ThinkProgress Home
ThinkProgress
ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Lobbying”

Green

UPDATE: Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels’ State-Paid Lobbyist Can’t Explain Keystone XL Pipeline Lobbying

By Josh Israel on Feb 3, 2012 at 1:30 pm

Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN)

Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN)

Last week, ThinkProgress Green reported that Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN), joined the oil industry in lobbying Congress on behalf of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, using taxpayer dollars. Although the proposed pipeline does not go through Indiana, and few, if any, Indiana workers are expected to be employed in its construction, the state’s DC representatives received $66,000 from Indiana taxpayers to lobby Congress in the fourth quarter of 2011.

Citing the ThinkProgress Green report, House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) wrote one of those lobbyists yesterday, noting that her disclosed Keystone KL lobbying “seems unusual” as Indiana lacks any “obvious interest” in seeing the pipeline completed. In the letter, addressed to lobbyist Deborah Hohlt, Waxman “would appreciate the opportunity to learn about Indiana’s interests in the proposed Keystone XL pipeline” and requested a briefing from her.

“You’re kind of catching me off-guard,” Hohlt told Politico when asked about her tar-sands lobbying:

Hohlt had no answers when POLITICO contacted her Thursday, saying she still hadn’t seen Waxman’s letter. “You’re kind of catching me off-guard,” she said.

But Jane Jankowski, the press secretary for Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, said Hohlt simply listed in her disclosure report “any topic she’s spoken about on behalf of the state.”

“Gov. Daniels has talked about the need for the Keystone pipeline and issued a statement about it, which she passed on to our delegation, so she included it on her report,” Jankowski wrote.

Hohlt’s disclosure form lists the pipeline as one of four energy-related issues on which she lobbied both Congress and the Department of Energy.

A second lobbyist, Griffin Foster, also reported lobbying Congress and the Obama administration on the Keystone XL pipeline on Daniels’ behalf, over the same period.

Green

CHART: Big Oil Backers Of Keystone XL Pipeline Gave Big To Senate GOP Allies

By Josh Israel on Jan 31, 2012 at 9:59 am

Keystone XL Map

Proposed Keystone XL pipeline map

On Monday, 43 Senate Republicans and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) introduced legislation to circumvent the Obama administration and approve the controversial Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. A ThinkProgress Green analysis reveals at least 35 of the 44 senators backing the proposal have received special interest political action committee contributions from the biggest backers of the pipeline since the start of the 2010 cycle.

$644,400 went to 35 of those senators who have endorsed this measure. Sens. Richard Burr (R-NC) and Rob Portman (R-OH) received the most, with $43,500 each. Manchin received $2,500 and the rest went to Republicans.

The most active companies and trade associations lobbying for the pipeline over the last three months were the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, ConocoPhillips, the Business Roundtable, Shell Oil, ExxonMobil, the American Petroleum Institute, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association, Deere & Company, TransCanada Pipelines, and Devon Energy.

Of those, the PACs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil, the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association, Deere & Company, and Devon Energy all made contributions to federal candidates over the past three years.

Here are their totals:
Read more

Green

Lobbying Of Keystone XL Backers Dwarfed Opponents During Debate At End Of 2011

By Josh Israel on Jan 26, 2012 at 11:00 am

Keystone XL protest in front of the White House

Keystone XL protesters (credit: Josh Lopez)

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, ExxonMobil, Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN), and other insiders made a furious lobbying push in the fourth quarter of 2011 for the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, as Congress and the White House debated the dangerous project’s future. Forty-five companies and organizations reported significant lobbying between October 1 and December 31 on the Keystone XL Pipeline in general or on legislation aiming to speed up the Obama administration’s consideration of the application — with the lion’s share coming from proponents of the foreign crude project.

Last week, ThinkProgress reported that, through the third quarter of 2011, at least 31 companies or organizations reported lobbying in favor for federal approval of the application by the TransCanada Corporation to build a tar sands pipeline between Alberta, Canada, and Nederland, Texas — while seven lobbied against it. That group included a wide array of energy and construction companies, trade associations, and labor unions lobbying for and a handful of environmental groups lobbying against.

During the fourth quarter of 2011, oil money poured into Washington to push for the tar sands pipeline:

– Backers include some of the most influential players in Washington. At least 31 pipeline supporters spent over $36.7 million lobbying on this and other issues in the fourth quarter of 2011. These included huge players including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, the American Petroleum Institute, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips — each of whom spend $1 million on lobbying each quarter. New supporters included the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ($251,383) and the office of Gov. Mitch Daniels ((R-IN) ($66,000).

