‘Let’s Learn About Coal’: Industry Front Group Distributes Coloring Book On The ‘Advantages’ Of Coal
‘Let’s Learn About Coal’: Industry Front Group Distributes Coloring Book On The ‘Advantages’ Of Coal
Friends of Coal (FOC) is a front group created by the West Virginia Coal Association. Its mission is to “inform and educate West Virginia citizens about the coal industry” and “provide a united voice” for the industry. To make dirty coal seem appealing, FOC has sponsored or initiated license plates, football games, basketball practices, plane jumps, fishing events, and scholarships.
FOC is now selling coal to children. ThinkProgress obtained the “Let’s Learn About Coal” coloring book, which asks children to unscramble statements about the “advantages” of coal, such as “Than coal other cheaper is fuels” (”Coal is cheaper than other fuels”). Kids also learn that coal is “important” and “provides jobs for lots of people!”:
The FOC Ladies Auxiliary has been handing the coloring book out to children around West Virginia as part of a “Coal in the Classroom” campaign. Coal officials go into schools and give presentations about the importance of coal. “We’d really like this to be statewide, that it be mandatory in the schools that they learn about coal,” said FOC ladies auxiliary president Regina Fairchild in January. The ladies auxiliary is also recruiting members for its “junior” FOC group, open to “girls and boys ages 8 to 16.”
Additionally, FOC ladies auxiliary members have visited children in West Virginia hospitals to give them a “special present“: Mr. Coal, “a small, black Labrador stuffed puppy meant to bring a smile to kids’ faces during hospital stays.” (Coal pollution kills 24,000 Americans each year.)
Last year, American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), another industry front group, also tried to make coal seem warm and fuzzy by creating the “coal carolers” — illustrated lumps of coal singing Christmas carols whose altered lyrics praised coal power. After widespread scorn, ACCCE took down the carolers. Find out more on what coal is really doing to Appalachia at Appalachian Voices.
- Comments
- 95
University Of Kentucky Approves New $7 Million Industry-Funded Dorm Named After ‘Coal’
University Of Kentucky Approves New $7 Million Industry-Funded Dorm Named After ‘Coal’
A group led by Alliance Coal CEO Joseph Craft recently proposed donating $7 million to the University of Kentucky for a new dorm for the men’s basketball team. The catch, however, is that the dorm would have to be named after Craft’s true love: coal. The proposed change sparked intense protests from local environmentalists and students. One professor said that as universities become “models for new energy sources,” putting “coal” on a prominent building could “make it difficult to attract top students and faculty members to the university.” Last night, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow and Dave Zirin, sports editor for The Nation, discussed the controversy. Watch it:
This afternoon, the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees voted 16-3 to approve the proposal for the new dorm, which will be named the “Wildcat Coal Lodge.” Significantly, two of the “no” votes were from faculty representative Ernie Yanarella and Student Government President Ryan Smith, who said he opposed the motion “as a voice for the student body.”
Students in the audience were reportedly not allowed to speak at the meeting. After the vote, people began chanting, “Move forward, not backward,” forcing the trustees to temporarily recess. More on the events at the meeting:
The vote set off shouts from about 30 protesters, mostly students, who attended the meeting.
“Big Coal is about to go down, and the university’s going down with them,” said Cor de Jong, who described himself as “a Lexingtonian and a basketball fan.”
A statement from students was passed out to board members moments before the vote. “They did not read our statement,” said Katie Goldey, a senior majoring in international studies. “They weren’t even given a chance to read it.”
Ironically, because the building costs more than $5 million, it is required to “meet the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards.”
The coal industry has been taking a greater “public role” in the University of Kentucky lately. While Craft has already donated millions of dollars and has a basketball practice facility named in his honor, this is the first time that coal is being specifically recognized. Last weekend, however, there was a “students only” basketball practice “sponsored by Joe Craft and the Friends of Coal.”
The battle over America’s clean energy future is increasingly being fought on college campuses. As Greenwire reported recently, environmentalists are turning to student activists to get the word out about dirty coal, while American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity — the coal industry’s biggest lobbying group — “spent the summer sending activists to 264 cities in eight states, where they attended community events and visited college campuses.” More here and here on efforts to get dirty coal off U.S. campuses.
Insurance Stocks Plunged As Reid Announced Public Option, Spiked After Lieberman Vowed To Filibuster It
Insurance Stocks Plunged As Reid Announced Public Option, Spiked After Lieberman Vowed To Filibuster It
Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced that he would be including a version of the public option (with a state opt-out provision) in the Senate’s final health care bill. Although all of the details of the public plan are yet to be determined, progressives cheered the move. As Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) admitted, without all the pressure that progressives in and out of Congress put on legislators, it is unlikely there would have been a public option included in Reid’s final bill.
