ctr for Organizational Res and Educ

<div>=</div><div> Center for Organizational Research and Education is the new name of Center for Consumer Freedom.  CCF formally changed its name in a <a href="http://apps.sos.wv.gov/business/charities/ReadPDF.aspx?DocID=177285" target="blank" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" line-height="line-height" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">filing with the </a><a href="http://apps.sos.wv.gov/business/charities/ReadPDF.aspx?DocID=177285" target="blank" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" line-height="line-height" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">West Virginia </a><a href="http://apps.sos.wv.gov/business/charities/ReadPDF.aspx?DocID=177285" target="blank" style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" line-height="line-height" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">secretary of state</a> on January 30. </div><div></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: small;">=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.exposedbycmd.org/2018/07/12/bradley-foundation-funds-web-climate-change-deniers/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.exposedbycmd.org/2018/07/12/bradley-foundation-funds-web-climate-change-deniers/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: small;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: small;">Armiak</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: small;">
</div><div style="font-size: small;">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.<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;">CENTERS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL AND FOSSIL FUEL DEVELOPMENT</h2>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” <a href="https://www.exposedbycmd.org/spn/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">State Policy Network</a> (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 <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Manhattan_Institute_for_Policy_Research" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Manhattan Institute for Policy Research</a> (MIPR), a member of SPN, received a total of $500,000 for its Center, with another $200,000 distributed in <a href="http://www.bradleyfdn.org/Portals/0/pdfs/Report2016/2016%20Annual%20Report.pdf" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">2016</a>. (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) Anexample 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 <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Independence_Institute" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Independence Institute</a>, 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 <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Competitive Enterprise Institute</a> (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 <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Cooler_Heads_Coalition" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background: 0px 0px; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Cooler Heads Coalition</a>, 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.<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;">SMEAR CAMPAIGNS AND FUNDING EFFORTS TO DISCREDIT CLIMATE SCIENCE</h2>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 <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Center_for_Consumer_Freedom" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Center for Consumer Freedom</a> (CCF), a front group created by the close Bradley ally <a target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background: 0px 0px rgb(255, 255, 102); color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Rick </a><a target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background: 0px 0px rgb(255, 255, 102); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Berman</a>, 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 <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Rick_Berman" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background: 0px 0px; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Berman and Company</a>, 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” <a href="http://www.bradleyfdn.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=5haFFTeImkg=&portalid=0" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">grant</a> from Bradley in 2013.According to Bradley’s background document, the Big Green Radicals project would include the following components:<blockquote style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 40px;">[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.</blockquote>In addition to providing the start-up funding for Big Green Radicals, Bradley gave $85,000 to the <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Capital_Research_Center" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background: 0px 0px; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Capital Research Center</a> (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 <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/George_C.Marshall_Institute" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">George C. Marshall Institute</a> (GMI), a right-wing front group largely funded by oil and gas interests. Newsweek <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/global-warming-deniers-well-funded-99775" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background: 0px 0px; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">called</a> 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 <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/William_Happer" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background: 0px 0px; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Dr. William Happer</a>, 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 <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=Asj-3efMVB8" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background: 0px 0px; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">said</a> 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)<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;">ENERGY ROUNDTABLES</h2>Documents show that, beginning in 2013, Bradley provided funding to the <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Thomas_Jefferson_Institute_for_Public_Policy" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy</a>, 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 <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Consumer_Energy_Alliance" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background: 0px 0px; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">C</a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Consumer_Energy_Alliance" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">onsumer Energy Alliance</a> (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: Artic 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)<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;">BRADLEY GRANTEES WORKED TOGETHER TO DEFEAT LOCAL REGULATIONS ON FRACKING IN COLORADO</h2>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 <a href="https://www.biggreenradicals.com/colorado/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="background-image: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; transition: all 500ms ease-in-out;">asserted</a> that “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.