– The few organizations lobbying against the pipeline were much smaller players. Seven organizations publicly opposed to the pipeline reported only about $1.1 million on all lobbying for that time. These included newcomers Environment America Inc., the National Farmers Union, and the Friends Committee on National Legislation. The Friends Committee is the advocacy arm of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) and its $427,181 lobbying total made it the largest spender on the no side, for the quarter.

– Most of the lobbying groups who lobbied for the issue in previous quarters continued to do so in this period. Just a few proponents, such as the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the National Taxpayers Union lobbied in previous quarters on the issue, but did not appear to in the fourth quarter. Only the Defenders of Wildlife lobbied in opposition to the bill in earlier quarters, but did not report lobbying on Keystone XL in this period.

– Self-interest continued to be a big factor. TransCanada Pipelines Inc. spent $410,000 on lobbying in quarter four of 2011.

As these groups were lobbying, the fourth quarter of 2011 saw public hearings on the bill, mass protests, industry-backed TV spots, and legislation pushed by Congressional Republicans to force an expedited permit application response by the administration.

TransCanada has vowed to reapply with a modified proposal and Republicans are threatening to hold up tax relief for working families to force federal approval. Expect 2012 to be more of the same: Washington lobbyists are gunning for Keystone XL, while the opposition is mostly grassroots and a few environmentalist organizations, largely outside of the Washington money game.

Green

Lobbying Disclosures Reveal Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels Used State Dollars To Lobby For Keystone XL Pipeline

By Josh Israel and Brad Johnson on Jan 26, 2012 at 9:30 am

Recently released lobbying disclosures show that Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN), who delivered the GOP rebuttal to the State of the Union last night, joined the oil industry in lobbying Congress on behalf of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.

The pipeline does not go through Indiana, and few, if any, Indiana workers are expected to be employed in its construction. However, the Indiana Petroleum Council has been touting the project.

An analysis of fourth quarter 2011 lobbying forms by ThinkProgress Green finds:

The state of Indiana’s DC representatives received $66,000 from Indiana taxpayers to lobby Congress in the fourth quarter of 2011. Deborah Hohlt reported receiving $50,500 for lobbying on behalf of the state, including advocacy of the tar sands pipeline. Hohlt is a long-time Washington lobbyist who began her career at the Republican National Committee and George H.W. Bush administration. Griffin Foster reported receiving $15,500 for lobbying on behalf of the state of Indiana, including the Keystone pipeline. Foster is a former legislative assistant to Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL).

During the rebuttal, Daniels attacked President Obama for “extremism” that “cancels a perfectly safe pipeline that would employ tens of thousands.” Daniels did not mention how many of those jobs seem to be going to DC lobbyists.

Green

Keystone XL Pipeline Backers Dwarfed Opponents In Lobbying Efforts

By Josh Israel on Jan 20, 2012 at 10:50 am

Keystone XL Map

Proposed Keystone XL pipeline map

On Wednesday, President Barack Obama announced his administration was denying an application by the TransCanada Corporation to build a tar sands pipeline between Alberta, Canada, and Nederland, Texas.

This decision, a major victory for grassroots activists, comes after lobbying by TransCanada and its big oil allies significantly dwarfed that of environmental groups. TransCanada alone nearly matched the combined lobbying expenditures of all Keystone XL opponents on all issues, over the periods in which they lobbied for and against the pipeline in 2011, a ThinkProgress Green analysis shows.

An analysis of lobbying disclosure records for the first, second, and third quarters of 2011 suggests that the lobbying expenses of the 20 or more business and labor interests who backed the project were much greater than those for the seven organizations that actively opposed the measure:

– Thirty-eight different companies or organizations reported lobbying the federal government on the Keystone XL pipeline in general or on H.R.1938 (the North American-Made Energy Security Act, a bill which aimed to speed up the Obama administration’s consideration of the application). Thirty-one groups supported the pipeline, and seven groups opposed it.

– TransCanada’s lobbying efforts alone over the first three quarters of 2011 totaled at least $920,000.

– The seven groups in opposition to Keystone XL spent just over $1 million on all lobbying efforts. Corporate Ethics International, Defenders of Wildlife, EarthJustice Legal Defense Fund, the League of Conservation Voters, the National Wildlife Federation, the Sierra Club, and the Western Organization of Resource Councils reported spending just over $1 million on lobbying efforts for the periods when they were lobbying on Keystone XL — little more than TransCanada’s spending. Lobbying disclosure forms do not specify how much is spent on individual issues.