Yet this afternoon, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) broke with the Democratic caucus that he is a member of and vowed to join a Republican-led filibuster if the public option is not removed from the bill. In response, insurance company stocks — which plummeted Monday as Reid made his announcement — shot up after Lieberman made his announcement around 1:30 pm:
Lieberman’s opposition to the public option puts him completely out of step with Connecticut voters. As this polling from 538.com’s Nate Silver shows, voters in every single one of Connecticut’s congressional districts favor the inclusion of a public option in health care legislation by wide margins. The stated reason for Lieberman’s opposition to the public option — that it would increase the debt and create another entitlement — is misplaced. As ThinkProgress has noted before, the public option would be self-sustaining and would cut the deficit.
Insurance giant Aetna, represented by the blue line above, fared the best among all of the health insurance companies. Aetna is based in Hartford, CT. It is also the tenth largest single private contributor to Lieberman’s re-election committee.
Goldman Sachs Analyst: Income ‘Inequality’ Will Lead To ‘Prosperity And Opportunity For All’
Goldman Sachs Analyst: Income ‘Inequality’ Will Lead To ‘Prosperity And Opportunity For All’
Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that Wall Street banks are on pace to pay out a record $140 billion in compensation this year. “Workers at 23 top investment banks, hedge funds, asset managers and stock and commodities exchanges can expect to earn even more than they did the peak year of 2007,” the Journal found.
The New York-based investment bank Goldman Sachs has “set aside $16.7 billion for compensation and benefits in the first nine months of 2009,” which is a 46 percent increase from last year. But according to a Goldman adviser, Wall Street’s record pay is necessary “to achieve greater prosperity and opportunity for all”:
A Goldman Sachs International adviser defended compensation in the finance industry as his company plans a near-record year for pay, saying the spending will help boost the economy. “We have to tolerate the inequality as a way to achieve greater prosperity and opportunity for all,” Brian Griffiths, who was a special adviser to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, said yesterday at a panel discussion hosted by St. Paul’s Cathedral in London.
At the same time that Wall Street’s pay has skyrocketed, pay cuts in other sectors “are occurring more frequently than at any time since the Great Depression.”
While record bonuses may indeed spur spending on million dollar apartments in New York City, the growth in Wall Street pay — and the growing share of national income that is going to the richest Americans — has not translated into shared prosperity. Consider, “back in 1985, the average annual salary for all workers across the country was actually a bit higher than the average [Wall Street] bonus ($19,000 to $13,970),” but “while the average bonus soared almost 14 times higher (by 2006), the average salary has essentially been stagnant since the mid-1980s.”
Goldman Sachs is able to make its current profits ($3.19 billion last quarter) — and thus pay huge bonuses — because of government programs aimed at reviving the economy, which allow the company to make “big bets using cheap dollars.” As Simon Nixon wrote, the profits “aren’t the due rewards for exceptional skill but gifts from taxpayers.”
Climate Spoof Forces Chamber To Decry ‘Public Relations Hoaxes’
Climate Spoof Forces Chamber To Decry ‘Public Relations Hoaxes’
This morning, activists from the Yes Men troupe claiming to represent the U.S. Chamber of Commerce announced the organization was reversing its years of opposition to any climate bill before Congress, saying in jest that the “Kerry-Boxer Bill is a good start to a strong climate bill.” CNBC and the Fox Business Network cited the many companies who have quit the Chamber as a reason for the fictional about-face.
The Chamber of Commerce quickly tried to quash the reports that it had reversed its “Scopes monkey trial” stance. Chamber of Commerce official Eric Wohlschlegel broke into the press conference held by the Yes Men at the National Press Club, shouting, “This guy is a fake!” After a “mild shoving match at the podium,” Wohlschegel told reporters, “It is a very sad day.” U.S. Chamber of Commerce official Thomas J. Collamore decried “public relations hoaxes” and called for “law enforcement authorities to investigate this event”:
Public relations hoaxes undermine the genuine effort to find solutions on the challenge of climate change. These irresponsible tactics are a foolish distraction from the serious effort by our nation to reduce greenhouse gases.
Of course, it is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other right-wing corporate groups that have been spending hundreds of millions of dollars supporting “public relations hoaxes” to “undermine the genuine effort to find solutions on the challenge of climate change.” As PG&E Chairman and CEO Peter Darbee explained his company’s departure from the Chamber, “extreme rhetoric and obstructionist tactics seem to increasingly mark the Chamber’s stance on this issue.”
