Thomas jefferson inst

see schnare

note there's another va stinktank? i think they are same 5 22

Christian N. Braunlich President Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy tppf open ltr

https://www.desmogblog.com/2020/01/26/state-policy-network-oil-transportation-climate-initiative-northeast

no lnx many

Last month New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu announced the state would not be participating in the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI), a regional cap-and-trade program aimed at reducing carbon emissions from vehicles. The program is still in early stages of development, but groups tied to petroleum interests and conservative networks funded by the Koch empire are already fighting it with opposition campaigns.

These campaigns are active in multiple states throughout the Northeast, featuring public events to sway legislators, public letters co-signed by various free market groups, and at least one study produced by a Koch- and oil-industry funded think tank based in Texas.

Public Health and Sustainability Benefits

Supporters of the program describe TCI as an important step towards cleaning up the transportation sector and say it will improve public health and community sustainability. A draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was released in December, along with initial projections of potential economic and public health benefits.

According to the TCI website, “Preliminary modeling estimates that by 2032, the proposed program could yield monetized annual public health benefits of as much as $10 billion, including over 1,000 fewer premature deaths, and over 1,300 fewer asthma symptoms annually region-wide, among other safety and health benefits.”

In his comments announcing New Hampshire’s withdrawal from the 12-state coalition, Governor Sununu cited an estimate for fuel price increase.“New Hampshire is already taking substantial steps to curb our carbon emissions, and this initiative, if enacted, would institute a new gas tax by up to 17 cents per gallon while only achieving minimal results,” Sununu said.

Around the same time as Sununu's announcement, a coalition of 18 conservative think tanks released an open letter in opposition to TCI. The groups claim the initiative is “a carbon dioxide tax being implemented through a gas tax.” According to the letter, “Citizens in TCI states can expect to be hit with higher personal costs, higher costs for goods and services, and higher taxes.” The language in the letter appears similar to Sununu’s description of TCI as a “gas tax” and a “financial boondoggle.”

The Republican governor of New Hampshire is the brother of James Sununu, board chairman of the Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy — one of the groups behind that open letter.

The Bartlett Center is a member of the State Policy Network, a Koch-funded network of think tanks based in states across the country that advocate against climate and clean energy policies and other initiatives deemed in opposition to “economic freedom.” This New Hampshire think tank also lists former Governor John H. Sununu — Chris Sununu’s father — as an emeritus board member. The organization has led the opposition to TCI in the Granite State.

With New Hampshire now backing out, pressure is mounting in other states to follow suit, as conservative think tanks continue to raise alarm at the proposal to rein in transportation-sector emissions.

'Biased' Surveys and Oil-Funded Studies Deployed in Connecticut and Virginia

When asked about the TCI in a recent radio interview, Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont did not give a definitive position, but he did say that a “gas tax” is “probably not the way to go.” Several newspapers picked up on this remark, including the conservative Boston Herald in Massachusetts and the Middletown Press in Connecticut.

The Yankee Institute for Public Policy,one of the think tanks that signed the opposition letter to TCI, posted a link to the Middletown Press article on its Facebook page with the caption, “good.” The Yankee Institute is Connecticut’s prominent conservative, free market think tank and another member of the State Policy Network. In December last year, the group posted on its blog in response to the TCI’s draft MOU release. The blog post labels the TCI as a “regional gasoline tax” and quotes from the oppositional open letter that the Yankee Institute signed.

More recently, the Yankee Institute attacked TCI in a blog post by claiming that modeling shows the program would have no effect on climate change.

“But the overall effect on the climate is too small to be measurable, according to climate modeling conducted by Brent Bennett, PhD, of Life: Powered — the energy policy division of the Texas Public Policy Foundation,” the blog post states. That climate modeling is meant to measure the impact of policy changes on global temperature, and is often used by conservative groups opposed to climate action — like the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) — to claim that a single policy will do nothing to alleviate global warming on a global scale.

“This modeling is flawed in that it’s an effort of focus on local costs and then change the scope of impact to global impacts. Demanding that any specific reductions making a difference on total pollution levels has been a polluter mantra for decades,” David Littell, senior advisor at the Regulatory Assistance Project, told DeSmog. “If we require any specific reduction in greenhouse gases to reduce global warming noticeably we will never do anything. No single reduction will move the dial, we need to transform our energy and transportation systems as a whole to address global warming and climate change.”

In Virginia, the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy is ramping up criticism of TCI though an opposition campaign that includes questionable polling and research. The Jefferson Institute is another conservative think tank, a member of the State Policy Network, and signatory of the TCI opposition letter.

The Jefferson Institute is promoting a new report, conducted by one of its own staff members, filled with misleading information about the expected impacts of TCI.

For example, the report claims that TCI will have no health benefits, will prevent no deaths, and will have no environmental benefits, citing dubious sources including the Koch-funded Texas Public Policy Foundation and notorious climate science denier Steve Milloy. The report points to the same TPPF climate modeling cited by the Yankee Institute, examining the impact that TCI would have on global temperature.

Jefferson Institute for Public Policy's report on the Transportation and Climate Initiative

Jefferson Institute for Public Policy's report on the Transportation and Climate Initiative posted on its website.

The author of the report, titled “The Transportation and Climate Initiative — All Pain and No Gain,” is David Schnare, an attorney who was embroiled in a legal dispute over finances with his business partner and who has sued universities to obtain climate scientists’ emails. Schnare is now the director of the Jefferson Institute’s Center for Environmental Stewardship.

