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Western Fuels Association" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Western_Fuels_Association">Western Fuels Association</a></li></ul><a id="Independent_power_producers" name="Independent_power_producers"> </a><h3 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Independent power producers</h3><ul><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Tenaska" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tenaska">Tenaska</a></li></ul><a id="Investor-owned_utilities" name="Investor-owned_utilities"> </a><h3 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Investor-owned utilities</h3><ul><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Allegheny Energy" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Allegheny_Energy">Allegheny Energy</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Ameren" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ameren">AMEREN Corporation</a> (also independent power production)</li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="American Electric Power" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power">American Electric Power</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="DTE Energy" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=DTE_Energy">DTE Energy</a> (Detroit Edison)</li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="E.ON U.S." href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=E.ON_U.S.">E.ON U.S.</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Luminant" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Luminant">Luminant</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Southern Company" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Southern_Company">Southern Company</a></li></ul><a id="Rural_electrics" name="Rural_electrics"> </a><h3 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Rural electrics</h3><ul><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arkansas_Electric_Cooperative_Corporation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Basin Electric Power Cooperative" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Basin_Electric_Power_Cooperative">Basin Electric Power Cooperative</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Buckeye Power (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Buckeye_Power&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Buckeye Power</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Oglethorpe Power Corporation (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oglethorpe_Power_Corporation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Oglethorpe Power Corporation</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Sunflower Electric Power Corporation" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sunflower_Electric_Power_Corporation">SEP Corporation</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tri-State_Generation_and_Transmission_Association">Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association</a></li></ul><a id="Transportation" name="Transportation"> </a><h3 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Transportation</h3><ul><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="BNSF Railway" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=BNSF_Railway" class="mw-redirect">BNSF Railway</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Crounse Corporation (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Crounse_Corporation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Crounse Corporation</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="CSX Corporation (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=CSX_Corporation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">CSX Corporation</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Norfolk Southern (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Norfolk_Southern&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Norfolk Southern</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Union Pacific Railroad" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Union_Pacific_Railroad" class="mw-redirect">Union Pacific Railroad</a></li></ul><a id="Other" name="Other"> </a><h3 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Other</h3><ul><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="GE Energy" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=GE_Energy">GE Energy</a></li></ul><a id="Personnel" name="Personnel"> </a><h2 style="font-weight: normal; text-align: left;">Personnel</h2>Executive names and salaries are as reported in ACCCE's 2006 report to the IRS: <a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-IRS2006-33">[34]</a><ul><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Stephen L. Miller (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stephen_L.Miller&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Stephen L. Miller</a> - President and CEO, salary $969,460 <a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#cite_note-34">[35]</a></li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="John Paul (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Paul&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">John Paul</a> - Vice President, North Region, salary $196,194</li><li style="text-align: left;"><a title="Rosemary L. Wilson (page does not exist)" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rosemary_L.Wilson&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new">Rosemary L. Wilson</a> - Vice President, Policy, salary $171,088</li></ul>----- ACCCE’s extensive and expensive efforts to buy itself primo ad space have previously landed it in partnership with CNN. ACCCE's predecessor group, Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC), co-sponsored six of the ’08 presidential debates along with <a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/clean-coal-unworkable-expensive-but-blessed-with-stimulus-mon/19159343/" target="blank">ACCCE for a cool $5 million</a> payment.   --- spliced obama sound bites  http://www.thegoodhuman.com/2009/02/18/greenwash-of-the-week-accces-obamaclean-coal-ads/ ----  Coal companies and the nation's biggest railroad association accounted for 50 percent of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity's (ACCCE) $47 million budget in 2008, according to ACCCE's tax return, E&E News reported on Wednesday. Yowza!Arch Coal, Peabody, and Consol each put in $5 million; Foundation Coal put in just $3 million. Meanwhile, the Association of American Railroads (AAR) put in $6 million. AAR represents major railroads including Union Pacific, BNSF, CSX, and Norfolk Southern, which get substantial portions of their revenues from hauling coal. ACCCE opposed the Waxman-Markey climate bill, and recently <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/duke_departs_coal_coalition_al.html">Duke Energy left the group</a> because of its entrenched opposition to meaningful climate legislation. I <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/accce_the_american_chamber_of.html">recently looked</a> closely at the ACCCE board of directors, many of which are named in the E&E story along with their contributions to the group. It is interesting to note how many board members ACCCE shares with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, especially in the coal and rail sectors. And of course, I've discussed U.S. Chamber President and CEO <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/are_chamber_of_commerce_presid.html">Tom Donohue's connections with Union Pacific</a> before. And we noticed that U.S. Chamber Executive Committee member and <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CAkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uschamber.com%2Fabout%2Fboard%2Fshepard.htm&ei=dE0ES46wD4TOlQeY2cTdAQ&usg=AFQjCNHlMBZLcd98VxbtinQXtCmrlsLATg&sig2=PMOADSN2HeQfMYP5anzEbw">immediate past Chairman of the Board of the U.S. Chamber</a> (i.e., Donohue's boss last year) is Donald J. Shepard, who sits on the <a href="http://investors.csx.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=92932&p=irol-govcommcomp">board of directors of CSX</a>. E&E also reported on the American Petroleum Institute's (API) tax return, noting that the group spent about $75 million on public relations and advertising in 2008. API has been a vocal opponent of climate legislation for a long time, including repeated investments in misinformation and <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/oil-lobbys-%E2%80%98energy-citizens%E2%80%99-astroturf-campaign-exposed-launch">Astroturf</a> campaigns. This past summer, API bankrolled the faux group "<a href="http://www.fightcleanenergysmears.org/behind_the_smears.cfm#ec">Energy Citizens</a>" which organized a number of anti-climate legislation public events around the country. It's a lot of money to spend for the right to keep the U.S. stuck with dirty energy sources that are warming the planet and melting the glaciers. Speaking of melting glaciers, <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/2009-11-18-oil-enough-energy-to-melt-glaciers/">check out this remarkably prescient ad</a> from Humble Oil, which formed several building blocks of what eventually became known as ExxonMobil. Talk about truth in advertising.Why should you buy their product? Because each day, they produce enough oil to melt 7 tons of glacier! Ok, it is from 1962, so its not like global warming was front-page news. On the other hand, it was <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013101808.html">just two years before President Lyndon B. Johnson noted</a>: "This generation has altered the composition of the atmosphere on a global scale through ... a steady increase in carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels" in a special message to Congress.) --- hoggan  The strategies are still popular, and many of the original players are still in the game. Industry pays more every year to promote climate confusion. An Astroturf group, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), spent between $35 million and $40 million for a huge campaign during the last presidential election. Some of the propaganda was obvious. You couldn’t watch the presidential debates without seeing “clean coal” ads. Other activity was less transparent. For example, the Hawthorn Group PR firm recruited and paid young people to wear bright white “clean coal” T-shirts and baseball caps to electoral rallies. They offered bonuses to anyone who got their photo taken with a candidate and got it on the news. For the debate over the Waxman-Markey climate change bill, ACCCE hired a Washington, D.C., Astroturf specialist called Bonner & Associates to generate fake grassroots opposition. Bonner employees got scripts directing them to hide who they were working for. (“Hi, I’m working with seniors/retirees to help stop their utility bills from doubling.”) They forged letters on purloined letterhead and sent them to Congress ahead of the vote. Congressman Markey’s office discovered the scripts and forgeries and continues to investigate. In each of these cases, the funders actually admit their intent to confuse the public and undermine the credibility of legitimate scientists. They use Astroturf front groups because people know who not to trust: A recent poll showed that only 19 percent of people believe what corporations say about climate change. = Pooley 2007 ACCCE, said not contra all , rebrand CEED, which rogers had pulled out of CEED ACCCE and green earth same ppl, office 182 byrd got $ r&D scrubbers, then co2 became issue. 