It’s doubtful that the Chamber — chaired by race-baiters and corrupt global warming deniers — will now be decrying clean coal carols, climate skeptics, fearmongering, and broken economic analyses as it spends over $100 million a year to lobby Congress.
Obama rips health insurance lobby as ‘deceptive,’ ‘dishonest,’ ‘bogus.’
Obama rips health insurance lobby as ‘deceptive,’ ‘dishonest,’ ‘bogus.’
Earlier this week, the health insurance lobby AHIP (America’s Health Insurance Plans) issued a false and dishonest report claiming that the Baucus health care bill would increase health care costs. Even the firm hired to do the analysis — PriceWaterhouseCoopers — backpedaled from the report’s conclusions. The insurance lobby’s strategy backfired as it appeared to alienate Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), who voted with the Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee. But Republicans dutifully peddled the study to try to sink health reform. In his weekly address, President Obama struck back at the insurance lobby, calling them out for their deception and deceit:
This is the unsustainable path we’re on, and it’s the path the insurers want to keep us on. In fact, the insurance industry is rolling out the big guns and breaking open their massive war chest – to marshal their forces for one last fight to save the status quo. They’re filling the airwaves with deceptive and dishonest ads. They’re flooding Capitol Hill with lobbyists and campaign contributions. And they’re funding studies designed to mislead the American people. [...]
It’s smoke and mirrors. It’s bogus. And it’s all too familiar. Every time we get close to passing reform, the insurance companies produce these phony studies as a prescription and say, “Take one of these, and call us in a decade.” Well, not this time. The fact is, the insurance industry is making this last-ditch effort to stop reform even as costs continue to rise and our health care dollars continue to be poured into their profits, bonuses, and administrative costs that do nothing to make us healthy – that often actually go toward figuring out how to avoid covering people. And they’re earning these profits and bonuses while enjoying a privileged exception from our anti-trust laws, a matter that Congress is rightfully reviewing.
Watch it:
Of course, the best way to keep insurance companies honest would be to pass a robust public health insurance plan — a provision that Obama did not talk about in his weekly address.
Maddow Calls Out Americans for Prosperity President: ‘Parasite Who Gets Fat On Americans’ Fears’
Maddow Calls Out Americans for Prosperity President: ‘Parasite Who Gets Fat On Americans’ Fears’
In May, the Wonk Room first reported on the sordid history of Republican operative Tim Phillips — who now heads the front group Americans for Prosperity (AFP) — with respect to his long history of orchestrating “grassroots” lobbying efforts for nefarious corporate and political clients. For example, Phillips helped run a “religious and pro-family” campaign for Enron’s largely successful attempt to achieve energy deregulation policies, and in another campaign used anti-Semitic attacks against Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) during Cantor’s first run for Congress.
Last night, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow called Phillips out for using deceptive tactics and fear in his campaigns, noting in particular his role in creating the ads which portrayed former Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA) — a triple amputee and Vietnam war veteran — as a terrorist sympathizer. Phillips stood by every single example of his work for his Republican and corporate clients, adding that he indeed does believe Cleland didn’t have the “courage to lead on the war on terror.”
Maddow extracted confessions from Phillips that he had in fact worked for a Jack Abramoff client to pressure members of Congress to vote against legislation that would have made the U.S. commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands — where Chinese workers were forced into prostitution and mandatory abortions — subject to federal wage and worker safety laws. Even given the deplorable conditions at the sweatshops, Phillips was unrepentant. “I don’t have an issue with it,” said Phillips, adding, “I’m not going to disown it.”
Phillips defended his methods with a curious argument. He disregarded the morals of his tactics, then explained that no matter what his organization says, who funds them, and how they operate, he and his corporate backers have every right to be “involved in the process.” Maddow conceded that point, but asserted that AFP’s fear-mongering and lying is simply bad for the country:
MADDOW: And I have to tell you, because we’re making this about you and me, is that I personally think that you and the folks who do what you do are a parasite who gets fat on Americans’ fears.
Watch it:
AFP, which was founded and is currently funded by David Koch of the Koch Industries oil refining empire, maintains a variety of mini-front groups to attack progressive labor efforts, clean energy legislation, and most recently, health reform. AFP places multimillion dollar ad buys knocking reform, employs dozens of high level Republican operatives planning “grassroots” events, and rents buses crisscrossing the country to shuttle anti-reform speakers to their rallies.
Insurance company executive refers to high-cost patients as ‘dogs.’
Insurance company executive refers to high-cost patients as ‘dogs.’
