Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth quoted the Bible — specifically the Old Testament — on Tuesday during remarks on the progress of the war against Iran, leaving some to express concerns about Christian nationalism and his potentially executing a holy or religious war.

Noting that he had just returned from Dover Air Force Base to accept the dignified transfer of another service member killed in the Iran war, Hegseth said, “I’ll close with Scripture, drawing strength from Psalm 144.”

“Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war and my fingers for battle,” he said. “He is my loving God and my fortress. My stronghold and my deliverer, my shield, in whom I take refuge. May the Lord grant unyielding strength and refuge to our warriors. Unbreakable protection to them in our homeland. And total victory over those who seek to harm them. Amen.”

Critics slammed his introduction of the religious text.

At The New Republic, Malcolm Ferguson wrote: “The Christian nationalist undertones of this war are getting even more obvious.”

“Listening to Hegseth read Psalm 144 feels like an ominous justification for further aggression rather than a comforting message,” Ferguson said.

“While it’s a lovely verse traditionally attributed to King David, it does not accurately portray the reality of the situation whatsoever,” he wrote. “The United States is the Goliath of this story, along with Israel. The countries’ joint attacks of aggression have killed over 1,200 Iranians, many of them young schoolgirls. Iranian fuel depots were hit so hard that oil rained from the sky in Tehran on Sunday. Seven American service members have died because a president who promised peace sent them to war for money and regime change, not liberation.”

Professor of public policy Josh Cowen responded to Secretary Hegseth’s reading of scripture: “He could have chosen Jesus’s words ‘Blessed are they who mourn’ or if he was really craving a psalm, ‘The Lord is my shepherd.'”

“Instead he’s sporting militant quotes not to assuage grief but to justify his actions that caused it,” Cowen said.

Dutch journalist Michael van der Galien, according to a translation on X, called it “concerning that Pete Hegseth uses a passage from the Old Testament to suggest that God would bless a specific war between America, Israel, and Iran.”

“From a Catholic perspective, war is always a tragedy and only justified under strict conditions of just war theory, such as self-defense and the protection of innocents, not as a divine mandate.”

Professor Massimo Faggioli, a Church historian, according to a translation on X, wrote of Hegseth’s Scripture quoting, “they’ll do absolutely anything to make it look like a religious war.”

---

===

hypoc

an 12 23 no lnx

Busted: Jim Jordan and James Comer have a new judicial plan

Matt Laslo

andRaw Story

December 25, 2023

WASHINGTON – Republicans in Congress aren’t just doing all they can to impeach the Biden name – and possibly President Joe Biden himself – they’re also going to extraordinary lengths to protect two billionaire GOP megadonors who helped the party remake the Supreme Court in recent years.

For one, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) are trying to stymie Washington, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s investigation into Federalist Society co-chairman Leonard Leo.

Schwalb is looking into allegations that Leo is illegally profiting off non-profits. Jordan and Comer have responded by threatening to subpoena Schwalb.

ALSO READ: A neuroscientist’s guide to surviving Christmas with Trump-loving relatives

Meanwhile on the other side of the U.S. Capitol, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee walked out en masse, boycotting Democrats’ effort to subpoena Leo and Republican jurisprudence sugar daddy Harlan Crow over the hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts he’s given to Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni over the decades, according to a ProPublica investigation.

The GOP offensive to protect two billionaire donors is blatant hypocrisy, according to ethics watchdogs.

“There are many senators who will say anything. I mean, as long as it's their guy, they'll defend anything, and they have no consistency whatsoever and they're completely hypocritical,” Melanie Sloan, a senior adviser for nonpartisan watchdog American Oversight, told Raw Story.

ALSO READ: Florida judge’s son is a neo-Nazi patron: data leak

In today’s tribal and perpetually warring Congress, it seems even pay-to-play politics are now partisan. While Senate Republicans are vowing to use all procedural tools at their disposal to block Leo and Crow from being subpoenaed, most in the party are also backing the Biden impeachment inquiry because they say Hunter Biden was selling access to his father — an accusation for which they’ve provided no evidence to date.

On paper – paper stamped with GOP letterhead, mind you – the impeachment inquiry is focused on buying access.

“It better be, because, quite honestly, Hunter Biden's personal problems aren't the issue. The issue is whether he was selling access to a vice president willing to provide that access, and whether the vice president at the time – the current president – was enriched by it,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) told Raw Story.

As for the hundreds of thousands of dollars in private jet travel, stays at his private retreat and luxurious free vacations aboard his 162-foot yacht that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni admitted to receiving from Harlan Crow?

“That's not enriching yourself, because you went on a boat ride for God's sake. That's not the same as cash in your checking account,” Cramer said of ProPublica’s revelations.

Cramer argues, if the trips weren’t free “maybe he wouldn't have gone on it.”

“The difference is … he’s a friend. Friends are allowed to provide hospitality for you in their home or on their boat. That's very different than a foreign adversary providing cash to a sitting vice president of the United States through his son. That's barely, barely even in the same ballpark, if at all,” Cramer said. “It’s a stretch, to say the least. It's just, it's not the same thing.”

That’s not even mentioning the free private school tuition Thomas’ nephew – who he raised like a son – received from Crow, which ProPublica estimates could have totaled upward of $150,000.

ALSO READ: Busted: These healthcare nonprofits are accepting millions from Big Tobacco

Senate Democrats, some of whom argue Thomas was in a prime position to rule on cases that effect Crow’s fortune, are particularly interested in whether Crow declared the lavish free vacations and travel as business expenses on his federal taxes.

For Leo – co-chairman of the Federalist Society, including the $1.6 billion fortune it now controls – Campaign for Accountability filed an IRS complaint alleging he’s funneling money from seven nonprofit entities he controls to his for-profit businesses, thus illegally profiting off campaign donations. The apparent interference from Jordan and Comer is appalling to watchdogs.

“Then, at the same time, they're screaming about the politicization of justice when they talk about Donald Trump, but they want to tell a sitting U.S. attorney – you know, the state's attorney for D.C. – who he can and can't look at because they don't want him looking at Leonard Leo,” Sloan said. “They just are bowing down at the altar of Leonard Leo and his $1.6 billion.”

House Republicans deny they’re interfering with an ongoing investigation.

“I’m confused. So it’s OK for Democrats to subpoena Leonard Leo and Harlan Crow, but not OK for us to look into AG Schwalb? Isn’t that literally the definition of a double standard — a.k.a Democrats can do something, but we can’t?” Russell M. Dye, communications director and counsel for the House Judiciary Committee, emailed Raw Story.

ALSO READ: ‘Too preposterous to be real’: College hires ‘pink slime’ publisher as journalism prof

Republicans say there’s no reason for an investigation, because the megadonors aren’t accused of trying to change the outcomes of specific cases before the Supreme Court.

“I really think there's like a fundamental difference here between trading favors and not, right? The difference here is the consideration. I've seen no evidence that any of the Supreme Court justices, least of all Clarence Thomas, offered to give anything back. To me, that’s the big difference,” Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) told Raw Story.

“Now look, if Harlan Crow or anybody else wrote $100 million to a Supreme Court Justice, and say, ‘Hey, please do this thing in my benefit’ — well, that raises some serious problems. But is it the standard that a Supreme Court justice can't have a rich friend?” Vance continued. “If they want to set that standard, it’s up to them, but I don't think that that raises nearly the same pay-to-play concerns as Joe Biden’s situation.”

Gifts are different than business appears to be the current GOP ethical standard for such matters.

“We're not talking about gifts. This is business. So with Hunter [Biden], this is, you know, he's on the Burisma board. He's doing these foreign business deals in Ukraine and China and lots of offices, and he is openly out there selling his dad,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) told Raw Story. “At the very least, he's clearly making money off his father. The question is, did the president benefit from that? That's what they need to answer. So that's why we have the inquiry.”

