fred upton bak
<div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnk capt 720</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">upton</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><span style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"> North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act of 2015</span></div><div><span style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">
</span></div><div><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></p><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">another kind of suppression:</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">
</font></div><div><div style="font-size: small;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">ATTEMPTING TO DEFUND, LIMIT THE EPA </b></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The first chance that the bloc of 85 freshman Republicans had to influence environmental policy was with H.R. 1, the bill that would fund the federal government for fiscal year 2011. The House passed a 27 percent budget cut for the EPA, which, had it passed the Senate, would have been the agency’s largest cut since 1981</span>. </font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“We were trying to tell our brothers on the Republican side that they’re never going to get this through the Senate, but they were posturing,” said Norm Dicks, a Democrat, and the former ranking member on the House Appropriations Committee. “They wanted to make the cuts. They thought they were going to win political points with the Tea Party-types for cutting the EPA budget.”</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Lawmakers also attempted other cuts by proposing 162 amendments, 22 of which would have cut EPA programs or limited the government’s enforcement of environmental regulations and its ability to study climate change</b>. <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">However, H.R. 1 never became law because the House and Senate were not able to reach a budget compromise until April 2011, when H.R. 1473 narrowly avoided a government shutdown. After negotiations with the Senate, the two houses agreed on a 15.6 percent cut, the <b>largest enacted cut since the EPA lost 16 percent of its budget in 1986</b>. RR</span></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The 22 amendments proposed in H.R. 1 signaled how this group of freshmen Republicans, and pledge-signers, wanted to limit the EPA and climate-change research. </b>Think Progress, a liberal blog, researched climate change statements by members of the 112th Congress, and found many members of Congress were doubtful of climate-change science.<b> The Investigative Reporting Workshop matched the Think Progress statements with the list of members of Congress who signed the pledge from Nov. 16, 2010, and found 17 of the 20 Senators who had signed the pledge said they doubted climate change science, as did 78 of the 156 representatives who had signed the pledge. </b></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Throughout the House's debate on H.R. 1, several pledge signers proposed amendments that would limit government regulation of climate change.</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Rep. Mike Pompeo,</span> a Republican who represents the Kansas district where Koch Industries is headquartered, and is a signer of the No Climate Tax Pledge, received $10,000 from Koch Industries PAC in the 2010 election.</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Once in the House, Pompeo proposed an amendment to H.R. 1 to cut $8.5 million, or roughly half the fiscal year 2010 budget, from the EPA’s greenhouse gas reporting program. Pompeo said at the time, “This data is the very foundation of the EPA's effort to pursue its radical anti-jobs agenda.”</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Another amendment was proposed by Republican Rep. John Carter of Texas, who wanted to ban using money to enforce a rule on cement manufacturing emissions</b>. He was one of the first representatives to sign the No Climate Tax Pledge. Carter and two other Texas Republicans proposed an amendment that would have prohibited the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases emitting from stationary sources, such as factories. </font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Republican Rep. <b>Ralph Hall of Texas</b>, also in that first group of representatives to sign the pledge, sponsored an amendment — which passed — to stop the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration from creating a National Climate Service, which was intended to be “a one-stop shop” for climate informatio</span>n. </font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Republican Rep. Morgan Griffith of Virginia sponsored an amendment — which passed — that stopped funds for EPA guidelines on surface coal mining operations</b>. </font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Republican Rep<b>. Kristi Noem of South Dakot</b>a signed the pledge in 2010 and received $5,000 from KochPAC. She sponsored an amendment — which passed — to prohibit money from being used to change the air quality standards regarding coarse particulate matter (dust). </font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">However, neither these amendments nor the bill survived in the Senate.</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Many of the 85 freshman Republicans sponsored bills in the House to limit the EPA’s regulatory power or to expand oil and natural gas drilling</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">. Koch Industries Public Sector LLC, the lobbying arm of Koch Industries, lobbied for </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 102, 0);">H.R. 910, the Energy Tax Prevention Act, which would have rolled back the Supreme Court’s ruling that the EPA could regulate greenhouse gases.</span><b style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 102, 0);"> The bill was sponsored by Republican Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">and co-signed by 92 Republicans</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> (and three Democrats),</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> 61 of whom also signed the pledge. </span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Had it passed, the Energy Climate Prevention Act would have prevented the EPA from defining greenhouse gases as air pollutants and prohibited all federal research or programs on climate change research.</b></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In June 2011<b>, Rep. Griffith of Virginia </b>also introduced the EPA Regulatory Relief Act, which would have allowed companies to ignore future EPA rules on industrial boiler and heater emissions while delaying the implementation of any rules that would constitute the “least burdensome regulatory alternative.” The bill eventually gained 101 Republican and 25 Democratic co-sponsors, 67 of whom signed the No Climate Tax Pledge.</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Griffith said he signed the No Climate Tax pledge because he believes national limits on greenhouse-gas emissions harm Virginia’s coal industry and the jobs it provides. <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 51);">He said he didn’t feel any pressure to sign the pledge from Americans for Prosperity, which he credits with helping him win a seat in Congress in 2010 by campaigning against the policies of his Democratic predecessor, Rick Boucher. </span></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Griffith also said that the $5,000 his campaign received from Koch Industries in June 2010 had no influence on his decision to sign the pledge less than two weeks later. Opposing President Obama’s “war on the coal industry” was a top issue during his campaign, he said.</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“When I was running in early 2010, this was already on my agenda,” Griffith said. “I was talking about these things long before I even knew that the Koch brothers and AFP were involved in these issues.” </font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The pledge isn't limited to those in Washington. Among other office-holders who signed it is Oklahoma Schools Superintendent Janet Barresi, who declined to talk about her reasons for signing the pledge in August 2010. But through her press secretary, Barresi said in statement that the school district relies on property taxes from power plants and oil and gas production.</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Oklahoma's schools depend on revenue from fossil fuels, and the destructive power of a tax on these fuels is not justified by questionable science," Barresi said in the statement.</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Contributing: Julia Broemmel</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></p><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4th phase denialism to DELAYISM ukraine war watershed drill baby enenrgy dominance biden greata fault:</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/jesse-watters/kremlin-praises-fox-news-fox-personalities-desperately-try-link-environmental-groups" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.mediamatters.org/jesse-watters/kremlin-praises-fox-news-fox-personalities-desperately-try-link-environmental-groups</a></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>as Russia’s foreign minister <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/russias-invasion-ukraine/russian-minister-sergey-lavrov-praises-fox-news-coverage-putins-invasion" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">praises</a> Fox News coverage of war in Ukraine, the network has exploited the crisis to villainize the environmental movement, capitalizing on the global economic sanctions against Vladimir Putin’s invasion to recycle <a href="https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/3/16/2086235/-GOP-Revives-Pre-Re-DeBunked-Disinfo-From-Dr-Evil-Smearing-Green-Groups-With-Fake-Russian-Ties?pm_campaign=blog&pm_medium=rss&pm_source=" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">previously debunked claims</a> that Russia is secretly funding “green campaigns” against oil drilling and fracking in the U.S.</b></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Fox hosts and personalities took their cues from a March 10 <a href="https://republicans-energycommerce.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/3.10.22-Letter-to-LCV.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">letter</a> from Republican members of the<b> House Energy Committee </b>asking three environmental groups – the League of Conservation Voters, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and Sierra Club – to provide evidence of any financial support from Russia.</span> Yet, as the Washington Post Fact Checker <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/17/bogus-allegation-that-putin-is-funding-california-environmental-charity/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">explains</a>, the “bogus” allegations in the letter are remnants of a <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/23/fracking-russia-republicans-240834" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">2017 scandal</a> concocted by Republicans to distract from an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Here are some examples of Fox pushing this lie: </font></p><ul style="font-size: small; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; clear: both; list-style: none; padding: 0px;"><li aria-level="1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 2.4rem; position: relative;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fox host Jesse Watters suggested green energy campaigns “are taking dirty Russian money” in order “to scare Americans out of fracking and energy exploration.” [Fox News, <em style="box-sizing: border-box;">Jesse Watters Primetime</em>, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/climate-deniers/fox-host-jesse-watters-suggests-russians-are-funding-green-energy-campaigns-scare" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">3/3/22</a>]</font></li><li aria-level="1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 2.4rem; position: relative;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Watters, and co-host Greg Gutfeld pushed this evidence-free claim again, saying that green energy campaigns in America are funded by Russia to increase dependence on foreign oil. [Fox News, <em style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Five</em>, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/greg-gutfeld/fox-news-hosts-make-evidence-free-claim-green-energy-campaigns-america-are-funded" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">3/4/22</a>]</font></li><li aria-level="1" style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 2.4rem; position: relative;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Fox’s Carley Shimkus stated that “a </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 102, 0);">lot of Republicans are calling for an investigation into whether Russia was funding climate change groups in the U.S</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">.” Co-host Rachel Campos-Duffy followed up, “Of course they were.” [Fox News, </span><em style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;">Fox & Friends</em><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, </span><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3986109" style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">3/16/22</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">]</span></font></li><li aria-level="1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 2.4rem; position: relative;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Gutfeld spent his monologue ranting that “the left are in lockstep with what Putin wants, for us to be dependent on other countries like his for energy,” saying “Russia duped Europe into depending on their energy by funding rabid environmental groups” and spread “disinformation within green groups to steer countries away from fracking and shale gas.” [Fox News, <em style="box-sizing: border-box;">Gutfeld!</em>, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3986099" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">3/16/22</a>] </font></li><li aria-level="1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 2.4rem; position: relative;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Later in the episode, Gutfeld suggested that opposition to fracking in the U.S. had been “driven” by Russian propaganda efforts: “The past 10 years, all this stuff – all the documentaries, all the Hollywood celebrities, all the stuff about fracking – might have all been driven by Russia, or at least paying for that.” [Fox News,<em style="box-sizing: border-box;"> Gutfeld!</em>, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3986101" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">3/16/22</a>] </font></li><li aria-level="1" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding-left: 2.4rem; position: relative;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Gutfeld repeated the claim yet again the next day, saying the Democrats should be thanking Putin for rising gas prices “because after all, it was Russia who infiltrated the green groups to get us off our domestic oil and buy their foreign oil.” [Fox News, <em style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Five</em>, <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3986102" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">3/17/22</a>]</font></li></ul><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fox personalities have been criticized for pro-Kremlin commentary – and the Kremlin itself has noticed, as exposed by minister Sergey Lavrov's <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/russias-invasion-ukraine/russian-minister-sergey-lavrov-praises-fox-news-coverage-putins-invasion" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">remarks</a> about Fox and a recently reported <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/russias-invasion-ukraine/report-kremlin-memo-tells-russian-media-feature-fox-host-tucker-carlson" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">memo</a> from the Russian government that directed the country’s media outlets to promote as many clips of Fox News star Tucker Carlson as possible. (The Kremlin’s propaganda and Carlson’s own rhetoric have <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/russias-invasion-ukraine/tucker-carlsons-history-pro-kremlin-anti-ukraine-propaganda" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">remarkable</a> similarities.) The narratives parroted by Fox to earn this praise – from blaming Joe Biden for rising gas prices to suggestions the war in Ukraine is pushed by elitist self interests – are baseless and incendiary. Their recent push of easily debunked anti-environmental conspiracies are no different.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The allegations stem from whether the aforementioned environmental groups received donations from the <a href="https://www.seachange.org/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Sea Change Foundation</a>, an environmental philanthropy group run by billionaire <a href="https://www.influencewatch.org/person/nathaniel-simons/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Nat Simons</a>. In 2015, a baseless report from the<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"> GOP lobbyist-led front group <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/environmental-policy-alliance-berman_n_4913303" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Environmental Policy Alliance</a></span> accused the law firm that set up a Bermuda-based company financing Sea Change of having extremely vague ties to an adviser to Putin. The firm <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/us-republicans-brewing-russian-scandal-to-target-greens-2/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">refuted</a> these allegations as “completely false and irresponsible,” saying, “We can state categorically that at no point did this philanthropic organization receive or expend funds from Russian sources or Russian-connected sources.” In fact, the <a href="https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2018/7/20/top-climate-change-donors-pull-back-the-curtain-on-their-past-and-future-giving" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">sole source</a> of the foundation’s funding is the Simons family. Despite the appearance of Kremlin-linked donations being obliterated, that did not stop 2017 House GOP members from <a href="https://republicans-science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/06_29_2017%20CLS%20%26%20Weber%20-%20Mnuchin.