In the state of New York, insurers are legally prohibited from discriminating against individuals who submit large claims. So when Guardian, a major insurance company, was faced with the high-cost claims of 37 year-old muscular dystrophy patient Ian Pearl, it decided to cancel its entire line of coverage in the state of New York rather than pay for Pearl’s claims. In an e-mail obtained by The Washington Times, it was revealed that one executive at the company refers to patients like Pearl as “dogs” that the company can simply “get rid of”:
Legally barred from discriminating against individuals who submit large claims, the New York-based insurer simply canceled lines of coverage altogether in entire states to avoid paying high-cost claims like Mr. Pearl’s. In an e-mail, one Guardian Life Insurance Co. executive called high-cost patients such as Mr. Pearl “dogs” that the company could “get rid of.”
A federal court quickly ruled that the company’s actions were legal, so on Dec. 1, barring an order by the federal Department of Health and Human Services, Mr. Pearl will lose his benefits.
The cost of Pearl’s annual treatment is approximately $1 million a year. The Pearl family is unable to receive the quality health care that Ian needs. “One-on-one skilled nursing is essential,” Mrs. Pearl said.
Chamber of Commerce goes from 3 million members to just 300,000 in one day.
Chamber of Commerce goes from 3 million members to just 300,000 in one day.
As Mother Jones reported yesterday, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce consistently says that its membership is 3 million, even though it’s actually closer to 200,000. The reason for the artificial inflation is that the organization is counting the memberships of 2,800 state and local chambers around the country, even though many of these businesses have no relationship with the national organization. Some of these members are now protesting the Chamber’s numbers game:
– “They don’t represent me,” says Mark Jaffe, CEO of the Greater New York Chamber of Commerce, which is a dues-paying member of the national group. … Jaffe also scoffed at the US Chamber’s oft-repeated claim to “represent 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions.” … “They are playing games” with their numbers, Jaffe said. “They don’t have half the businesses in America as registered, dues-paying members.”
– Jaffe’s objections to the US Chamber’s policies were echoed by Rob Black, vice-president of public policy for the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce. “We take a fundamentally different approach than the US Chamber,” he said, adding that while the national Chamber opposes the Waxman-Markey climate bill, “we support a market-driven cap-and-trade system.”
A day after this public scrutiny began, the Chamber is quietly backing down. At a press conference this morning, Chamber officials “repeatedly cited a membership of 300,000. That’s a tenth as many members as the Chamber claimed a day earlier.”
Chamber of Commerce inflates its membership numbers from 200,000 to 3 million.
Chamber of Commerce inflates its membership numbers from 200,000 to 3 million.
The Chamber of Commerce regularly brags that it has more than 3 million members. But as Mother Jones reports today, its actual number is closer to 200,000. The 2.7 million jump occurred in February 1997, right around the time current president Tom Donohue came in. Basically, what the Chamber is doing is counting the memberships of 2,800 state and local chambers around the country. Mother Jones explains how misleading this tactic is:
Apparently, the Chamber’s claim to “represent” the 3 million individual members of local chambers is solely based on the fact that those local chambers are members of the national group—even though many of those chambers’ individual members do not have a direct relationship with the national body. To get an idea of the tenuousness of this connection, consider the American Highway Users Alliance. Like the Chamber, the AHUA has worked to undermine climate legislation, and counts the American Automobile Association as a member, which itself has 51 million members. The AHUA has never pretended to speak for those 51 million drivers.
Energy Secretary Chu: ‘I Think It’s Wonderful’ That Companies Are Leaving The Chamber Over Its Denialism
Energy Secretary Chu: ‘I Think It’s Wonderful’ That Companies Are Leaving The Chamber Over Its Denialism
Recently, there has been a “business backlash” against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for its extreme global-warming denier views. Businesses, fed up with the Chamber’s resistance to taking any sort of action to curb carbon emissions, have been leaving the business federation one after another. In the past month alone, Pacific Gas & Electric, Exelon, Public Service Company of New Mexico, and Apple have left the U.S. Chamber of Commerce over its extreme views on climate change.
Yesterday, during a solar energy event at the National Mall, Energy Secretary Steven Chu was asked by a Reuters reporter what he thought about the exodus of businesses from the Chamber. He replied by telling the reporter that he thinks it’s “wonderful” that companies are leaving:
CHU: I think it’s wonderful. I think that companies like that, Exelon, for example, others are saying that we have to recognize reality. In order to position the odd states in an economically competitive place and also to make the world minimize the dangers of significant climate change for our children and grandchildren we’ve got to go in this direction. So they’re saying, we can’t be a party to foot-dragging, to denials to things of that nature.
Listen here:
The Chamber has responded to the business exodus with scorn. After the flight of the most recent company, Apple, U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue bitterly responded, “It is unfortunate that your company didn’t take the time to understand the Chamber’s position on climate and forfeited the opportunity to advance a 21st century approach to climate change.”
