Koch, M

<pre>

</pre>

<div class="blogheader clearfix"><span class="blogdate">Wed, 2011-08-03 06:15</span><span class="blogname">Ben Jervey</span>

</div>

<h2>U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Launches Campaign To Lobby For Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline</h2>

</div>

<p>Last Friday, after <a target="blank" href="http://finchannel.com/Main_News/Jobs/91725_U.S.Chamber%E2%80%99s_Energy_Institute_Applauds_House_Approval_of_Keystone_XL_Pipeline_Legislation/">applauding the House's vote</a> <span class="print-footnote">[1]</span> to rush a decision on TransCanada Corp's Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, the <b>U.S. Chamber of Commerce launched a new campaign to boost the controversial project. </b><a target="_blank" href="http://www.fuelingus.org/"><b>The Partnership to Fuel America</b></a><b> </b><span class="print-footnote"><b>[2]</b></span><b> is run out of the U.S. Chamber's </b><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3643"><b>Institute for 21st Century Energy</b></a><b> </b><span class="print-footnote">[3]</span>, and seems positioned to be the U.S. Chamber's main influence channel to drum up support for Keystone XL. Supportive comments aside, it's also the first time the U.S. Chamber has so publicly and overtly aligned with the Canadian company's project.</p>

<p>

The launch comes at a pivotal moment for Keystone XL. The Obama administration has the final say in approving the pipeline, and they've said the decision will be made by the end of the year. The new House legislation declared that the Obama administration must make the call by November 1st. A final environmental review of the prospective project is expected from the State Department in August. (To learn more about how tar sands pipelines like Keystone XL are a much greater risk than normal crude pipelines, see my earlier <a href="http://desmogblog.com/many-problems-tar-sands-pipelines">post</a> <span class="print-footnote">[4]</span>.)</p>

<p>

Which is all to say: the next couple months will determine whether or not Keystone XL is approved and built. Given the U.S. Chamber's long history of support for all things fossil fuel -- and long history of fighting against any sort of pollution controls -- it's no real surprise that the Chamber is throwing its considerable weight behind Keystone XL. But until now, the nation's largest lobbying group (which spends more money than the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/01/new-lobbying-reports-show-big.html">next five lobbying groups combined</a> <span class="print-footnote">[5]</span>, and which receives the majority of its funding from 16 anonymous corporate donors) hadn't done more than release comments in support of the Keystone XL project. (Well, publicly, that is. They've probably done quite a bit behind closed doors.)</p>

<p>

So what more do we know about the <a href="http://www.fuelingus.org/" target="_blank">Partnership to Fuel America</a> <span class="print-footnote">[2]</span>? According to the U.S. Chamber's Institute for 21st Century Energy, it will be "comprised of American businesses and industries that understand the need for more energy in the United States and believe that Canada's significant resources can help achieve that goal." Their site makes numerous references to "North American energy," but the only North American sources of energy listed are Canada's tar sands, and every news item listed on the site is specifically about the Keystone XL project.

Though you won't find him anywhere on the official site, the<b><span style=" color: #ED1C24;"> "partnership" is being led by a gentleman named </span></b><a target="_blank" href="http://energyxxi.org/pages/Matthew_Koch.aspx"><b><span style=" color: #ED1C24;">Matt Koch</span></b></a><b><span style=" color: #ED1C24;"> </span></b><span class="print-footnote"><b><span style=" color: #ED1C24;">[6]</span></b></span><b><span style=" color: #ED1C24;">, who is vice president for Oil Sands and Arctic Issues at the U.S. Chamber's Institute for 21st Century Energy.</span></b> And, no, I couldn't find any evidence that this is some long-lost Koch brother of the Koch Industries clan, but lately he's been earning his living off of fossil fuels just the same.

Before working for private industry, Matt Koch served in George W. Bush's White House, as an Associate Director of Cabinet Affairs, and also in the Department of Energy. Before settling into the capital, Koch served as Natural Resource Policy Director at the<b> Texas</b> Office of State-Federal Relations, securing the Lone Star State's oil interests inside the Beltway.