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">requesting an investigation</a>, and now recycling the debunked claims. </font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The network’s hosts and guests – primarily recently promoted prime-time stars <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/jesse-watters/fox-news-names-misinformation-machine-jesse-watters-permanent-host-7-pm-hour" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Jesse Watters</a> and <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/greg-gutfeld/fox-news-rewards-greg-gutfelds-bigotry-lies-and-sycophancy-another-weekday-show" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">Greg Gutfeld</a> – are also conflating a separate <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/russia-funding-environmental-groups-europe-united-state" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">online article</a> from Fox that quotes “experts” like the <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano</span> noting that “Russians actually fund some of the most rabid environmental groups in Europe.” (Carafano has been a <a href="https://twitter.com/JJCarafano/status/1479814396293570563" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">vocal</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/JJCarafano/status/1451517522126180355" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">critic</a> of climate science and recently co-authored a piece describing the Biden administration’s climate policies as a “<a href="https://nationalinterest.org/feature/biden%E2%80%99s-climate-policy-titanic-disaster-waiting-195790" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">titanic disaster in waiting</a>.”) The article’s so-called “experts” also included right-wing media’s <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/right-wing-medias-favorite-climate-contrarians-go-fox-shows-bash-bidens-climate-plan" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">favorite climate contrarian</a>,<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 102, 0);"> Michael Shellenberger, a <a href="https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2020/07/shellenbergers-op-ad/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">notorious</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1239364394863063046" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">natural gas</a> advocate who’s pushed lies about the <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/09/04/why-renewables-cant-save-the-climate/?sh=39128e723526" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">cost and efficiency</a> of renewable energy. </span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Republicans point to a 2017 <a href="https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">national intelligence report</a> that highlighted a Russian state news channel, RT America, that ran “anti-fracking programming,” and was trying to expand its U.S. audience. Not only did the report not provide any evidence that the channel had been successful, <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">but <b>as of March 4, RT America announced it was “<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/03/media/rt-america-layoffs/index.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">ceasing production</a>.</b>” It is simply preposterous to believe that over a decade of fracking commentary was driven by the network prior to its dissolution</span>.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 1.5em; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Some efforts against European drilling and fracking have been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-secretly-working-with-environmentalists-to-oppose-fracking" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; transition: box-shadow 0.15s ease-in-out 0s; box-shadow: rgba(25, 118, 210, 0.5) 0px -1px 0px inset;">linked</a> to Kremlin propaganda designed to increase dependency on Russian oil exports, but with each reshaping of the conspiracy theory, there has been no evidence of any similarly funded successful campaign in the United States.</b></font></p><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="font-size: small;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">---</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ref 1</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/russia-funding-environmental-groups-europe-united-state" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.foxnews.com/world/russia-funding-environmental-groups-europe-united-state</a></font></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx pix [vid?]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">RUSSIA Published <b>March 15, 2022 </b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Russia duped Europe into energy dependence by funding 'rabid environmental groups': experts</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Expert James Carafano: 'Russians actually fund some of the most rabid environmental groups in Europe'</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">By Emma Colton | Fox News</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">[soc med]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[Biden engaged in 'war on American energy,' finally banned Russia oil over bad news cycle, House rep says</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">NEW</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">You can now listen to Fox News articles! <span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">BeyondWords]</span></font></span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">For years, world leaders have accused Russia of funding environmental groups in Europe to steer nations away from energy independence and strengthen Russia’s iron grip over the continent</span>.<b> As nations across the globe begin shunning Russian oil in response to the country’s invasion of Ukraine, U.S. leaders are also questioning how deep Russia’s ties go in the environmental community. </b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"The Russians actually fund some of the most rabid environmental groups in Europe because they sic them on the energy projects that aren’t Russian," James Carafano, vice president of the Kathryn and <b>Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at the Heritage Foundation, </b>told Fox News Digital in a recent phone interview. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">RUSSIA INVADES UKRAINE: LIVE UPDATES]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Back in June 2014, just months after Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine, European leaders sounded off that Russia was using disinformation operations with environmental groups to steer countries away from fracking in favor of Russian oil.</b> </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"I have met allies who can report that Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called non-governmental organisations - environmental organisations working against shale gas - to maintain European dependence on imported Russian gas," Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the former prime minister of Denmark and then-secretary-general of NATO, said, according to the Guardian. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">NATO’s press office passed the remarks off as Rasmussen’s personal views, but one NATO official sounded the alarm that Russia’s grip on Europe was tightening. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">HOUSE REPUBLICANS DEMAND ANSWERS FROM ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS OVER ALLEGATION OF COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"We don't go into the details of discussions among allied leaders, but Russia has been using a mix of hard and soft power in its attempt to recreate a sphere of influence, including through a campaign of disinformation on many issues, including energy. In general, the potential for Russia using energy supplies as a means of putting pressure on European nations is a matter of concern. No country should use supply and pricing terms as tools of coercion," the NATO official told the Guardian in 2014. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Environmental groups have meanwhile feverishly denied any ties to Russia. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"The idea we’re puppets of Putin is so preposterous that you have to wonder what they’re smoking over at NATO HQ,<b>" Greenpeace </b>told the Guardian in 2014.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">By 2016, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Scotland and Bulgaria had all banned fracking, either temporarily or permanently. Russia’s power over European energy grew large by 2022, providing roughly 40% of the continent’s natural gas supply. Lithuania, for example, gets 83% of its oil imports from Russia, Poland gets 58% and Finland 80%, The Hill reported. [DENMARK?]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">"You're not really an independent nation if you depend on foreign countries so heavily for your energy supplies," Michael Shellenberger, the<b> best-selling</b> author of "Apocalypse Never," told Fox News earlier this month. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>EUROPE'S GREEN ENERGY POLICIES STRENGTHENED PUTIN, MICHAEL SHELLENBERGER SAYS</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Shellenberger said that 15 years ago, "Europe produced more natural gas than Russia," but that all changed as "Russia increased its natural gas production and Europe reduced it." </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">"Europe decided not to frack in large part in response to climate activists," Shellenberger told Fox News. "We now think there is strong evidence suggesting [the climate activists] were supported directly through financing from Russia.</span>" </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>REPUBLICANS CALL ON YELLEN TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER RUSSIAN MONEY FINANCED USA GREEN GROUPS</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">In the U.S., Republican <b>Reps. Lamar Smith and Randy Webe</b>r sent a letter to then-Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin in 2017 arguing that Russia’s goal is to "suppress the widespread adoption of fracking in Europe and the U.S." by funding such environmental groups. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The two Republicans even cited former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who complained during a private 2014 speech about "phony environmental groups" pushing an anti-fracking agenda. </b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"We were even up against<b> phony environmental groups</b>, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, ‘Oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you,’ and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia," Clinton said, according to excerpts leaked by WikiLeaks in 2016. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee are now holding three environmental groups’ feet to the fire. </font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The Republicans, led by</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 102, 0);"> Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers,</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b> [ALSO UPTON] </b>are demanding that the League of Conservation Voters, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Sierra Club disclose their ties to a</span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> San Francisco-based nongovernmental organization</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> that Russian President Vladimir Putin allegedly uses to wield power over American energy production.</span></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>[PIX: Russian President Vladimir Putin chairs a Security Council </b>meeting in Moscow, Russia.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"Provided the public reporting of Putin's dark money influence in Europe and the concerns surrounding similar efforts in the United States, we write today to explore your connections with<b> Sea Change</b>," the Republicans wrote in the letter to the three groups last week. "Any action by President Putin, the Russian government, or Putin's allies to undermine American energy security must be addressed."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The three groups denied any ties in a previous comment to Fox News, describing the accusations as "completely false," "rooted in a smear campaign," and a phony "conspiracy theory."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">"It is vital to our national security to know if Vladimir Putin, the Russian government, or Putin’s allies are meddling with America’s energy affordability and security. If the League of Conservation Voters, the Natural Resources Defense Council, or Sierra Club have nothing to hide, then we look forward to seeing the evidence they provide by March 25th," House Energy and Commerce Committee <b>Republican leader McMorris Rodgers</b> told Fox News Digital</span>. </font></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ref {note many lnx are just to fox category/tag]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-republicans-demand-answers-environmental-groups-collusion-russia" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-republicans-demand-answers-environmental-groups-collusion-russia</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx vid [interestingly on 3 22 pix of ukraine devastation]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">REPUBLICANS Published March 10, 2022 7:37pm EST</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">House Republicans demand answers from environmental groups over allegation of collusion with Russia</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The group's reportedly have ties to the Sea Change Foundation based in San Francisco</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Kyle MorrisBy Kyle Morris | Fox News</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">FacebookTwitter Flipboard</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Vladimir Putin is laughing at the Biden administration:</b> Charlie Hurt]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Fox News contributor tells Laura Ingraham that Vladimir Putin is sitting back laughing at the Biden administration.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[NEW</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">You can now listen to Fox News articles!</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Listen to this article BeyondWords]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans</b> are calling on certain environmental groups to disclose their ties to a non-governmental organization which is, according to the committee, reportedly used by Russian President Vladimir Putin to make an impact on American energy production.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Three environmental groups – the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the Sierra Club – reportedly have ties to the San Francisco-based NGO environmental organization called the Sea Change Foundation, according to Republicans on the committee.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">MARYLAND GOV. LARRY HOGAN WORKING ON ‘EMERGENCY SUSPENSION’ OF STATE GAS TAX</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a letter sent to each of the three groups, Republicans inquired about the funding the groups have received from Sea Change since 2006 and called for disclosure of whether the groups "are aware of concerns that Sea Change may be a conduit for Russian funding."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Provided the public reporting of Putin's dark money influence in Europe and the concerns surrounding similar efforts in the United States, we write today to explore your connections with Sea Change," the Republicans stated in the letter. "Any action by President Putin, the Russian government, or Putin's allies to undermine American energy security must be addressed."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In addition, the Republicans asked the groups if they have received funds or took a particular action after a request "from the Russian government or anyone connected with the Russian government."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">All three of the groups, according to Republicans on the committee, were identified as top recipients of Sea Change grants since 2006. The letter was signed by more than 20 Congressional Republicans, including Energy and Commerce Committee Republican leade</span><b style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">r Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Wash., and ranking member Rep. </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Fred Upton, R-Mich</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">.</span></b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>"If the League of Conservation Voters, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Sierra Club have nothing to hide, then we look forward to seeing the evidence by March 25," a spokesperson for Energy and Commerce Republicans told Fox News.</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a response shared with Fox News, Bob Deans, the director of strategic engagement for the NRDC, suggested the "allegations are false" and are "rooted in a smear campaign."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"We receive no funding from the governments of Russia or China," Deans said. "We answer to our independent leadership, and we don’t do the bidding of any government – foreign or otherwise – in our work to advocate for commonsense environmental protections in the public interest. These allegations are rooted in a smear campaign orchestrated nearly a decade ago by fossil fuel interests and a right-wing think tank. They only serve then, as now, as a distraction."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Similarly, a statement provided to Fox News from the LCV said the "story is completely false and has been put to rest for years."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"We have no connections to Russia, or China, and have been an effective advocate for environmental protection for over 50 years," the group stated. "These false and poorly researched allegations are rooted in a nearly 10-year-old right-wing think tank and fossil fuel industry-funded smear campaign that gets revived every few years to serve as a distraction."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Natali Sevriukova reacts next to her house following a rocket attack the city of Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, Feb. 25, 2022.]</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a statement shared with Fox News, Melinda Pierce, Sierra Club's legislative director, concluded the allegation of collusion is a "false conspiracy theory."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>"This false conspiracy theory, invented by the same deceitful front groups paid to do polluters' and big tobacco’s dirty work, has been repeatedly debunked over its nearly 10-year existence,</b>" Pierce said. "The Sierra Club has no connections to Russia or China, and proudly fights for clean energy and climate action because this is what our planet requires, our families deserve, and what the overwhelming majority of Americans across the country demand."</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fox News did not receive an immediate response from the Sea Change Foundation.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Gasoline prices in America hit a record high this week amid Russia’s continued invasion into Ukraine and the announcement that the United States would suspend purchases of Russian oil. As of Thursday, the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline reached $4.318, according to AAA data. Prices surpassed the $4 mark Sunday for the first time in 14 years.</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The Republican members have requested a response to their questions by March 25.</b></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Kyle Morris covers politics for Fox News. On Twitter: @RealKyleMorris.