When pressed on the impeachment inquiry into Biden, former Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) wasn’t up to date on the specifics, even as he proudly remembers getting the investigative ball rolling for House Republicans.

“You’re talking about the substance of it. I’m not sure I can talk about the substance of it,” Grassley told Raw Story. “Except, the process is necessary to complete what [Sen. Ron] Johnson (R-WI) and I started four years ago, and that is to get all the information that Congress is entitled to in our oversight capacity and that's what it's all about, as far as I know.”

The Supreme Court adopted a new code of ethics since the lavish gifts were first reported, so Democrats’ complaints are outdated, Grassley argues.

ALSO READ: You blew it in New Hampshire, Joe Biden. Pray it doesn’t hurt you — and then some

“Because the judicial branch put out their … new regulation, and if that doesn’t take care of it – and we won't know that for a little while, maybe a year or two – then maybe that'd be a legitimate question,” Grassley said. “But right now it’s not a legitimate question considering the initiative of the Supreme Court.”

After all, 10 Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee walked out of the vote to subpoena Leo and Crow on November 30 – allowing Democrats to pass the measure 11-0 – Senate Republicans argue the vote broke committee rules.

“They’re not legal,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told Raw Story. “Anybody who knows a lawbook from a J. Crew catalog knows they can get those subpoenas quashed in one hearing.”

Because of wholesale GOP opposition, there doesn’t seem to be the votes to formalize the subpoenas on the Senate floor where Republicans are threatening to require a 60-vote threshold.

“You’ll never see this come to the floor,” Judiciary Committee ranking member Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Politico. “We’ll attack it legally, we’ll vote against it. It’d be a s—show.”

Even as the party hasn’t decided how it will proceed in the Senate, many Democrats expected this.

“We're going after the icons of the Republican Party, Leonard Leo, of course, and, to some, Justice Thomas. They’re very sensitive to that,” Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) told Raw Story. “Public sentiment is overwhelmingly in our favor, so they have got to be strident in opposition.”

The two different standards for Biden and GOP donors is remarkable to Democrats.

“Republicans want to protect the court that they have packed, and they protect the court by maintaining its status as an unaccountable highest court of the land,” Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) told Raw Story. “It looks like they're doing everything they can to keep hidden the secret relationships that are going on at the court with powerful interests that bring cases before the court.”

To the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), this made-for-Fox-and-Newsmax drama shows how completely former President Donald Trump has remade the GOP in his own image.

“It is just sad the way that Donald Trump has completed his stranglehold over the Republican Party,” Raskin told Raw Story. “Donald Trump has taught them – from the Charlottesville riot forward – that there should be no enemies on the right. And they have no enemies on the right, and they will take no principled stance against anybody on the right, no matter how fascistic they are.”

===

http://redgreenandblue.org/2022/05/31/no-cant-carbon-tariff-without-first-setting-carbon-price-another-reporter-falls-gop-greenwashing/

punked reporter?

rgb

Climate Denier Roundup

What you can’t do, though, is institute a carbon border adjustment mechanism on imported goods without first putting a domestic price on carbon. You shouldn’t because you’d be allowing US companies to pollute without paying. You can’t because you’d be forcing foreign-made goods to essentially pay a carbon tax, so it would be immediately run afoul of the World Trade Organization, to which the U.S. is a signatory.

This basic reality of international law makes the most recent example of media credulously helping Republicans greenwash their climate denial so stark. Yesterday,Sara Schonhardt at E&E News/PoliticoPRO wrote Senator Kevin Cramer, “a rare Republican proponent of climate-focused trade policy,” wants to adopt a carbon border adjustment, because in part, it would allow the U.S. entry into a European “climate club” with favorable trade conditions.

Germany is using its G7 presidency to push for what Schonhardt describes as “a coalition centered on trade policy and other efforts to make industry less carbon-intensive,” which would include a carbon border mechanism– once EU’s carbon price gets off the floor.

In the U.S. though, there isn’t a carbon price at all.

But “Cramer does not believe a carbon price should be required for the U.S. to pursue a carbon border adjustment mechanism and doesn’t see it as a hindrance to talks,” Schonhardt reports as though it were a reasonable thing for an elected legislator to propose, and not an admission that Cramer is entirely uninterested in actually reducing emissions.

And he even basically admitted that his aim isn’t to speed up climate policy, but instead slow it down: “Every time a European leader comes in, I do sort of plead with them, ‘Help us catch up. Let’s reconcile something together before you move forward too quickly.'”

Schonhardt concludes the story with Cramer’s acknowledgment that Sen. Joe Manchin has also raised the idea in the bipartisan negotiations and that “if there is going to be an agreement, in all likelihood it will be some form of carbon border adjustment.”

(carbon price graphic by Sightline Institute)

But an actual price on carbon would remain “problematic for most Republicans” who aren’t exactly known for their willingness to “move forward too quickly” on climate policy.

So Cramer’s apparently open to step two of a carbon tax, applying it to goods produced elsewhere, while skipping step one of a U.S. application. Which would violate WTO rules and presumably a host of other U.S. trade agreements.

Last September, WTO Deputy Director-General Jean-Marie Paugam made it clear that the WTO’s rules don’t preclude environmental policies like the potential EU CABM, “provided that it is not discriminatory or does not disguise primarily competitive or protectionist motives.”

Putting a carbon tax on imports, but not domestic goods, is basically WTO’s definition of discrimination. Giving Cramer climate cred for proposing this would be like giving Republicans credit for compromising on gun control because they propose putting a 100% tax on guns made in other countries. Of course, that would be a blatant subsidy for U.S. gun manufacturers — it also wouldn’t be the worst gun violence response the GOP has had this week.

(Originally appeared at DailyKos)

===

https://www.climateofdenial.org/track-climate-change-denial/kevin-cramer/

CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL GOVERNMENT KEVIN CRAMER

Kevin Cramer (R-ND) has been a junior United States senator for North Dakota since taking the position in 2019. Prior to becoming a Senator, Cramer served the United States House of Representatives for the at-large congressional district of North Dakota from 2013 to 2019. Early in his political career, Cramer served as the chair of North Dakota’s Republican Party, and was part of North Dakota’s Public Service Commission.

Cramer is a big advocate for :{oil drilling}:in the U.S., a big industry in his state of North Dakota. His views on fossil fuel extraction and refinement were a big part of his endorsement of Donald Trump leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Cramer was then appointed by Trump as an energy advisor for his presidential campaign, and wrote a paper which outlined a proposal for an energy plan for Trump’s administration to follow. Trump and Cramer are in agreement when it comes to lessening environmental restrictions on oil drilling.

Perhaps Cramer’s strangest stance on climate change is his proposed :{carbon tax:(style="box-sizing:inherit;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;font-style:inherit;font-variant:inherit;font-stretch:inherit"):}:, which never came to fruition as Trump opposed this policy. While on the surface a carbon tax seems like a progressive way to discourage the use of fossil fuels as energy. Cramer’s plan on the other hand would see the proceeds from the carbon tax reinvested into the oil industry. In effect, the tax would only fund the extraction and use of more fossil fuels rather than support an alternative energy source.

Cramer is very adamant about keeping the American fossil fuel industry in good standing. He does support renewable energy research, but not as an alternative or replacement for fossil fuels. He also advocates for more :{fossil fuel trade}: between the United States and its allies with the reasoning that if more countries depended on American oil and coal, they might not need to rely on less friendly nations for energy.

Friends of Kevin Cramer:

Donald Trump

an 4 22 common dr

'No negotiating with arsonists': Green groups slam Manchin-led climate compromise with GOP

Jessica Corbett and Common Dreams April 27, 2022

Advocacy groups on Tuesday blasted new efforts by U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin to strike a deal with the GOP on climate legislation after months of the West Virginia Democrat preventing the House-approved Build Back Better Act from reaching President Joe Biden's desk.