The Jefferson Institute is also touting results of a poll indicating a majority of Virginians would oppose TCI if it meant a tax increase of at least 18 cents per gallon of gas. The same poll found that 61 percent would support TCI given benefits like reducing carbon emissions and developing the clean energy economy. The two questions yielding these results were added at the request of the Jefferson Institute to a more general poll on political and legislative topics.

According to one expert in polling and strategic communication, the way in which the two questions were posed was intended to generate these results.

“The approach used in this survey strikes me as biased in a more subtle way,” Ed Maibach, of the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University, told DeSmog. “The first question specifies the benefits only — which are benefits that most people value — and then assesses support for the [TCI] proposal. The second question states the costs only, and then assesses support for the proposal, but participants in the survey may or may not remember the benefits stated in the prior question,” Maibach explained. “A better (i.e., fairer) way to assess support for the proposal would be to present the benefits and costs — in a fair and balanced manner — in the same question.”

TCI Opponents Gather in Boston

The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, a free market conservative think tank, is leading the opposition to TCI in the Bay State. The group is lobbying the state legislature and pushing for a bill that would prohibit participation in TCI without legislative approval.

Last week the alliance and other conservative think tanks convened a press conference in Boston voicing their opposition to TCI.

Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance spokesman Paul Craney told reporters that multiple governors have expressed concerns about the initiative and that momentum to squash it was on their side. “Things are going in our direction for the taxpayers and consumers,” Craney said.

“What we once saw as maybe a regional approach seems to be falling apart,” added Chris Carlozzi, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business for Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Groups represented at the press conference, according to MassLive, included Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, the Vermont chapter of Americans for Prosperity, Maine Heritage Policy Center, Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity, and Connecticut’s Yankee Institute for Public Policy. Most of these groups are members of the Koch-funded State Policy Network.

TCI Moves Forward

Mass. Gov. Charlie Baker

Governor Charlie Baker, Lt. Governor Karyn Polito, MassDOT Secretary and CEO Stephanie Pollack and Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Kathleen Theoharides at the Massachusetts Transportation and Climate Initiative Business Summit in December 2019. Credit: Gov. Charlie Baker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Despite the criticisms and opposition campaigns, the initiative to introduce a regional cap on transportation sector emissions is moving ahead. The program is accepting public comments on the draft MOU through the end of February. A final MOU is expected later this spring, and the program could become operational by 2022.

Massachusetts Governor Charlie Bakerlet TCI critics down when defending the program in his State of the Commonwealth address this week.

“Greenhouse gas emissions from transportation have been on the rise for decades and now represent 40 percent of this state’s total emissions. Unless we take on transportation, we won’t meet our objectives,” Baker said. “RGGI, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative that our proposal is based on, has worked for 10 years. Power plants have adopted clean energy solutions and funded energy efficiency programs, investing 3.3 billion dollars across the region. Greenhouse gas emissions in the power sector have dropped by nearly 50 percent. Applied to the transportation sector, the same market mechanisms can encourage automakers and fuel suppliers to find efficiencies and deploy cleaner fuels. In addition, the Transportation Climate Initiative will deliver millions of dollars in needed investments in our transportation infrastructure. It’s a critical part in expanding public transportation, transforming our highways and reducing congestion.”

https://www.desmogblog.com/2020/03/03/longtime-climate-science-foe-david-schnare-uses-scare-tactics-bash-transportation-climate-initiative-koch-tied-think

3/20

Opponents of a regional proposal to curb transportation sector emissions in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic are using a number of deceptive tactics to attack and criticize the Transportation and Climate Initiative. Groups tied to the oil industry have pointed to misleading studies, deployed questionable public opinion polling and circulated an open letter in opposition.

In Virginia, a conservative think tank is now touting a biased analysis, dismissed by critics as misleading “scare tactics,” authored by anti-environmental attorney David Schnare, that questions Virginia’s legal authority to participate in the regional program.

The Transportation and Climate Initiative aims to reduce carbon emissions from on-road vehicles by up to 25 percent over 10 years through a cap-and-invest model, whereby fuel suppliers and distributors would purchase allowances allocated under the cap, and proceeds would be invested into clean transportation initiatives. The program is modeled after the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative for the power sector, which is expected to result in CO2 emission reductions of 45 percent below 2005 levels by this year. But critics of the TCI proposal, many of whom also opposed RGGI, claim that it will do little to cut emissions and is just a scheme to raise gas prices, equivalent to a gas tax.

According to a legal analysis on Virginia’s participation in the program, published by the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, “TCI proposes rationing gasoline and diesel fuel sales and initiating a per gallon gas tax hike.” David Schnare, who wrote the analysis, claims that the program would impose not a fee but a tax and therefore requires authorization by the state legislature. Virginia’s governor, Schnare says, does not have unilateral authority to join TCI. Schnare also threatens to sue should Virginia attempt to join TCI without authorization by the legislature.

“We hope the Governor simply chooses to withdraw,” Schnare said. “But any effort to impose TCI unilaterally without the General Assembly will certainly be met with appropriate legal action.”

“Nothing in the TCI program would ration gasoline and motor fuels. TCI would simply put a limit on climate pollution,” said Mark Kresowik, eastern region deputy director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign, emphasizing that TCI is not a tax by any legal standard.