And yet, predictably, a lot of the banks and big financial firms don't like the idea of a consumer agency very much. In fact, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending millions on an ad campaign to kill it. You might have seen some of these ads -- the ones that claim that local butchers and other small businesses somehow will be harmed by this agency. This is, of course, completely false -- and we've made clear that only businesses that offer financial services would be affected by this agency. I don't know how many of your butchers are offering financial services.
Chamber to Apple: You don’t understand our ’21st century approach to climate change.’
Chamber to Apple: You don’t understand our ’21st century approach to climate change.’
U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue, who last year called for further “scientific inquiry” into climate science because of a “cooling trend,” today rebuked Apple for leaving his organization. Apple — recognized as the most innovative company in the world — had criticized the Chamber for not having a “more progressive stance” on climate change, saying, “We strongly object to the Chamber’s comments opposing the EPA’s efforts to limit greenhouse gases.” In an angry letter, Donohue argued they did not understand the Chamber’s “21st century approach to climate change“:
I am sorry to learn of Apple’s resignation from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. It is unfortunate that your company didn’t take the time to understand the Chamber’s position on climate and forfeited the opportunity to advance a 21st century approach to climate change.
Of course, Apple is right. The Chamber of Commerce has a retrograde stance on global warming, opposes regulating greenhouse gas emissions, and has become an enemy of a clean-energy economy. In fact, in an unusual merger of interests, long-time Apple rival Microsoft has also distanced itself from the Chamber’s radical views.
Franken Wins Bipartisan Support For Legislation Reining In KBR’s Treatment Of Rape
Franken Wins Bipartisan Support For Legislation Reining In KBR’s Treatment Of Rape
In 2005, Jamie Leigh Jones was gang-raped by her co-workers while she was working for Halliburton/KBR in Baghdad. She was detained in a shipping container for at least 24 hours without food, water, or a bed, and “warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she’d be out of a job.” (Jones was not an isolated case.) Jones was prevented from bringing charges in court against KBR because her employment contract stipulated that sexual assault allegations would only be heard in private arbitration.
Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) proposed an amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would withhold defense contracts from companies like KBR “if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court.” Speaking on the Senate floor yesterday, Franken said:
The constitution gives everybody the right to due process of law … And today, defense contractors are using fine print in their contracts do deny women like Jamie Leigh Jones their day in court. … The victims of rape and discrimination deserve their day in court [and] Congress plainly has the constitutional power to make that happen.
Watch Franken’s speech:
On the Senate floor, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) spoke against the amendment, calling it “a political attack directed at Halliburton.” Franken responded, “This amendment does not single out a single contractor. This amendment would defund any contractor that refuses to give a victim of rape their day in court.”
In the end, Franken won the debate. His amendment passed by a 68-30 vote, earning the support of 10 Republican senators including that of newly-minted Florida Sen. George LeMieux. “He did what a senator should do, which was he was working it,” LeMieux said in praise of Franken. “He was working for his amendment.”
Appearing with Franken after the vote, an elated Jones expressed her deep appreciation. “It means the world to me,” she said of the amendment’s passage. “It means that every tear shed to go public and repeat my story over and over again to make a difference for other women was worth it.”
Media Disregard Substance Of Michael Moore’s Film — Instead Engage In Character Assassination
Media Disregard Substance Of Michael Moore’s Film — Instead Engage In Character Assassination
Today is the nationwide release of Michael Moore’s new film Capitalism: A Love Story. The film chronicles how free market capitalism has created a system of “legalized greed” which corrupts government, removes basic elements of humanity from business, and has torn down the middle class. While Moore uses personal stories of individuals abused by corporate excess to create a narrative, he also explains much larger, sweeping problems like the rapidly widening gap between rich and poor.
As Moore has toured the media circuit promoting his film, hosts and pundits have worked quickly to try to marginalize his message. Rather than attack the substance of his film or debate the issues he raises, media figures are attempting to destroy Moore’s credibility. The most common trope has been to cast Moore as a “hypocrite” for being successful while at the same time criticizing capitalism. The other attack is to simply ridicule and mock Moore as an “extremist.” Business media in particular has been disdainful of Moore, accusing him of seeking “slavery.” Moore was scheduled to host CNBC’s Power Lunch, but was booted off shortly after six minutes. ThinkProgress has compiled a video of some of the character attacks on Moore. Watch it:
While Moore certainly has critics, in the past, much of the anti-Moore media assault had been orchestrated by powerful corporate interests. Bill Moyers Journal obtained two powerpoint presentations outlining in detail exactly how the industry coordinated an effort to marginalize Moore and the impact of his film SiCKO:
– Position Moore as “fringe” to stop any Democrats from embracing points he raises.