Manchin and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) organized a Monday night meeting to "gauge bipartisan interest in a path forward that addresses our nation's climate and energy security needs head-on," a Manchin spokesperson, Sam Runyon, told Bloomberg.

Food & Water Watch managing director of policy Mitch Jones said in a statement Tuesday that "the Build Back Better bill was effectively stymied by Sen. Manchin, who is now apparently part of an effort to craft a bipartisan bill that would be even weaker than the compromise efforts he soundly rejected last year."

While congressional Democrats attempted to use the budget reconciliation process to pass the $1.75 trillion package, it was blocked by Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Manchin, who said Monday that "if I can find something bipartisan, we don't need reconciliation."

According to Bloomberg, "Manchin told reporters after the meeting that one area of common ground could be reform of the federal oil and gas leasing process."

The outlet reported:

In addition to reform on permitting, a potential package could include revisions to federal land policy, aid for domestic pipelines, efforts tobolster production of both liquefied natural gas at home and abroad and critical minerals, a person familiar with the matter said. It’s possible the changes could be paired with hundreds of billions of dollars in new and expanded tax credits for wind and solar power, nuclear plants, biofuels and advanced energy manufacturing sought by Democrats and the White House and included in earlier iterations of the Build Back Better spending bill, the person said.

Runyon didn't respond to a request for comment about the possible elements of a deal.

In his response to reports about Manchin's negotiations,Jones said that "this approach could only be considered 'climate legislation' if we warp the meaning of that term to include bills that will make climate change worse."

"Instead of letting Manchin and fossil fuel interests define the terms," he added, "the White House and Democratic leadership must push for the solutions we need, not merely what pleases Joe Manchin."

Sierra Club also released a statement Tuesday opposing attempts to compromise with the GOP, declaring that "just as there's no negotiating with arsonists on how much of a building they can burn, there's no negotiating with a party of climate deniers on climate action."

"For decades, the overwhelming majority of Republicans in Washington, D.C. have made their views on climate change abundantly clear: It's much ado about nothing, if it even exists," the group noted, citing some prominent examples—including recent comments from Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), who attended Manchin's meeting.

During an NPR interview in January, Cramer said:

The vast majority of people that we work for, that would be our constituents, believe that there is climate change, that it is going the wrong direction in terms of the temperature of the Earth and that they want us to do something about it. My starting point is that it's not near the crisis that the alarmists have made it out to be. But at the same time, nobody is going to solve the problem except humans. Other than God himself, we're the only ones in a position to contribute or to lower our contribution, whatever that might be. And our constituents expect us to do that.

Asked what he says to young people concerned about the future, Cramer said that "what I would tell them is that the Earth has gone through cycles for as long as there's been creation. What I would also tell them is what we can't do is we can't destroy ourselves in the process of trying to save the Earth."

Discussing the Monday meeting with Axios, Cramer said that Manchin, "not surprisingly, likes to be proactive and he wants to see what's possible."

"What's acceptable to them has got to be something that can get 10 of us," he added. "And that's going to be pretty tough."

Sierra Club said that "even when Republicans are capable of recognizing the facts about the climate crisis, they're unwilling to take any action to address it," highlighting that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) "wasted decades denying the existence of climate change—collecting a small fortune in donations from corporate polluters along the way—only to now have no plan to address the crisis."

"It's past time for President Biden and Democratic leadership to reject this nonsense and deliver on their promises of action on climate, care, jobs, and justice," the group asserted. "Our communities and our planet urgently need investments in transitioning to clean energy, reducing pollution, cutting costs for working families, creating good jobs, and promoting environmental justice."

Sierra Club was among the groups that held "Fight for Our Future" rallies across the country this past weekend.

===

rgblue

no lnx

Citizens’ Climate Lobby: Conservative climate event pushes for congressional action

Published on March 17th, 2022

TAGGED: CARBON FEE, CITIZENS CLIMATE LOBBY, CONGRESS, CONSERVATIVE, ECORIGHT

At the end of this month, conservative voters from across America will come to D.C. to build Republican support for a carbon price. This conservative climate leadership conference is hosted by Citizens’ Climate Lobby (CCL) and will be attended by more than 60 people who identify on the political right.

Citizens' Climate Lobby: Conservative climate event pushes for congressional action By Flannery Winchester

On Tues., March 29, attendees will hear from CCL staff, business leaders, other organizations on the eco-right, and members of Congress. Invited speakers from the Hill include Rep. John Curtis (R-UT-03), Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC-01), Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND), among others.

“Today, we see Republicans in Congress getting engaged on the climate issue and bringing conservative solutions to the table. This event will show them that their voters are behind them and eager for them to do even more,” said Drew Eyerly, Conservative Outreach Director for CCL.

On Wed., March 30, attendees will be split between two tracks to receive training in lobbying and climate communications. The two tracks are based on age, offering tailored content for climate advocates who are over age 40 and those who are under 40. According to an Ipsos/Newsy poll, 77 percent of young Republicans say climate change is a serious threat.Research shows that 75 percent of Republicans under 40 support a specific policy of putting a price on carbon pollution and giving regular dividends to households, which CCL is pushing for.

“It’s especially important that representatives hear from younger conservatives, who we know are more than twice as likely to say this is an important issue to them, than older conservatives,” said Nate Abercrombie, CCL’s Conservative Outreach Coordinator in a recent interview.

The advocates at this month’s event are yet another wave in the tide of grassroots advocates pushing Congress for climate action. Each June, more than a thousand volunteers of all political stripes attend CCL’s annual conference and hold hundreds of meetings with congressional offices.

“Citizens’ Climate Lobby is a nonpartisan organization, and we believe that the best way to achieve strong, lasting climate legislation is with support across the political spectrum,” explained Madeleine Para, CCL’s Executive Director. “We’re grateful to these conservative volunteers for making their voices heard at this event. With every conversation, they’re showing elected Republicans that climate change should be a bridge issue that we all work together on.”

Flannery Winchester has put her words to work for magazines, for marketing agencies, and now for our earth as the Communications Director for Citizens’ Climate Lobby . She is grateful to spend every day working to preserve this beautiful planet.

===

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Cramer

Kevin John Cramer (born January 21, 1961) is an American politician who has served as the junior United States **senator**for North Dakota since 2019. A member of the Republican Party, he represented North Dakota's at-large congressional district in the United States House of Representatives from 2013 to 2019.

Cramer chaired the North Dakota Republican Party from 1991 to 1993 and served as State Tourism Director from 1993 to 1997 and Economic Development Director from 1997 to 2000. He served on the state's Public Service Commission from 2003 to 2012.

Early life and education[

Cramer was born in Rolette, North Dakota, the first of five children of Clarice (Hjelden) and Richard Cramer.^[1] He was raised in Kindred, North Dakota, in Cass County, and graduated from Kindred High School. He received a B.A. degree from Concordia College in Moorhead, Minnesota, in 1983. He earned a master's degree in management from the University of Mary in Bismarck, North Dakota, in 2003.^[2]

Early career[

After college, Cramer campaigned for the Republican-endorsed tax commissioner candidate Scott Hove in 1984.^[3] In 1986, he campaigned for U.S. Senator Mark Andrews in his bid for reelection. Andrews lost to North Dakota Democratic-Nonpartisan League Party U.S. Senator Kent Conrad. Cramer went to work for the state Republican Party.^[4]

Cramer served as chairman of the North Dakota Republican Party from 1991 to 1993. At age 30, he was the youngest person to be named state party chairman.^[3]

In May 1993, Republican governor Ed Schafer appointed Cramer state tourism director. Cramer was preceded by Jim Fuglie^[5] and succeeded by Bob Martinson.^[6] He served in the position until he was appointed Economic Development Director in June 1997. Cramer was preceded by Chuck Stroup^[7] and succeeded by Lee Peterson in December 2000 as the director.^[8][9]