David Schnare's Long History Attacking Climate Science and Defending Fossil Fuel Interests

Schnare is currently the Director of the Center for Environmental Stewardship at the Thomas Jefferson Institute, and both he and TJI are part of a larger network linked with fossil fuel interests that work against climate and environmental protection policies.

The Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy is a member of the State Policy Network, a Koch-backed web of right-wing think tanks promoting climate science denial and other policy positions that benefit corporate donors. The Jefferson Institute has received funding from Donors Capital Fund ($214,450) and Donors Trust ($5,000), anonymous funding vehicles supporting a number of organizations that promote conservative and free enterprise interests. As DeSmog has noted, “the groups and projects given grants from DCF and DT are among the most active in questioning the link between fossil fuel emissions and climate change and blocking attempts to legislate against greenhouse gas emissions.” The Jefferson Institute is one such group, and was called out by name by Senate Democrats in 2016 in a series of speeches denouncing climate change denial from 32 organizations with links to fossil-fuel interests.

Schnare is a former EPA scientist and attorney and initially was a member of President Trump’s EPA transition team. He is affiliated with climate denial groups like the Heartland Institute, and was a speaker at the 2017 Heartland Institute “America First Energy Conference,” where he how to challenge the EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding that serves as the basis for regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

Schnare has a history of harassing climate scientists by suing universities to get access to the scientists’ emails. In 2011, he unsuccessfully sued the University of Virginia to try to obtain Michael Mann’s emails. As DeSmog previously reported, Schnare was forced to pay out $630,000 from a dark money group he co-founded with Christopher Horner, the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic. The payout resulted from a heated legal dispute in which Schnare is alleged to have used FMELC as his personal piggy bank.

Schnare's Reports Use Disinformation as “Scare Tactics”

Given this background, it is not surprising that Schnare and the Thomas Jefferson Institute are railing against the proposed Transportation and Climate Initiative. TJI and Schnare have published several misleading analyses of the program claiming it is a “carbon car tax” and would be “all pain and no gain,” claims that are simply untrue. The latest legal analysis is a continuation of Schnare making these unfounded arguments. For example, Schnare’s claim that TCI “proposes rationing gasoline and diesel fuel sales” is blatantly false, as sources familiar with the program told DeSmog.

“This is a pollution reduction program,” said Bruce Ho, senior advocate in the climate and clean energy program at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “The type of policy [Schnare and TJI] are describing in their paper is not the policy that states are actually proposing.”

“The oil industry and its allies are going heavy on the scare tactics right now,” added Morgan Butler, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center. “TCI is not being designed to ration gas, but rather to help move us beyond it by investing revenues from the program in making cleaner and healthier transportation options more available to everyone.”

Schnare’s claim that Virginia’s governor cannot unilaterally join TCI is also not accurate. As Kresowik explained, the governor does have authority to sign on to an agreement or memorandum of understanding (MOU), and then the legislature would have to act to implement the program in the state.

“The governor can absolutely sign the memorandum of understanding and move forward with the other states,” Kresowik said.

“The hand waving in this paper that Virginia is doing something that’s not allowed is just wrong,” added Ho. “Neither Virginia nor any other TCI jurisdiction has proposed skirting those legal requirements. They’ve been very upfront that they are going to go through all of the legally required processes within states.”

Ho said that Schnare’s entire analysis is disingenuous, as it mischaracterizes what the TCI program is actually proposing. “It’s a clear case of fear-mongering, setting up a straw man argument that is just not reflective of reality,” he said.

Schnare’s case against TCI runs counter to even oil giant BP's recent endorsement of the program.BP America Chairman and President Susain Dio, in a piece published last week in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, urged Virginia Governor Ralph Northam and the General Assembly to move forward with both TCI and RGGI. “While a national carbon pricing program would be the gold standard, state and regional plans can play a critical role now,” Dio writes. “And we can’t wait.” BP's support of TCI falls inline with the company's recent announcement that it will no longer lobby against policies that regulate or limit carbon pollution. Though the sincerity of BP's statements are not yet clear, the company's surprise public support of TCI indirectly rebuts and counters both pieces of Schnare's flawed analysis.

:{https://www.exposedbycmd.org:(style="background-color:#ffffff;"):}::{/2018:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}::{/07/12/bradley-foundation-funds-web-climate-change-deniers/:(style="background-color:#ffffff;"):}:

Armiak

Bradley Foundation internal documents reviewed by the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) reveal a concerted effort by the organization to delegitimize climate science, while promoting fossil fuel energy development in the United States.

An analysis of Bradley’s climate-related activities shows that the foundation has made significant grants to support energy policy think tanks, attack-dog groups that target environmentalists, and efforts to discredit climate science.

A 2013 internal foundation document details how Bradley “instructed staff to explore options…to make more energy-related grants.” The document also notes that the Board gave a “terminal grant” of $263,591 to the Sand County Foundation (SCF), which previously administered the Bradley Fund for the Environment.

The documents do not reveal Bradley’s motivation in splitting from SCF, but they do outline a serious effort to promote fossil fuel industry interests at the expense of the environment.

CENTERS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL AND FOSSIL FUEL DEVELOPMENT

As part of its push to support studies and public relations to cast doubt on mounting scientific evidence on climate change, Bradley has focused its resources on “Energy Policy Centers,” many of which are housed in “Bradley-supported” State Policy Network (SPN) “think tanks.” SPN is a web of 156 right-wing groups in 49 states, Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico, Canada, and the UK that receives funding from the billionaire Koch brothers, the Bradley Foundation, and the Roe Foundation, as well as many multi-national corporations.