Immediately before joining the U.S. Chamber's payroll, Koch was Director of Federal Relations at the<b><span style=" color: #ED1C24;"> American Petroleum Institute</span></b>, and one of their chief lobbyists. According to the Institute for 21st Century Energy, <a target="_blank" href="http://energyxxi.org/pages/Matthew_Koch.aspx">Koch was</a> <span class="print-footnote">[6]</span> "API's chief advocate and issue manager for all downstream and refining-related issues affecting the oil and natural gas industry."

What's more, he was "responsible for initiating and managing API's ongoing, multifaceted oil sands strategy and campaign." Now he's running that very same strategy for the U.S. Chamber, and the big tar sands battle of the moment is the Keystone XL.

<span style=" background-color: #FFF200;">It's worth noting that this Partnership to Fuel America launch -- the overt and very public alignment between the U.S. Chamber and TransCanada's Keystone project -- comes at the very moment that both the Chamber and the Keystone XL are being acutely targeted by various activist campaigns.</span> <a target="blank" href="http://350.org/">350.org</a> <span class="print-footnote">[7]</span> just launched the clever and timely "<a target="blank" href="http://www.uschamberofsecrets.org/">U.S. Chamber of Secrets</a> <span class="print-footnote">[8]</span>" website as part of their <a target="blank" href="http://chamber.350.org/">ongoing campaign</a> <span class="print-footnote">[9]</span> to expose the organization as a front group for fossil fuel corporations and other big polluters. (Check out their impressive <a target="blank" href="http://chamber.350.org/poster/">infographic about the Chamber</a> <span class="print-footnote">[10]</span>, which tells a pretty startling story.)

Meanwhile, a whole slew of activists are gearing up for the <a target="blank" href="http://www.tarsandsaction.org/">Tar Sands Action</a> <span class="print-footnote">[11]</span> in late August, which is specifically targeting the Keystone XL pipeline, which organizers <a target="blank" href="http://www.tarsandsaction.org/invitation/">describe as</a> <span class="print-footnote">[12]</span> "a fifteen hundred mile fuse to the biggest carbon bomb on the continent."</p>

<p>

But, now, there's no need to speculate about a possible link between the U.S. Chamber and the Keystone XL project. That connection is now public and crystal clear. So it must be asked: why is the U.S. Chamber spending so much energy and resources supporting a project that will be built, operated, and profitted from by a Canadian company, one the U.S. Chamber isn't supposed to represent? Perhaps that answer lies in those other, more renowned Kochs, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/koch-brothers-exposed-brave-new-films-explains-how-billionaires-could-profit-keystone-xl-pipeline">who stand to make a killing off of Keystone XL</a> <span class="print-footnote">[13]</span> if it's completed, and who are <a target="_blank" href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/20/124642/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/">known to have shady ties to the U.S. Chamber</a> <span class="print-footnote">[14]</span>.  http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/20/124642/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/</p>

</div>

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/tags/oil-sands">oil sands</a> <span class="print-footnote">[15]</span></div>

<div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/643">American Petroleum Institute</a> <span class="print-footnote">[16]</span></div>

<div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2509">alberta tar sands</a> <span class="print-footnote">[18]</span></div>

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2521">U.S. Chamber of Commerce</a> <span class="print-footnote">[19]</span></div>

<div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a> <span class="print-footnote">[20]</span></div>

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3676">chamber of commerce</a> <span class="print-footnote">[21]</span></div>

<div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5857">Keystone XL</a> <span class="print-footnote">[22]</span></div>

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6562">keystone</a> <span class="print-footnote">[23]</span></div>

<div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6577">pipelines</a> <span class="print-footnote">[24]</span></div>

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6584">pipeline</a> <span class="print-footnote">[25]</span></div>

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7010">partnership to fuel america</a> <span class="print-footnote">[27]</span></div>

<div class="field-item odd"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7011">institute for 21st century energy</a> <span class="print-footnote">[28]</span></div>

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7012">u.s. chamber</a> <span class="print-footnote">[29]</span></div>

</div>

<div class="blogreadmore">Read more: <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/u-s-chamber-commerce-launches-campaign-lobby-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline">U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Launches Campaign To Lobby For Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline</a> <span class="print-footnote">[30]</span></div>

</div>

<div class="print-source_url"><strong>Source URL:</strong> <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/u-s-chamber-commerce-launches-campaign-lobby-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline">http://www.desmogblog.com/u-s-chamber-commerce-launches-campaign-lobby-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline</a></div>