– “Position SiCKO as a threat to the Democrats’ larger agenda.”
– “Amplify the industry’s voice around the film’s release … outreach to broadcast and cable TV news.”
– “Create media tool kit on industry’s positions, strong track records, etc.”
The campaign to smear Moore has reemerged. Will the media ask serious questions about the failure of free market capitalism, or will they simply engage in character assassination against Moore?
Nike Resigns From The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Board Of Directors Over Global Warming Disagreements
Nike Resigns From The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Board Of Directors Over Global Warming Disagreements
In the past couple weeks, three energy companies have ditched the reeling U.S. Chamber of Commerce over its opposition to global warming action. Although Nike has publicly expressed its frustrations with the Chamber’s anti-science positions, it hasn’t started to sever ties with the organization — until now.
Facing increasing pressure from activists, Nike today announced that is resigning from the Chamber’s board of directors:
It is important that US companies be represented by a strong and effective Chamber that reflects the interests of all its members on multiple issues. We believe that on the issue of climate change the Chamber has not represented the diversity of perspective held by the board of directors.
Therefore, we have decided to resign our board of directors position. We will continue our membership to advocate for climate change legislation inside the committee structure and believe that we can better influence policy by being part of the conversation. Moving forward we will continue to evaluate our membership.
The New York Times has an editorial today criticizing the Chamber for being “way behind the curve“:
The United States Chamber of Commerce’s Web site says the group supports “a comprehensive legislative solution” to global warming. Yet no organization in this country has done more to undermine such legislation. [...]
The chamber has now declared war on the Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to use regulatory means to control emissions — beginning with one official’s ill-advised (and since apologized-for) demand for a “Scopes monkey trial” questioning the science behind the agency’s preliminary finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health.
As the Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson has noted, the Chamber is beginning to feel the heat and is trying to rewrite the history of its denialism. Enviroknow writes that two questions remain: 1) “When will Nike formally end its membership in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce?” and 2) “Which of the following 17 corporations — which are on the record in support of federal climate legislation yet sit on the Chamber’s Board of Directors — will be the next to part ways with the chamber?”
Chamber Of Commerce Rewrites History: ‘We’ve Never Questioned The Science Behind Global Warming’
Chamber Of Commerce Rewrites History: ‘We’ve Never Questioned The Science Behind Global Warming’
Tom Donohue, U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO
Energy companies are abandoning the sinking ship of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in droves over its opposition to clean energy action, whether by the EPA or by Congress.
Under pressure, Chamber president Tom Donohue today claimed the Chamber “continues to support strong federal legislation and a binding international agreement to reduce carbon emissions and address climate change.” And spokesman Eric Wohlschlegel recently argued that the Chamber respects the science of climate change:
We’ve never questioned the science behind global warming.
This is a blatant falsehood, by any definition. Just last month, the Chamber’s Senior Vice President William Kovacs called for the “Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century” to put “the science of climate change on trial.” The Chamber, dominated by pollution-industry skeptics such as Don Blankenship, Harry Alford, and Fred Palmer, has questioned climate science since at least 1992:
2008: Chamber President Tom Donohue Says ‘Scientific Inquiry’ Into Climate Change ‘Should Continue’ Because Of ‘Cooling Trend.’ [U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 3/4/08]
2001: Chamber Claims Global Warming ‘About One Percent From Human Activity,’ Says ‘Things Just Change.’ [CNNFN, 7/16/01]
1992: Chamber Sponsors Global Warming Denier Pat Michaels To ‘Refute The Global Warming Warnings.’ [Chicago Sun-Times, 5/13/92]
In addition to being the Chamber of Commerce president, Tom Donohue works for Union Pacific, a company opposed to climate regulation.
If you want a clean energy future with millions of clean energy jobs, this is the bill. If you want a chance at a global climate deal and hence a chance at preserving a livable climate, this is the bill. . . . This bill is key to taking back control of America’s future from Big Oil, the corporate polluters and their lobbyists, and you can be sure they are going to fight as hard — and as dirty — as possible to kill it.
Nation’s Largest Utility Leaves U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Over Climate Denial
Nation’s Largest Utility Leaves U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Over Climate Denial
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the largest lobbying force in the nation, promoting a right-wing agenda as the “voice of business.” The Chamber claims that a cap-and-trade program to limit global warming pollution would “strangle the economy” and has even called for a “Scopes monkey trial” on the science of global warming.