<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin: 0px 0px 10px; text-transform: uppercase;">OTHER NOTABLE BRADLEY GRANTS</h2>Other significant Bradley grants to support fossil fuel development or dispute climate science in recent years include:<ul style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0px 20px; padding: 0px;"><li style="box-sizing: inherit; list-style-type: initial; margin: 0px 0px 10px;">$150,000 to Opportunity Ohio for “program activities.” (2016)</li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; list-style-type: initial; margin: 0px 0px 10px;">$100,000 to Energy and Environment Legal Institute for “transparency practice general.” (2016) HORNER SCHNARE</li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; list-style-type: initial; margin: 0px 0px 10px;">$20,000 to Foundation for Research on Economics & the Environment for “general operations.” (2016)</li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; list-style-type: initial; margin: 0px 0px 10px;">$200,000 to Competitive Enterprise Institute for “general operations” and “litigation.” (2013, 2015)</li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; list-style-type: initial; margin: 0px 0px 10px;">$100,000 to The Sand County Foundation for “energy resource development.” (2014)</li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; list-style-type: initial; margin: 0px 0px 10px;">$100,000 to National Center for Policy Analysis for “general operations.” (2014)</li><li style="box-sizing: inherit; list-style-type: initial; margin: 0px 0px 10px;">$20,000 to Foundation for Research on Economics & the Environment for “general operations.” (2014)</li></ul></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: small;"></div></div><div></div><div>berman exposed:</div><div>
</div><div><div>Green Decoys</div><div>Green Decoys is a project of the Center for Organizational Research and Education that claims several sportsmen, hunting, and fishing groups are actually fronts for environmentalists.</div><div>
</div><div>Big Green Radicals</div><div>Big Green Radicals is a project of the Center for Organizational Research and Education that attacks environmental advocacy groups, particularly the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, and Food & Water Watch.</div><div style="line-height: 22.75px;">
</div></div><div>=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div>As Stop HumaneWatchers, we have long followed the anti-animal attacks of Rick Berman and the Center for Consumer Freedom.  But we are also aware of his <a href="http://bermanexposed.org/" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">many other front groups</a> campaigning on issues such as teachers unions, the minimum wage, drunk driving, high-fructose corn syrup, and tanning beds.  That’s why we figured it was only a matter of time before Berman moved into the anti-environment arena.  With large corporations and foundations plowing <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2013/12/23/dark-money-feeding-climate-change-denial/" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">over $1 billion in untraceable dark money</a> each year into front groups that deny climate change, we knew Berman would want a piece of that pie.  Last week our <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jmogerman/dr_evil_says_we_are_big_green.html" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">suspicions were confirmed</a> with the appearance of a <a href="http://www.biggreenradicals.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/BGR-WSJ-Ad.jpg" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">full-page ad</a> in The Wall Street Journal targeting three environmental nonprofits: Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Food and Water Watch.  Just who was behind the ad?  The ad itself pointed readers to a new website: <a href="http://www.biggreenradicals.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/BGR-WSJ-Ad.jpg" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">BigGreenRadicals.com</a>, a project of the “Environmental Policy Alliance” – not to be confused with the Environmental Protection Agency even though it had a similar name with the same initials, a classic Berman ploy.  The website of <a href="http://environmentalpolicyalliance.org/" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Environmental Policy Alliance</a> held another clue: its address of 1090 Vermont Ave., NW Suite 800, Washington, DC 20005.  If that address sounds familiar, it’s likely you have seen the <a href="http://stophumanewatch.org/Documents/IRS/CCF/CCF-2011.pdf" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">tax returns for Center for Consumer Freedom</a>, which list the exact same address.  <h2 style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Berman’s fingerprints</h2>So what exactly is the Environmental Policy Alliance?  This new Berman front group has four campaigns:<ul style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li>Big Green Radicals, which bashes the three environmental organizations listed above;</li><li><a href="http://www.greendecoys.com/" target="blank">Green Decoys</a>, which targets hunting and fishing groups that certain powers think are too environmentalist;</li><li><a href="http://www.leedexposed.com/" target="blank">LEED Exposed</a>, which goes after sustainable certification in buildings;</li><li><a href="http://epafacts.com/" target="blank">EPA Facts</a>, which targets the actual Environmental Protection Agency.</li></ul>All of these sites have Berman’s fingerprints all over them.  Never one for self-reflection, Berman takes the criticisms that opponents have made of his clients and tries to turn them around on his targets.  For example, where environmentalists have charged that the oil-friendly Bush White House muzzled science to fit its politics, Berman’s EPA Facts claims the EPA uses “agenda-driven science.”  Where critics have pointed to right-wing foundation funding for climate-denial front groups like the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Heartland_Institute#Foundation_funders" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Heartland Institute</a>, Berman’s Green Decoys claims conservation groups like Trout Unlimited receive funding from what it calls “environmentalist foundations.”  And just as HumaneWatch paints the Humane Society of the United States as having a gigantic budget – never mind that the HSUS’s net worth is 4.6 percent that of Cargill – so Big Green Radicals paints Food and Water Watch as “among the most powerful … voices pushing the green agenda” – despite the fact its budget is 0.0026 percent of Exxon’s. <h2 style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Who’s footing the bill?</h2>Obviously someone has hired Berman to go after these environmental organizations.  The question is, who?  Berman does not list who funds his smear campaigns on any of his websites, but it’s not hard to figure out which industries are footing the bill, even if we don’t know specifically which corporations.  Green Decoys, for example, seems particularly offended that Trout Unlimited has come out in favor of <a href="http://www.tu.org/node/362" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">regulations on hydraulic fracturing</a>, or fracking.  TU isn’t against fracking altogether, just against unregulated fracking – but that’s enough to merit a smear campaign from Berman.  Big Green Radicals attacks not just Food and Water Watch’s opposition to fracking, but its campaign to <a href="https://secure3.convio.net/fww/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=225" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">label genetically modified food</a>.  