The examined documents show that the Center for Energy Policy and the Environment (CEPE) at the **Manhattan Institute**for Policy Research (MIPR), a member of SPN, received a total of $500,000 for its Center, with another $200,000 distributed in 2016. (Manhattan Institute for Policy Research GPR, February 23, 2016) CEPE works to promote fossil fuel development despite the devastating effects of climate change. A background document on CEPE states its goal clearly: “The Center’s research and public education activity aims at demonstrating that the United States is poised to reap substantial economic benefits in the form of job creation, lower gasoline and electricity prices, and increased productivity provided public policies allow companies to access valuable energy resources and distribute them at home and abroad.”

A recommendation by Bradley staff on the Manhattan Institute’s 2016 grant proposal specifically states that CEPE is worth funding because, “They have succeeded in identifying and publicizing so many of the falsehoods that surround energy and the environment.” (Manhattan Institute for Policy Research GPR, February 23, 2016) An example of this “success” can be found in the work of CEPE senior fellow Mark Mills, who is recognized as originating the idea that North America can surpass the Middle East as the largest energy supplier in the world. (Manhattan Institute for Policy Research GPR, November 12, 2013)

The Energy Policy Center (EPC) at another SPN “think tank”, the Independence Institute, received $195,000 from the Bradley Foundation between 2012 and 2016.

Bradley documents examined show that EPC’s purpose is to “consciously counter-balance former Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter’s environmental think tank” at Colorado State University, which promotes a “New Energy Economy.”

Bradley considers EPC to be highly successful in fighting local and federal environmental initiatives. The Bradley documents note that EPC was a “key coalition partner” in preempting local bans on fracking in Colorado, and that it “has developed a toolkit for policymakers, attorneys general, and other conservative state think tanks to help them push back against U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations.” (Independence Institute GPR, June 2, 2015)

In addition to these two centers, Bradley has funded the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), an “associate member” of SPN, and the Center for Energy Innovation and Independence at Consumers’ Research.

CEE is led by the prominent climate change denier Myron Ebell, who steered Trump’s EPA transition team. Ebell also chairs the Cooler Heads Coalition, which brings together right-wing activists and scholars for monthly meetings. The coalition was established on May 6, 1997, “to dispel the myths of global warming by exposing flawed economic, scientific and risk analysis.”

CEI was long tied to tobacco disinformation campaigns, but is now a leading organization in the movement to discredit climate science.

Bradley does not mention how much of its funding to CEI was designated for CEE operations. Between 1986 and 2015, Bradley Foundation gave $2.2 million to CEI, the majority of which was “to support general operations.” (Competitive Enterprise Institute GPR, June 2, 2015).

The Center for Energy Innovation and Independence received $250,000 from Bradley in 2013 to get the new group off the ground. According to a background document, the group “will closely monitor federal environmental regulations and potentially lay the foundation for multi-state litigation against them, similar to those actions in the Obamacare and Dodd-Frank lawsuits, of which aggressive (Scott) Pruitt was and is a part.” Pruitt is the former AG of Oklahoma and recently resigned as the EPA Administrator under Trump.

SMEAR CAMPAIGNS AND FUNDING EFFORTS TO DISCREDIT CLIMATE SCIENCE

At the same time Bradley rolled out funding for “Energy Policy Centers,” it was doling out cash to discredit environmental organizations and climate change science.

A grant proposal record for the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a front group created by the close Bradley ally Rick Berman, details an organized effort to weaken the credibility of well-respected, national environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club, the National Resources Defense Council, and Food and Water Watch. (The Center for Consumer Freedom GPR, November 12, 2013) Berman also founded Berman and Company, a notorious Washington, D.C.-based corporate lobbying and PR company known for creating numerous corporate “front groups” and astroturf propaganda campaigns.

Berman’s anti-environmental project at CCF was called Big Green Radicals and was seeded with a $150,000 “public education” grant from Bradley in 2013.

According to Bradley’s background document, the Big Green Radicals project would include the following components:

[N]ew, updated research profiles for NRDC, Food and Water Watch, and Sierra Club; standalone websites for all three organizations; a Facebook group seeded with several thousand fans to provide a base for the message; the production of two online videos to explain the real agenda of the environmental left; and Google keyword advertising for members of the media and the public searching for information about one of the targeted groups.

In addition to providing the start-up funding for Big Green Radicals, Bradley gave $85,000 to the Capital Research Center (CRC), a group led by former Berman and Company employee Scott Walter. The grant was designated for “general operations,” but it may have been used to support the publication Green Watch. A background document on CRC states that, “Green Watch tracks the money flow to environmental nonprofits and critiques their positions, and those of their allies, including their policymaking ones.” (Capital Research Center GPR, August 19, 2014)

Since 2014, the Bradley Foundation has distributed numerous grants to discredit the vast amount of scientific research demonstrating the harmful effects of climate change. In 2014, it gave $65,000 to the George C. Marshall Institute (GMI), a right-wing front group largely funded by oil and gas interests. Newsweek called GMI “a central cog in the denial machine” in 2007.