Following his stint as director of economic development, Cramer became director of the Harold Schafer Leadership Foundation in 2000. He served in the position until 2003.^[9]

North Dakota Public Service Commission (2003–2012)[

In 2003, Governor John Hoeven appointed Cramer to the Public Service Commission.^[10] He was elected to a six-year term on the Public Service Commission in 2004, defeating NPL nominee Ron Gumeringer, 65–35%.^[11]

In 2010, Cramer was reelected to a second term on the Public Service Commission, defeating Democratic nominee Brad Crabtree 61–35%.^[12] He served on the commission until 2012.^[13]

U.S. House of Representatives (2013–2019):{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

1996:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit]Elections:{:{}:[edit:{]}:

In 1996, House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas—a North Dakota native—persuaded Cramer to challenge Democratic U.S. Congressman Earl Pomeroy for North Dakota's at-large congressional seat. Pomeroy defeated him, 55%–43%.^[14]

1998[

In 1998, Cramer challenged Pomeroy again. Pomeroy won, 56%–41%.^[15]

2010

On January 14, Cramer announced that he would run for North Dakota's seat in the United States House of Representatives for a third time in the 2010 election.^[16] In early 2010, he appeared at North Dakota town hall meetings, where he opposed the Affordable Care Act.^[17] Cramer attended numerous Tea Party rallies in North Dakota, speaking about energy, taxes, jobs and the U.S. Constitution.^{[18][better source needed]} At the state Republican Party convention in March 2010, former House Majority Leader Rick Berg won the Republican congressional nomination; Berg was elected to Congress in November.^[19]

2012:{:{[}:

In 2012, Berg retired in order to run for the U.S. Senate. Cramer decided to run for the seat a fourth time.

Various national conservative groups, include FreedomWorks and the Club for Growth, endorsed Cramer, while Berg endorsed Cramer's rival, fellow Public Service Commissioner Brian Kalk.^[20] In the Republican primary election in June 2012, Cramer received 54,405 votes (54%) to Kalk's 45,415 (45%).^[21]

In the November 2012 general election Cramer defeated Democratic-NPL State Representative Pam Gulleson, with 173,585 votes (55%) to Gulleson's 131,870 (42%). Libertarian Party candidate Eric Olson received about 3% of the vote.^[22] He was sworn in on January 3, 2013.^[23]

2014[

In 2014 Cramer ran for reelection and was unopposed in the Republican primary.^[24] He won the general election with 55% of the vote, defeating Democratic-NPL nominee George B. Sinner, who received 38%. Libertarian candidate Jack Seaman received slightly under 6%.^[25]

2016:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Main article: 2016 United States House of Representatives election in North Dakota

In 2016 Cramer ran for a third term in Congress. He was unopposed in the primary^[26] and defeated Democratic-NPL nominee Chase Iron Eyes, a Native American activist, in the general election with 69% of the vote.^[27][28]

Tenure and political positions[

Cramer speaking at the 2013 CPAC in National Harbor, Maryland.

Abortion[

Cramer opposes abortion. He is a critic of Planned Parenthood and has called for cutting off public funding of the group.^[29][30] In 2013 Cramer condemned the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade and tied an uptick in mass shootings to the legalization of abortion and a decline in religious values.^[31] This remark was criticized by the director of the North Dakota Democratic Party and in Cosmopolitan. Cramer said, "I was asked recently by a reporter if I am afraid that some people would attack me if I speak like this. And I said, 'No, I am not afraid they will, I am quite certain they will.'"^[32][33] In the same speech, Cramer said of U.S. society: "We have normalized perversion and perverted God's natural law."^[31]

Donald Trump[

Cramer was "one of a handful of early Trump endorsers" among U.S. House Republicans.^[34]

Cramer supported Trump's 2017 executive order banning entry to the U.S. by citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries, saying, "I think what Donald Trump is doing is he's pulling America's head out of the sand and facing the reality that we have not been kept very safe by current immigration and refugee policies."^[35] He has been described as one of Trump's allies in Congress and pledged to be with Trump "100 percent of the time".^[36]

In February 2017, during Trump's first address to a joint session of Congress, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and a number of other female Democratic members of Congress wore white in protest of Trump. Cramer mocked the protest, saying Pelosi dressed "poorly" and remarking, "It is a syndrome. There is no question, there is a disease associated with the notion that a bunch of women would wear bad-looking white pantsuits in solidarity with Hillary Clinton to celebrate her loss. You cannot get that weird."^[37]

In June 2020, Cramer blocked bipartisan legislation to sanction China over its actions to undermine Hong Kong's independence—legislation he had co-sponsored—because the Trump administration requested that he do so.^[38]

On May 28, 2021, Cramer voted against creating an independent commission to investigate the 2021 United States Capitol attack.^[39]

Environment and energy[

Cramer rejects the scientific consensus on climate change.^[40][41] He has said that he would support a small carbon tax if the revenue went to research and development on clean fuel.^[40][41][42] Reuters has described Cramer as "one of America's most ardent drilling advocates."^[43] He supports an increase in oil and gas drilling on public lands and cutting taxes for energy producers, and opposes what he characterizes as overreach by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.^[44] In May 2016 Trump asked Cramer to draft his campaign's energy policy.^[43] Cramer wrote Trump's energy plan, which heavily promoted fossil fuels, weakened environmental regulation, and vowed to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and repeal U.S. regulations of carbon emissions.^[45]

Food stamps[

Cramer supports cuts in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly the Food Stamp Program), and attracted controversy in 2013 when he cited a biblical quotation several times in support of Republicans' efforts to cut $40 billion from the program over ten years.^[46][47]

Gun policy[

Cramer said that gun control would not have prevented the Orlando nightclub shooting.^[48] In 2016 he criticized proposed gun control legislation, saying, "The problem isn't the U.S. Constitution. The problem is Islamic terrorism."^[49]

Health care[

Cramer opposes the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") and voted to repeal it without a replacement five times.^[50][51][52] He has voted against health insurance protections for patients with preexisting conditions and against the expansion of Medicaid.^[52] Cramer has said that the American Health Care Act of 2017, the Republican bill he supported to repeal and replace Obamacare, would have prevented "price discrimination" against people with preexisting conditions; The Washington Postfact-checker called this assertion false.^[53]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Cramer introduced legislation to ban vaccine and mask mandates.^[54] He opposed adding unruly passengers to the "no-fly" list, saying that unruly passengers who refuse to comply with mask requirements are not the same as terrorists.^[55]

LGBT rights[

Cramer opposes same-sex marriage and condemned the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.^{[56][57][58][59]}

Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

In 2018, Cramer called both Anita Hill's sexual harassment allegation against Clarence Thomas and Christine Blasey Ford's sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh "absurd". He called Ford's allegation "even more absurd" than Hill's because the sexual assault that Ford described "never went anywhere" and because both Kavanaugh and Ford were intoxicated teenagers.^[60] Cramer questioned whether Ford's allegation would disqualify Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court even if true, but said that if Kavanaugh were found to have lied in denying the allegation, that would be disqualifying.^[61]

Taxes[

Cramer has voted to repeal the estate tax, which imposes a tax after the first several million dollars on a dead person's estate.^[62] He supports Trump's 25% tax on many types of imports, which may have decreased sales for North Dakota's soybean industry in 2018, but has said he believes the long-term benefits of a trade war are worth it.^[63][64]

Violence Against Women Act[

In 2013, at a forum on the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), Cramer engaged in "a testy exchange with Native American victim assistance leaders."^[65][66] He later issued a statement apologizing for his "tone and rhetoric" during the exchange.^[65] Cramer voted to reauthorize VAWA,^[67] but opposed language in the act that would allow tribal courts to prosecute non-Natives "for abusing or assaulting Native American women on Indian land."^[68] Cramer asked, "How could a non-Native man get a fair trial on a reservation?"^[68] and questioned the provision's constitutionality. He voted for an amendment to repeal it.^[67]