</font></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">new</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><a href="https://thinkprogress.org/house-energy-and-commerce-committee-from-koch-to-conduct-global-warming-witch-trial-cc5df36d1aeb/"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://thinkprogress.org/house-energy-and-commerce-committee-from-koch-to-conduct-global-warming-witch-trial-cc5df36d1aeb/</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><div class="postheader" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><h1 class="posttitle" style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 1.2; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">House Energy and Commerce “</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Committee from Koch” to conduct global warming witch trial</span></font></h1></div><div class="postmetashare--wrapper" style="box-sizing: inherit; display: flex; margin-bottom: 1.5625em;"><header class="postmeta" style="box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: 0.15625rem; line-height: 2rem; text-transform: uppercase; margin-bottom: 0px; display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap;"><span class="postbyline" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; -webkit-box-align: center; align-items: center; display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap;"><span class="postbylineauthor" style="box-sizing: inherit; -webkit-box-align: center; align-items: center; display: flex; margin-right: 1rem;"><a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/author/thinkprogress/" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; white-space: nowrap;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">THINKPROGRESS</font></a></span></span><span class="posttimestamp" style="box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: 0.15625rem; margin-right: 1rem;"><time class="postdate" datetime="2011-02-08T22:40:02-05:00" style="box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: 0.15625rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">FEB 8,<b> 2011, </b></font></time></span></header></div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><ul id="share" class="share" style="box-sizing: inherit; list-style: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline-block; z-index: 4000; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></ul><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div class="article-contentwrapper" style="box-sizing: inherit; display: flex; -webkit-box-pack: justify; justify-content: space-between; margin: 3.75rem auto 0px; max-width: 43.75rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></font></font><div class="article-content" style="box-sizing: inherit; width: 700px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font><div class="postcontent" style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 2.2rem; margin-bottom: 2em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></font></a><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></a></font></font></font></font></font><ul class="postList" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; clear: both; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></a></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font><li name="a312" id="a312" class="graf graf--li graf-after--h3" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></a><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Koch brothers contributed over a quarter of a million dollars to House Energy and Commerce Committee panel members in 2010</font></a></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></li><li name="376c" id="376c" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The committee is stacking the witness stand with big polluters and their allies</font></a></li><li name="3ed7" id="3ed7" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Americans strongly support protecting our air and holding polluters accountable</font></a></li><li name="d9a1" id="d9a1" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Public health professionals and business leaders oppose efforts to handcuff EPA</font></a></li></ul><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: inherit;">This fact sheet was put together by Noreen Nielsen and CAPAF</span>.</font></a></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><a id="sticky-anchor-top" style="box-sizing: inherit; word-break: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The</span><b style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> House Energy and Commerce Committee plans to hold a hearing Wednesday to discuss </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">blocking the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to reduce carbon dioxide pollution. </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">We can expect the same old half-truths, misstatements, and outright lies from the new majority, with an extra dose of </span></b></font></a><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/07/AR2011020700022_pf.html" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">special interest pandering</a>.</b></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The reality, however, is that the draft legislation to stop EPA from setting pollution safeguards, proposed by <b>Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI)</b>, Subcommittee Chair Ed Whitfield (R-KY), and Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) is nothing less than an attempt to give big polluters free rein to dirty the air we breathe and the water we drink. This proposed language””which was hatched at a secret meeting between the bill’s sponsors and other energy-<a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49034.html" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">related trade lobbyists</a>””would protect corporate polluters and their profits at the expense of public health. But a deeper look into the panel members’ campaign <a href="http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2011/02/pdf/epa_hill_brief.pdf" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">money and political ties</a> reveals that their efforts to shield polluters from regulation should really come as no surprise:</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The Koch brothers contributed over a quarter of a million dollars to House Energy and Commerce Committee panel members in 2010</font></strong></p><ul class="postList" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; clear: both; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem;"><li name="ada2" id="ada2" class="graf graf--li graf-after--p" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Koch brothers and their employees are the biggest oil and gas donors to lawmakers sitting on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. They contributed <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-koch-brothers-20110206,0,1681069.story" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">$279,500</a> to 22 of the committee’s 31 Republicans and $32,000 to five Democrats.</font></li><li name="f55e" id="f55e" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Nine of the 12 new Republicans on the panel signed the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity “<a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/gop-senate-deniers/http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/gop-senate-deniers/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">No Climate Tax</a>” pledge that opposed any government action to reduce carbon dioxide pollution.</font></li><li name="5228" id="5228" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Koch front-group Americans for Prosperity spent over <a href="http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?C30001051" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">$200,000 on ads</a> to help key Energy and Commerce Committee members in the 2010 elections. Five of the six GOP freshman lawmakers on the panel benefited from the group’s separate advertising and grassroots activity during the 2010 campaign.</font></li><li name="80b1" id="80b1" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) received $20,000 from Koch employees in 2010, making them among his <a href="http://lat.ms/hN35gw" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">top 10 donors</a>.</font></li><li name="c8a8" id="c8a8" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Koch operatives <a href="about:invalid#zSoyz" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">met with Rep. Upton</a> on the first day of the 112th Congress to discuss gutting the Clean Air Act by handcuffing the EPA.</b></font></li><li name="4b97" id="4b97" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Koch Industries, the private company of the billionaire <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/tag/koch" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Koch brothers</a>, is one of the <a href="about:invalid#zSoyz" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">primary sources of carbon pollution</a> in the United States</font></li><li name="fc16" id="fc16" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to the EPA, Koch Industries is responsible for more than <a href="http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/016bcfb1deb9fecd85256aca005d74df/981d17e5ab07246f8525686500621079?OpenDocument" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">300 oil spills</a> in the United States and has leaked 3 million gallons of crude oil into fisheries and drinking waters. They were fined a record <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Koch_Industries" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">$35 million</a> and an additional <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Koch_Industries" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">$8 million in Minnesota</a> for discharging into streams.</font></li></ul><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The committee is stacking the witness stand with big polluters and their allies</font></strong></p><ul class="postList" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; clear: both; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem;"><li name="266d" id="266d" class="graf graf--li graf-after--p" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">National Black Chamber of Commerce president <strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">Harry Alford</strong> has received <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=113" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">$425,000 from ExxonMobil</a> since 1998.</font></li><li name="27a3" id="27a3" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">Margo Thorning</strong> is the vice president and chief economist for the American Council for Capital Formation, or ACCF. ACCF has received <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/koch-industries/american-council-on-capital-fo/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">$215,000</a> from Koch foundations and nearly <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=77" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">$1.7 million from ExxonMobil</a>.</font></li><li name="a49c" id="a49c" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott</strong>’s 2010 campaign was heavily funded by some of <a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/state-politics/20100917-Texas-attorney-general-race-donations-raise-5630.ece" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Texas’s largest industries</a>, with most coming from people connected to oil and gas interest. A <a href="http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/02/17/texas-climatologist-v-denier-petition/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">vocal climate-denier</a>, Abbott sued the Obama administration to end an offshore oil-drilling moratorium instituted following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and has taken the federal EPA to court three times in the past year.</font></li><li name="6def" id="6def" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Lonnie Carter is president of Santee Cooper, the <a href="http://southcarolina.sierraclub.org/cathcart/articles.htm" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">largest single mercury polluter</a> in South Carolina.</font></li><li name="c3fb" id="c3fb" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">Steve Cousins</strong> is vice president of Lion Oil, which ranks <a href="http://scorecard.goodguide.com/ranking/rank-facilities.tcl?how_many=100&drop_down_name=Total+environmental+releases&fips_state_code=Entire+United+States&sic_2=29" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">27 on the list of top 100</a> facilities releasing chemicals such as nitrous oxides, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and benzene into the environment.</font></li><li name="f617" id="f617" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">Peter Glaser </strong>of Troutman Sanders LLP works with the Washington Legal Foundation, which has received <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=69" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">$325,000 from ExxonMobil</a> since 1998.</font></li><li name="843a" id="843a" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">Fred Harnack </strong>represents the U.S. Steel Corporation, which ranks 19th on the <a href="http://www.peri.umass.edu/toxic_index/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">2010 Political Economy Research Institute Toxic 100 Air Polluters</a> list.</font></li><li name="f0a0" id="f0a0" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">James Pearce</strong> is the environmental general manager for FMC Corp., which had to <a href="http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/dcfe5654cd78898e852572a000657b5b/9cfa49273c893f42852570cb0075e172!OpenDocument&Highlight=2,pesticide" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">pay the largest civil penalty ever obtained</a> under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act for repeatedly violating the hazardous waste law at its phosphorus production facility in Pocatello, Idaho.</font></li><li name="4921" id="4921" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">Steve Rowlan</strong> is the environmental general manager at Nucor Corp., which is 24 on the 2010 Political Economy Research Institute <a href="http://www.peri.umass.edu/toxic_index/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Toxic 100 Air Polluters</a> list.</font></li><li name="6df3" id="6df3" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Self-proclaimed “climate-denier-in-chief” <strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK)</strong>, and one of the draft legislation sponsors, will also testify at the hearing.</font></li><li name="c488" id="c488" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Illinois Farm Bureau president<strong style="box-sizing: inherit;"> Phillip Nelson</strong> has a history of <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/09/us-usa-agriculture-idUSTRE7083CA20110109?feedType=RSS&feedName=environmentNews" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">attacking air and water safeguards</a>, while supporting <a href="http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=151547" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">big polluting mega-farms</a>.</font></li></ul><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Americans strongly support protecting our air and holding polluters accountable</font></strong></p><ul class="postList" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; clear: both; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem;"><li name="db43" id="db43" class="graf graf--li graf-after--p" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Seventy-seven percent of the public””including <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/2-2%20ORC%20International%20EPA%20Survey%20Report.pdf" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">61 percent of Republicans</a>””oppose efforts in Congress to block Clean Air Act updates for carbon dioxide, smog, and other pollutants according to a recent National Resources Defense Council poll.</font></li><li name="bdcc" id="bdcc" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the EPA needs to do more to hold polluters accountable and protect our air and water.</font></li><li name="91fa" id="91fa" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A recent USA Today/Gallup Poll showed that of the eight actions Congress could take this year,<a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/greenhouse/post/2011/02/americans-back-epa-solar-wind/1" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);"> Americans most favor an energy bill</a> that provides incentives for using alternative energy (83 percent).</font></li><li name="49a3" id="49a3" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The vast majority of Republicans””as well as a majority of Americans””oppose the <a href="http://archive.thinkprogress.org/default/2011/01/25/140762/newt-epa-abolish/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Newt Gingrich plan to dismantle the EPA</a>. More than <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/07/idUS140003086120110207" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">75 percent</a> of the respondents oppose congressional efforts to limit the EPA’s authority to enforce the Clean Air Act</font></li></ul><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Public health professionals and business leaders oppose efforts to handcuff EPA</font></strong></p><ul class="postList" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; clear: both; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem;"><li name="802c" id="802c" class="graf graf--li graf-after--p" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Since its founding the EPA’s standard setting and <a href="http://www.epa.gov/40th/achieve.html" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">polluter accountability efforts</a> have prevented 205,000 premature deaths, 843,000 asthma attacks, 18 million child respiratory illnesses, and more.</font></li><li name="34d2" id="34d2" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The economic benefits of the Clean Air Act rules outweighed the costs by more than 20-to-1 in 2010. It will be nearly <a href="http://www.epa.gov/oar/sect812/aug10/summaryreport.pdf" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">30-to-1 by 2020</a>, according to an Environmental Protection Agency analysis.</font></li><li name="417f" id="417f" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.lungusa.org/press-room/press-releases/upton-clean-air-bill.html" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Public health professionals</a> from the American Lung Association to the <a href="http://healthyamericans.org/newsroom/releases/?releaseid=229" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Trust for America’s Health</a> and the <a href="http://www.apha.org/about/news/pressreleases/2011/upton+clean+air+act+bill.htm" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">American Public Health Association</a> oppose Rep. Upton’s bill.</font></li><li name="ed1a" id="ed1a" class="graf graf--li graf-after--li" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">More than <a href="http://www.americanbusinessforcleanenergy.org/ckfinder/userfiles/files/CAA_Support_Letter.pdf" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">60,000 small businesses</a> sent a letter to the White House and Congress urging them to support the EPA’s ability to enforce the Clean Air Act.</font></li></ul><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">— <span style="box-sizing: inherit;">Noreen Nielsen and the Center for American Progress Action Fund</span>.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The House Energy and Commerce Committee plans to hold a hearing Wednesday to discuss blocking the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to reduce carbon dioxide pollution. We can expect the same old half-truths, misstatements, and outright lies from the new majority, with an extra dose of special interest pandering<http www.washingtonpost.com="www.washingtonpost.com" wp-dyn="wp-dyn" content="content" article="article" ar2011020700022_pf.html="AR2011020700022_pf.html">.