GMI folded in late 2015,so Bradley recommended $50,000 in “seed funding” the following year for its “successor organization,” the CO2 Coalition. The coalition is led by a Dr. William Happer, a well-known climate change denier. “We’re doing our best to try and counter this myth that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant. It’s not a pollutant at all,” Happer said at a Heritage Foundation event on energy and climate.

Another $10,000 Bradley grant in 2014 for the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (CSCDGC) went to support its Science & Public Policy Institute (SPPI). A staff recommendation notes that SPPI “has helped demonstrate that no real-world data confirms that floods, draughts [sic], or hurricanes are becoming more frequent or severe, as global-warming alarmists allege. Neither is there any real-world data that sea levels are about to rise precipitously, inundating the world’s coasted [sic] lowlands, as is also often alleged.” (Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change GPR, June 17, 2014)

ENERGY ROUNDTABLES

Documents show that, beginning in 2013, Bradley provided funding to the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, also an SPN member, to host and organize two “energy roundtables” a year — one before the Heritage Foundation’s annual Resource Bank meeting, and the other before SPN’s annual fall meeting. (Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy GPR, November 10, 2015)

The $50,000-per-year grant from Bradley for the meetings was matched “by staff arrangement” by the Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA), a front group for the energy industry that promotes fossil fuel development and opposes efforts to regulate its activities.

“Planned and put on in close cooperation with the Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA), the roundtables allow state think tanks to better promote free-market energy and environmental policies,” one document states. (Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy GPR, November 12, 2013)

Attendance has been high at the roundtables, with as many as “67 SPN leaders” attending the event in Denver in September 2014. The agenda for that meeting details presentations from a number of fossil fuel lovers including: Arctic Power, Consumer Energy Alliance, Vital for Colorado, Devon Energy, GOPAC (a political action committee that backs and trains Republican candidates), and Freedom Partners. Freedom Partners, a funding conduit for the billionaire Koch brothers, delivered a talk on “Messaging and State Action.” (Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy GPR, November 11, 2014)

BRADLEY GRANTEES WORKED TOGETHER TO DEFEAT LOCAL REGULATIONS ON FRACKING IN COLORADO

In 2014, the Independence Institute and Berman’s Big Green Radicals worked in lockstep in Colorado to defeat local fracking bans, such as the one that passed by ballot measure in Longmont in November of 2013. A 2015 Bradley backgrounder on the Independence Institute praises the anti-fracking work of Independence Institute’s Energy Policy Center, saying, “It has also been a key coalition partner in the movement to stop local and statewide bans on hydraulic fracturing. Last year, current Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper crafted a delicately balanced compromise on local control of oil and gas drilling that removed all initiatives on the issue from the state ballot.”

Berman’s Big Green Radicals rolled out an attack campaign to discredit anti-fracking efforts in the state in May of 2014. Big Green Radicals assertedthat “extreme groups, mostly based far from Colorado in San Francisco, New York, or Washington D.C., are spending millions and spreading their anti-science message to scare voters into approving ballot measures in November to send the oil and gas industry (and the jobs and affordable energy it provides) packing from the Centennial State.”

The efforts by these two groups were successful in overturning local fracking bans. Bradley agreed and decreased its funding recommendation for EPC to $25,000 in 2016, saying, “it is unlikely that there will be any significant developments for EPC in the upcoming months, and therefore staff believes this reduced award is important.”

It is uncertain where the next battleground for energy development will be for Bradley, but the documents demonstrate that they have the funds to bankroll infrastructure in place to discredit climate science and smear the opposition.

OTHER NOTABLE BRADLEY GRANTS

Other significant Bradley grants to support fossil fuel development or dispute climate science in recent years include:

$150,000 to Opportunity Ohio for “program activities.” (2016)
$100,000 to Energy and Environment Legal Institute for “transparency practice general.” (2016) HORNER SCHNARE
$20,000 to Foundation for Research on Economics & the Environment for “general operations.” (2016)
$200,000 to Competitive Enterprise Institute for “general operations” and “litigation.” (2013, 2015)
$100,000 toThe Sand County Foundation for “energy resource development.” (2014)
$100,000 to National Center for Policy Analysis for “general operations.” (2014)
$20,000 to Foundation for Research on Economics & the Environment for “general operations.” (2014)

https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/01/25/trump-state-policy-network-summit-dominion-bradley-foundation-climate-denial

Last December groups promoting climate change denial sponsored a two-day conference which brought together energy executives and lobbyists with Trump administration officials.

According to the conference’s agenda, which DeSmog has obtained exclusively, the participating energy and utility companies included Dominion Energy, General Electric, and Georgia Power. Officials from the Departments of Energy and the Interior were among the panelists.

The event, billed as a “State Energy Policy Summit,” was organized by the Thomas Jefferson Institute,* a member of the State Policy Network (SPN), a powerful group of think tanks pushing states to adopt conservative policies. Both the SPN and its ally the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) are funded by an array of corporations, right-wing groups, and wealthy conservative donors that include brothers Charles and David Koch.

The conference, which took place from December 7-8, 2017 in Washington, D.C., was also sponsored by the Thomas Jefferson Instituteand The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation — two groups that promote climate change denial — and the Consumer Energy Alliance, an advocacy group working on behalf of the oil and gas industry.

..doc]

Lobbying Opportunities

The conference placed in one room energy interests and the government representatives and agencies which they are currently lobbying.