92 CEED started by Snow (CSX and B2 treas sec). 2.8 m$, Miller asst' to hazel oleary in clinton admin. 2000 miller and lucas astroturf ABEC, Hired hawthorne Gp with big dB 183 ==<div class="clearfix"><div class="block block-views block-bid-341" id="block-views-polluter_tabs-block_2"><div class="content clearfix"><div class="view view-polluter-tabs view-id-polluter_tabs view-display-id-block_2 view-dom-id-5"><div class="view-content"><div class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first views-row-last"><div class="views-field-field-employer-nid"><div class="field-content" style="text-align: left;">company <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/american-coalition-clean-coal-electricity">American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity</a></div></div><div class="views-field-field-title-value" style="text-align: left;">position President and CEO</div><div class="views-field-body"><div class="field-content">bio<div style="text-align: left;">As the CEO of the <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/american-coalition-clean-coal-electricity" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity</a>, Stephen Miller is a politically influential face of the coal industry.  Miller is a <a target="blank" href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Steve_Miller" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">graduate of the University of Kentucky and the UK School of Law</a>.</div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">Miller has been involved in <a target="blank" href="http://www.coalcandothat.com/content.php?view=126">politics, government and social policy for 30 years</a>.  He co-founded the <a target="blank" href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Energy_and_Economic_Development">Center for Energy and Economic Development (CEED)</a> and was named President and CEO in 1994.  Miller also helped lead the creation of <a target="blank" href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Americans_for_Balanced_Energy_Choices">Americans for Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC)</a>. These organizations, which <a target="blank" href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/1284/">consolidated into ACCCE in 2008</a>, are coal industry astroturfing groups meant to convince lawmakers and lay people that clean coal is a viable and environmentally sound energy option. To accomplish this mission, ACCCE spends millions on advertising, public relations and political lobbying to promote the coal industry’s claims of climate-related solutions.  This money comes directly from the country's major coal-generated <a target="blank" href="http://www.thenation.com/article/dirt-clean-coal?page=0,0">utilities, coal producers, and railroads</a>.</div></div></div><div class="views-field-field-quotes-value"><div class="field-content"><div class="polluter-subtitle"> Quotes </div><div class="polluter-body"><div style="text-align: left;">Our strategy in dealing with mercury has been two-fold: prevent states from taking precipitous or unwarranted action to regulate mercury and engage in the federal rulemaking to protect the interests of coal-based electricity.</div><div style="text-align: left;">-<a target="blank" href="http://www.arizonaenergy.org/Barriers/coal_industry_strategy_letter_to.htm">Leaked CEED strategy letter to Peabody CEO</a>, June 18, 2004</div> <div style="text-align: left;">"Indeed, many scientists maintain that [greenhouse gas] emissions from electric power plants are not contributing significantly to overall warming trends."</div><div style="text-align: left;">-<a target="blank" href="http://www.thenation.com/article/dirt-clean-coal">The Nation</a>, April 13, 2009</div><div style="text-align: left;"> </div><div style="text-align: left;">“We know there has never been an environmental challenge to using coal to generate electricity for which technology has not provided the ultimate answer.  Climate change will not be an exception to that rule.”</div><div style="text-align: left;"><a target="blank" href="http://www.cleancoalusa.org/docs/media/videos/">“Climate Policy” video</a>, ACCCE media room</div> </div></div></div><div class="views-field-field-evidence-value"><div class="field-content"><div class="polluter-subtitle">Evidence </div><div class="polluter-body"><div style="text-align: left;">Before becoming ACCCE, the Center for Energy and Economic Development (CEED) worked with the Western Fuels Association (a <a target="blank" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Western_Fuels_Association" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">coal utility coalition</a>) and Greening Earth Society (a <a target="blank" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greening_Earth_Society" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">publicity front group</a>) to adamantly deny that carbon dioxide is an atmospheric pollutant, <a target="blank" href="http://www.thenation.com/article/dirt-clean-coal?page=0,0" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">lobbying against the Kyoto Protocol</a>.  