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The reality, however, is that the draft legislation to stop EPA from setting pollution safeguards, proposed by Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI), Subcommittee Chair Ed Whitfield (R-KY), and Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) is nothing less than an attempt to give big polluters free rein to dirty the air we breathe and the water we drink. This proposed language””which was hatched at a secret meeting between the bill’s sponsors and other energy-related trade lobbyists<http www.politico.com="www.politico.com" news="news" stories="stories" html="html">””would protect corporate polluters and their profits at the expense of public health. But a deeper look into the panel members’ campaign money and political ties<http www.americanprogressaction.org="www.americanprogressaction.org" issues="issues" pdf="pdf" epa_hill_brief.pdf="epa_hill_brief.pdf"> reveals that their efforts to shield polluters from regulation should really come as no surprise.</http></http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Koch brothers contributed over a quarter of a million dollars to House Energy and Commerce Committee panel members in 2010</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· The Koch brothers and their employees are the biggest oil and gas donors to lawmakers sitting on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. They contributed $279,500<http www.latimes.com="www.latimes.com" news="news" nationworld="nationworld" nation="nation" la-na-koch-brothers-20110206="la-na-koch-brothers-20110206" story="story"> to 22 of the committee’s 31 Republicans and $32,000 to five Democrats.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Nine of the 12 new Republicans on the panel signed the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity “No Climate Tax<http wonkroom.thinkprogress.org="wonkroom.thinkprogress.org" gop-senate-deniers="gop-senate-deniers">” pledge that opposed any government action to reduce carbon dioxide pollution.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Koch front-group Americans for Prosperity spent over $200,000 on ads<http query.nictusa.com="query.nictusa.com" cgi-bin="cgi-bin" fecimg="fecimg" c30001051="C30001051"> to help key Energy and Commerce Committee members in the 2010 elections. Five of the six GOP freshman lawmakers on the panel benefited from the group’s separate advertising and grassroots activity during the 2010 campaign.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) received $20,000 from Koch employees in 2010, making them among his top 10 donors<http lat.ms="lat.ms" hn35gw="hN35gw">.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Koch operatives met with Rep. Upton<http archive.thinkprogress.org="archive.thinkprogress.org" upton-boehner-koch="upton-boehner-koch"> on the first day of the 112th Congress to discuss gutting the Clean Air Act by handcuffing the EPA.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Koch Industries, the private company of the billionaire Koch brothers<http wonkroom.thinkprogress.org="wonkroom.thinkprogress.org" tag="tag" koch="koch">, is one of the primary sources of carbon pollution in the United States<http wonkroom.thinkprogress.org="wonkroom.thinkprogress.org" koch-carbon-footprint="koch-carbon-footprint">.</http></http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· According to the EPA, Koch Industries is responsible for more than 300 oil spills<http yosemite.epa.gov="yosemite.epa.gov" opa="opa" admpress.nsf="admpress.nsf" bcfb1deb9fecd85256aca005d74df="bcfb1deb9fecd85256aca005d74df" d17e5ab07246f8525686500621079="d17e5ab07246f8525686500621079" opendocument="OpenDocument"> in the United States and has leaked 3 million gallons of crude oil into fisheries and drinking waters. They were fined a record $35 million dollars<http www.sourcewatch.org="www.sourcewatch.org" index.php="index.php" title="Koch_Industries"> and an additional $8 million in Minnesota<http www.sourcewatch.org="www.sourcewatch.org" index.php="index.php" title="Koch_Industries"> for discharging into streams.</http></http></http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The committee is stacking the witness stand with big polluters and their allies</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· National Black Chamber of Commerce president Harry Alford has received $425,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998<http www.exxonsecrets.org="www.exxonsecrets.org" html="html" orgfactsheet.php="orgfactsheet.php" id="113">.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Margo Thorning is the vice president and chief economist for the American Council for Capital Formation, or ACCF. ACCF has received $215,000 from Koch foundations<http www.greenpeace.org="www.greenpeace.org" usa="usa" en="en" campaigns="campaigns" global-warming-and-energy="global-warming-and-energy" polluterwatch="polluterwatch" koch-industries="koch-industries" american-council-on-capital-fo="american-council-on-capital-fo"> and nearly $1.7 million from ExxonMobil<http www.exxonsecrets.org="www.exxonsecrets.org" html="html" orgfactsheet.php="orgfactsheet.php" id="77">.</http></http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott’s 2010 campaign was heavily funded by some of Texas’s largest industries<http www.dallasnews.com="www.dallasnews.com" news="news" politics="politics" state-politics="state-politics" texas-attorney-general-race-donations-raise-5630.ece="Texas-attorney-general-race-donations-raise-5630.ece">, with most coming from people connected to oil and gas interest. A vocal climate-denier<http wonkroom.thinkprogress.org="wonkroom.thinkprogress.org" texas-climatologist-v-denier-petition="texas-climatologist-v-denier-petition">, Abbott sued the Obama administration to end an offshore oil-drilling moratorium instituted following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and has taken the federal EPA to court three times in the past year.</http></http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Lonnie Carter is president of Santee Cooper, the largest single mercury polluter<http southcarolina.sierraclub.org="southcarolina.sierraclub.org" cathcart="cathcart" articles.htm="articles.htm"> in South Carolina.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Steve Cousins is vice president of Lion Oil, which ranks 27 on the list of top 100 facilities<http scorecard.goodguide.com="scorecard.goodguide.com" ranking="ranking" rank-facilities.tcl="rank-facilities.tcl" how_many="100&drop_down_name=Total+environmental+releases&fips_state_code=Entire+United+States&sic_2=29"> releasing chemicals such as nitrous oxides, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and benzene into the environment.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Peter Glaser of Troutman Sanders LLP works with the Washington Legal Foundation, which has received $325,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998<http www.exxonsecrets.org="www.exxonsecrets.org" html="html" orgfactsheet.php="orgfactsheet.php" id="69">.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Fred Harnack represents the U.S. Steel Corporation, which ranks 19th on the 2010 Political Economy Research Institute Toxic 100 Air Polluters<http www.peri.umass.edu="www.peri.umass.edu" toxic_index="toxic_index"> list.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· James Pearce is the environmental general manager for FMC Corp., which had to pay the largest civil penalty ever obtained<http yosemite.epa.gov="yosemite.epa.gov" opa="opa" admpress.nsf="admpress.nsf" dcfe5654cd78898e852572a000657b5b="dcfe5654cd78898e852572a000657b5b" cfa49273c893f42852570cb0075e172="cfa49273c893f42852570cb0075e172" opendocument="OpenDocument" highlight="2,pesticide"> under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act for repeatedly violating the hazardous waste law at its phosphorus production facility in Pocatello, Idaho.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Steve Rowlan is the environmental general manager at Nucor Corp., which is 24 on the 2010 Political Economy Research Institute Toxic 100 Air Polluters<http www.peri.umass.edu="www.peri.umass.edu" toxic_index="toxic_index"> list.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Self-proclaimed “climate-denier-in-chief” Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), and one of the draft legislation sponsors, will also testify at the hearing.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">* Illinois Farm Bureau president Phillip Nelson has a history of attacking air and water safeguards<http www.reuters.com="www.reuters.com" article="article" us-usa-agriculture-idustre7083ca20110109="us-usa-agriculture-idUSTRE7083CA20110109" feedtype="RSS&feedName=environmentNews">, while supporting big polluting mega-farms<http news.medill.northwestern.edu="news.medill.northwestern.edu" chicago="chicago" news.aspx="news.aspx" id="151547">.</http></http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Americans strongly support protecting our air and holding polluters accountable</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Seventy-seven percent of the public””including 61 percent of Republicans””oppose efforts in Congress to block Clean Air Act updates for carbon dioxide, smog, and other pollutants according to a recent National Resources Defense Council poll<http switchboard.nrdc.org="switchboard.nrdc.org" blogs="blogs" paltman="paltman" orc="ORC" international="International" epa="EPA" survey="Survey" report.pdf="Report.pdf">.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the EPA needs to do more to hold polluters accountable and protect our air and water.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· A recent USA Today/Gallup Poll<http content.usatoday.com="content.usatoday.com" communities="communities" greenhouse="greenhouse" post="post" americans-back-epa-solar-wind="americans-back-epa-solar-wind"> showed that of the eight actions Congress could take this year, Americans most favor an energy bill that provides incentives for using alternative energy (83 percent).</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· The vast majority of Republicans””as well as a majority of Americans””oppose the Newt Gingrich plan to dismantle the EPA<http archive.thinkprogress.org="archive.thinkprogress.org" default="default" newt-epa-abolish="newt-epa-abolish">. More than 75 percent of the respondents oppose<http www.reuters.com="www.reuters.com" article="article" idus140003086120110207="idUS140003086120110207"> congressional efforts to limit the EPA’s authority to enforce the Clean Air Act</http></http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Public health professionals and business leaders oppose efforts to handcuff EPA</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Since its founding the EPA’s standard setting and polluter accountability efforts have prevented<http www.epa.gov="www.epa.gov" th="th" achieve.html="achieve.html"> 205,000 premature deaths, 843,000 asthma attacks, 18 million child respiratory illnesses, and more.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· The economic benefits of the Clean Air Act rules outweighed the costs by more than 20-to-1 in 2010. It will be nearly 30-to-1 by 2020, according to an Environmental Protection Agency analysis<http www.epa.gov="www.epa.gov" oar="oar" sect812="sect812" aug10="aug10" summaryreport.pdf="summaryreport.pdf">.</http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· Public health professionals from the American Lung Association<http www.lungusa.org="www.lungusa.org" press-room="press-room" press-releases="press-releases" upton-clean-air-bill.html="upton-clean-air-bill.html"> to the Trust for America’s Health<http healthyamericans.org="healthyamericans.org" newsroom="newsroom" releases="releases" releaseid="229"> and the American Public Health Association<http www.apha.org="www.apha.org" about="about" news="news" pressreleases="pressreleases" upton="upton" clean="clean" air="air" act="act" bill.htm="bill.htm"> oppose Rep. Upton’s bill.</http></http></http></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2.1875rem; line-height: 2.2rem;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">· More than 60,000 small businesses<http www.americanbusinessforcleanenergy.org="www.americanbusinessforcleanenergy.org" ckfinder="ckfinder" userfiles="userfiles" files="files" caa_support_letter.pdf="CAA_Support_Letter.pdf"> sent a letter to the White House and Congress urging them to support the EPA’s ability to enforce the Clean Air Act.</http></font></p></div><footer class="posttags" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: 1px; line-height: 2rem; margin-bottom: 2em; clear: both;"><span class="tags-list" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: inherit; margin-right: 0.5em;"><a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/tag/climate/" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; font-weight: 600; text-transform: uppercase;">#CLIMATE</a>,</span> <span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/tag/epa/" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; font-weight: 600; text-transform: uppercase;">#EPA</a></span></font></span></footer></div></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">new</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">desmog has no bio, but tag, here is later 1/2</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>
</div><div>Rep. Fred Upton</div><div><b>Congressmen Supporting LNG Exports Received $11.5 Million From Big Oil, Electric Utilities</b></div><div>Read time: 7 mins</div><div>By Steve Horn • Tuesday<b>, January 29, 2013 </b></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>On Jan. 25, 110 members of the U.S. House of Representatives - 94 Republicans and 16 Democrats - signed a letter urging Energy Secretary Steven Chu to approve expanded exports of liquified natural gas (LNG).</div><div>
</div><div>It was an overt sign of solidarity with the Obama Administration Department of Energy's (DOE) LNG exports study, produced by a corporate consulting firm with long ties to Big Tobacco named NERA Economic Consulting (NERA is short for National Economic Research Associates), co-founded in 1961 by the “Father of Deregulation,” Alfred E. Kahn. That study concluded exporting gas obtained from the controversial hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) process - sent via pipelines to coastal LNG terminals and then onto tankers - is in the best economic interests of the United States. </div><div>
</div><div>A DeSmogBlog investigation shows that these 110 signatories accepted $11.5 million in campaign contributions from Big Oil and electric utilities in the run-up to the November 2012 election, according to Center for Responsive Politics data.</div><div>
</div><div>Big Oil pumped $7.9 million into the signatories' coffers, while the remaining $3.6 million came from the electric utilities industry, two industries whose pocketbooks would widen with the mass exportation of the U.S. shale gas bounty. Further, 108 of the 110 signers represent states in which fracking is occuring. </div><div>
</div><div>Read moreabout Congressmen Supporting LNG Exports Received $11.5 Million From Big Oil, Electric Utilities Steve Horn's blog 1 comment 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>Waxman Renews Request For Congress To Investigate Koch Industries Interest in Keystone XL Pipeline</div><div>Read time: 2 mins</div><div>By Brendan DeMelle • Tuesday, October 18, 2011 - 16:52</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) today renewed his request to Reps. Fred Upton (R-MI) and Ed Whitfield (R-KY) that the House Committee on Energy and Commerce investigate Koch Industries' interest in the Keystone XL pipeline. Rep. Waxman's letter cites the recent revelations in InsideClimate News that Koch subsidiary Flint Hills Resources Canada LP claimed “a direct and substantial interest” in the Keystone XL in front of Canadian regulators, while the Kochtopus continues to deny any interest publicly. </div><div>
</div><div>Koch representatives previously told Rep. Waxman that Keystone XL has “nothing to do with any of our businesses” and that Koch has “no financial interest” in the pipeline.</div><div>
</div><div>Waxman writes in his letter [PDF] today: </div><div>“There appears to be a direct contradiction between what Koch representatives told me and the assertion by a Koch subsidiary that it “has a direct and substantial interest” in the Keystone XL pipeline. I believe the Committee should examine this matter to determine the nature ofKoch's interest in the pipeline. The Committee should also investigate whether Koch sought to conceal its interest in the pipeline from the Committee. </div><div>
</div><div>These issues are significant and timely given the pending approvals required for the Keystone XL pipeline, which has been the subject of legislation by our Committee. Charles and David Koch and Koch Industries should not be exempt from responsible oversight and normal accountability. If members of the Committee were misled by Koch, that is a serious matter that deserves prompt and thorough investigation.”</div><div>
</div><div>Read moreabout Waxman Renews Request For Congress To Investigate Koch Industries Interest in Keystone XL Pipeline Brendan DeMelle's blog 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>GOP House Energy Action Team Is Dirty Energy Dream Team</div><div>Read time: 9 mins</div><div>By Farron Cousins • Tuesday, May 17, 2011 - 10:52</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Earlier this month, House Republicans formed the House Energy Action Team, or “HEAT.” 26 GOP members of Congress joined the group, whose stated mission to is to reduce American dependence on foreign oil and reduce gasoline prices for American consumers.</div><div>
</div><div>On the surface, the group’s intentions seem reasonable, but a comprehensive analysis by DeSmogBlog shows that the members of HEAT are using their positions to promote the use of oil and other dirty fossil fuels, rather than promoting the development and use of clean renewable fuel sources.</div><div>
</div><div>Among the initiatives that the group took up first are three bills that would expand offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico – an area that will be dealing with the effects of the BP oil disaster for years to come. This combination of bills would end the Obama Administration’s moratorium on new drilling in the Gulf, as well as expedite the leasing process for new drilling permits.</div><div>
</div><div>Republican members of HEAT also voted in favor of H.R. 1 earlier this year, which would reduce funding for alternative energy research, as well as strip the EPA of its authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.</div><div>
</div><div>ThinkProgress compiled a list of the campaign contributions each member of HEAT has received over the course of their careers (which total more than $4 million for all members combined.) It is important to note that all but one of these members voted against repealing the $4 billion in subsidies that the oil industry receives every year. The members are listed below with their career contributions from the oil and gas industry, as well as their positions and proposals on energy and environment throughout their careers:</div><div>
</div><div>Read moreabout GOP House Energy Action Team Is Dirty Energy Dream Team Farron Cousins's blog 6 comments 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>Bill to Block EPA Climate Regulations Moves Forward in Congress</div><div>Read time: 4 mins</div><div>By Ashley Braun • Wednesday, March 16, 2011 - 13:13</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>On Tuesday, Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives moved one step closer to passing a bill to permanently prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating global warming pollution. The House Energy and Commerce Committee approved the bill, H.R. 910 or the “Energy Tax Prevention Act,” in a vote that fell mostly along party lines.</div><div>
</div><div>Under the guise of lowering gas prices, the bill would deliver several very lethal blows to EPA efforts to address climate change – and to President Obama’s energy agenda – by:</div><div>