The first panel dealt with offshore energy development. It featured speakers from the National Ocean Industries Association, International Association of Geophysical Contractors, and National Ocean Policy Coalition — three trade groups advancing the interests of the offshore and energy exploration industries. A fourth member of the panel was Tim Williams, deputy director of the office of external affairs in the U.S. Department of the Interior. Williams, a former Republican operative who worked on the Trump campaign, was appointed to his position by Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke.

Keynote addresses by U.S. Representatives David Rouzer (R-NC) andBruce Westerman (R-AR) followed the panel. Over his brief Congressional career, Westerman has received a total of $114,450 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry, one of the top industries throwing support behind him. Rouzer, between 2011 and 2018, has netted $91,490 from the industry

Congressional records indicate that the energy participants on the offshore panel are presently lobbying both the Interior Department and Congress. National Ocean Industries Association is lobbying the Interior Department on various matters concerning offshore energy, including the Outer Continental Shelf.

Similarly, the International Association of Geophysical Contractors is lobbying the Interior Department and the House of Representatives on “[I]ssues impacting offshore seismic activities.” It is also lobbying Congress on H.R. 3131, or the SEA Act (Streamlining Environmental Approvals Act), which Representative Rouzer has co-sponsored. The bill seeks to ease environmental approval processes for offshore exploration in ways that amend current protections for endangered marine mammal habitats.

HBW Resources, the lobbying firm behind the Consumer Energy Alliance, one of the conference’s sponsors, is currently lobbying the House of Representatives on behalf of the National Ocean Policy Coalition.

A second panel, on electric power, included representatives from Dominion Energy, Georgia Power, and the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry’s main trade group. They were joined by Sean Kennedy from the State Government Leadership Foundation, a group which advances Republican candidates and various conservative causes. Though the group keeps its funding sources under wraps, ProPublica reported in 2013 that past donors included ExxonMobil and the Edison Electric Institute.

Dominion was represented on the panel by Bill Murray, a long-time Virginia lobbyist for the company. At the time of the panel, Murray, a Democrat, was serving on newly elected governor Ralph Northam’s transition team. Murray was unavailable for comment, but a spokesperson for Dominion told DeSmog:

“Bill attended the meeting because he was invited. He is a sought-after speaker on several energy policy topics as well as health care. He talked about emissions-free, carbon-free nuclear power and its role in meeting the country’s electricity needs. Again, Bill speaks to a myriad of organizations about various policy topics. He was invited, he accepted. Along with all the other presenters.”

Dominion is linked in other ways to the Thomas Jefferson Institute, one of the conference’s sponsors. Two of its lobbyists in Virginia, James Beamer and John Rust, serve on the institute’s board of directors.

Another conference panel featured Andrew Black, president of the Association of Oil Pipelines; Chrissy Borskey, a lobbyist for General Electric; and Doug Little, deputy assistant secretary for intergovernmental and external affairs at the U.S.Department of Energy. General Electric is currently lobbying the Department of Energy on a variety of issues, including energy infrastructure, energy appropriations, and renewable energy standards.

The Departments of Energy and the Interior did not respond to requests for comment. General Electric and Georgia Power also did not respond to similar requests.

Sponsoring Climate Denial

The Bradley Foundation, one of this conference’s sponsors, has for years been at the forefront of a sophisticated apparatus that funds climate denial, what Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle calls the “climate change countermovement.”

Internal Bradley Foundation documents, hacked and released in the last 18 months, support this characterization, revealing that the group contributed millions of dollars to organizations that deny climate change or obfuscate the established science behind it.

In recent years this funding went to such groups as the Heartland Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, which a Bradley Foundation memo described as the three “best” organizations in the “energy and environment component.” The foundation also donated to the CO2 Coalition, the George C. Marshall Institute (which shut down in 2015 and transferred its climate research to the CO2 Coalition), and the Thomas Jefferson Institute — another of the conference’s sponsors.

Based in Springfield, Virginia, the Thomas Jefferson Institute promotes market-based policies that limit government intervention and instead focus on “personal responsibility.” Its Environmental Stewardship program is headed by David Schnare, former general counsel of the coal industry-supported Energy & Environment Legal Institute and a Trump transition team member, who was engaged in protracted legal pursuits of climate scientists.

Under Schnare, the Environmental Stewardship program at the institute sowed doubts about climate change and critiqued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and its renewable energy mandates.

The conference’s third sponsor, the Consumer Energy Alliance, has been in recent years actively promoting the gas and oil pipeline buildup throughout the country. The group is funded by various fossil fuel producers, pipeline companies, industrial energy users, and utility trade groups, including such major players as Dominion, General Electric, Spectra Energy (now Enbridge), and Edison Electric Institute.

At times, the alliance used controversial tactics, such as when it submitted letters of support for Spectra’s NEXUS pipeline in Ohio — letters signed by people who denied signing them. One of the letters was signed by a man who had been dead for 18 years.

TAGS:

State Policy Network

Trump Administration

dominion energy

American Legislative Exchange Council ALEC

Bradley Foundation

Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy

Consumer Energy Alliance

Bill Murray

http://www.thomasjeffersoninst.org/staff_scholars.php

===

srcwatch

The Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy (TJI) is a state-based think tank in Virginia "dealing with the issues of improving education, government reform, economic development and environmental stewardship."^[1] The Institute states as its mission "to provide Virginia's political, business, academic, community and media leadership with thoughtful, realistic, useful and non-partisan analysis of public policy issues confronting our Commonwealth."^[2]. Its "alternative policy ideas focus on state and local issues and are based on the Institute's belief in free markets, limited government and individual responsibility," according to the organization's website.^[2]

The group was founded in 1985^[3] and is a member of the State Policy Network (SPN).

