Skip to main content

On Jan. 25, 110 members of the U.S. House of Representatives - 94 Republicans and 16 Democrats - signed a letter urging Energy Secretary Steven Chu to approve expanded exports of liquified natural gas (LNG).

A DeSmogBlog investigation shows that these 110 signatories accepted $11.5 million in campaign contributions from Big Oil and electric utilities in the run-up to the November 2012 election, according to Center for Responsive Politics data.

Big Oil pumped $7.9 million into the signatories' coffers, while the remaining $3.6 million came from the electric utilities industry, two industries whose pocketbooks would widen with the mass exportation of the U.S. shale gas bounty. Further, 108 of the 110 signers represent states in which fracking is occuring.  

Cross-Posted from DeSmogBlog

On Jan. 25, 110 members of the U.S. House of Representatives – 94 Republicans and 16 Democrats - signed a letter urging Energy Secretary Steven Chu to approve expanded exports of liquified natural gas (LNG).

It was an overt sign of solidarity with the Obama Administration Department of Energy’s (DOE) LNG exports study, produced by a corporate consulting firm with long ties to Big Tobacco named NERA Economic Consulting (NERA is short for National Economic Research Associates), co-founded in 1961 by the “Father of Deregulation,” Alfred E. Kahn. That study concluded exporting gas obtained from the controversial hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) process - sent via pipelines to coastal LNG terminals and then onto tankers – is in the best economic interests of the United States.

A DeSmogBlog investigation shows that these 110 signatories accepted $11.5 million in campaign contributions from Big Oil and electric utilities in the run-up to the November 2012 election, according to Center for Responsive Politics data.

Big Oil pumped $7.9 million into the signatories’ coffers, while the remaining $3.6 million came from the electric utilities industry, two industries whose pocketbooks would widen with the mass exportation of the U.S. shale gas bounty. Further, 108 of the 110 signers represent states in which fracking is occuring.

Exhibit A: Human Geography of Campaign Finance Post-Citizens United

Energy issues are almost always questions of infrastructure, geography, and geopolitics. So too is the case of LNG exports, with this letter serving as Exhibit A of the new human geography of campaign finance in the post-Citizens United world.

Texas

The expression always seems to ring true: everything is bigger in Texas.

This letter is no different, as 19 of the 110 signatories represent congressional districts in The Lone Star State, 12 Republicans and seven Democrats. Texas is home to both the Eagle Ford Shale basin and the Barnett Shale basin, as well as prospective LNG export terminals in Sabine Pass (co-owned by ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and Qatar Petroleum), Freeport (partially owned by ConocoPhillips) and Corpus Christi (owned by LNG export giant, Cheniere).

The “Texas 19″ alone raked in $2.5 million from Big Oil and electric utilities.

Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX8), a recipient of $166,000 from Big Oil and another $23,000 from the electric utilities industry, oversees a congressional district in part based in Houston, the corporate epicenter for the oil and gas industry and home to the innovative leader in the sphere of LNG exports, Cheniere Energy. ExxonMobil and Chesapeake Energy, the number one and two producers of unconventional gas in the U.S., each gave Brady $10,000 before his 2012 electoral victory. Anadarko, Marathon and Valero also followed suit with $10,000 contributions and ConocoPhillips chipped in an extra $7,500.

Brady’s Texas colleague Joe Barton (R-TX6), whose congressional district in large part overlaps the Barnett Shale basin, took $162,150 from Big Oil and another $124,950 from the electric utilities industry. He received $13,000 from utilities giant Exelon Corporation, $12,500 from ExxonMobil, $10,000 from Koch Industries, $7,000 from Chevron and $5,000 from Chesapeake Energy. Koch Industries’ Koch Pipeline runs from the Eagle Ford Shale basin to Corpus Christi.

The Dirty, Dirty South

Southern politics are dirty – both literally and figuratively speaking.

Look no further than to Rep. Charles Boustany’s (R-LA3) campaign coffers – which took in $240,300 from Big Oil and $44,500 from the electric utilities industry - for prima facie evidence of this. Boustany raised $10,000 from Chesapeake Energy, $11,000 from GE, $12,000 from AGL Resources and $12,500 from Dore Energy. Dore was the anonymous $1,000,000 donor to Republican Rick Santorum’s presidential primary run in early 2012.