– The 31 groups supporting Keystone XL spent $59.8 million on all lobbying. Combined with the massive lobbying prowess of supporters like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, ConocoPhillips, Shell Oil, Exxon Mobil Corporation, the American Petroleum Institute, and the National Association of Manufacturers, as well as less expected players like the National Taxpayers Union and Deere & Company, supporters of the pipeline had lobbying operations over the periods in which they lobbied on application totaling at least $59.8 million.

– Oil and energy companies alone spent more than $37 million on total lobbying.

TransCanada has vowed to reapply. If these numbers are any indication, they will likely do so with some well-funded allies.

See the organizations who reported lobbying on the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline in the first three quarters of 2011:
Read more

Alyssa

Watch These Movies While You’re Waiting For The Iowa Caucus Results

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Jan 3, 2012 at 2:52 pm

Thanks to the vast expansion of our cable news industry, you could spend hours tonight watching talking heads speculate about the potential results of the Iowa Caucuses tonight. But fortunately, you don’t have to! You can keep hitting refresh on Twitter or the news site of your choice while watching any one of these movies, which actually get the mechanics of politics right in a way that most others don’t, and that most snap-judgment analysts won’t.

1. Primary Colors (1998): Unlike most political movies, which set up a dichotomy between often-unnamed but clearly defined members of opposite parties, the vast majority of Primary Colors takes place during the Democratic primary. That means you get tough debates, hilariously incompetent campaign volunteers who get whipped into a professional fighting force, the entrance of a late-breaking messiah candidate who turns out to be not-so-messianic, and best of all, a deeply cranky conversation about a meeting with the Lubavitcher Rebbe. This is politics as informed and presented by people who have actually been there.

2. Definitely, Maybe (2008): This movie may be disguised as a romantic comedy, but it’s a savvy look at the disappointment of the Clinton years that draws its small dramas from an actual understanding of political pressure points. Fundraising gets you places. Both candidates and journalists have a dangerous desire to be liked. Not putting union bugs on Democratic paper goods during a campaign is disastrous. The president probably will not remember his early volunteers years down the road.

3. The American President (1995) and Thank You For Smoking (2005): It’s sort of amazing how naive Aaron Sorkin is about lobbying in The American President, a movie that makes the profession look so sexy and principled it’s sort of shocking it wasn’t a product of the influence industry itself. Thank You For Smoking is a loopy tonic to that misconception. Watch this double-header as we gear up for a Super PAC-filled election year, and vow not to get fooled again.

4. Contagion (2011): In the hysteria of an election year, it can be easy to forget that there’s life beyond politics and elected officials. But a lot of what’s important about presidential candidates is the people they’d appoint to serve under them, and any administration is limited in the changes it can make by layers of existing bureaucracy, regulations, and the time it takes to turn a ship much bigger than the Titanic around. Contagion‘s a critically important reminder that in crisis, it’s not always a matter of whose finger is on the button.

5. All the President’s Men (1976) and Dick (1999): These two very different retellings of the same essential story make two different but critically important points. First, journalism is hard, and it’s difficult to do it even when you have all the right breaks and time in which to do it: so how hard must it be to nail down true stories on the campaign trail, where everyone is sleep-deprived and exhausted, and events are moving extraordinarily rapidly. Second, politicians are people, often eccentric, obnoxious people. They want power, but they want other things too, including pot brownies and to kick their dogs.

NEWS FLASH

US Chamber Gloats About Keystone XL Poison-Pill Lobbying Spree | The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is leading the charge to attach poison-pill Keystone XL tar sands legislation to the payroll tax cut extension bill, with a massive lobbying effort on behalf of the nation’s dirty oil businesses. “The Chamber created a coalition of pro-Keystone XL Pipeline partners across the United States,” the Hill reported. That story about corporate corruption of our nation’s politics and health was posted on the US Chamber website and Twitter feed, a promotion of the pay-for-play services they provide as the world’s largest right-wing lobbying shop. The Chamber is one the of the key lobbying groups behind the other payroll poison pill, legislation to block Boiler MACT rules that would reduce mercury, carbon monoxide, and other hazardous air pollutants.