[hide]

Personnel

Board

Michael W. Thompson, Chairman and President
Randal C. Teague, Secretary, Treasurer and Counsel
John Alderson
William W. Beach
James Beamer
W. Stephen Cannon
Stephan Q. Cassaday
Rebecca Donatelli
James W. Dyke, Jr
Keith Fulton
Robert v. L. Hartwell
Alan I. Kirshner
Jay Poole
Joseph Ragan
Hon. John Rust
John G. Ryan
Robert W. Shinn
Mr. Todd A. Stottlemyer
Dr. Robert F. Turner
Robert W. Woltz, Jr.

Staff

Michael W. Thompson, Chairman and President
Christian N. Braunlich, vice president (also Assistant Vice President of Public Affairs for the National Association of Manufacturers, president of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, and vice president of the Center for Education Reform)
Leonard Gilroy, Senior Fellow on Government Reform (Director of Government Reform at Reason Foundation)
David Schnare, Director of TJI's Center for Environmental Stewardship (also American Tradition Institute attorney)

Funding

The organization generally brings in between $200,000 and $300,000 a year (see core financials below). Its funders include:^[4]

Chase Foundation of Virginia: $48,770 (2001-2012)
Donors Capital Fund: $214,450 (2007-2010)
DonorsTrust: $5,000 (2009-2010)
Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice: $31,100 (2005, 2010, 2012)
Jaquelin Hume Foundation: $295,000 (2001-2012)
JM Foundation: $110,000 (1998, 2001, 2004, 2008-2009, 2012)
Neal and Jane Freeman Foundation: $20,000 (2002-2003)
NFIB Research Foundation: $20,000 (2011-2012)^[5][6]
PhRMA: $7,500 (2010)
State Policy Network: $72,200 (2002, 2007, 2011)
The Roe Foundation: $183,000 (1998-2012)
William E. Simon Foundation: $1,000 (2002)

Core Financials

2012^[7]

Total Revenue: $279,151
Total Expenses: $286,741
Net Assets: -$18,304

2011^[8]

Total Revenue: $259,018
Total Expenses: $277,803
Net Assets: $32,094

2010^[9]:

Total Revenue: $306,376.00
Total Expenses: $298,312.00
Net Assets: $50,869.00

2009^[10]:

Total Revenue: $224,363.00
Total Expenses: $266,545.00
Net Assets: $42,815.00

Contact Details

9035 Golden Sunset Lane

Springfield, VA 22153

Phone: (703) 440 9447

Fax: (703) 455 1531

Email: info at thomasjeffersoninst.org Website: thomasjeffersoninst.org

Articles and Resources

External Resources

DeSmog Blog, Stink Tanks: Historical Records Reveal State Policy Network Was Created by ALEC, December 9, 2013.
The Guardian, State conservative groups plan US-wide assault on education, health and tax, December 5, 2013.
Portland Press Herald, "Washington County residents have mixed reactions to plan to eliminate taxes," December 5, 2013.
The Texas Observer, "The Money Behind the Fight to Undermine Medicaid," December 5, 2013.
Media Matters, North Carolina Newspapers Largely Ignore Conservative Funding Of Sham Think Tanks, December 3, 2013.
Shepherd Express, Masters of Manipulation: Right-wing Billionaires, Corporations and the Bradley Foundation Pay for Junk Studies that Prop up Their Agenda, November 27, 2013.
"Moyers & Company," How a Shadowy Network of Corporate Front Groups Distorts the Marketplace of Ideas, November 19, 2013.
MSNBC "Rachel Maddow Show," November 18, 2013.
Free Speech TV "Ring of Fire," Facebook, Microsoft, AT&T and Others Supporting Right Wing Propaganda Machine, November 18, 2013.
Topeka Capital-Journal, Trabert dismisses report tying KPI to Koch agenda, November 16, 2013.
The New Yorker (Jane Mayer), Is IKEA the New Model for the Conservative Movement?, November 15, 2013.
Salon, Ted Cruz and Koch brothers embroiled in shadowy Tea Party scheme, November 15, 2013.
St. Louis Business Journal, Beyond Sinquefield: Who else is funding the Show-Me Institute?, November 15, 2013.
The Guardian, Facebook and Microsoft help fund rightwing lobby network, report finds, November 14, 2013.
Huffington Post, Meet The Little-Known Network Pushing Ideas For Kochs, ALEC, November 14, 2013.
CBS St. Louis, Show-Me Institute’s Ties Questioned in New Report, November 14, 2013.
Talking Points Memo, Florida Conservative Group Helping Muck Up Obamacare In Alaska, November 14, 2013.
Mint Press News, Reports Reveal SPN’s Secret Corporate Agenda Through Use ‘Expert’ Testimony, November 14, 2013.
Media Matters, Shadowy Right-Wing Group Generates Media Coverage For Conservative Policy From Coast To Coast, November 14, 2013.
The Institute for Southern Studies, Are conservative think tanks breaking lobbying laws?, November 14, 2013.
Nonprofit Quarterly, Corporate Money in Network of Right-Wing State Policy Think Tanks, November 14, 2013.
The Progressive, Right-Wing Think Tanks Push Privatization in the States, November 13, 2013.
Politico, Report: Think tanks tied to Kochs, November 13, 2013.
Lawrence Journal-World, Reports released by progressive groups are critical of Kansas Policy Institute, November 13, 2013.
Maine Insights, Report: Maine Heritage Policy Center’s funding connection to Koch Brothers, November 13, 2013.
The Florida Current, Liberal groups bemoan lobbying by conservative think tanks, November 13, 2013.
The Oregonian, Cascade Policy Institute benefits from secretive donor group but says it operates independently, November 13, 2013.
Center for Media and Democracy, EXPOSED: The State Policy Network, The Powerful Right-Wing Network Helping to Hijack State Politics and Government, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
Arizona Working Families and CMD, A Reporter’s Guide to the Goldwater Institute: What Citizens, Policymakers, and Reporters Should Know, organizational report, updated November 13, 2013.
Progress Florida and CMD, Lawmaking Under the Influence of Very Special Interests: Understand the role of Florida ‘think tanks’ in driving a Koch-fueled, ALEC-allied corporate agenda, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
Maine's Majority Education Fund, Fooling Maine: How national conservative groups infiltrated Maine politics by founding and funding the Maine Heritage Policy Center, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
Progress Michigan, Who's Running Michigan? The Far-Right Influence of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
Alliance for a Better Minnesota, Who's in Charge: How Nationalized Corporate-Run Think Tanks Influence Minnesota Politics, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
Progress Missouri, What Missourians Need to Know About the Show-Me Institute, organizational report, updated November 13, 2013.
Granite State Progress, Bad Bartlett: The Josiah Bartlett Center and NH Watchdog Answer the Call of the Koch Brothers, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
ProgressOhio, Smoke Screen: The Buckeye Institute, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
Keystone Progress, Think tanks or corporate lobbyist propaganda mills?, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
Progress Texas, TPPF + ALEC, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
One Wisconsin Now, S is for Shill: Inside the Bradley Foundation's Attack on Public Education, organizational report, November 13, 2013.
Muncie Voice, Pence and Right-Wing Are Taking Over Public Education, November 13, 2013.
The Spokesman-Review, Shawn Vestal: Idaho Freedom Foundation pushes limits of word ‘charity’, November 2, 2013.
AZ Central, When this ‘watchdog’ pitches, taxpayers strike out, October 12, 2013.
IndyStar, Daniels says speech to partisan group was a mistake, October 10, 2013.
Muncie Voice, Indiana Policy Review: Not an Independent News Source, October 2, 2013.
The Spokesman-Review, Idaho Freedom Foundation's charitable status scrutinized, September 15, 2013.
CounterSpin, Lee Fang on 'The Right Leans In', April 5, 2013.
FireDogLake, State Policy Network, an umbrella coordinating ALEC, Heritage, Heartland and others, April 4, 2013.
Thom Hartmann with Lee Fang on MSNBC, The conservative State Policy Network is sneaking into your state & will change America, March 29, 2013.
Current TV "War Room",, March 28, 2013.
The Nation, The Right Leans In, March 26, 2013.
Democracy Now, Donors Trust: Little-Known Group Helps Wealthy Backers Fund Right-Wing Agenda in Secret, February 19, 2013.
Paul Abowd, Center for Public Integrity, Donors use charity to push free-market policies in states, Consider the Source, February 14, 2013.
John R. Mashey, Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax 2, DeSmog Blog report, updated October 23, 2012, p. 74.
Urban Milwaukee, Stealth Conservatives, October 11, 2012.
Rome News-Tribune, ANALYSIS: Georgia leaders depend on the same well for ideas, October 2012.
Andy Kroll, The Right-Wing Network Behind the War on Unions, Mother Jones, April 25, 2011.
Guidestar, State Policy Network, IRS filings and other organizational information about SPN.
Center for Policy Alternatives, ALEC and the Extreme Right-Wing Agenda, organizational brochure about ALEC and SPN.
John J. Miller, Fifty Flowers Bloom: Conservative think tanks — mini–Heritage Foundations — at the state level, National Review, November 19, 2007.
Bridge Project, State Policy Network, online resource listing grants to SPN and SPN's connections to other groups.
People for the American Way, State Policy Network, RightWingWatch.org, organizational resource.
Greenpeace, Koch Industries Climate Denial Front Group: State Policy Network (SPN), organizational resource.

References

:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Thomas Jefferson Institute, Staff Scholars, organizational website, accessed December 8, 2011.
↑ ^Jump ^up ^to:2.0 ^2.1 Thomas Jefferson Institute, Mission, organizational website, accessed December 2012.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, GuideStar.org, accessed April 2013.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Except where noted: American Bridge 21st Century, Recipient: Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, Bridge Project" conservative transparency website, accessed March 2014.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ NFIB Research Foundation, 2012 Form 990, annual organizational IRS filing, May 7, 2013, p. 22.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ NFIB Research Foundation, 2011 Form 990, annual organizational IRS filing, May 10, 2012, p. 23.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, 2012 Form 990, annual organizational IRS filing, August 12, 2013.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, IRS Form 990, 2011, organizational tax filing, August 13, 2012.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, 2010. GuideStar.
:{Jump up:(style="top:-99999px;clip:rect(1px 1px 1px 1px);overflow:hidden;position:absolute !important;padding:0px !important;border:0px !important;height:1px !important;width:1px !important"):}:↑ Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, IRS form 990, 2009. GuideStar.