Committee assignments

Committee on Energy and Commerce^[69]

Caucus memberships

Congressional NextGen 9-1-1 Caucus^[70]
Congressional Western Caucus^[71]

U.S. Senate[

[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kevin_Cramer,_official_portrait,_116th_congress_%28cropped%29.jpg)

Cramer during the 116th Congress

Elections[

2018[

Main article: 2018 United States Senate election in North Dakota

On January 11, 2018, after months of speculation, Cramer announced^[72] that he would not seek the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate to run against Democratic-NPL incumbent Heidi Heitkamp and would instead run for reelection to the U.S. House.^[73] On February 15, he announced that he had changed his mind and would run for the Senate.^[74] Odney advertising firm president Pat Finken served as Cramer's campaign manager.^[75] On April 7,^[76] Cramer won the North Dakota Republican Party's endorsement. Three days later, his campaign announced it had raised $1.35 million in the first quarter of 2018, most of it in late February and March.^[77]

In June 2018, The Washington Post reported that Cramer had contacted the White House to seek political help in his Senate campaign and was upset that Trump had not publicly criticized Heitkamp in the same way that he had criticized other Democrats.^[78] Cramer later publicly criticized White House staff and argued that Trump was refraining because Heitkamp was a woman.^[78] Trump scheduled a trip to North Dakota that month to campaign for Cramer, a trip that Politico reported "could go a long way toward extinguishing tensions between the White House and the Senate hopeful."^[79]

During his 2018 campaign, Cramer sought and received the support of the Public Advocate of the United States, an anti-LGBT group that advocates conversion therapy and ties homosexuality to pedophilia.^[59] In an eight-question survey for the group, Cramer said he would oppose "'Transgender Bathrooms' legislation and regulations—which have the effect of encouraging and protecting pedophiles".^[59] He also agreed with the organization that "public schools should be 'prevented from brainwashing elementary school children with the Homosexual Agenda.'"^[59] Cramer supported requiring schools to teach that there are only two genders and granting Christian businesses the right to not service same-sex weddings.^[59] A spokesman for him said: "Let's be clear. Congressman Cramer doesn't support the teaching of history with any special emphasis on any particular group. History is history and should be taught as such. Additionally, Kevin does not think transgender people are at all comparable to pedophiles—this a gross misinterpretation of the survey question."^[59]

Cramer won the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate on June 12, 2018.^[80] The next month, a spokesperson for the political network organized by the Koch brothers announced that they would not financially support Cramer's campaign because the brothers viewed him as insufficiently supportive of free trade and fiscal conservatism, and because they felt he held other views inconsistent with theirs.^[81]

In the November 6 general election, Cramer defeated Heitkamp^[82] with 55% of the vote to Heitkamp's 45%.^[83]

Tenure[

In July 2019, Cramer said he favored lawsuits seeking to overturn Obamacare.^[84] The same year, he held up the confirmation of a White House budget official in order to get the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to release sensitive documents about border wall construction.^[85] Cramer had pushed the Army Corps to use a North Dakota firm run by his 2018 campaign donor Tommy Fisher. Fisher donated $10,000 to Cramer's campaign and was also Cramer's guest at the 2018 State of the Union Address, where he shook Trump's hand.^[86][87] In December 2019, Fisher Industries and the Fisher Sand and Gravel subsidiary, run by a Trump donor, were awarded the $400 million contract.^[88] Fisher Sand & Gravel had been previously fined $1.16 million for violating tax laws,^[89] and racked up 1,300 air-quality violations and over $625,000 in fines.^[90]

In October 2019, Cramer defended Trump's decision to host the G7 conference at the Trump National Doral Miami, a resort Trump owns. Cramer said, "I don’t have any concerns about it other than just politically how it appears", and praised Trump for the "tremendous integrity in his boldness and his transparency" in deciding to select his own property for the summit.^[91] Lack of support from Trump's Republican allies who were weary of defending him led Trump to quickly abandon his plans, as customary congressional support withered.^[92][93]

In December 2019, at Trump's request, Cramer cast the only vote against a Senate motion to recognize the Armenian genocide, passage of which required unanimous consent.Trump opposed the motion because of his relationship with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.^[94][95] Senator Lindsey Graham had voted against such a motion previously, but refused to do so after Trump withdrew of a contingent of U.S. troops, allowing the Turks to attack the US's Kurdish allies who had rolled back the Islamic State in Syria's forces.^[96]

On March 24, 2020, Cramer tweeted that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was “retarded.” He later deleted the tweet and apologized, saying he had intended to write “ridiculous”,^[97][98] blaming autocorrect and his "fat fingers".^[99][100]

After Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election and Trump refused to concede and made numerous baseless claims of fraud, Cramer at first defended Trump^[101] but later said "the election was not stolen" and that he had "moved on a long time ago".^[102][103]

Committee assignments

For the 116th United States Congress, Cramer was named to five Senate committees.^[104] They are:

Personal life[

Cramer and his wife Kris had five children together^[105] and five grandchildren as of 2018.^[106] Their son Isaac died in 2018 due to complications of alcohol addiction. They had earlier adopted Isaac's son from a previous relationship, whose mother had been killed by her abusive husband.^[107]

Cramer co-chairs the Roughrider Honor Flight program. This program gives World War II veterans the chance to visit the World War II memorial in Washington, D.C.^[108]

Electoral history

...

===

an kos 621

Senate Republicans desperately want to tee up some policy-focused jabs at the Biden agenda that can resonate with their base and independents alike ahead of next year's midterms.

But every time they appear in the conservative right-wing echo chamber, hosts quickly redirect the conversation back to some sensational culture war issue to keep their viewers hopped up on rage.

Take Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, who recently went on Newsmax to stoke consternation over President Joe Biden's energy policy, including cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, job losses, and rising gas prices.

But according to the *Washington Post*, within minutes of the 8-minute appearance, Newsmax hosts steered Cramer to more incendiary territory—whether Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was incorporating critical race theory into military training.

Cramer admitted to the Post that Republicans were failing to engage their voters with policy discussions that once resonated and even inflamed their base, like the runaway deficit charge that became a flashpoint for the Tea Party movement. But he also insisted that a discussion around inflation could break through if Americans continued to be impacted by things like rising gas prices at the pumps.

"If there's anything to worry about, it's this sense that something has to happen instantly for it to be effective," Cramer said. "I reject that."

But the problem for Republicans is twofold. First, for four years, Trump juiced up GOP voters on a steady diet of sugary sodas and pop rocks. But now that congressional Republicans are back to pretending to care about substantive policy again, their voters are too addicted to the sugar highs to give a damn about last decade's red meat.

Second, almost all of Biden's agenda is exceedingly more popular than Republicans or, for that matter, the policy they're trying to sell. For instance, a month after Biden signed the American Rescue Plan into law, a Washington Post-ABC poll found that 65% of Americans still supported the $1.9 trillion relief package, while just 31% opposed it.

Biden's American Jobs Plan typically hasn't drawn quite as much support as the relief plan in polling, but in poll after poll people still favor it far more than they oppose it, and the more voters hear about it the more they like it. An April Navigator Research poll of the jobs plan, for instance, found baseline support of 53% for the $2.3 trillion jobs and infrastructure proposal but just 23% opposition to it. And after the plan was described in greater detail to respondents, support shot up to 70%.

As for Republicans, they're a wildly unpopular party pushing wildly unpopular policies to defend their wildly unpopular 2017 tax giveaway to the rich.

Senate Republicans also appear to be a bit out of practice after holding the majority since 2014. Even they eventually came around to the realization that their efforts to combat Biden's coronavirus relief plan was a 100% flop.

Now it's occurring to them that focusing their message 100% on Dr. Seuss and the great Potato Head controversy without incorporating any crossover appeal whatsoever for independent voters isn't exactly a winning strategy for the midterms, particularly in the Senate.

So for now, Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the Senate GOP's No. 3, will keep hosting press conferences with the caucus every Wednesday and Thursday in an effort to drive messages that occasionally manage to veer into policy territory.

McConnell will keep appearing on Fox News to slam Biden's "radical left-wing proposals" only to end up talking about that latest tweets of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

And all Republicans will appeal to the heavens to give them some policy gift such as sustained soaring inflation that might allow them to ween their voters off Trump's steady junk food diet.

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

GOP senator tied himself in knots with a ridiculous answer rather than say Biden is president-elect

Cody Fenwick

December 15, 2020

On Monday, the Electoral College officially voted 306-232 to make Joe Biden the next president of the United States. Many other milestones had made the final result clear for weeks, but President Donald Trump has decided to contest the election anyway.

===

chuck Todd slammed for 'malfeasance of journalism' for allowing pro-Trump Republican to spew 'blatant lies'

David Badash The New Civil Rights Movement

November 23, 2020

**Chuck Todd** is once again under fire, as calls mount to fire the host of NBC News' once-venerated "Meet the Press."

===

'are you really not capable of answering a question?’ CNN’s Tapper hammers GOP senator ranting about Mueller and Biden when asked about Trump’s Ukraine scandal

CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday hammered Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND)…

https://freedomroad.us/who-we-are/ruth-anna-buffalo/

North Dakota Republican Who Sponsored Law Disenfranchising Native Americans Loses Election — to a Native American

Tuesday night in North Dakota, Democrats faced a stinging blow with the loss of Sen. Heidi Heitkamp.

A bipartisan problem-solver, Heitkamp did a lot in her time in the Senate — she expanded the Violence Against Women Act to cover Native American tribes, sponsored a bill to help farmers hurt by tariffs, and heroically stood up for women by voting againstBrett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court.She was unseated by GOP Rep. Kevin Cramer, a hard-right ideologue who has suggested attempted rape isn't a crime. The loss was broadly expected, as she was badly trailing in polls for weeks.

But further down the ballot, North Dakota Republicans paid a steep price for the lengths they went to to defeat her.

Shortly after Heitkamp first won her seat in 2012, carried to a narrow victory by Native American voters, GOP lawmakers in North Dakota retaliated by passing a voter ID bill making it almost impossible for Native Americans on tribal lands to vote. The law required them to use an ID card bearing a residential street address — even though most people in tribal communities do not have a street address. The law was initially blocked by a federal judge, but allowed to take effect on appeal.

But North Dakota Republicans didn't anticipate what a massive backlash there would be to their skullduggery. Immediately after the Supreme Court let the law take effect, furious Democratic activists all over the country crowdfunded a massive effort to get street addresses and updated ID cards for Native Americans in the state.

The effort was so successful that on Election Day, Native turnout was actually *higher* than 2012 in several places. The high turnout was not enough to save Heitkamp, as the state's electorate has shifted significantly right of where it was six years ago — but at the legislative level, angry Native voters flipped at least three red seats blue, including state House Majority Leader Al Carlson.

In the most poetic justice of the night, Randy Boehning, a GOP state representative in Fargo who sponsored the Native American disenfranchisement law in the first place, was unseated by Democrat Ruth Anna Buffalo — a Native American.

It is hard to call the midterm results in North Dakota a positive thing for Democrats. But even though they lost the Senate race, they can take satisfaction in knowing that the Republican law passed to deny Native Americans the vote was an utter failure that woke a sleeping giant — and may have done the GOP more harm than good.

https://www.alternet.org/election-03918/heidi-heitkamp-kevin-cramer-me-too-victimization

no lnx

the North Dakota Senate race, Republican challenger Rep. Kevin Cramer has staked out a clear position against the women challenging rape culture.

A few weeks ago, he claimed that the claims of sexual assault by Brett Kavanaugh would not disqualify him from the Supreme Court even if true because the alleged assault against Dr. Christine Blasey Ford "never went anywhere" — only relenting after a TV interviewer explained to him why it would be bad if it was true. More recently, Cramer blasted the whole Me Too movement for saying "you're just supposed to believe somebody because they said it happened," and remarked that his female relatives "cannot understand this movement toward victimization" because "they are pioneers of the prairie."

According to the New York Times, When asked about these comments at a Scandinavian festival in Rutland, incumbent Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp had some choice words for Cramer for dismissing survivors of sexual assault as weak.

"The better part of my career in public life has been working with victims. Did you ask him how many victims during this process he actually sat down with, and survivors he sat down with, and visited with personally?"

Heitkamp, who served as North Dakota's attorney general in the 90s, voted against confirming Kavanaugh — and hails from one of the reddest states of any senator to do so.

"I think it's wonderful that his wife has never had an experience, and good for her, and it’s wonderful his mom hasn't," Heitkamp continued, growing visibly emotional. "My mom did. And I think it affected my mom her whole life. And it didn't make her less strong. And I want you to put this in there, it did not make my mom less strong that she was a victim. She got stronger and she made us strong. And to suggest that this movement doesn't make women strong and stronger is really unfortunate."

Should Cramer be elected to the Senate, the implications for North Dakota women could be dark. Already, the Republican-controlled Congress is dangerously close to letting the Violence Against Women Act lapse, and when the last big reauthorization came up in 2013, several Republicans voted against it. Cramer, who was in the House at the time, did vote for it, but simultaneously complained that the provisions for Native American tribes — provisions Heitkamp fought for, and which are essential to Native women in the state — were unconstitutional. He felt strongly enough about it that he violently insulted the Tribal Council during a meeting in 2013.

Recent polls show Cramer with a fairly large lead. So it will be down to Democrats who support her stand against the Supreme Court takeover to help her turn things around if she is to win a second term.

===

On Tuesday, Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) and Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) issued separate statements suggesting that the acting Secretary of the Army Robert Speer has ordered the Army Corps to issue the final easement to tunnel under Lake Oahe.

Cramer's statement appeared on his website with a photo of a shovel and a hashtag saying, #Build It.

"I have received word the Department of Defense is granting the easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline and Congressional notification is imminent," he said. "It's time to get to work and finish this important piece of energy infrastructure enhancing America's energy security and putting North Dakotans and Americans back to work. President Trump has proven to be a man of action and I am grateful for his commitment to this and other critical infrastructure projects so vital to our nation."

But in a statement Tuesday night, the Standing Rock Sioux said they had not received notice that the easement had been granted, calling the lawmakers' claims "premature" and challenging the possible suspension of the Army Corps' environmental impact statement as a "wholly unexplained and arbitrary change based on the president's personal views and, potentially, personal investments."

Law enforcement has arrested 696 protesters since August 10, 2016, the Morton County Sheriff's Office said. Unfortunately for the Water Protectors, they might be facing a legal nightmare.