The Western Fuels Association, then led by current <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/peabody-energy" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">Peabody</a> CEO <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/fred-palmer" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">Fred Palmer</a>, and the Greening Earth Society are known for non-scientific claims of supposed environmental <a target="blank" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greening_Earth_Society" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">benefits of carbon dioxide emissions</a>.  Additionally, Greening Earth Society’s “<a target="blank" href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/index.php?mapid=1610" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">scientific advisors</a>” have ties to <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/exxonmobil" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">ExxonMobil</a> through their <a target="blank" href="http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/news-and-blogs/campaign-blog/exxon-continued-to-fund-climate-denial-in-200/blog/26100" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">institutions</a>.</div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">ACCCE spent over <a target="blank" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?year=2010&lname=American+Cltn+for+Clean+Coal+Electricity&id=">$12 million from 2008-2010 on lobbying</a>, almost $10 million of which was spent in 2008 alone.</div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">In the 2008 election year, ACCCE spent $40 million on television and radio advertising, profoundly <a target="blank" href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coalition_for_Clean_Coal_Electricity#The_Hawthorn_Group.27s_work_for_ACCCE">influencing the political attention</a> that coal received.  At the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, ACCCE spent $1.7 million on advertising and outreach.  Additionally, direct lobbying from Miller effectively reversed a statement from Joe Biden suggesting the Obama/Biden platform would not be supportive of “clean coal” during the 2008 election season.</div><div style="text-align: left;">Source: <a target="blank" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122446094489848785.html">The Wall Street Journal</a></div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">A <a target="blank" href="http://www.arizonaenergy.org/Barriers/coal_industry_strategy_letter_to.htm">leaked 2004 letter from Miller</a> (then with CEED) to former <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/peabody-energy">Peabody</a> CEO Irl F. Engelhardt reveals CEED’s efforts to prevent greenhouse gas regulation on national, regional and state levels, stall EPA regulation of carbon dioxide through the Clean Air Act, and weaken standards for haze and mercury pollution control.  Concerning mercury regulation, Miller wrote:</div>“Our strategy in dealing with mercury has been two-fold: prevent states from taking precipitous or unwarranted action to regulate mercury and engage in the federal rulemaking to protect the interests of coal-based electricity.” In August 2009, Select Committee on Global Warming Chairman Ed Markey (D-Mass.) investigated <a target="blank" href="http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/04/04greenwire-coal-industry-group-linked-to-a-dozen-forged-ca-2624.html?pagewanted=1">forged letters sent by an ACCCE contractor to three House lawmakers</a>.  Miller admitted to the existence of the forgeries and <a target="blank" href="http://www.americaspower.org/News/Press-Room/Press-Releases/ACCCE-Statement-Regarding-Falsified-Constituent-Contacts-Made-to-Congressional-Offices-by-Bonner-and-Associates">released a statement</a> on Aug. 3, 2009, which read, in part: “Because of Bonner and Associates’ misconduct, we apologize to the community groups and the Members of Congress involved. There is no place for this type of deception. We applaud efforts to ensure that everyone involved in the public policy dialogue lives up to the highest ethical standards.”<div style="text-align: left;">While <a target="blank" href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/29/accce-lies-underoath/" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">testifying under oath about the forged letters</a> before Congress, Miller falsely claimed that his organization had only participated in direct federal lobbying since 2008.</div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">On September 6, 2010, Miller wrote a <a target="blank" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/opinion/lweb07acid.html?r=4">response letter to the editor of the New York Times</a>, expressing opposition to EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gases.</div></div></div></div><div class="views-field-field-links-resources-url"><div class="field-content"><div class="polluter-subtitle" style="text-align: left;">Links and Resources</div><div class="polluter-body"><div class="field-item field-item-0" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.cleancoalusa.org/docs/about/" target="blank">ACCCE</a></div><div class="field-item field-item-1" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.coalcandothat.com/content.php?view=126" target="blank">CoalCanDoThat</a></div><div class="field-item field-item-2" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Steve_Miller" target="blank">WhoRunsGov</a></div><div class="field-item field-item-3" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?lname=Miller%2C%20Stephen%20L&id=Y00000217210&year=2010" target="blank">OpenSecrets</a></div><div class="field-item field-item-4" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/1284/" target="blank">Center for Public Integrity</a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/stephen-miller">http://www.polluterwatch.com/stephen-miller</a></div>