<p><strong>Links:</strong>

[1] http://finchannel.com/Main_News/Jobs/91725_U.S._Chamber%E2%80%99s_Energy_Institute_Applauds_House_Approval_of_Keystone_XL_Pipeline_Legislation/

[2] http://www.fuelingus.org/

[3] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3643

[4] http://desmogblog.com/many-problems-tar-sands-pipelines

[5] http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/01/new-lobbying-reports-show-big.html

[6] http://energyxxi.org/pages/Matthew_Koch.aspx

[7] http://350.org/

[8] http://www.uschamberofsecrets.org/

[9] http://chamber.350.org/

[10] http://chamber.350.org/poster/

[11] http://www.tarsandsaction.org/

[12] http://www.tarsandsaction.org/invitation/

[13] http://www.desmogblog.com/koch-brothers-exposed-brave-new-films-explains-how-billionaires-could-profit-keystone-xl-pipeline

[14] http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/20/124642/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/

[15] http://www.desmogblog.com/tags/oil-sands

[16] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/643

[17] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/1286

[18] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2509

[19] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2521

[20] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2632

[21] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3676

[22] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5857

[23] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6562

[24] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6577

[25] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6584

[26] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7009

[27] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7010

[28] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7011

[29] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7012

[30] http://www.desmogblog.com/u-s-chamber-commerce-launches-campaign-lobby-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline</p>

</div>

<pre>

RS The most egregious example of cooked intelligence was a study

underwritten in part by the API, Cooney's former employer. The study,

which purported to show that the twentieth century was not unusually

warm, was authored by two astrophysicists, both of whom were on the

payroll of the George C. Marshall Institute, a climate-denial group

funded by ExxonMobil and now headed by Bill O'Keefe, Cooney's former

boss. The paper's publication in a minor German journal in January

2003 quickly created a scandal, with the editor in chief and three

other editors resigning in shame after acknowledging that the paper

was fundamentally flawed and should never have been published.

"It was sham science," says McCarthy, the Harvard scientist. "It's

almost laughable, except that this study was held up by the

administration as a definitive refutation of the temperature record."

But even as the paper was being discredited, it was causing great

excitement in the White House. When Kathie Olsen of the Office of

Science and Technology Policy [worked for sen c burns,

abramoff; nasa scandal?; goldwater teaching award]forwarded the study to Cooney, he

responded with an enthusiastic, "Thanks, Kathie!" Six minutes later,

according to internal e-mails, the study was in the hands of Kevin

O'Donovan, who served as Cheney's point man on climate. The study

also grabbed President Bush's attention, as revealed in an e-mail

sent two days later to a high-ranking White House official: "Bob - if

you din't [sic] already have, this is the study the President was

talking about."

 The study gave Cheney's office the quasi-plausible refutation of

climate science it was waiting for. According to a memo reviewed by

congressional investigators, but which the CEQ refused to make

public, Cooney was eager to promote the sham science. The study, he e-

mailed O'Donovan, "represents an opening to potentially reinvigorate

debate on the actual climate history of the past 1,000 years." The

paper, he added, "contradicts the dogmatic view held by many in the

climate science community that the past century was the warmest in

the past millennium. . . . We plan to begin to refer to this study in

administration communications on the science of global climate

change."

 One e-mail exchange about the study underscores just how many

industry foxes were guarding the climate henhouse. When <b><span style=" color: #ED1C24;">Matthew Koch

(a White House energy adviser who today lobbies for API)</span></b> saw the

study, he wrote to Cooney (the former API lobbyist who is

now "corporate issues manager" for ExxonMobil) and CC'd O'Donovan

(who now works for Shell Oil).

 "What??!!" Koch wrote in mock disbelief at the study's claim that the

planet isn't really heating up. "I want to grow oranges in the

Arctic!"

 Such joking aside, the administration continues to hold up the

discredited study as a counterweight to the IPCC's scientific, peer-

reviewed findings on global warming. Testifying before the House

Oversight Committee in March, Connaughton lauded the study as a "new

and major piece of science." His only regret, he said, is that "I'm

not a scientist, so I can't find it conclusive."

</pre>