As Freshet Collective reported:

"A randomized survey conducted by the National Jury Project concluded it is highly likely that the more than 600 water protectors facing criminal charges in the coming months will not receive fair trials from petit jurors impaneled in Morton and Burleigh Counties. The survey found that 77 percent of the juror-eligible population in Morton County and 85 percent of the juror-eligible population in Burleigh County had already decided the defendants were guilty."

http://www.ecowatch.com/arrested-standing-rock-dapl-2233136348.html

FIRST ELECTED:2012

Leadership PAC (1):

Badlands PAC

House

Total to Democrats: $0

Total to Republicans: $23,500| Recipient | Total |

Abraham, Ralph (R-LA)	($1,000)
Blum, Rod (R-IA)	$1,000
Coffman, Mike (R-CO)	$2,000
Comstock, Barbara (R-VA)	$1,000
Cramer, Kevin (R-ND)	$2,500
Curbelo, Carlos (R-FL)	$1,000
Dold, Bob (R-IL)	$1,000
Hardy, Cresent (R-NV)	$1,000
Hurd, Will (R-TX)	$1,000
Katko, John (R-NY)	$1,000
Knight, Steve (R-CA)	$1,000
MacArthur, Thomas (R-NJ)	($1,000)
Paulsen, Erik (R-MN)	$4,500
Poliquin, Bruce (R-ME)	$2,000
Valadao, David (R-CA)	$1,000
Walberg, Tim (R-MI)	$1,000
Young, David (R-IA)	$1,000
Zeldin, Lee (R-NY)	$1,000
Zinke, Ryan K (R-MT)	$2,500

Senate

Total to Democrats: $0

Total to Republicans: $6,500| Recipient | Total |

Cassidy, Bill (R-LA)	($1,000)
Hoeven, John (R-ND)	$2,500
Toomey, Pat (R-PA)	$2,500
Young, Todd (R-IN)	$2,500

badlands 2016

1 American Crystal Sugar $10,000 $0 $10,000

1 Home Depot $10,000 $0 $10,000

3 AT&T Inc $7,500 $0 $7,500

4 Arizona Commerce Authority $5,000 $5,000 $0

4 Koch Industries $5,000 $0 $5,000

4 Sabin Metal $5,000 $5,000 $0

7 BNSF Railway $4,000 $0 $4,000

8 General Electric $3,500 $0 $3,500

8 Great River Energy $3,500 $0 $3,500

10 National Rural Electric Cooperative Assn $3,000 $0 $3,000

11 General Atomics $2,500 $0 $2,500

11 National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $2,500 $0 $2,500

13 Basin Electric Power Co-Op $2,375 $0 $2,375

1American Crystal Sugar$10,000$0$10,0001Home Depot$10,000$0$10,0003AT&T Inc$7,500$0$7,5004Arizona Commerce Authority$5,000$5,000$04Koch Industries$5,000$0$5,0004Sabin Metal$5,000$5,000$07BNSF Railway$4,000$0$4,0008General Electric$3,500$0$3,5008Great River Energy$3,500$0$3,50010National Rural Electric Cooperative Assn$3,000$0$3,00011General Atomics$2,500$0$2,50011National Cable & Telecommunications Assn$2,500$0$2,50013Basin Electric Power Co-Op$2,375$0$2,375

Career Fundraising

1995 - 2016 Total Receipts: $5,014,379

1995 - 2016 Total Spent: $4,569,971

Debts: $0

Last Report: Monday, November 28, 2016

Top 5 Contributors, 1995 - 2016

Contributor Total Indivs PACs

Oasis Petroleum $58,500 $58,500 $0

SelectEnergy Services $40,300 $40,300 $0

Armstrong Corp $32,800 $32,800 $0

BNSF Railway $26,150 $3,650 $22,500

Koch Industries $25,500 $0 $25,500

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00004614&newMem=N&recs=20

career

Industry	Total
Oil & Gas	$643,400
Crop Production & Basic Processing	$308,340
Retired	$222,770
Leadership PACs	$200,263
Agricultural Services/Products	$128,250
Health Professionals	$121,050
Commercial Banks	$110,650
Real Estate	$98,455
Electric Utilities	$96,000
Insurance	$85,350
Mining	$73,950
General Contractors	$72,700
Misc Energy	$65,700
Lawyers/Law Firms	$64,852
Telecom Services	$60,000
Education	$58,400
Automotive	$57,100
Building Materials & Equipment	$54,750
Telephone Utilities	$53,500
Retail Sales	$53,250

Sector Totals

Sector	Total	PACs	Indivs
Agribusiness	$526,473	$250,300	$276,173
Communications/Electronics	$187,325	$160,000	$27,325
Construction	$229,200	$84,500	$144,700
Defense	$51,000	$51,000	$0
E:{nergy & Natural Resources:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}:	$879,050	$466,400	$412,650
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate	$406,955	$149,500	$257,455
Health	$193,100	$129,400	$63,700
Lawyers & Lobbyists	$96,995	$10,000	$86,995
Transportation	$122,031	$79,000	$43,031
Misc Business	$323,782	$134,057	$189,725
Labor	$14,000	$14,000	$0
Ideological/Single-Issue	$329,795	$270,266	$59,529
Other	$319,755	$0	$319,755

Contributor Total Indivs PACs

Oasis Petroleum $58,500 $58,500 $0

Select Energy Services $40,300 $40,300 $0

Armstrong Corp $32,800 $32,800 $0

BNSF Railway $26,150 $3,650 $22,500

Koch Industries $25,500 $0 $25,500

North American Coal Corp $25,200 $3,400 $21,800

Home Depot $25,000 $0 $25,000

National Auto Dealers Assn $25,000 $0 $25,000

Cody Oil & Gas $24,800 $24,800 $0

American Crystal Sugar $24,750 $2,250 $22,500

Exxon Mobil $23,500 $0 $23,500

Tesoro Corp $23,500 $0 $23,500

State of North Dakota $23,460 $23,460 $0

Lignite Energy Council $22,750 $0 $22,750

Arthur Companies $22,700 $22,700 $0

Mortenson Farms $22,700 $22,700 $0

American Bankers Assn $22,500 $0 $22,500

Microsoft Corp $22,450 $2,950 $19,500

Deere & Co $22,000 $0 $22,000

National Assn of Home Builders $22,000 $0 $22,000

===

Cycle Race Top vote-getting candidates Raised Spent Election Results

2016 ND01 Kevin Cramer*

Chase Iron Eyes $1,382,670

$225,622 $978,864

$210,086 Incumbent Reelected

2014 ND01 Kevin Cramer*

George Sinner $1,492,880

$943,814 $1,505,728

$929,146 Incumbent Reelected

2012 ND01 Kevin Cramer

Pam Gulleson $1,325,478

$1,023,930 $1,291,733

$1,019,196 Open S

pacs

Business	$1,511,157	(84%)	(84%)
	Labor	$14,000	(1%)
	Ideological/Single Issue	$269,266	(15%)

Kevin Cramer

On May 13, Trump announced that he had brought on Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) as an energy adviser. Reuters reported that Cramer said he would write a detailed report for Trump on energy policy ideas, which would “emphasize the dangers of foreign ownership of U.S. energy assets, as well as what he characterized as burdensome taxes and over-regulation.”

The Fossil Fuel Connection

Over his congressional career, Cramer has received $596,600 from the oil and gas industry, more than twice as much as he’s taken from any other industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Cramer is a vocal climate science denier. As Slate has noted, Cramer has alleged, “We know the global climate is cooling,” and declared, “the idea that CO2 is somehow causing global warming is on its face fraudulent.”

The New York Times reported that Cramer listed the following rules that Trump “might do away with if he were president”:The Clean Power Plan, the Clean Water Rule, and limits on methane emissions.And E&E News reported that Cramer said he expects the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act to be among the statutes “rolled back in the first 100 days of a Trump administration, or over the two-year course of a Republican-held Congress.” Cramer has also said he would encourage Trump to “walk away from President Barack Obama’s agreement to sign the Paris climate accord,” Bloomberg reported.

http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/09/27/climate-science-denialist-myron-ebell-named-trump-adviser

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s energy policy to dig, drill, and frack as much fossil fuel out of the ground as possible only really works by denying two realities.

The first reality denied is that there is no global agreement to move the world away from the fuels that Trump thinks are the future.

The second reality denied, of course, is the existence of decades of scientific evidence linking fossil fuel burning to dangerous climate change.

So with this in mind, the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s(CEI) Myron Ebell seems a perfect addition to Trump’s team.

As the U.S. media picks through the entrails from the first presidential debate, a few hours earlier it was revealed that should Trump win,:{ Ebell would lead the Republican’s “EPA transition team”:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}: that would strip the agency of key powers.

Ebell has long fought the legitimacy of climate science while promoting fossil fuels — epitomizing Trump’s current approach to energy and climate science.

For the best part of 20 years, Ebell has been actively working in favor of the fossil fuel industry by attempting to undermine climate science.