Security

INTERVIEW: Lanny Davis Rejects Business Partner Josh Block’s Smears Against CAP, Defends His Lobbying Work

By Eli Clifton on Dec 9, 2011 at 7:20 pm

Lanny Davis, a leading lobbyist and former special counsel to President Bill Clinton, responded to the recent controversy surrounding Josh Block, a former American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) spokesperson and current Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) fellow who compiled thousands of words of opposition research on ThinkProgress and Media Matters bloggers and smeared the Center for American Progress as writing “borderline anti-Semitic stuff.” Davis, a business partner of Block’s, told ThinkProgress:

He’s done this all independently without any input from me. I respect Josh Block but I 100 percent disagree with much of his language. People can disagree about Israel’s policies without being anti-Semites. In fact I think it’s a terrible mistake to blur the two. We should be able to debate Israel’s policies. I am very pro-Israel. I believe the onus for negotiations is on the Palestinians but both Israelis and Palestinians share responsibility. However, that’s all fair debate. Israelis debate the subject. We debate the subject. Impugning motives of people at the Center [for American Progress] and impugning [that] those motives are driven by anti-Semitism is, in my opinion, wrong. I respect John Podesta and the Center greatly.

In our post yesterday on Block, we explained that Davis “represented business interests backing the 2009 coup in Honduras.” In an interview today, Davis responded, “I am on the record as having opposed the illegal and indefensible deportation of Mr. Zelaya. Suggestions that I supported a military coup are simply false.”

Davis also defended his lobbying work for the Ivory Coast, telling ThinkProgress, “The Ivory Coast Embassy in DC retained me, not Mr. Gbagbo. My mission, among other things, working behind the scenes for ten days before I quit, was to facilitate a phone call from the President of the United States to Mr. Gbagbo to bring about a face saving effort to avoid bloodshed.”

Economy

Between 2008 And 2010, 30 Big Corporations Spent More Lobbying Washington Than They Paid In Income Taxes

By Zaid Jilani on Dec 7, 2011 at 10:35 am

General Electric spent more lobbying the government than it did in federal income taxes between 2008 and 2010.

Today, thousands of 99 Percenters will march on K Street in Washington, D.C. as a part of an action called “Take Back The Capitol,” taking aim at the lobbying firms that corporate interests use to influence the federal government.

A report released this month by Public Campaign demonstrates just how important it is for Americans to battle corporate special interests and reclaim our democracy. The group’s research finds that thirty big corporations actually spent more money lobbying the federal government between 2008 and 2010 than they spent in taxes. For example, General Electric — one of the top 10 most profitable companies in the world — got a net tax rebate of $4.7 billion during this period. Meanwhile, it spent $84 million lobbying the federal government.

Here’s the full list of the 30 corporations identified and what they paid in federal taxes as opposed to lobbying:

To follow today’s actions, check out Take Back The Capitol’s website, and find instant updates about the protest through the hashtag #99indc. ThinkProgress will be covering today’s events at our 99 Percent Movement special topics page.

Update

For more, see Public Campaign’s full report.

Related Posts

Politics

Did Newt Gingrich Break Georgia’s Lobbying Law In 2004?

By Travis Waldron on Dec 6, 2011 at 1:15 pm

Between his time as Speaker of the House and Republican presidential frontrunner, Newt Gingrich worked as an advocate for various causes and organizations, a past that has raised questions about whether the duties he was paid to do constituted lobbying. Gingrich, for instance, was reportedly paid $1.6 million by mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from 1999 to 2007 and worked with pro-ethanol groups in 2009. None of these activities seem to have required him to register as a lobbyist under federal law, though many critics have dismissed this as a technicality.

But Gingrich also worked with state lawmakers, particularly on behalf of his Center for Health Transformation (CHT). The New York Times last week highlighted meetings conducted with Georgia lawmakers in 2004, wherein Gingrich promoted the activities of VitalSprings — a paying member of CHT. According to Politico’s Emily Schultheis, those meetings likely constituted lobbying under state law. If so, Gingrich’s failure to register as a lobbyist may amount to a violation of a Georgia law that was in place at the time:

The state’s lobbying laws have recently changed, adding a 10 percent threshold for amount of time spent on lobbying activities — but in 2004, the two main requirements for lobbyist registration were compensation for promoting products or companies to lawmakers, or spending over $250 on those promotion activities.

William Perry, executive director of Common Cause Georgia, says Gingrich should have been a registered lobbyist in the state.

“If he was receiving compensation — and it doesn’t have to be compensation for lobbying [specifically] — and you have a meeting with legislators to try to get either something passed or you’re representing a vendor, you’d have to register,” he said.

As ThinkProgress has reported, Gingrich has a lengthy history of peddling the interests of companies that pay him, even if he has never met the threshold to register as a federal lobbyist. Now, however, it appears that Gingrich may not only have acted as a lobbyist on the state level, but that he may have also broken Georgia law in trying to avoid disclosure.

Older

Switch to Mobile