Today, Exelon CEO John Rowe announced that his company — the largest electric utility company in the United States — would not renew its membership in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce because of its opposition to global warming action. In his keynote address to the annual conference of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), the nation’s largest association of energy efficiency experts, Rowe said that the Chamber’s multi-million-dollar campaign against clean energy legislation is incompatible with Exelon’s commitment to climate change leadership. As Rowe said when he accepted a leadership award from the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce in 2008:
Exelon has staked out an industry-leading position on the issue of climate change and, in the spirit of Daniel Burnham, we have launched our own “not so little plan” to eliminate the equivalent of our entire carbon footprint by the year 2020. I do not know if it will stir men’s souls, but I hope it will stir policymakers and others in our industry to action.
Confirming Exelon’s decision to ThinkProgress, a spokesperson explained that “Exelon is a big supporter of climate legislation.” Exelon is the third energy company to sever ties with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in the past week, joining Pacific Gas & Electric and PNM Resources.
The carbon-based free lunch is over. But while we can’t fix our climate problems for free, the price signal sent through a cap-and-trade system will drive low-carbon investments in the most inexpensive and efficient way possible. Putting a price on carbon is essential, because it will force us to do the cheapest things, like energy efficiency, first.
Insurer Denies Woman’s Claim: She Should Have Known That Her Bleeding Breast Was Not An ‘Emergency’
Insurer Denies Woman’s Claim: She Should Have Known That Her Bleeding Breast Was Not An ‘Emergency’
One of the worst abuses of private insurance companies is the practice of using spurious reasons to deny claims. In April, Rosalinda Miran-Ramirez awoke and found her shirt soaked in blood. Realizing that her “her left breast [was] bleeding from the nipple,” she rushed to the emergency room.
Today, CBS-5 reports that this San Francisco Department of Public Health employee has had her claim denied because her insurance company, Blue Shield of California, didn’t consider her situation to be an “emergency.” Even though her doctor told her it was likely a tumor, Blue Shield said that Miran-Ramirez should have known it wasn’t:
But Miran-Ramirez said the real shock came when her insurance company, Blue Shield of California HMO, which had initially approved the claim for the emergency room visit, reversed course and sent her a new bill three months later requiring her to pay the total charges for that visit: $2,791.00.
Why? Documents from Blue Shield indicate the company had reviewed the case and determined Miran-Ramirez “reasonably should have known that an emergency did not exist.”
“I am like how can they say that it was not an emergency? Like, my breast was bleeding! I am not a clinical person but if your breast is bleeding, for me that’s an emergency,” she said. [...]
So she appealed. And she was denied again. This time Blue Shield told her she hadn’t been in “any acute distress.”
Watch CBS-5’s report:
The sad truth is Miran-Ramirez is certainly not alone in having her claim denied by a major health insurer. The California Nurses Association (CNA), a nurses’ union and health care advocacy group, recently released a comprehensive study of claims denials across California. The study found that the six largest insurers in California rejected 47.7 million claims in the first half of 2009, nearly 22 percent of all claims submitted. The CNA twice successfully lobbied the California legislature to pass legislation that would establish a single-payer universal health care system in the state, only to have it vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA).
Last week, in a congressional hearing titled “Between You and Your Doctor: the Bureaucracy of Private Health Insurance,” top insurance executives testified before Chairman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) that the insurance company practice of denials can be fatal for its customers.
Indeed, such a denial cost 17-year old Nataline Sarkisyan her life in 2007, when Cigna denied coverage for a liver transplant until it was too late. Her mother, Hilda Sarkisyan, came to D.C. earlier this year to lobby for a public health insurance plan that would stop such denials. She told the press, “Insurance companies cannot decide who’s going to live and who’s going to die.”
Following the CBS-5 investigation, Blue Shield agreed to pay for all charges for Miran-Ramirez’s emergency room visit.
Former Insurance Executive: Lobbyists Make Empty Promises For Reform, Instead Trust CEOs Under Oath
Former Insurance Executive: Lobbyists Make Empty Promises For Reform, Instead Trust CEOs Under Oath
NOTE: This is the fourth installment of our series — Meet Your Insurance Company Executive: An Interview with Wendell Potter.
Last week, ThinkProgress spoke with Wendell Potter, a former VP of communications at health insurance giant CIGNA, about how insurance companies deceive the public with vague promises of “being at the table” for reform. Earlier this year, Karen Ignagni, the chief lobbyist and leader for AHIP, the trade group representing the health insurance industry, came to the White House and pledged to President Obama, “You have our commitment to play, to contribute and to help pass healthcare reform this year.” This trope, repeated by other representatives for the insurance industry, achieved the goal of persuading many that this year would be “different” for reform and that insurers would not torpedo legislation like in previous efforts. But as Potter notes, lobbyists and public relations professionals like Ignagni can make broad promises without ever being accountable. Individual insurance companies are not on board with what Ignagni is selling:
– AHIP says the industry will end the immoral practice of rescinding coverage of sick customers. But when asked this summer — under oath — by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) if they would “commit” to stopping this practice, executives from UnitedHealth Group, Assurant, and WellPoint all refused.
