Dirty Energy Koch Brothers' Sock Puppets

Dirty Energy Koch Brothers - Anti-American

About this website

ECOWATCH.COM|BY ECOWATCH

These 4 Koch-Funded Congressmen Are Behind the Bill to Abolish the EPA

These 4 Koch-Funded Congressmen Are Behind the Bill to Abolish the EPA

By Alex Kotch

Florida Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz turned heads when he introduced a bill on Feb. 3 to "completely abolish" the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

"Today, the American people are drowning in rules and regulations promulgated by unelected bureaucrats," Gaetz told fellow GOP lawmakers in an email reported by the Huffington Post "and the Environmental Protection Agency has become an extraordinary offender."

Rep. Gaetz's bill came the day after a Senate committee voted in favor of confirming Scott Pruitt, the fossil fuel-friendly attorney general of Oklahoma who has sued the EPA 14 times, to head the agency.

VIDEO ON LINK

And like Pruitt, Rep. Gaetz and his three fellow sponsors of H.R. 861 have all benefited from campaign donations from oil, gas and coal companies and large electric utilities.

The four GOP representatives have raked in campaign cash from some of the biggest corporations peddling fossil fuels, including Koch Industries, Duke Energy, Chevron and ExxonMobil. What's more, an independent political spending group funded by an oil and gas company stepped in with ad buys to aid in Gaetz's recent U.S. House race.

CHART ON LINK

Over their careers, these legislators appear to have responded in kind, pushing legislation favored by the industries reliant on fossil fuels. Here's who they are, how much they've received from the industry and what they've been up to in recent years.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL)

Since 2010, Gaetz's political campaigns have received $28,000 directly from fossil fuel companies and energy utilities, according to data compiled by the National Institute on Money in State Politics. These donors include the corporate PACs of utilities including Duke Energy, Gulf Power, NextEra Energy, Progress Energy, Southern Company and Teco Energy; oil and gas companies Chevron, Exxon and Koch Industries; and individual donors including the CEO of Gulf Power and the CEO of Global Industries and Dore Energy.

In 2016, as Gaetz ran for his first term in Congress, a super PAC supporting him received a $100,000 donation from Harness Oil and Gas, a Texas-based company reportedly run by family friends. This super PAC, North Florida Neighbors, spent more than $460,000, the bulk of its total expenditures during that election cycle, supporting Gaetz.

As a Florida state legislator, Gaetz successfully fought the requirement that gas sold in the state contain a minimum percentage of ethanol, something he called "a feel-good attempt to use alternative energy."

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY)

Massie, a U.S. representative since 2012, was first elected with the backing of the Tea Party group FreedomWorks, which heavily opposes environmental regulations and regularly questions whether humans are affecting the climate.

In his three congressional campaigns, Massie took in nearly $155,000 from companies working in various parts of the oil, gas and coal industries, including Alpha Natural Resources, Chevron, Duke Energy, Exxon, Halliburton and Koch Industries, as well as from CSX Corporation, a transportation company that operates trains carrying coal, oil, natural gas and frac sand, an essential material used in shale drilling.

From his position in Congress, Massie has attacked and attempted to weaken the EPA repeatedly. He co-sponsored a 2016 bill to shift how the EPA analyzes greenhouse gas emissions in favor of fossil fuel companies—a bill lobbied for by Marathon Petroleum (which has given him $20,000) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (which raises doubt about human-caused climate change). Before that, he co-sponsored a 2015 resolution weakening an EPA rule under the Clean Air Act and a 2014 bill lowering EPA ambient air quality standards.

The Liberty for All Super PAC, funded mostly by the young, Texas-based millionaire investor John Ramsey, spent nearly $630,000 backing Massie for Congress in 2012. Unsurprisingly, Ramsey has "oil and gas ventures," according to his biography on the super PAC's website.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA)

Loudermilk's state and federal campaigns have received more than $60,000 from fossil fuel companies and trade associations, including Duke Energy, Exxon, Georgia Mining Association, Georgia Power, Koch Industries and Valero Energy.

In Congress, Loudermilk has co-sponsored several energy-related bills: a nuclear energy bill for which Duke Energy and Southern Company lobbied; a repeal of the U.S. crude oil export ban, which numerous fossil fuel companies, including BP, Chevron, Exxon, Marathon Oil and ConocoPhillips, lobbied in support of; and a bill challenging EPA greenhouse gas regulations, another piece of legislation oil and gas companies and utilities favored.

Both Loudermilk and Massie sit on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology—which has jurisdiction over the EPA, the Department of Energy and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)—and its subcommittee on oversight, key positions that would naturally attract the attention of fossil fuel companies.

Loudermilk's 2015 financial disclosure statement reveals that he received state funding to attend and speak at a "conservative policy summit" hosted by the climate change-denying Heritage Foundation, which has reportedly received $780,000 from ExxonMobil and nearly $6 million from Koch family foundations. Another speaker at the conference was Myron Ebell, the notorious climate change denier who led Trump's EPA transition team. Ebell crafted Trump's plan to hobble the EPA.

As a Georgia state senator, Loudermilk was on the communications and technology task force of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a conservative bill mill that unites state legislators and big business representatives. ALEC has a history of producing templates for anti-environmental legislation involving climate change denial, promoting gas pipelines and attacking residential solar energy. In addition, ALEC is funded by many of the same fossil fuel corporations that donated to the campaigns of Loudermilk and his fellow legislators hoping to abolish the EPA: Chevron, CSX, Dominion, Duke Energy, Exxon and Koch Industries, to name a few.

Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS)

PACs and employees of companies in the energy and natural resources sector have given more than $265,000 to Palazzo's four federal election campaigns, which includes $168,000 from oil and gas companies. The fourth-largest donor is Mississippi Power, an electric utility owned by Southern Company that burns coal and natural gas and has given Palazzo's campaigns more than $34,000. Palazzo has also taken in $24,000 from Chevron, nearly $20,000 from Koch Industries and $19,000 from General Electric.

In 2015 Palazzo voted to oppose an EPA rule that increased emissions standards for coal-fired power plants and the year prior, he voted to halt defense spending on climate change initiatives and cut all funding for the Department of Energy's energy efficiency and renewable energy program. In previous years, Palazzo voted to speed up natural gas pipeline permits, allow state laws to supersede federal EPA laws regarding hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") and cut funding to the EPA, among other measures.

While serving as Mississippi state representative, Palazzo was also a member of ALEC.

Rep. Gaetz's office declined to offer comment, while the other three representatives did not respond to requests for comment.

While their bill to kill the EPA has been receiving little support from either political party and is unlikely to pass, its mere existence marks the extent to which fossil fuel funding has the potential to influence elected officials. This bill joins an effort already underway among the GOP-controlled House, Senate and White House to roll back regulations to protect the environment and public health.

Congressional observers likely can expect to see more of the same from these four representatives in the future.

Reposted with permission from our media associate DeSmogBlog.

https://www.ecowatch.com/abolish-epa-bill-pruitt-2267818117.html?fbclid=IwAR3QeHxgLcEbq5C2sNZb4QU6hsl14yr_Rzf3kHuQ_Zw1XL0Mxf48kXmbGS0


Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) IS A HOLOCAUST DENIER

Choose your leaders with wisdom.....

Political Loudmouth added a new photo.

Junior Broadhurs

Stunning Ignorance of Trump Supporters, It's called PROSTITUTION!

STOP THE GOP RIGGED ELECTIONS AND VOTE THEM OUT!


It's called PROSTITUTION! 

Bill Moyers shared a link.

Vote Correlation: FCC Ruling and Telecom Contributions

The Senate repealed FCC ruling that would bar ISPs from 

selling customer data,…

BILLMOYERS.COM

Selling Out Internet Privacy: Members of Congress Were Well-Compensated for Their Votes

Money in politics researchers find that the more a politician got in contributions from the telecomm industry, the more likely he or she was to vote in favor of allowing ISPs to sell their customers' data.

BY CENTER FOR RESPONSIVE POLITICS STAFF | MARCH 31, 2017

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) was one of the leading proponents of the 

recent legislation allowing ISPs to sell customer data. She has received 

close to $564,000 from the telecom industry over the course of 

her House career. (Gage Skidmore/Flickr cc 2.0)

This post originally appeared at OpenSecrets.org.

The House’s vote Tuesday approving a resolution that would allow internet service providers to sell data about their customers’ browsing history split nearly along party lines. The final vote was 215-205, with nine members not voting.

The Democrats voted against the resolution as a block. On the Republican side, 15 members split from their party and opposed the bill.

(To skip straight to the data, click here.)

The resolution — which was approved by the Senate last week — blocks a Federal Communications Commission rule that would bar ISPs from selling customer data, including app usage, browsing history, even Social Security numbers, to marketers and others. Widely praised by privacy and consumer advocates when it was finalized last year, the rule hadn’t yet taken effect. Now — assuming President Trump signs it, as he’s expected to — it won’t.

And not only that, but under the terms of the Congressional Review Act, which was the mechanism used by Congress to negate the rule, no such rule can ever be issued again.

Here’s the short version of how we got here: The Federal Trade Commission regulates most of the internet, including companies like Google and Facebook. When it comes to privacy, the FTC generally prohibits unfair or deceptive trade practices. But the FTC has no authority over “common carriers” — a designation that applies to internet service providers, thanks in part to a ruling by the FCC (different agency, similar acronym) two years ago classifying high-speed internet as an essential telecommunications service.

Companies like AT&T, Comcast and others — many of which spend millions of dollars lobbying Washington every year — have chafed under the FCC’s privacy law, which is stronger and more specific than the FTC’s. The FCC generally prohibits carriers from using customer info for marketing purposes without the consent of customers. Left vague, though, were issues like what info was covered, and what constitutes “consent.” That’s where the rule finalized last year enters the picture. It specifies that the providers can’t sell a customer’s web browsing history or app usage, among other data, without consent. And it prohibits the companies from using an “opt-out” definition of consent; customers would affirmatively have to give their permission for their data to be shared.

The industry has basically argued that it shouldn’t have to abide by requirements that are more stringent than those that apply to Google, Facebook and similar companies. It has been using a group it formed two years ago, the 21st Century Privacy Coalition (whose purpose seems to cut against its name) to help argue its case.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican and vocal proponent of killing the rule, said this week that allowing the FTC and FCC to regulate different parts of the internet will “create confusion within the internet ecosystem and end up harming consumers.”

Critics of that view say it’s hard to see how stronger protection of consumer privacy will hurt those consumers. In addition, ISPs “provide an essential service,” said Laura Moy, a visiting law professor at Georgetown University and expert on technology and the law — and many Americans have little or no choice about their providers. “Maybe the answer is to regulate everyone more closely.”

Without the rule, the old statutory language — with its relative vagueness about consent and what information is governed — will apply. Given that the FCC is now chaired by a Republican, Ajit Pai, who strongly objected to the agency’s reclassification of the internet two years ago, it’s possible that providers will be able to take actions that push the envelope more than in previous years, critics fear.

It’s clear, though, that a great many Americans are unhappy that Congress has voted to kill a rule that is titled “Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services” — and that could have an impact down the line.

“I think even many Republican constituents whose reps voted to quash the rule are really outraged,” said Moy. “If the reaction to this is any indicator, it could be politically impossible” to do things like revoke rules mandating net neutrality, another Obama-era legacy that Pai and other Republicans would like to dismantle.

Finally, the data

We took a look at the contributions received by members of the House and Senate from the telecom industry,

Here’s what we found: On the House side, while there wasn’t a huge difference in overall funds received by lawmakers voting for or against the resolution, there was a gap in the Republican vote. GOP lawmakers who voted to quash the rule received an average of $138,000 from the industry over the course of their careers.

The 15 Republicans voting nay? They got just $77,000.

Some Dems were quite popular targets for industry contributions. Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, for instance, who is the second-highest ranking Democrat in the House, has received more than $1.3 million from telecom interests in the course of his long career, more than all but two House members; he received almost $190,000 in the 2016 cycle alone.

Still, he voted against the bill, as did South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn ($968,000 career), California Rep. Anna Eshoo ($864,000) and every other Democrat.

We can’t know if they objected to the bill on its merits, or they wanted to oppose the Republican agenda in all its manifestations, or what other motivations they might have had. Similarly, the yea-voting Republicans might have been on board for the bill because they oppose regulation in most forms, or they wanted to be team players, or for some other reason.

Blackburn has received close to $564,000 from the telecom industry over the course of her House career.

Nine House members — six Republicans and three Democrats — didn’t vote on the measure.

Over in the Senate, where the vote last week was strictly along party lines, the 50 Republicans voting for the bill had received an average of $368,648 from the industry during their congressional careers. The 48 Democrats who voted against it took in $329,180, about 11 percent less. Two senators — Rand Paul of Kentucky and John Isakson of Georgia, both Republicans — didn’t cast votes.


http://billmoyers.com/story/vote-correlation-internet-privacy-resolution-telecom-contributions/

Mass Power Forward

Bad for ratepayers. Bad for the environment. Take action today to oppose Eversource's anti-solar rate hike.

I Oppose Eversource's Anti-Solar Rate Hike

More investor profit. Fees on solar. Higher bills. Eversource Energy's unjustifiable rate hikes are bad for consumers and bad for the environment. Speak up today to put a stop to this terrible proposal, which is currently under review at the Massachusetts…

Learn More

ACTIONNETWORK.ORG

https://actionnetwork.org/letters/eversources-anti-solar-rate-hike-is-absurd

Trump’s attack on environmental laws won’t 

save coal miners’ jobs

Trump falsely claims coal mining jobs will be saved by savaging 

environmental regulations.

LATIMES.COM

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-coal-jobs-20170328-story.html

No spin or twist on this. Just watch the video.

Trump Voters' Ignorance Leaves CNN's News Anchor Speechless — WATCH

Donald Trump has been in office for less than three months. But, by any metric, his administration has been among the most dishonest and turbulent in American…

POLITICALDIG.COM

Donald Trump has been in office for less than three months. But, by any metric, his administration has been among the most dishonest and turbulent in American presidential history. On Wednesday night, CNN’s Alisyn Camerota attempted to find out if Trump voters would agree. Her focus group left her positively dumbstruck.

“Health care, some people put in the ‘loss’ column; the travel ban is not yet in effect; the budget has not gotten a hearty agreement; he said he’d get rid of DACA right away; he said he’d get rid of the Iran Nuclear Deal; the wall hasn’t been built; he hasn’t defeated ISIS in 30 days,” she rattled off. “How long realistically would you give him to accomplish some of those things?”

Of course, they offered no time frame.

Camerota also discovered that the panel still believed Trump’s claims of voter fraud, despite his failing to proof a shred of evidence.

“He got elected, and we don’t know, as far as the votes and fraud and everything else,” said guest Billy Bae.

“Whether they’re illegal, meaning they came into the country illegally, or they’re illegal voters — they came over from Massachusetts into New Hampshire,” Baer told her.

“Who cares, though?” asked Josh Youssef, another guest.

“I care,” Camerota said. “Just to be clear,” she pressed Baer, “You saw it with your own eyes, busloads and busloads of people coming from somewhere other than New Hampshire to vote. You saw that?”

Watch their response to that question: LINK

http://politicaldig.com/trump-voters-excuses-incompetence-leave-cnns-news-anchor-speechless

 Don't believe anything! 

BREAKING: Flynn FLIPS on Trump, Is 
Working With FBI to IMPEACH Trump. 
IT'S HAPPENING.

Michael Flynn may be the FBI's secret weapon against Trump.

LEARNPROGRESS.ORG

http://www.learnprogress.org/flynn-flips-trump-fbi/

Incompetence, stupidity, greed and zealotry more than malevolance.

Clowns appointed from a conviction of loyalty rather than competence and prevented adequate vetting. Information about Flynn and others was publicly available.

Do you hear the Morally Bankrupt Republican Congress protesting? NO! They're covering up because they're incapable of governing!

VOTE THEM OUT!

 link.

Maddow Just Exposed A Scandal That Will 

Take Pence Down With Trump

If you thought his hands were clean, think again...

OCCUPYDEMOCRATS.COM|BY COLIN TAYLOR

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/03/31/maddow-just-exposed-scandal-will-take-pence-trump/

Their swamp runneth over!

"Maddow explains that as the head of Trump’s transition team, Pence was in charge of vetting all of Trump’s appointees, including Flynn, who was given one of the most important jobs in the cabinet and access to our nation’s most classified documents. .... [then emerged a bunch of cascading corruption scandals involving Flynn, and now] ...

"The man [Pence] who was in charge of vetting the White House’s hiring is trying to argue that he apparently failed to discover the fact that Flynn was receiving boatloads from foreign governments.

"Of course, Pence was lying. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) then announced that in fact he had sent Pence a letter back in November asking him to look into Flynn’s shady dealings with the Turkish government.

"Which means that President Trump and Mike Pence both knowingly handed our nation’s deepest secrets over to a man who they knew was operating as a paid agent of a foreign government, a man they knew was under potential blackmail by a different foreign power for lying to the public and the FBI, and Pence not only did nothing about it for three weeks but lied to the public about it as well."