</div><div>Read moreabout Bill to Block EPA Climate Regulations Moves Forward in Congress Ashley Braun's blog 1 comment 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>Upton’s Upcoming Pipeline Safety Legislation Is Next Favor To Koch Brothers</div><div>Read time: 4 mins</div><div>By TJ Scolnick • Thursday, March 10, 2011 - 03:45</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) this week revealed that he is preparing legislation and hearings on improving pipeline safety. In reality, he’s just solidifying his support of the proposed TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline, a boondoggle for the Koch brothers who control nearly 25% of the dirty tar sands oil already entering the U.S. from Canada. Koch Industries is poised to grab an even bigger share of that figure if the Keystone XL pipeline is built, sending more dirty tar sands to Gulf Coast refineries – if it doesn’t leak out along the way, that is.</div><div>
</div><div>Although Upton’s House Energy and Commerce Committee “does not have primary jurisdiction over the nation’s 2.3 million miles of hazardous liquids pipelines,” Ed Sackley, Upton’s district representative said that Upton will likely hold hearings anyway and “move something in the 112th Congress.”</div><div>
</div><div>Read moreabout Upton’s Upcoming Pipeline Safety Legislation Is Next Favor To Koch Brothers TJ Scolnick's blog 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>Current GOP Is “Party of Science Deniers,” Waxman Says</div><div>Read time: 3 mins</div><div>By Brendan DeMelle • Tuesday, March 8, 2011 - 01:12</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>During a speech at the Center for American Progress Action Fund on Monday, Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) came out swinging against Republican climate science denial and political attacks against the Clean Air Act. </div><div>
</div><div>Waxman told the crowd, “it apparently no longer matters in Congress what health experts and scientists think. All that seems to matter is what Koch Industries think.”</div><div>
</div><div>Rep. Waxman’s frank assessment of the state of political attacks on science in the age of the Koch Congress should garner some interesting responses at today’s House Subcommittee on Energy and Power hearing “Climate Science and EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Regulations,” where the GOP majority is sure to belittle climate science and ignore the urgent need to cut global warming pollution, yet again. ??</div><div>
</div><div>Read moreabout Current GOP Is “Party of Science Deniers,” Waxman Says Brendan DeMelle's blog 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>EPA Study Again Shows The Benefits Of The Clean Air Act To U.S. Economy</div><div>Read time: 3 mins</div><div>By Brendan DeMelle • Wednesday, March 2, 2011 - 13:26</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) yesterday released its Second Prospective Report examining the benefits of the Clean Air Act amendments from 1990 up to 2020. The study confirms that the EPA’s clean air protections are not only vital for safeguarding the physical health and longevity of Americans, they are also extremely good for our economy. While the cost of implementing the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments was just $65 billion, the direct benefits from these protections are projected to reach almost $2 trillion for the year 2020.</div><div>
</div><div>In 2020, the study projects the Clean Air Act will prevent more than 230,000 cases of premature mortality, 200,000 heart attacks,? 17 million lost work days? and 2.4 million asthma attacks.</div><div>
</div><div>Read moreabout EPA Study Again Shows The Benefits Of The Clean Air Act To U.S. Economy Brendan DeMelle's blog 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>The Koch-Exxon-Skeptic Argument Went Up In Smoke On Eve Of Upton's Show Trial</div><div>Read time: 3 mins</div><div>By TJ Scolnick • Wednesday, February 9, 2011 - 14:39</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its authority to regulate global warming pollution went through its first shakedown today before the Koch Industries and ExxonMobil funded [pdf] House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Energy and Power Subcommittee.</div><div>
</div><div>The show trial was a chance for the Kochtopus, fossil fuel interests, and global warming skeptics (including Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) who announced he is releasing a denialist book) to cry foul that industry is being victimized and that global warming is not a threat, and does not pose any risks to the health and well-being of Americans, and the planet.</div><div>
</div><div>But Chairman Fred Upton's (R-MI) and co-author Sen. Inhofe’s polluter-friendly bill, “The Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011” (see memo [pdf]) had to contend with the “bombshell” revelations released late on the eve before the meeting. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the ranking Democrat on the Committee, posted a particularly relevant January 2008 letter [pdf] from former EPA Administrator Steven L. Johnson to then President George W. Bush.</div><div>
</div><div>Read moreabout The Koch-Exxon-Skeptic Argument Went Up In Smoke On Eve Of Upton's Show Trial TJ Scolnick's blog 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>Upton's Show Trial To Attack EPA Carbon Controls Set For Wednesday Morning</div><div>Read time: 5 mins</div><div>By TJ Scolnick • Tuesday, February 8, 2011 - 19:42</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Remember reading about those Soviet-era show trials where politics and everything BUT the facts were actually discussed? Well on February 9th, the Koch brothers and Exxon Mobil are paying for a show trial of their own.</div><div>
</div><div>On Wednesday at 9:30 am, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Energy and Power will hold a hearing to examine legislation (see memo [pdf])aiming to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from curbing global warming pollution from stationary sources (power plants, factories, etc.). The bill “HR , The Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011” was proposed last week by self-anointed “manmade climate change” skeptic (see video below) and Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI), with the help of Subcommittee Chair Ed Whitfield (R-KY) and well-known climate skeptic Senator James Inhofe (R-OK).</div><div>
</div><div>The Centre for American Progress Action Fund (CAP) has a brilliant backgrounder [pdf] on the hearing describing how polluter friendly support in the Committee on Energy and Commerce, primarily on the Republican side, has been paid for by Koch Industries and their partners in polluting the planet. CAP shows that during the 2010 election cycle, the Kochs and their employees gave $279,500 to 22 Republicans on the Committee and $32,000 to five of its Democrats.</div><div>Read moreabout Upton's Show Trial To Attack EPA Carbon Controls Set For Wednesday Morning TJ Scolnick's blog 0 Comments</div><div>PRINT SUBSCRIBE</div><div>Waxman Asks if Pat Michaels Has Misrepresented His Funding</div><div>Read time: 1 min</div><div>By Richard Littlemore • Monday, January 24, 2011 - 11:53</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>Rep Henry Waxman (D-CA), the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee, has written to committee Chair Fred Upton (R-MI) requesting an investigation into whether Patrick J. Michaels misled the committee when he reported that only three per cent of his income comes from industry.</div><div>
</div><div>Michaels is a famous denier-for-hire who, as Waxman notes, has estimated previously that 40% of his income comes from the energy industry. As the only “scientist” who told the E&C committee that climate change is nothing to worry about, it should be interesting to question whether that opinion was bought and paid for - and by whom - especially when Pat Michaels’ personal accounting seems so casually inaccurate.</div><div>
</div><div>Given that Michaels hailed from Virginia, maybe that state’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli would like to join the investigation. He’s all about holding people accountable, isn’t he?</div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">dk $ mayer:</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">112th congress 2010 biggest leap to right on record; waxman lost chr on energy (pt man on cap in trade win) ; koch $ > exxon 22/of 31; 5 of 6 frosh AFP $ </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Climate Pledge, created 2008 to ~ scotus on GHG EPA 274</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Morgan Griffith > Boucher on energy comm. Took lead on war on EPA, “rein in, cut 27% (senate limited to 16) ½ US lives 10 mi of toxic waste 274. Crossett Ark 11/15 fam cancer G-P paper mill effluent. Air usa today most toxic 1%; class action fail; lisa jackson vowed action.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Koch TRI #1: 950 mil lbs/yr 275, release 56.8 so #5 polluter; 24 mill tons ghg/yr by 2011 = 5 mil cars.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Frosh Mike Pompeo (koch $ in his aerospace co) ~ EPA GHG and dBase consumer complaints on unsafe products 276</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">2011 koch 8m$ lobby congress, most green. Upton had been mod on env, but naked belly crawl to find on flank (like Inglis) [BULB bill?] co- author op-ed with Tim P WSJ CPP? “Unconst pwr grab...kill millions of jobs” ; got chair, said he’d make LJ need parking space.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Wish list: no new ESA, uranium adjacent to grand cyn, dereg mountain top, coal ash not designated as air pollution 277. Req EPA to consider costs without regard to health or science ~ Clean air act rip heart out. ~ alt energy: Solyndra walton backers (pgm was B2 and turned profit); another solar co fail backed by D Doll, koch donor. AFP => gop on grn.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">hr 8 veto threat</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/sap/114/saphr8r_20151130.pdf</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">// sen https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s2012 fred likes sen</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/8</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">7/15</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sadly, my prediction came true on Wednesday when Republican members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee announced [8] they’d hold hearings on the video.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“This video is abhorrent and rips at the heart. The committee will get to the bottom of this appalling situation,” the press release quotes Republican lawmakers Fred Upton, Marsha Blackburn, Tim Murphy, and Joe Pitts as saying.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">6/15</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">pharmaceutical interests are pushing hard in favor of a bill that could speed up Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of new drugs. But the bipartisan 21st Century Cures Act, which was approved last month by the the House Energy and Commerce Committee (the members of which have all sponsored the bill) and could reach the House floor by the end of June, has some health advocates up in arms.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A primary concern is that the bill would encourage the FDA to move away from its reliance on controlled trials — and specifically those using randomization — as the main marker for determining whether a drug is safe and effective enough to go on the market. Instead, it suggests that “clinical experience,” which includes observational study, patient anecdotes, and other such methods, be given more consideration. Clinical experience is and has been used as supplemental evidence by the FDA, but not as the primary method for determining a drug’s safety and efficacy.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Dr. John Powers, the former lead medical officer for antimicrobial development and resistance issues at the FDA and a member of the National Physicians Alliance’s FDA task force, said that such a method was akin to using “Star Trek medicine mentality” that relies on unsubstantiated belief instead of valid scientific evidence.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The number of ways patients can be different from each other that can influence patient-centered outcomes independent of treatment is innumerable,” Powers told OpenSecrets Blog, adding that with clinical experience, one “can’t take into account all complexities that happen in the human body.”</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The 21st Century Cures initiative was launched on April 30, 2014 by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and committee member Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), and a white paper on the initiative was released the following day. The legislation, which was introduced by Upton last month (with adiscussion document released in January), currently has 138 sponsors — most of whom boast the pharmaceuticals/health products industry as one of their top 20 contributors in the 2014 election cycle.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">That includes all of the bill’s original sponsors: $302,700 for Upton, $184,500 for Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), $174,072 for Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) — the Committee’s ranking member, $112,949 for DeGette and $72,044 for Gene Green (D-Texas).</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Pallone’s district contains the headquarters of pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson, whose PAC gave him $10,000 in the last election cycle.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The company has lobbied on the initiative as well — as have numerous pharmaceutical companies and trade groups, which bring vast resources to bear on anything going on in Washington that might affect their interests. In fact, the pharmaceuticals/health products industry consistently spends more on lobbying than any other interest group. Big spenders over the past two years that have mentioned the initiative most frequently in lobbying reports include drug companies Sanofi(which spent nearly $6 million on lobbying in 2014, $1.8 million in the first quarter of 2015), AstraZeneca PLC ($2.9 million in 2014, $503,000 in 2015) andGlaxoSmithKline ($4.4 million in 2014, $1.7 million in 2015) — as well as industry associations such as the Biotechnology Industry Organization ($8.3 million in 2014, $2 million in 2015) and the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America(PhRMA) ($16.6 million in 2014, over $5.4 million in 2015).</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Both name brand and generic drug companies, often at odds, want the bill to go through. The Generic Pharmaceutical Association‘s President and CEO Ralph G. Neas referred to it in a press release as a “bipartisan achievement that should enhance the drug approval process and significantly boost critical research and development efforts.”</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In the first quarter of 2015, 208 entities lobbied on the initiative, a list with countless pharmaceutical and biotechnology-centered companies.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A spokeswoman from the House Energy and Commerce Committee maintains that safety will not be compromised by the bill. “Modernizing health care innovation and maintaining the highest standards of safety and efficacy are not mutually exclusive,” she said. “This is why the committee brought every key player to the table — including the FDA, the NIH, top scientists, researchers, and thought leaders — for more than a year to carefully develop this vital legislation.”</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Former FDA commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach, who served under former President George W. Bush, along with Manhattan Institute scholar Paul Howard, wrote in support of the bill in the Morning Consult this week. “Armed with massive computing power and modern analytics, advanced diagnostics like functional MRIs, and electronic medical records, researchers can now compile massive databases containing genomic variants and patient health outcomes that can allow them to rapidly identify, test, and validate hypothesis about effective disease fighting strategies,” von Eschenbach and Howard write. “With this information in hand, it is unnecessary and perhaps even unethical to demand that we conduct traditional large, blinded and randomized controlled trials for precision medicines supported by a variety of mechanistic and pre-clinical data.”</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But two other former FDA commissioners have concerns with 21st Century Cures — even though it does allot over $10 billion to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and $550 million to the FDA over five years. Margaret Hamburg, a recently departed commissioner, said in a March speech, that “there’s a misperception that you might be able to speed up innovation by lowering the standards for safety and efficacy, and I think that would be a terrible mistake that would not only just damage patients, but industry as well.” David Kessler, who served as commissioner during both the George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations, wrote this month in a joint New York Times op-ed that the act “could substantially lower the standards for approval of many medical products, potentially placing patients at unnecessary risk of injury or death.”</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And the National Center for Health Research, a think tank involved in research “used to encourage new, more effective programs, policies, and medical treatments,” is also worried about the legislation. In addition to uneasiness about relying on clinical experience, other concerns include parts of the Act that would allow new drugs to be approved for select individuals based on preliminary data, create financial incentives for the use of new antibiotics, and could allow companies to use limited evidence in order to get FDA approval for new medical devices.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So far, it’s only in the House where the two sides are tussling over whether the bill is a salutary prescription; no companion measure is yet pending in the Senate.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Correction, 6/16: This post has been corrected to reflect the fact that formal 21st Century Cures legislation was not introduced until the second quarter of 2015; the companies mentioned lobbied on the initiative.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Categories: Chemical & Related Manufacturing Congress Congressional Committees Influence & LobbyingLobbying Pharmaceutical/Health products Politicians & Elections</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Tags: 21st Century Cures Act, alex lazar, astrazeneca, Bill Clinton, Biotechnology Industry Organization, David Kessler, Diana DeGette, Food and Drug Administration, Frank Pallone, Fred Upton, Gene Green, Generic Pharmaceutical Association, George H.W. Bush, George W Bush, glaxosmithkline, House Energy and Commerce Committee, Joe Pitts, Margaret Hamburg, National Institute of Health, New York Times,Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America, Ralph Neas, sanofi</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015/06/phrma-companies-push-hard-on-house-bill-to-ease-testing-of-new-drugs</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rep. Fred Upton (R-Miss.) is among the deniers who sit on the House energy committee.