The Sierra Club is also attacked for its campaigns against fossil fuels and GMO foods, as well as its <a href="http://www.sierraclub.org/habitat/esa/" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">defense of the Endangered Species Act</a>.  And LEED Exposed turns what ought to be a no-brainer – energy efficient construction of new buildings – <a href="http://www.architectmagazine.com/architecture/astroturf-organization-turns-to-green-building-leed-exposed_o.aspx" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">into a political issue</a>.  Who could possibly be against energy efficient buildings?  As it turns out, plastics, vinyl, and chemical companies that supply inefficient and sometimes toxic building materials don’t like LEED very much — they are behind a push for <a href="http://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/leed-bashing-plastic-people-join-lumber-industry-trying-get-feds-drop-leed.html" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">federal agencies</a> and <a href="http://ohiogreenbuildinglaw.com/2014/02/05/angry-rich-and-wrong-the-fight-to-ban-leed-in-ohio/" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">state governments</a> to ban use of LEED certification.  Just this month, LEED Exposed released a new report claiming that LEED-certified buildings are not as energy efficient as traditional buildings.  That report was covered by <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/03/david-martosko-daily-caller-humane-society-animal-rights-facebook" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Berman’s old friend</a> the <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/02/report-dcs-green-approved-buildings-using-more-energy/" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px;">Daily Caller</a> in a story made available for free to other outlets, and by the <a href="http://m.nationalreview.com/article/372410/green-building-certification-program-leeds-behind-jillian-kay-melchior" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">National Review</a>, which is currently being <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/30/climate-scientists-lawsuit-could-wipe-out-conservative-national-review-magazine/" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">sued for defamation</a> after comparing climate scientist Michael Mann to child molester Jerry Sandusky.  While both outlets happily quoted Berman employee Anastasia Swearingen, neither bothered to mention who her boss is, nor that the Environmental Policy Alliance occupies the same Washington, D.C., offices as the Center for Consumer Freedom.  Fortunately these facts did not escape the U.S. Green Building Council, which <a href="http://2bgreener.com/?p=134" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">refuted the report</a> and linked it back to Berman.  <h2 style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Rebranding</h2>Amidst all of our questions about the new territory Berman is venturing into, one thing caught our eye.  While Big Green Radicals, LEED Exposed and the other new smear campaigns are all projects of the Environmental Policy Alliance, which lists the same address as Center for Consumer Freedom, the Environmental Policy Alliance is itself a project of something we had never heard of called the Center for Organizational Research and Education.  The Center for Organizational Research and Education has no web footprint whatsoever.  Google it, and you will not find a website, or even a mention of it on a parent company site.  That’s because, as noted by <a href="http://www.architectmagazine.com/architecture/astroturf-organization-turns-to-green-building-leed-exposed_o.aspx" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Architect Magazine</a>, Center for Organizational Research and Education is the new name of Center for Consumer Freedom.  CCF formally changed its name in a <a href="http://apps.sos.wv.gov/business/charities/ReadPDF.aspx?DocID=177285" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">filing with the </a><a href="http://apps.sos.wv.gov/business/charities/ReadPDF.aspx?DocID=177285" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">West Virginia </a><a href="http://apps.sos.wv.gov/business/charities/ReadPDF.aspx?DocID=177285" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">secretary of state</a> on January 30.  Why has Rick Berman taken the extreme step of changing the name of Center for Consumer Freedom?  A couple of possibilities come to mind.  First, Center for Consumer Freedom has been thoroughly exposed as a front group for Big Food and Big Ag by <a href="http://stophumanewatch.org/blog/web-of-lies" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Stop HumaneWatch</a>and others, including pretty much <a href="http://stophumanewatch.org/in-the-media" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">every major media outlet</a> in the country.  When companies’ reputations are damaged beyond repair, they often respond by simply changing their name, such as when tobacco company Philip Morris <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/16/business/philip-morris-to-change-name-to-altria.html" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">changed its name to Altria</a> shortly after settling the landmark case over health care costs related to smoking with a group of state attorneys general.  <h2 style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">A new direction?</h2>Perhaps Berman plans to take his Center for Organizational Research and Education in a new direction, making the attacks on environmental organizations front and center while pushing the attacks on animal welfare groups to one side.  After all, most major food producers including Smithfield and McDonald’s have <a href="https://www.facebook.com/HSUSFarmAnimals/photos/pb.199101346801473.-2207520000.1394345930./526327410745530/" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">already agreed to adopt more humane practices</a> such as phasing out gestation crates.  The National Pork Producers Council <a href="https://www.facebook.com/HSUSFarmAnimals/photos/pb.199101346801473.-2207520000.1394346092./707757162602553" target="blank" style="line-height: 22.75px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">may still hate HSUS</a>, but let’s face it: Their budget pales in comparison to Big Oil, Big Coal, and Big Gas, who have a lot of money and a lot of reason to spend it with all the climate change regulations likely to start coming down the pike.  Still, we don’t think HumaneWatch is going anywhere.  As long as someone is paying Berman, he will keep running it, even as he creates new campaigns and hires more Washington operatives willing to sell their souls for profit.  And some players in the Big Ag community seem happy to keep throwing their money at Berman, even though not a single one of his campaigns against the HSUS has had an effect.  Despite all of Berman’s efforts, HSUS donations continue to grow and its programs continue to expand.  The fact is, most people support policies to treat animals with kindness, and the HSUS is the most effective organization in the country at getting these policies put into place.  People also generally like clean air and clean water.  So if Berman truly is changing his emphasis from anti-animal campaigns to anti-environment, we don’t expect him to be any more successful there either.