Fissures Grow In Right-Wing Business Lobby As Caterpillar Speaks Out In Favor Of Clean Energy Legislation
Fissures Grow In Right-Wing Business Lobby As Caterpillar Speaks Out In Favor Of Clean Energy Legislation
Yesterday, President Obama sat down with members of his Economic Recovery Advisory Board to discuss the pending Waxman-Markey energy reform legislation. One of the advisers is James Owens, who is the CEO of Caterpillar and also a member of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), the right-wing trade group that has taken a hard-line approach against any energy reform that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. When the President asked Owens if he saw a “competitive disadvantage” as a “big manufacturer” in dealing with energy reform, Owens said placing a cap on carbon would actually spur innovation:
OWENS: I agree with Jeff. I think we have the technology, we have the smarts here, and the product technologies, the economic incents of what’s needed. And that’s why I think of us in industry support a clarity around a carbon price, because that’s going to drive a lot of innovation and a lot of efficiency and will get with the program of reducing carbon emissions.
Owens continued laying out his support of clean energy legislation, noting most of Caterpillar’s renewable energy related products are currently sold “outside the United States…partly because of the way we regulate emissions site-specific, as opposed to looking at combined emissions and energy efficiency.” He also emphasized that giving the markets a price for carbon would “help our country be more competitive using the technologies that are out there.”
Owen’s increasingly outspoken tone comes at a time of tectonic shifts in the business community on clean energy. Currently, some of the most powerful traditional business trade groups — the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers — are devoting their efforts to “kill” clean energy reform legislation. But member corporations of these groups are at odds with this approach. The Natural Resources Defense Council conducted a study of the Chamber’s board members’ position on climate change legislation and found:
And out of the group of businesses that have publicly stated their positions, 19 favored federal action and only four opposed it. And three of those four are coal-mining companies.
Earlier this month, the utility company Duke Energy announced it would abandon its membership to the NAM over the trade group’s radical opposition to climate change legislation. When ThinkProgress asked NAM’s chief energy lobbyist about Duke Energy’s departure, NAM cowered and tried to hide its position. Similarly, member corporations such as Nike and Johnson and Johnson have applied pressure to the Chamber to drop its opposition to clean energy legislation.
With Caterpillar and other corporations calling for action on clean energy, the question becomes: will the NAM and other trade groups continue to lobby and fund ads opposing this legislation, or will member corporations find more relevant trade groups that will advance their interests in Washington?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Businesses have more to lose from living under a rock than Republicans do.
May 21st, 2009 at 8:13 pmWith Caterpillar and other corporations calling for action on clean energy, the question becomes: will the NAM and other trade groups continue to lobby and fund ads opposing this legislation, or will member corporations find more relevant trade groups that will advance their interests in Washington?
Before answering that question, I would like to know why businesses have more say in the drafting of or nation’s laws than people like me? Businesses are only interested in maximizing their profits. I am interested in the health and general welfare of my fellow citizens. Shouldn’t that earn me a seat at the table? Besides, I cast my vote for Obama; none of the corporate members of the NAM even had a vote.
May 21st, 2009 at 8:17 pmWayne Ant Schneider says:
May 21st, 2009 at 8:45 pmI agree Wayne. It seems to me from history, that Industry/Business have always had a seat at the table. But under GW Bush, it got completley out of control. Business, especially Big Oil, Big Pharma, ad infinitum were allowed to write the legislation at the expense of the health, safty, and welfare of the American People.
My son, the patent attorney, has long favored CAT as a good stock to invest in.
May 21st, 2009 at 8:54 pmThe reality of free energy goes mainstream. On April 19, 2009 CBS’ 60 Minutes broadcasted a segment on Cold Fusion. Not only do they speak optimistically, they also state the Pentagon verified the free energy claims! The MUST SEE CBS video and article are linked below:
Cold Fusion Is Hot Again
60 Minutes: Once Considered Junk Science, Cold Fusion Gets A Second Look By Researchers
Why was this technology suppressed for 20 years? Why does Obama still suppress the technology? See here for answers:
The 9/11 Truth Movement, Free Energy Suppression, and the Global Elite’s Agenda
May 21st, 2009 at 9:18 pm“Fissures grow,” said the Spider to the Fly! And so ThinkProgress.org sets itself up for one grand controversy! But to precisely suck out the optimism from the Caterpillar, of course, you had to experience the meeting, first hand, right!?”
May 21st, 2009 at 9:50 pmwill the NAM and other trade groups continue to lobby and fund ads opposing this legislation, or will member corporations find more relevant trade groups that will advance their interests in Washington?
REALLY!
May 21st, 2009 at 9:56 pmwhat IS it with the “opposition” of the inevitable???
what a waste of dollars hiring lobbyists to lie and cheat…
…
OMG!!! How unAmurkin of them!!!!
/snark
May 21st, 2009 at 10:15 pmDiesels are very fuel flexible so why wouldn’t CAT be open to to reducing carbon emissions. Fossil diesel is dirty stuff.
May 21st, 2009 at 10:23 pmThe problem as I see it doesn’t lay within the manufaturers of engines and machinery. It resides within the oil companies and their inability to provide better fuel products. They can do it, it just isn’t as profitable as low cat crack fossil diesel and pathetically formulated auto fuel.
The “fissures grow” approach to this story is a mistake. Instead of making Caterpillar feel like it’s betraying the right-wing, you should make them feel like they are doing the right thing. “Caterpillar emerges as independant, thoughtful, right-winf voice.” That sort of approach.
May 21st, 2009 at 10:23 pmGeorge W. Bush gave businesses like Caterpillar eight long years of tax breaks, de-regulation, refusal to enforce regulations, global warming denial, and every possible advantage over any consumer, labor or environmental concerns.
I couldn’t care less if Caterpillar is ’seeing the light’. It’s all PR to these corporatists. They’re no more green than Dick Armey is. They just know which way the wind is blowing, and are adjusting their sales. Sails. Mixed Metaphor Alert!
May 21st, 2009 at 10:34 pmCaterpillar Corp. is a multi-national and wants business in every market, including countries with stronger emission laws, so this was the wise move. America finds itself in a shrinking sphere of influence so this won’t be the last story we read about “change”. I hope we end up with more than pocket change and dirtier air but I’m not going to hold my breath and see what happens.
May 21st, 2009 at 11:00 pmIf one were to follow the link tectonic shifts they would see that some businesses are changing their stance on cap and trade. I dont see this as betrayal of the right wing. Its a business decision and obviously CAT thinks they will profit from capturing/storing/selling of carbon
May 21st, 2009 at 11:03 pmThis is fun! If you once allow a fact based argument, you may have to actually debate the issue on the merits. That means you have to think, and that will disqualify you from the Republican party.
May 22nd, 2009 at 1:08 amI wonder how many of the companies are playing both sides, like the health insurance companies. Say one thing to keep up the public image, but do the opposite behind the scenes.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:26 amLet’s just watch our language, Little Mister.
Da Banksta
May 22nd, 2009 at 6:02 amSo does this mean Cat is going to stop selling their machines to companies who use it to tear down the rain forests? If not, it doesn’t matter much.
May 22nd, 2009 at 9:53 amCaterpillar Corp. is a multi-national and wants business in every market, including countries with stronger emission laws, so this was the wise move.
May 22nd, 2009 at 1:11 pmFast forward to 2014 when laws are passed mandating the retirement of all existing heavy construction equipment with newer, more fuel efficient models like those soon-to-be-built by the good folks at Caterpillar Corp.
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:20 am