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The House Energy and Commerce Committee wasted a good chunk of time Tuesday on yet more anti-environmental legislation that doesn’t stand a snowflake’s chance in climate-changed hell of becoming law. H.R. 3826, The Electricity Security and Affordability Act, would suspend the EPA’s proposed climate rules for power plants.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And for bonus points, the committee threw out an amendment to the doomed bill that would have acknowledged that climate change is real.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), presumably tired of yawning her way through anti-scientific charades, added the amendment, merely acknowledging the banal fact that greenhouse gas pollution “threatens the American public’s health and welfare” by contributing to climatic changes. Here’s ClimateProgress explaining how the Republicans responded:</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[The bill] passed in Tuesday’s committee, but the amendment, which would have placed on the record that the committee accepts that climate change is happening and is caused by greenhouse gas pollution, did not.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twenty-four E&C [Energy & Commerce Committee] members — all Republicans — voted against the amendment. Among them was E&C Chair Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), who has said before that he doesn’t think climate change is caused by human activity, and Joe Barton (R-TX), who also questions humans’ role in climate change. …</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This isn’t the first time House Republicans have rejected amendments stating the reality of climate change. In 2011, House Republicans voted down amendments that called on Congress to accept that climate change is real, man-made, and a human health threat.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">How could the Republicans on the energy committee be so unfathomably stupid as to continue to claim that climate change is some kind of dystopian fantasy, despite all the science to the contrary?</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Maybe they aren’t stupid. Maybe there’s another explanation. “In total,” ClimateProgress reported, “the Republicans who voted to deny climate change have accepted about $9.3 million in career contributions from the oil, gas, and coal industries.”Source</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">24 House Republicans Just Voted To Deny The Reality Of Climate Change, ClimateProgress</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">he House Energy and Commerce Committee Tuesday voted down an amendment that would have stated conclusively that climate change is occurring.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">E&C Committee members voted 24-20 against the amendment, introduced by Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) to H.R. 3826, the Electricity Security and Affordability Act. That bill, if it makes it through Congress, would put an end to EPA regulations on emissions for new power plants until technologies like carbon capture and storage are commercially viable in at least six states for one year. It passed in Tuesday’s committee, but the amendment, which would have placed on the record that the committee accepts that climate change is happening and is caused by greenhouse gas pollution, did not.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Twenty-four E&C members — all Republicans — voted against the amendment. Among them was E&C Chair Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), who has said before that he doesn’t think climate change is caused by human activity, and Joe Barton (R-TX), who also questions humans’ role in climate change. In total, the Republicans who voted to deny climate change have accepted about $9.3 million in career contributions from the oil, gas and coal industries, according to analysis by the CAP Action War Room.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This isn’t the first time House Republicans have rejected amendments stating the reality of climate change. In 2011, House Republicans voted down amendments that called on Congress to accept that climate change is real, man-made, and a human health threat.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Scientists, of course, disagree with the committee members. Ninety-seven percent of scientific studies that take a stance on climate change agree that human activity is causing climate change. In October, a study found that temperatures in the Canadian Arctic today are warmer than at any point in the last 44,000 years and possibly even as far back as 120,000 years.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The key piece here is just how unprecedented the warming of Arctic Canada is,” Gifford Miller, UC Boulder Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research Associate Director and lead author of the study said. “This study really says the warming we are seeing is outside any kind of known natural variability, and it has to be due to increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Perhaps realizing that the law is not on their side, some of these industry groups have simultaneously taken a legislative approach to fighting EPA regulations, pushing for enactment of HR 910, the “Energy Tax Prevention Act.” The bill, sponsored by Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), would take away the EPA’s regulatory power over greenhouse gases. The Republican House endorsed the proposal last April, mostly along party lines, but the measure has stalled in the Democratic Senate. The Industrial Minerals Association, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Mining Association, and Peabody Energy Company all reported lobbying on the bill in 2011 — part of their combined $9.8 million lobbying efforts on this and other subjects.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">WASHINGTON, DC, April 16, 2013 (ENS) – In a new report, “Cooking the Books: How The State Department Analysis Ignores the True Climate Impact of the Keystone XL Pipeline,” environmental groups and scientists opposed to the pipeline warn of “climate disaster” if President Barack Obama allows it to cross the Canada-U.S. border, carrying tar sands bitumen from Alberta to Nebraska.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“This is simply incorrect,” states “Cooking the Books. [2]”In its latest environmental analysis [3] of the pipeline, issued March 1, the State Department asserts that if the pipeline is not built, the Alberta tar sands will be exploited one way or another and carbon dioxide will be emitted anyway.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would send at least 181 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent each year into the atmosphere, warming the Earth’s climate, finds the report’s authors Steve Kretzmann, Lorne Stockman, David Turnbull and Paulina Essunger of Oil Change International.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These emissions compare to the emissions from 51 coal-fired power plants or the tailpipe emissions from more than 37.7 million cars – more cars than are now registered in California, Washington, Oregon, Florida, Michigan, and New York combined, calculates the report, which was issued by some of the nation’s largest and most influential environmental groups: Natural Resources Defense Council, 350.org, Environment America, National Wildlife Federation, Friends of the Earth, Sierra Club, Greenpeace and Oil Change International.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Alberta-based TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP has applied for a Presidential Permit authorizing the Keystone XL pipeline to cross the U.S.-Canada border carrying 830,000 barrels of diluted bitumen per day from the tar sands of northern Alberta to an existing pipeline in Steele City, Nebraska.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The proposed project would consist of 1,204 miles of 36-inch-diameter pipeline, with 329 miles of pipeline in Canada and 875 miles in the United States. It would cross the international border between Saskatchewan and Montana.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It is the State Department’s responsibility to determine if granting a permit is in the national interest. President Obama will make the final decision.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people,” Obama said then. “I’m disappointed that Republicans in Congress forced this decision, but it does not change my administration’s commitment to American-made energy that creates jobs and reduces our dependence on oil.”On January 18, 2012 President Obama rejected TransCanada’s first permit application, refusing to be pushed by Congressional Republicans who tied the pipeline decision to a bill providing a payroll tax cut extension.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">House Republicans are still trying to force a decision favorable to the $7 billion pipeline. They plan to vote by Memorial Day on legislation that would go around President and give congressional approval to TransCanada.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton Upton, a Michigan Republican, is a coauthor of the legislation – the Northern Route Approval Act (H.R. 3) – which would clear regulatory and legal hurdles, and remove the project’s requirement for a Presidential Permit.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton told a House subcommittee April 10, “We have an historic opportunity with the Keystone XL pipeline to create thousands of good-paying American jobs and reduce our reliance on overseas energy.” Upton did not mention the pipeline’s impact on the planetary temperature.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Environmentalists dispute the “thousands” of jobs to which Upton refers, saying only a few dozen permanent jobs would be created.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The State Department has issued two Environmental Impact Statements, both of which find that the Keystone XL pipeline is “not likely result in significant adverse environmental effects,” and “no substantive change in global greenhouse gas emissions.”</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Scientists and environmental groups disagree with those conclusions....</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://www.alternet.org/print/environment/revealed-how-keystone-xl-pipeline-would-hasten-climate-change</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In an effort to block a ballot measure in California that would require the labeling of genetically modified foods, shape a Senate race in Ohio with potential repercussions for fracking, and influence a host of House contests key to toxic chemical reform -- the chemical industry has been busy wielding its wallet, say environmental advocates.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">New numbers support that assertion: Tens of millions of dollars continue to feed industry friendly causes and candidates this election season, with federal campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures by the chemical industry more than doubling since 2000.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"The more the truth has gotten out about the chemical regulatory system not working; the more the science has shed light on the consequences for American families as they bear the burden of problems linked to environmental exposures such as learning disabilities, childhood cancer and breast cancer; I think the more it has increased demands for change," said Andy Igrejas, national campaign director for the nonprofit Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"And industry has ramped up its spending to block such a change," he added.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The chemical and agro-chemical industries have generally argued that stiffer regulations would be overly burdensome to companies and costly to the country. Anne Kolton of the American Chemistry Council, a lobbying group for the chemical industry, said the ACC is "proud" of its efforts to "highlight the good work being done in Washington to grow the economy and create jobs."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Monsanto and other agro-chemical companies have invested more than $20 million -- on top of the food industry's nearly equivalent contribution -- for ads opposing Proposition 37, a California measure that would require labeling of genetically modified foods, or GMOs. Proponents of the bill have raised less than $8 million.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Meanwhile, chemical interests have spent some $375 million since 2005 to help elect and try to influence federal leaders, specifically in regards to a pending overhaul of the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA), according to a report released this week by Common Cause, a nonprofit, nonpartisan citizen's lobbying organization.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"It's been 36 years since they passed TSCA, and people are showing how it really fails to protect people," said James Browning, Common Cause's regional director for state operations and a principal author of the report. "Public health advocates are starting to win the fight, they have so much evidence on their side. Industry is realizing it needs to start spending more to stop it."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In July, the Safe Chemicals Act passed out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. First introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) in 2005, the act would replace the TSCA and essentially reverse the burden of proof on chemical safety. In other words, chemicals would be required to be tested and proven safe before they are placed on store shelves -- something that it not the case today. The bill is now awaiting a vote from the full Senate.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The ACC, whose member companies' spending was included in the Common Cause report, has said it is committed to working on a bipartisan bill, but has also expressed concerns with the Safe Chemicals Act.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"As one of America's most significant manufacturing industries, we have a significant interest in seeing good policies enacted that will encourage economic growth and job creation including a balanced approach to regulation, a strong domestic energy policy and sound tax and trade policies, and we believe it is important to support leaders in Congress who share those priorities," Kolton said.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Overall, Common Cause found that chemical industry contributions in the current election cycle have gone predominantly to Republicans: 78 percent compared to 22 percent for Democrats. President Barack Obama received $217,283, for example, compared to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's $704,337.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The report, titled "Toxic Spending," also highlights how the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United decision opened up a new "avenue of influence" for the chemical industry in the form of so-called Super PACs. Chemical interests have given $23 million to these groups in the current elections, according to the study.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Browning noted that actual spending numbers are likely even higher due to incomplete tracking of ad spending and a surge of undisclosed contributions from nonprofit organizations.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This year, chemical interests are targeting a few key races, Browning said, including a heated Senate battle in Ohio. Josh Mandel, the Republican contender, ranks third among recipients of chemical industry campaign contributions, and has expressed plans to open up more land to natural gas drilling. Calls and emails to Mandel's campaign office seeking comment were not returned.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Clearly, they see Ohio as pivotal and that race as pivotal," Browning said.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A Common Cause report from last year found people on Rep. Fred Upton's (R-Mich.) House Energy & Commerce Committee who voted for the so-called Haliburton loophole -- which essentially exempts the natural gas industry from the Safe Drinking Water Act -- received more than six times as much money from oil and gas companies as people who voted against it.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://dirtyenergymoney.com/view.php?can=N00004133&type=search#view=connections</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">---</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">epa email: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/20/epa-email-investigation_n_2333288.html</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Obama administration's chief environmental watchdog, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, is stepping down after a nearly four-year tenure marked by high-profile brawls over global warming pollution, the Keystone XL oil pipeline, new controls on coal-fired plants and several other hot-button issues that affect the nation's economy and people's health.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Jackson, the agency's first black administrator, constantly found herself caught between administration pledges to solve controversial environmental problems and steady resistance from Republicans and industrial groups who complained that the agency's rules destroyed jobs and made it harder for American companies to compete internationally.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The GOP chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Fred Upton, said last year that Jackson would need her own parking spot at the Capitol because he planned to bring her in so frequently for questioning. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney called for her firing, a stance that had little downside during the GOP primary.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Jackson, 50, a chemical engineer by training, did not point to any particular reason for her departure. Historically, Cabinet members looking to move on will leave at the beginning of a president's second term.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), an influential energy policymaker, appeared to reverse his position on renewable energy in a debate with GOP challenger Jack Hoogendyk on Sunday, telling a Western Michigan University audience he believes in government support for "all the alternative energy policies."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When asked by a moderator what alternative energy processes he favors and whether there should be subsidies for alternative energy, Upton replied, "I supported all the alternative energy policies, not just Keystone, that's clean coal, safe nuclear.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"All of these forms of energy need to make it on their own," the congressman added, according to a transcript of the debate provided by the Kalamazoo Gazette. "We need to support them. We need a North American energy plan which makes us energy independent. I'm convinced we can do that and renewable need to be part of that mix along with the other things I mentioned.”</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For anyone who has been listening, that doesn't square with what Upton has been saying as the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Upton has been among the Republicans leading the investigation of Solyndra, the California-based solar company that went bankrupt after receiving a half-billion dollars in federal loans, saying in September, "I question whether the government is qualified to act as a venture capitalist, picking winners and losers in speculative ventures and shelling out billions of taxpayer dollars to keep them afloat." Nevermind that he previously lobbied the Department of Energy requesting loans for at least four energy projects in his home state.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">More recently Upton mocked what he called President Barack Obama's "affinity for massive taxpayer spending on more expensive energy sources." In his op-ed in the American Magazine entitled "Rethinking America's Energy Policy,", Upton wrote:</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When I first became involved in these issues, President Jimmy Carter told us our domestic energy supplies were running out and a foreign cartel would determine everything from the cars we drove to the temperatures in our homes. The future he painted looked bleak. Consider oil and natural gas. Not long ago, many believed supplies had peaked and it was only a matter of time until we were left with nothing but dry holes in the ground and increased dependence on foreign imports. Based on this belief, Washington decided that American taxpayers needed to spend dramatically on developing alternative supplies to replace hydrocarbons. President Obama continues this policy today. During his recent energy public relations tour, he repeatedly referred to Republicans as subscribers to the ‘flat earth’ worldview because we do not share his affinity for massive taxpayer spending on more expensive energy sources. But if anyone is stuck in the past, it’s President Obama, as he has refused to acknowledge the great potential of America’s energy resources thanks to new technologies that help us unlock them. New discoveries and production of resources like shale oil and gas are dramatically altering our energy supply outlook and the entire global geopolitical landscape. And the pace of change -- particularly in the past few years --continues to accelerate.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton's statement praising investment in renewables came in the first debate in Michigan's Aug. 7 Republican primary. But a GOP Energy and Commerce spokesman told The Huffington Post on Tuesday night that Upton fully intended for all aforementioned forms of energy to make it on their own, adding that an "all of the above energy strategy" is one that allows all forms of energy to compete without the government artificially putting a thumb on the scale. Such initiatives, he said, are best supported by cutting red tape and making sure government doesn't get in the way of any form of energy development.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">More than 150 people showed up at Western Michigan University's Schneider Hall Auditorium for the debate, sponsored by WMUK and the Kalamazoo Gazette.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/12/fred-upton-flip-flop-alternative-energy_n_1591161.html?ir=Green&ref=topbar</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton tells reporters the House leadership is looking at every option after President Barack Obama decided this week to block the $7 billion Keystone XL pipeline, at least temporarily. The Michigan Republican and other House GOP lawmakers argue that the decision was politically driven and will deny the nation both jobs and a new energy source.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">---</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">chesapeake energy: </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The McLendons have concentrated their donations on top Republicans (in fact, the only Democrat to receive any money from the pair was West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, who received $4,800). The couple has given $61,600 to the Republican National Committee, $55,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee and $10,000 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee. </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They have also given a combined $10,000 to Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), the chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has oversight over issues central to Chesapeake's interests. And besides that, Upton is a first cousin of McClendon's wife -- and, according to OpenSecrets.org data, an investor in Chesapeake: in 2010, he held a stake worth between $150,000 and $350,000.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">180</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/green-energy-republicans-pressure-energy-department_n_1322428.html?ir=Green</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">----</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Stephen Kretzmann</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Executive Director, Oil Change International</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fred Upton: Big Oil's Superman in the Super Congress</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Posted: 8/17/11 03:54 PM ET</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Numerous recent polls reveal that the American people believe that Congress is more responsive to their campaign donors than their own constituents. In addition, Americans of all affiliations clearly favor ending oil industry handouts. The question is, whose side is Fred Upton on: the American people's or Big Oil's?</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rep. Upton is Big Oil's biggest champion on the newly named Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction. All six Republicans on the Committee have consistently voted to preserve oil industry handouts.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Six months into his tenure as Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Fred Upton has stopped even trying to hide his pro-Big-Oil agenda. Upton consistently sides with the oil and gas industry -- and it's clear why.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">During his House career, Upton has received $281,350 in oil and gas industry campaign contributions and more than a third that total, $100,700, during the 2010 election cycle. The energy industry is opening their wallets for Upton -- in the second quarter of 2011 alone, Upton raised $104,000 in campaign contributions from oil, gas and coal -- and its not even an election year.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This may seem like a lot of money, until you consider the return on Big Oil's investment. The oil industry has spent roughly $280,000 to back Upton and $4 billion is the low end of credible estimates of the value of their subsidies. Eliminating some of the zeroes, would you invest $2.80 to get $40,000 in return? Of course you would. Big Oil could spend a hundred or even a thousand times more on Fred Upton, and it would still be a great bargain for them.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Oil industry lobbyists have made keeping the corporate welfare a top priority. The American Petroleum Institute announced earlier this year that it would for the first time begin directly donating to candidates, adding to the more than $13.6 million the oil industry gave to current members of Congress during the last election cycle.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In July, Upton pushed legislation that would speed up the development of the Keystone XL pipeline through his committee. Common sense would make that a risky political decision, considering what Michiganites have endured since the Enbridge Energy oil spill into the Kalamazoo River that feeds Lake Michigan. But Upton has already shown his disregard for Michigan families by appearing in the front row of an API conference, just six months after the spill of a million gallons of oil into the river running right though his district.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In fact, since taking the chairmanship, Upton has been maneuvering to dismantle the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of the Interior, blasting the standards and protections that keep American families safe from the reckless practices of Big Oil companies. And he's not doing this on behalf of the working men and women of this district. A recent poll from the American Lung Association revealed 65 percent of Michigan and Ohio voters supported stricter EPA limits.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Big Oil is working hard to keep campaign checks flowing and the access they bring open and active. The 2010 increase in funds marked a dramatic shift in Upton's politics. Unfortunately for regular families, that kind of access is limited if you can't write a huge check.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So, Upton's priorities continue to seemingly move away from protecting families and towards pushing the agenda of his financiers.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Is Fred Upton willing to act on behalf of Michigan families for a change? Or will he continue to be Big Oil's champion? The answer will show us all who Fred Upton really listens to most.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> BULB bill? 180</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">By DARREN GOODE | 7/12/11 7:48 PM EDT</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">House lawmakers Tuesday stymied an initial effort by Republicans to put an end to infamous light bulb efficiency standards.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The bill from Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) to repeal part of a 2007 energy law requiring traditional incandescent light bulbs to be 30 percent more energy efficient beginning in 2012 failed to get the necessary two-thirds support needed for approval under expedited rules. A majority of members â?? 233 â?? supported the repeal, including five Democrats. Ten Republicans joined 183 Democrats opposing the measure.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Continue</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi personally whipped Democratic Caucus members to vote against the bill, a Democratic aide told POLITICO.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â??I was concerned that Ms. Pelosi might make it a litmus test issue in her caucus, and she did,â? Barton said after the vote. â??We only got 5 Democrat votes. Everybody in the Blue Dog caucus and the Black caucus that voted no, voted against their constituents.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"I thought I had 25 at a minimum. I thought, if it were truly a free vote, I thought weâ??d pass it on suspension,â? he added.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Barton said his plan is to move the measure under a regular rule requiring only majority support or as a spending bill amendment.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"We can put it on an appropriations bill. We can back it under a rule. I can try and go to some of the Democrats who didnâ??t vote for it and figure out a way to get them to consider voting for it in a little bit of a different format," he said.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The expedited procedure used Tuesday is normally meant to fast-track noncontentious bills without committee consideration, such as post office namings, and requires two-thirds support from those present and voting and does not allow for amendments.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The bill would fall under the jurisdiction of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, whose chairman â?? Michigan Republican Fred Upton â?? helped put the efficiency language in the 2007 bill.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton reversed his stance on the language he helped co-author with Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) â?? and was signed into law by then-President George W. Bush.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Uptonâ??s change of heart came as he was trying to shore up his conservative credentials while running for the energy panel chairmanship.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The light bulb efficiency standard has become a symbol of federal government stymieing of consumer choice that has been roundly attacked by conservatives.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Barton had expressed confidence before the vote that he could secure the necessary support of at least 40 Democrats and win as many as 300 votes overall.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58842.html#ixzz1STa7V3oF</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">-----</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">---</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Limbaugh accuses Upton of â??nannyismâ? over light bulb bill</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">By Eartha Jane Melzer | 11.10.10 | 3:41 pm</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rush Limbaugh says that Fred Upton (R-St. Joseph) should not become chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee because he co-sponsored bipartisan legislation to phase out incandescent light bulbs.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On his show yesterday Limbaugh said:</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Now, this would be a tone deaf disaster if the Republican leadership lets Fred Upton ascend to the chairmanship of the House energy committee. This is exactly the kind of nannyism, statism, what have you, that was voted against and was defeated last week. No Republican complicit in nannyism, statism, can be rewarded this way. But seniority may rule the day.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In 2007 Upton, together with Jane Harman (D-CA) sponsored a bill to phase out the 100 watt incandescent light bulb by 2012, ban all incandescents by 2014, and require that light bulbs be at least three times as efficient as todayâ??s 100-watt incandescent bulb by 2020. This measure became part of the Energy Independence and Security Act.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A release from Harmanâ??s office estimated that the light bulb legislation will prevent the emission of 100 million tons of carbon dioxide annually by 2030.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â??We must continue to put the spotlight on energy savings,â? Upton said this spring as he and Harman introduced a bill to extend efficiency standards to outdoor lighting, â??As our nationâ??s energy needs are expected to jump significantly over the next two decades, it is imperative that we take advantage of burgeoning efficient technologies. With American industry taking the lead, we will help create jobs here at home and save communities billions of dollars each year in their energy bills.â?</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Limbaugh predicted widespread resistance to energy-saving compact fluorescent lighting.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Uptonâ??s competition for the chairmanship comes from Joe Barton (R-TX) â?? who apologized to BP for having to compensate victims of the Gulf oil spill â?? and Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) who rejected concerns about climate change on the grounds that the earth will end only when God decides it will be over.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">---</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">greenpeaceJul 18, 2011 09:51 AM</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Representative Fred Uptonâ??(R-MI), District 6</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â??People in Michigan are good at separating fact from fiction.â?</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chair, House Energy and Commerce Committee22</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In top 25% of House members receiving campaign cash from fossil fuel companies7</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Coal Polluters of Uptonâ??s District23</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Cobb Generating Plant (owner, Consumers Energy Company</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[subsidiary of CMS Energy[) within 100 miles of district.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ No mercury controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ Minimal nitrogen dioxide controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ No sulfur dioxide controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">J.H. Campbell Generating Plant (owner, Consumers Energy Company</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[subsidiary of CMS Energy]) within 100 miles of district.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ No mercury controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ No nitrogen dioxide controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ No sulfur dioxide controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Eckert Station (owner, Lansing Board of Water & Light [a subsidiary of the</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">City of Lansing, Michigan]), within 100 miles of district.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ No mercury controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ Minimal nitrogen dioxide controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ No sulfur dioxide controls.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There are 3 other coal-fired power plants within 100 miles of District 6.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Impact Annually of These Three Coal Plants6</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ Deaths: 194</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ Heart Attacks: 317</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ Asthma Attacks: 3200</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ Hospital Admissions: 140</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ Chronic Bronchitis: 119</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">â?¢ Asthma ER Visits: 193</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Yearly Costs: $1,490,768,0006</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Coal Polluters Support Representative Upton</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Fossil fuel industry has given Upton $541,450 since the 1998 election season. Coal donors include CMS Energy ($65,200),</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">DTE Energy ($48,100), and American Electric Power ($31,150).7</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton Represents Coal Polluters</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton voted to stop EPA from reducing mercury and other toxic air pollution from cement plants.12</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Coal Caucus members are threatening with a bill to strip EPAâ??s budget to reduce mercury pollution from coal-fired power</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">plants. Upton voted yes for this bill in committee..14</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton sponsored and pushed through his committee a bill to keep EPA from making coal companies reduce global warming</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">pollution.2</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton voted yes to an amendment in the budget bill that would stop EPA from developing protections from coal ash pollution.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">12</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton voted three times in support of coal-industry amendments on mountaintop removal mining.15</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Jobs to Produce Power in Michigan</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Wind and Solar: 7,45313,18</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Coal: 2,3204</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">----</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">rs:</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">When Upton was named chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee in December, climate activists breathed a sigh of relief. At least the two other frontrunners â?? Joe Barton, a longtime shill for the oil and gas industry, and John Shimkus, who invokes the Bible to justify doing nothing to stop global warming â?? didn't get the job. But Upton, a moderate who has backed new standards for more efficient light bulbs and admitted that "we need to reduce emissions," won the chairmanship by shamelessly transforming himself into a Tea Party wanna-be. He now claims he is "not convinced" that carbon needs to be regulated and denounces climate legislation as "an unconstitutional power grab that will kill millions of jobs." As chairman, Upton is expected to further boost his credibility with the Tea Party by launching an all-out war on new regulations proposed by the EPA, including stricter air-quality standards and tougher limits on toxic coal ash. In fact, Upton has promised that EPA officials will spend so much time being questioned before his committee that "we will give them their own parking place" on Capitol Hill.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">---</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">see peterson-upton-inhofe</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/06/nation/la-na-koch-brothers-20110206/5</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton received $20,000 in donations from Koch employees</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">in 2010, making them among his top 10 donors in that</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that the EPA had the</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">power to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">under the Clean Air Act. Pompeo, Griffith and others</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">want to strip the EPA of that authority.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Until recently, Upton would have been an unlikely</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">champion of that view.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In 2009, he told a Michigan newspaper: "Climate change</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">is a serious problem that necessitates serious</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">solutions." Rush Limbaugh ridiculed Upton for his</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">sponsorship of an energy-saving bill. Tea party groups</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">opposed his bid for the committee chairmanship.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But as chairman, Upton said that EPA Administrator Lisa</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Jackson would have to attend so many hearings before his</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">committee that she would need her own parking space on</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Capitol Hill. In daily e-mail blasts, he hammered at the</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">EPA's "job-killing" regulations.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">His bluntest rhetoric against the EPA came in late</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">December, in a Wall Street Journal commentary he wrote</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">with Phillips of Americans for Prosperity.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The EPA's regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, they</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">wrote, "represents an unconstitutional power grab that</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">will kill millions of jobs â?? unless Congress steps in."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In an e-mail statement, Upton denied that his position</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">on climate change had shifted, and he explained his work</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">with conservative activists. "Meeting with and listening</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">to individuals and organizations that will be affected</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">by the laws and regulations this committee oversees is</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">one of our fundamental responsibilities," he said.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">---</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://www.grist.org/article/2011-03-03-fred-uptons-bizarre-war-on-24-million-americans-with-asthma</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Cross-posted from the Natural Resources Defense Council.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) is teaming up with House Energy and Commerce Chair Fred Upton (R-Mich.) to introduce a bill to allow America's biggest polluters to continue dumping unlimited amounts of carbon emissions into the air. It's not that surprising that Inhofe is pushing this in the Senate. After all, Inhofe has always prided himself on being a little "out there" in a distinctly Charlie Sheen "wild man" kind of way.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But what is going on with the formerly-known-as reasonable Rep. Upton?</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Just about every major health group in the United States is now telling Upton that he is putting the welfare of millions of Americans at risk who suffer from asthma (that's 24 million people right there -- including 7 million children!) and other respiratory diseases.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Consider this from the American Lung Association:</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The enactment of Chairman Fred Upton's bill would strip away Clean Air Act protections that safeguard Americans and their families from air pollution that puts their lives at risk. The protections against the health harm from carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollution are essential to public health and must be preserved. -- Charles D. Connor, president and chief executive officer</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And it's not like people back home in the Michigan sixth congressional district are exactly clamoring for more pollution. The American Lung Association estimates [PDF] that over 225,000 Michigan children have asthma, a condition made worse and more dangerous by air pollution.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Perhaps not surprisingly, our Feb. 2011 survey [PDF] conducted in Upton's congressional district found:</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">62 percent of Upton's constituents oppose a bill he is sponsoring to dismantle the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to reduce carbon dioxide and other pollutants;</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">67 percent -- including 60 percent of Republicans -- agreed with the statement that "Congress should let the EPA do its job," as opposed to the minority who believe that "Congress should decide" what actions are taken to curb carbon pollution;</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">61 percent say that "the EPA needs to do more to hold polluters accountable and protect the air and water";</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">57 percent favor "the EPA setting new standards with stricter limits on air pollution."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If you were a member of Congress would you look at the following chart and assume that your constituents are best served by handcuffing the Environmental Protection Agency in its efforts to keep our air as clean as possible?</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Most of Congressman Upton\'s Constituents Think Congress Should Let the EPA Do Its JobClick for a larger version.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Of course, the easy Washington answer here is to say "follow the money."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And it's worth noting that over the course of his career, Upton has taken over $750,000 from polluters.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00004133&type=I</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> But, in some ways, that's too easy and too cynical an answer. After all, it's not like all polluters are looking to dismantle the EPA.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As PoliticoPro [$ubreq] reported yesterday:</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Top power company CEOs rained on the Republican parade Tuesday as Congress eyes legislation forcing an outright halt to EPA climate change rules.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The leaders -- from American Electric Power, NextEra Energy, Southern Co., and Dominion Resources -- said to varying degrees that they support allowing the EPA to proceed on a "reasonable" time frame on greenhouse gas rules for power plants, petroleum refiners and other major stationary sources.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They also didn't sound so thrilled with the draft bill preempting the EPA that House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) plans to start moving later this spring.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"I think that's probably a bit strong," said Michael Morris, president and CEO of Columbus, Ohio-based AEP, in an interview at an energy industry conference in Washington. "Congressman Upton is a dear friend and a very strong leader and a visionary elected official, but I think even he knows that that probably isn't going to happen."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"I don't support complete preemption," Lewis Hay, chairman and CEO of NextEra Energy, a Juno Beach, Fla.-based power company, told Politico. "When I look at what EPA has done so far and the position they've taken on greenhouse gases, I think it's actually been pretty moderate."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">So just why is Fred Upton waging this war against 24 million American asthma victims?</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">----</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Cross-posted from the Wonk Room.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, incoming energy chair Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) joined Americans For Prosperity (AFP) President Tim Phillips, a global warming denier, to support the lawsuits by global warming polluters against climate rules. One of the companies leading the charge against the Environmental Protection Agency's greenhouse gas endangerment finding is Koch Industries, the private pollution giant whose billionaire owners have been directing the Tea Party movement through its AFP front group.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Upton was once considered a "moderate on environmental issues," but has worked hard to refashion himself as a hard-right defender of pollution in recent months. Some Tea Party groups tried to block Upton from taking the gavel of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, attacking his past support for energy-efficient light bulbs. Upton previously claimed that "climate change is a serious problem" and that "the world will be better off" if we reduced carbon emissions. However, in the course of the past two years -- as he received $20,000 from Koch Industries -- Upton has shifted to oppose not only cap-and-trade legislation but any form of limits on climate pollution whatsoever, instead supporting investigations against climate scientists and lawsuits against the EPA and its supposed "unconstitutional power grab that will kill millions of jobs":</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">April 2009: "Climate change is a serious problem that necessitates serious solutions."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">June 2009: "We have a unique opportunity and a responsibility to reduce emissions and preserve our economy -- the American public is desperate for solutions, but a national energy tax is not the answer."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">December 2009: "I think we can lower our emissions. I think the world will be better off if we did that, and we can do it without cap-and-trade."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">January 2010: "No matter what we did between now and 2050, it, there was no real science to verify that it would reduce the temperature rise that some predicted. And that's why we do need hearings."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">December 2010: "Moreover, the principal argument for a two-year delay is that it will allow Congress time to create its own plan for regulating carbon. This presumes that carbon is a problem in need of regulation. We are not convinced."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"We think the American consumer would prefer not to be skinned by Obama's EPA," Upton and Phillips wrote in the Wall Street Journal, invoking the grisly image of the president murdering his fellow citizens. The world would be better off if Upton went back to believing instead in serious solutions to serious problems.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> </font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/chemical-industry-campaign-contributions-environmental-regulations_n_2017412.html</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chemical Industry Uses Wallet To Block Tighter Regulations, Environmental Advocates Say</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Posted: 10/25/2012 6:57 pm EDT Updated: 10/25/2012 7:51 pm EDT</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In an effort to block a ballot measure in California that would require the labeling of genetically modified foods, shape a Senate race in Ohio with potential repercussions for fracking, and influence a host of House contests key to toxic chemical reform -- the chemical industry has been busy wielding its wallet, say environmental advocates.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">New numbers support that assertion: Tens of millions of dollars continue to feed industry friendly causes and candidates this election season, with federal campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures by the chemical industry more than doubling since 2000.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"The more the truth has gotten out about the chemical regulatory system not working; the more the science has shed light on the consequences for American families as they bear the burden of problems linked to environmental exposures such as learning disabilities, childhood cancer and breast cancer; I think the more it has increased demands for change," said Andy Igrejas, national campaign director for the nonprofit Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"And industry has ramped up its spending to block such a change," he added.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The chemical and agro-chemical industries have generally argued that stiffer regulations would be overly burdensome to companies and costly to the country. Anne Kolton of the American Chemistry Council, a lobbying group for the chemical industry, said the ACC is "proud" of its efforts to "highlight the good work being done in Washington to grow the economy and create jobs."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Monsanto and other agro-chemical companies have invested more than $20 million -- on top of the food industry's nearly equivalent contribution -- for ads opposing Proposition 37, a California measure that would require labeling of genetically modified foods, or GMOs. Proponents of the bill have raised less than $8 million.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Meanwhile, chemical interests have spent some $375 million since 2005 to help elect and try to influence federal leaders, specifically in regards to a pending overhaul of the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA), according to a report released this week by Common Cause, a nonprofit, nonpartisan citizen's lobbying organization.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"It's been 36 years since they passed TSCA, and people are showing how it really fails to protect people," said James Browning, Common Cause's regional director for state operations and a principal author of the report. "Public health advocates are starting to win the fight, they have so much evidence on their side. Industry is realizing it needs to start spending more to stop it."</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In July, the Safe Chemicals Act passed out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. First introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) in 2005, the act would replace the TSCA and essentially reverse the burden of proof on chemical safety. In other words, chemicals would be required to be tested and proven safe before they are placed on store shelves -- something that it not the case today. The bill is now awaiting a vote from the full Senate.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The ACC, whose member companies' spending was included in the Common Cause report, has said it is committed to working on a bipartisan bill, but has also expressed concerns with the Safe Chemicals Act.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"As one of America's most significant manufacturing industries, we have a significant interest in seeing good policies enacted that will encourage economic growth and job creation including a balanced approach to regulation, a strong domestic energy policy and sound tax and trade policies, and we believe it is important to support leaders in Congress who share those priorities," Kolton said.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Overall, Common Cause found that chemical industry contributions in the current election cycle have gone predominantly to Republicans: 78 percent compared to 22 percent for Democrats. President Barack Obama received $217,283, for example, compared to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's $704,337.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The report, titled "Toxic Spending," also highlights how the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United decision opened up a new "avenue of influence" for the chemical industry in the form of so-called Super PACs. Chemical interests have given $23 million to these groups in the current elections, according to the study.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Browning noted that actual spending numbers are likely even higher due to incomplete tracking of ad spending and a surge of undisclosed contributions from nonprofit organizations.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This year, chemical interests are targeting a few key races, Browning said, including a heated Senate battle in Ohio. Josh Mandel, the Republican contender, ranks third among recipients of chemical industry campaign contributions, and has expressed plans to open up more land to natural gas drilling. Calls and emails to Mandel's campaign office seeking comment were not returned.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"Clearly, they see Ohio as pivotal and that race as pivotal," Browning said.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A Common Cause report from last year found people on Rep. Fred Upton's (R-Mich.) House Energy & Commerce Committee who voted for the so-called Haliburton loophole -- which essentially exempts the natural gas industry from the Safe Drinking Water Act -- received more than six times as much money from oil and gas companies as people who voted against it.</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">"There's a long history of industry throwing weight around and with it being successful," Browning added.</font></font></div></div>