In 1998, Ebell joined with the American Petroleum Institute and staff from fossil fuel companies Exxon, Chevron, and Southern Company to try to reshape how the U.S. people understood the risks of climate change.

In a multi-million dollar plan that was leaked, Ebell and others concluded that a “victory” would be theirs only when the public doubted the links between dangerous global warming and fossil fuel burning.

Over the years, the CEI, where Ebell works as the director of the Center for Energy and Environment, has accepted cash from fossil fuel interests including oil giant ExxonMobil and foundations funded and controlled by the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch.

Bad Company

Ebell looks to be in good company in the Republican nominee’s camp.

In August, Trump’s team announced Kathleen Hartnett-White as one of several new additions to its “economic advisory team.”

Hartnett-White is another who doubts the well-established link between fossil fuel burning and climate change.

In a column last year, Hartnett-White lauded the “environmental benefits” of fossil fuel burning, while claiming the evidence for climate change was waning.

Hartnett-White is director of an energy and environment project at the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) — another group that has taken money from the Koch brothers.

In July, the TPPF released a “research booklet” written by contrarian Dr. Roy Spencer that attempted to undermine findings related to sea level rise, extreme temperatures, and other impacts from burning fossil fuels.

Hartnett-White is also an adviser to the CO2 Coalition — a group that includes extreme climate science denier Patrick Moore, who rejects any evidence for human-caused climate change.

Trump’s key energy adviser, Republican congressman Kevin Cramer, is also a self-confessed “skeptic.”

Another Trump aide and potential energy secretary in a Trump presidency is Harold Hamm, the founder and CEO of major oil producer Continental Resources. Hamm has also been a donor to Cramer's political campaigns. As DeSmog has reported, Hamm's company could gain from any future decisions to allow the Keystone XL pipeline.

Trump's Climate Hoax

During the presidential debate, climate change was barely mentioned. At one point, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton taunted Trump, saying that he “thinks climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese.”

Trump interjected, saying “I do not say that,” going on to disparage solar power. He has claimed a tweet saying global warming was a concept “created by and for the Chinese” was a joke, but has continued to refer to climate change using terms like “hoax” since.

Given the “advisers” Trump is surrounding himself with so far, it seems unlikely he will get in touch with reality ahead of the November election.

see google 2 9/16

2 faced denier

===

Since Republicans have spent so long telling their constituents that climate change is not a serious threat, they are in no position to do anything about it in government.

This leaves the Democrats with the responsibility to pass as much legislation to lessen the impact of climate change and deal with its consequences. Since Republicans insist on vetoing nearly all legislation concerning the threat, it is likely that if Hillary Clinton is elected, she will have to follow Obama's footsteps and implement policy through executive actions.

Conservative media and politicians may not be the only reasons why Americans are so divided about the climate: Corporate groups are also hedging their bets and throwing investment behind both sides, an investigation by Reuters found.

Some of the country's most vocal corporate supporters of Obama's environmental programs have been found to be funding some of the most ardent anti-climate change politicians in Washington. Among these companies are PepsiCo, Dupont and Google, Reuters said on Tuesday.

Though companies often split their campaign donations to both parties, arguing for both sides of a particular issue may be a problem, the head of the Investor Responsibility Research Center Institute Jon Kukomnik told Reuters.

"There really needs to be a process that looks at these issues … at C-suite and board levels on a periodic basis," he said.

Of the 35 biggest U.S. companies which signed on to Obama's American Business Act on Climate Change Pledge last year, 25 of these companies are supporting Congressional climate deniers by helping to fund their campaigns.

These climate deniers include North Dakota Republican Congressman Kevin Cramer, who once argued the Earth was getting cooler and not warmer, and Oklahoma Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe, who once held up a snowball in the Senate to prove that global warming is not occurring.

Other companies which signed the environmental pact and then gave political donations to climate deniers are Mondelez, Google,AT&T, Verizon and GE.

Only GE responded to Reuters' requests for comment, saying it supports "elected officials based on a wide range of issues." The company insists it has been "outspoken about the need to address climate change."

Sen. Inhofe said businesses might have signed the environmental pact because it appeared politically expedient to do so at that moment.

"These are competitive companies, and the board might have said, 'Look, right now it might be a popular thing to join this, and there's no downside since we're not really committing to anything,'" he said.

However, investors may want companies to be more committed to environmental sustainability, Lauren Compere of Boston Common Asset Management said.

"No company wants to be perceived as espousing progressive climate policies on the one hand, while funding climate deniers on the other," she said.

http://www.ecowatch.com/companies-drive-climate-denial-1998224867.html

grist

Donald Trump’s new energy adviser is exactly the kind of guy you’d expect to find passing white papers along to the Republican presidential candidate who called global warming “bullshit” and a “hoax” invented by the Chinese.

Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), an early Trump endorser, is a self-proclaimed climate skeptic. In the past week alone, the former electricity regulator turned Congressman lamented the denial of a new coal terminal permit in Washington State and called the Obama administration’s new methane regulations a “one-size-fits-all sledge hammer on the fossil fuel industry” created by “extreme environmentalists.”

All that’s enough to raise green eyebrows. What’s more troubling is the short-sightedness and illogic apparent in the policy positions Cramer says he’ll recommend to the presumptive nominee.

In an interview with ClimateWire, Cramer voiced his support for a “very, very modest carbon tax” to replace the Clean Power Plan. It’s an intriguing position for a climate skeptic to take, until you realize that he wants to use the new tax revenue to “fund clean fossil fuel research and development.” The truly curious bit here is that Cramer called a revenue-neutral carbon tax “inappropriate” in the same interview — but his proposed tax isrevenue neutral.

“I would still tell [Trump], ‘Yeah, we need to stop and repeal the Clean Power Plan,'” Cramer said. “If in fact he wants a more carbon-restrained energy policy, he ought to work with real scientists and work with Congress to come up with a better one.” It’s unclear whether Cramer’s “real scientists” accept real climate science.

Asked if he was scared by Trump’s recent comment that ozone-depleting compounds don’t hurt the environment, Cramer responded, “No, it doesn’t scare me, because frankly, it gets back to his blunt talk. He speaks so plainly, and yes, it may not seem sophisticated, it may not seem hyper-intellectual, but it’s plain enough for everybody to understand.”

The problem, of course, is that “plain enough for everybody to understand” should not be a synonym for “patently false.”

On Twitter, Cramer comes off as a plain-spoken, back-slapping fossil-fuel advocate. Here’s a classic quip:

I agree with @GinaEPA 's quote today- "The Clean Power Plan is not the most elegant of tools." It's more like turning a screw with a hammer!

—

Rep. Kevin Cramer (@RepKevinCramer) May 07, 2016

Which would nearly approach amusing, if Cramer himself wasn’t the threading holding the screw back. Here he is in 2013: “These mandates and these wind farms are all based on this fraudulent science from the EPA, meaning their claim that CO2 is a pollutant and is causing global warming.”

Since then, Cramer has followed a path taken by others in the GOP and traded in his outright denial in favor of deflection masquerading as pragmatism.“I don’t even participate in that ‘climate change is real, climate change isn’t real’ debate,” Cramer said last year. “It doesn’t matter to me whether it’s real or it isn’t real.”

Sure it does. The largest industry donor to Cramer’s campaigns is the oil and gas sector; his largest single contributor is Tesoro. All while North Dakota’s oil boom verges on an echo.

So no, there aren’t many surprises here. Cramer opposed renewal of the federal government’s tax credits for wind energy production and co-sponsored the Federal Land Freedom Act, which would allow states to lease energy rights on federal lands.Last year, he introduced a bill that would authorize the Secretary of Interior to approve natural gas pipelines running through units of the National Park System. What could go wrong?

Because this is the way the world works, Cramer currently serves on the House Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy. And with President Trump in the White House, he could be your next Secretary of Energy.