Boustany’s coastal Louisiana congressional district sits in the heart of one of the shale gas industry’s prime hubs for LNG exports. Six Lousiana representatives signed off on the letter.

Georgia is another key spoke in the wheel of the gas industry’s plan to export its U.S. shale gas prize, with the Elba Island LNG export terminal located on the coast of the Peach State in Savannah, GA. Yesterday, the owner of the LNG terminal, El Paso Pipeline Partners (itself a wholly owned subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, a corporation founded by a former Enron executive, Richard Kinder), signed a joint venture agreement with Shell Oil Company, which now owns 49 percent of the entity as a result of the deal.

Three Georgia representatives put their names on the letter.

Dancing the Marcellus Swing

No exposé of the influence of Big Oil would be complete without looking into the famed Marcellus Shale, a geological basin predominantly located in New York and Pennsylvnia, which also touches parts of Maryland, Ohio, Virginia, and West Virginia.

Twenty-nine politicians representing districts in these states signed onto the letter in support of expedited LNG exports. This cadre of 26 Republicans and 3 Democrats was showered with $2,457,872 in contributions from Big Oil and the electric utilities industry prior to the 2012 election, with $1,319,181 of it coming from the oil and gas industry and the other $1,138,691 of it coming from the electric utilities industry.

A case in point is Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY23), whose congressional district is situated in the heart of what could be the future epicenter of fracking in upstate New York. Reed received $109,021 from the oil and gas industry and another $46,741 from the electric utilities industry. On top of $10,500 from Chesapeake Energy, Reed accepted another $10,000 in campaign contributions from National Fuel Gas Corporation, $9,500 from utilities heavyweight Exelon Corporation, and $7,800 from ConocoPhillips.

Maryland Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD1) – who received $10,000 each from ExxonMobil and Koch Industries prior to his 2012 electoral victory – also signed onto the letter. His congressional district sits on the Atlantic coast in Maryland, where Dominion Resources is planning to export shale gas obtained from the Marcellus Shale at its Lusby, MD Dominion Cove Point LNG export terminal.

The Western Frontier

The oil, gas and electric utilities industries’ clout can also be seen out west, with 18 congressional members from western states signing onto the letter.

Six of them represent California, a state that could soon see a fracking boom in the Monterey Shale basin, which is predicted to “trigger a 21st Century ‘gold rush’,” according to a recent report by Energy and Environment News. These six CA representatives alone accepted $246,242 in campaign contributions from the oil, gas and electric utilities industries during the 2011-2012 electoral season.

Rep. Cory Gardner (R-CO4) received $192,800 in campaign finance from the oil and gas industry and another $68,500 from the electric utilities industry prior to the 2012 election. $10,000 from each of these corporations entered Gardner’s war chest: FirstEnergy, ExxonMobil, Koch Industries, and Chesapeake Energy.

In the northwest, co-signer Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR2) received $79,400 from Big Oil and $133,320 from the electric utilities sector, with $12,500 of it coming from Koch Industries, $10,000 of it coming from Valero and another $9,000 from electric utilities company Exelon, all according to OpenSecrets.org.

There is a ferocious battle over the future of natural gas pipelines and two LNG export terminals in Oregon: Oregon LNG and Jordan Cove LNG. It’s clear from following the money trail and reading this letter which side of the battle Rep. Walden represents.

The Wild, Wild Midwest and the Heartland

Most political observers think of the Midwest and the Heartland region as the home of big agribusiness, not Big Oil.

In the age of the domestic unconventional oil and gas boom, it’s now the home of both. Ten representatives from the region signed onto the letter and 21 if Ohio (lumped in earlier with the Marcellus Shale) is included in the fold. When the Heartland region is included, the number jumps up to 31.  

Four of them represent congressional districts in Michigan and one of them, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI4), is a family relative of notorious Chesapeake Energy CEO, Aubrey McClendon.

Upton’s 2012 electoral campaign season was bankrolled to the tune of $210,800 by Big Oil, with an accompanying $279,500 from the electric utilities industry. On top of the $24,600 and $20,000 he obtained from electric utilities giants Entergy and DTE Energy, respectively, OpenSecrets.org shows that $17,500 also flowed his way from Chesapeake Energy, $11,500 from Chevron, and $10,000 each from GE, ExxonMobil, Koch Industries and Marathon Petroleum.

No discussion on the corrupting influence of money in politics is complete without mentioning Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KA4), recipient of an astounding $299,800 from the oil and gas industry and another $47,000 from the electric utilities industry prior to his 2012 electoral victory. $110,000 of that money came from Koch Industries alone, perhaps unsurprising given the fact that Pompeo’s congressional district extends into the Wichita, KS corporate headquarters of the industrial giant now infamous for its bankrolling of the climate change denial machine.

Another $10,000 to Pompeo came from Berkshire Hathaway, Warren Buffett’s lucrative holding company that owns Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNSF), a key freight rail mover of oil, gas, pipe, frac sand, and other extractive industry equipment, while ExxonMobil also gave a generous donation of $8,500.

Congress for Sale on LNG Exports

It’s one thing to say it, quite another to depict it, but the inescapable conclusion is that Congress is for sale on the issue of LNG exports, bought off by Big Oil and the electric utilities industry.

They’re “representatives,” sure. But who do they represent?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Exporting the LNG isn't really the problem (0+ / 0-)

    extracting it in the first place is!

    However, once it is taken out of the ground, it * should * be exported . . ..

  •  We need campaign finance reform so much (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pinto Pony, Tinfoil Hat, mrkvica

    it hurts. Yes, I understand that corporations are people, too, but where is the line between free speech and bribery? How can it be free speech if it costs so much?

  •  Steve - I am confused (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mrkvica

    Under the Tillman Act of 1907 corporations cannot donate to candidates for federal office. The amounts that you list in your diary as contributions from Big Oil & Gas, and utility companies, were they:

    Cash from the corporate treasury?
    Independent expenditures of corporate cash on behalf of the candidates?
    Corporate PACs funded by employees?
    Independent contributions from employees who work at these companies?

    I think in the post Citizens United era it is important to differentiate actual corporate political expenditures from the campaign donations of people who work at corporations.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 08:03:20 AM PST

  •  Steve Horn is a hit and run diary author (0+ / 0-)

    28 diaries and 28 comments, all tip jars.

    Don't ask this diary author any questions. This is someone who uses DKOS as one more place to post press releases and does not interact with people who comment in his diaries or ever comment on the diaries of other authors.

    It's time to start ignoring Steve until he actually engages our community.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 09:05:17 AM PST

    •  A shame he doesn't participate, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib, 6412093

      as fracking, and everything it entails, is an important subject to be aware of and discuss.

      •  I agree his diary subjects are topical (0+ / 0-)

        and he could have an impact if he engaged in his diaries and other diaries as well. I just have an issue with people who just drop diaries here and never engage our community. One of the obligations of diary authors is to engage in the comments in your diary.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 10:36:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I can't keep my mouth shut about this diary (0+ / 0-)

    even if the diarist doesn't meet Kos standards.

    That's because one of my hottest issues is natural gas exports.  Exporting gas looks good at first glance, but it will harm the economy and environment.

    Exporting  natural gas will raise the price of natural gas for US commercial and residential users.  This means your home heating bill goes up.

    It also means that utilities will burn more coal, when gas gets more expensive.  One study figured exporting gas would trigger construction of from 3 to 6 additional coal fired power plants in the US.  

    Exporting gas will also drive up the cost of industrial feedstocks for many manufacturing processes.  

    This impact is so significant that Dow Chemical has quit the National Association of Manufacturers over the issue of gas exports.  Dow opposes exports because it will jack up the price of their chemical feedstocks.

    Exporting gas will also drive the fracking into a frenzy, since there would be virtually unlimited markets at super-high prices in Japan, India, and eastern Europe.  The current fracking actors are not models of environmental consciousness.

    And each LNG export terminal will produce more air pollution, including greenhouse gasses, than a large  petroleum refinery.  If all 16-odd export docks get built, some areas, for instance Houston-Port Arthur, will experience severe levels of toxic air pollution exceeding health standards.

    Orly, it isn't evidence just because you downloaded it from the internet.

    by 6412093 on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 12:18:06 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site