– AHIP says the health insurance industry is fully supportive of the idea of covering everybody, regardless of medical condition. However, in conference call with investors last month, Aetna CEO Ron Williams bluntly stated that he would pursue profits rather than add or keep enrollment. “We have a clear bias toward profitability over growth,” said Williams.
Potter continues by arguing that the public should be examining the business practices of insurers, not blindly accepting the promises of lobbyists:
POTTER: But if those companies are under oath, three different companies, including one of the largest in the land, that they will continue those, that’s who you should believe. That’s what will be the policy going forward. The trade association doesn’t have power to change practices of the insurance industry at the insurance company level. It can’t change a business model or a way of doing business.
Watch it:
The friendly, positive statements by Ignagni and her colleagues are part of the “duplicitous” campaign by the insurance industry to charm the public while secretly working to kill and undermine reform. ThinkProgress has documented this campaign and produced this page explaining the insurance industry tactics.
With median annual compensation of more than $12.4 million, C.E.O.’s at the big health-care companies make two-thirds more than their counterparts in finance and are the highest paid of any industry. The health-care industry’s total annual profit has grown to an estimated $200 billion, and it doled out nearly $170 million in campaign contributions in 2007 and 2008. It now spends more than any other industry lobbying the federal government—$3.5 billion over the past decade and a record $263 million in the first six months of this year.
CNBC Calls Out WellPoint CEO For Lying About How Much Money It Makes Off Its Consumers
CNBC Calls Out WellPoint CEO For Lying About How Much Money It Makes Off Its Consumers
Today at the Clinton Global Initiative conference, CNBC hosts Mark Haines and Maria Bartiromo interviewed WellPoint CEO Angela Braly on the current health reform debate. Bartiromo pressed Braly on the topic of rescissions, an extremely controversial practice where health insurers find reasons to cancel your coverage when you get sick. “Can you give us an understanding of what factors,” asked Baritomo, “go into denying coverage for a customer?” Rather than answering the question, Braly quickly dodged and started praising her own company for the percent of each premium dollar spent on healthcare (known as the medical loss ratio). But after listening to Braly compliment her company for spending 87 cents per a premium dollar for health “delivery,” CNBC host Haines called her out for essentially lying with “clever” language:
HAINES: I believe you just said very cleverly worded 87 cents of every premium dollar goes to the delivery of healthcare. But in fact why don’t we look at your, the amount of payments you make per dollar you take in. It’s more like 80 cents, is it not? You pay 80 cents in benefits for every dollar. [...]
BARTIROMO: According to your 10k, the number is more like 80 or 81 cents.
BRALY: Yeah I’m citing a Pricewaterhouse Coopers study for the industry overall. 87 cents on the dollar is going to healthcare costs, in the industry–
HAINES: Well there you go again, that’s too cleverly worded. Going to healthcare costs? [...]
BRALY: Relative to other margins in the healthcare industry — biotech’s at 18, pharma’s at 16 — you know really we’re a low cost, low margin provider in the healthcare equation.
Watch it:
Haines was correct in calling out Braly’s deceptive language: WellPoint certainly does not spend 87 cents of every premium dollar on actual healthcare. In their 2nd quarter disclosures, WellPoint reportedly spent only 82.9% of every premium dollar on benefits, the remainder went to administrative costs, executive compensation (Braly herself makes approximately $10 million a year) and profits. The amount of every premium dollar spent on healthcare for WellPoint has actually been decreasing, while WellPoint has signaled they plan to be “hiking” premiums to at least “6% to 8% annually.” Although Braly likes to pretend that private insurers currently are a “low margin provider,” the truth is traditional Medicare’s administrative costs are only about 2%.
It is also no wonder Braly would want to dodge the question about rescissions. Earlier this summer, an executive from WellPoint testifying under oath specifically refused to “commit” to ending this practice, despite lofty claims to the contrary by insurance industry public relations professionals.
Indeed, WellPoint is refusing to end this immoral practice because rescissions are built into its business model. WellPoint reportedly provides monetary rewards for employees who successfully rescind the coverage of its customers and lists about 1,400 conditions as reasons for rescinding care. Three insurers alone (WellPoint, UnitedHealth and Assurant) canceled more than 20,000 policies in the last five years, saving the companies $300 million.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll