December, 03 2009, 02:49pm EDT
Greenpeace Asks Schumer to Investigate Big Oil's Senate Rules Violations
WASHINGTON
Greenpeace Executive Director Phil Radford
today sent a letter to Senate Rules and Administration Committee
Chairman Chuck Schumer (D-NY) asking him to investigate the
controversial "forum" co-sponsored by the American Petroleum Institute
(API) and Newsweek Magazine on Tuesday in the Mansfield Room of the US
Capitol Building.
The event, which, which was moderated by Newsweek
columnist Howard Fineman, featured a panel that included API President Jack
Gerard, Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Representatives Ed Markey (D-MA) and Fred
Upton (R-MI). The "forum" was organized to discuss the pending clean energy and
climate legislation before the Senate. During the event, promotional materials
were distributed and displayed using Newsweek's
and API's corporate logos, a clear violation of Senate rules.
As Chairman of the Senate Rules Committee,
Schumer has jurisdiction over violations of Senate rules regarding Senate-run
facilities on the Capitol grounds.
Any requests for photographic evidence of the
brochures and signs on display at the event should be directed to Adam Feiler
at afeiler@greenpeace.org.
The full text of the letter from Radford is
below.
-----------------------------
December 3, 2009
Senator
Charles Schumer
Senate
Committee on Rules and Administration
305 Russell
Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Schumer,
As you may know, on Tuesday, December 1st, Newsweek Magazine and the American
Petroleum Institute (API) co-sponsored a controversial "forum" in the Mansfield
Room (S-207) in the US Capitol Building. According to the admission of public
relations staff at Newsweek and
several news accounts, API paid Newsweek enough
to make the trade group eligible to co-sponsor an "Executive Forum." As part of
API's advertising deal with Newsweek,
the group's President, registered lobbyist Jack Gerard, was granted the only
non-governmental seat on the panel aside from a Newsweek editor.
After reviewing the Senate Rules governing events held at
the US Capitol, I believe this forum violated the guidelines governing events
held in the Senate Wing of the US Capitol or in Senate office buildings. I am
writing to urge you to investigate this matter and share the findings of that
investigation with the public. Additionally, I hope you will consider the
greater impact that this type of conduct could have on the public's perception
of the United States Congress. The United States Capitol is not a convention
center with rooms available to the lobbyist who signs the largest check, nor is
it a venue for any private, profit-making company to promote its product.
The Senate Committee on Rules and Administration provides
clear guidance for events held in taxpayer-funded facilities like the Capitol:
Commercial, Promotional or Profit Making Events
*
Booking and use of Senate space for any commercial, promotional, or
profit-making purpose is strictly prohibited.
* No signs, placards, photographs, brochures or pamphlets displaying a group or
company name or logo are permitted.
* No products or services may be promoted or sold on the premises. No
promotional material may be distributed on the premises.
Several members of my staff attended the "forum" and
provided the details below that prove that this event was beyond the pale of
acceptable conduct within the walls of the US Capitol. You will find attached
with this letter documentation of many of the claims made below.
The "forum", which was moderated by Newsweek columnist Howard Fineman, featured a panel that included
Gerard and three members of Congress: Senator Byron Dorgan, Representative
Edward Markey and Representative Fred Upton. Other members of Congress and
their staff also attended the "forum", which included food, wine, and beer as
refreshments, the cost of which was presumably covered by API's package deal.
Despite the Senate rule banning promotional materials and company names and
logos, the Mansfield room was covered in brochures, signs and other materials
that outwardly promoted API, Newsweek
and the magazine's advertisers. Examples include:
- At the beginning of the "forum" each seat was
covered by an API brochure that featured the group's logo and included the
tagline "America's oil and natural gas industry supports over 9 million jobs.
One of them may be yours." - Newsweek
provided every attendee with copies of its magazine and other materials that
included paid advertisements. - Posters located at the front of the room and at
the entrance to the Mansfield room included both Newsweek's and API's corporate logos.
These materials appear to be in clear violation of the rules
banning promotional material in the Senate wing of the Capitol and Senate
office buildings. I hope you share my shock that API was permitted to pay Newsweek for the opportunity to directly
influence members of Congress and their staff with brochures and other
information just steps from the Senate floor. It is equally disturbing that Newsweek was permitted to use the room
in the first place and to distribute copies of the publication, which included
numerous advertisements.
As you and your colleagues debate energy and climate
legislation that could put our nation on the course to a new clean energy
economy, I hope you agree that it is critically important to ensure that no
lobbyist or interest group is able to buy special "pay-to-play" access to
influence members or their staff. This "Executive Forum" clearly violated the
"letter of the law" governing events at the US Capitol and it threatens to
undermine Congress's
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000LATEST NEWS
Russia's Putin Secures Another Term
The controversial leader won a record number of votes for a post-Soviet candidate even as opponents organized a protest at noon on the election's third and last day.
Mar 17, 2024
Despite protests on Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin won reelection with more votes than any candidate since the fall of the Soviet Union.
Exit poll the Public Opinion Foundation (POF) put the final tally after three days of voting at 87.8%, the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) at 87%, and Russia's Central Election Commission (CEC) at 87.3%. Putin will now serve another six-year term, meaning he will have been at the helm of the Russian state for longer than any leader since Catherine the Great, surpassing Josef Stalin.
The election comes less than a month after the second anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and is likely to lead to more tensions between the Russian and U.S. governments.
"It gives me some hope to see how many people are not happy with the dictatorship, the war, with what's happening in Russia."
"For a U.S. administration that hoped Putin's Ukraine adventure would be wrapped up by now with a decisive setback to Moscow's interests, the election is a reminder that Putin expects that there will be many more rounds in the geopolitical boxing ring," Nikolas Gvosdev, director of the National Security Program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, told the Russia Matters project.
With most of Putin's prominent opponents either dead, imprisoned, or in exile, the elections results were considered a foregone conclusion by both friends and foes of his administration.
A Putin spokesperson said in 2023 that the election was "not really democracy" but instead "costly bureaucracy," according to CNN. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the White House National Security Council said the election was "obviously not free nor fair."
However, Russian opponents of Putin did find a way to demonstrate their position with a protest called "Noon Against Putin." The protest was called for by St. Petersburg politician Maxim Reznik, according to The Guardian. Participants were instructed to head to a polling place at noon and cast a paper ballot for one of the candidates running against Putin, or to write-in another candidate or spoil their ballot.
Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny had endorsed the protest before his death last month in a Russian prison, leading the Independent Novaya Gazeta newspaper to dub it "Navalny's political testament."
The action drew crowds to polling places both in Russian cities like Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Yekaterinburg and at Russian embassies around the world.
"This is the first time in my life I have ever seen a queue for elections," one woman waiting in line in Moscow told
CNN. Russian journalists reported that the lines at some stations within the country reached the thousands, according to Reuters.
Navalny's widow, Yulia Navalnaya, who had also endorsed the protest, voted at the embassy in Berlin, while several protesters gathered outside the embassy in London.
"I expected there to be a lot of people, but not this many," London-based participant Maria Dorofeyeva told The Guardian, adding, "It gives me some hope to see how many people are not happy with the dictatorship, the war, with what's happening in Russia. And we want to stop it."
Ruslan Shaveddinov of Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation told Reuters:
"We showed ourselves, all of Russia and the whole world that Putin is not Russia (and) that Putin has seized power in Russia."
"Our victory is that we, the people, defeated fear, we defeated solitude—many people saw they were not alone," Shaveddinov said
Keep ReadingShow Less
Van Hollen Says Netanyahu Spreading 'Flat Out Lies' About UNRWA
The Maryland senator defended the organization on CBS and said there was no evidence that it was a "proxy for Hamas."
Mar 17, 2024
U.S. Senator for Maryland Chris Van Hollen continued his defense of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and its work in Gaza in an appearance on CBS News' "Face the Nation" on Sunday.
"The claim that Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu and others are making that somehow UNRWA is a proxy for Hamas are just flat out lies, that's a flat out lie," he told journalist Margaret Brennan.
The U.S. was one of many Western countries that paused funding for UNRWA after the agency announced in January that it had fired 12 staffers over Israeli allegations that they had been involved in Hamas' October 7 attack on Israel. However, some countries including Canada, Sweden, the European Union, and Australia have since restored funding. A report has also emerged that Israel tortured UNRWA staffers into falsely confessing to involvement in the Hamas attack.
"Netanyahu has wanted to get rid of UNRWA because he had seen them as a means to continue the hopes of the Palestinian people for a homeland of their own."
Van Hollen's remarks on Sunday come days after he argued for the restoration of UNRWA funds on the floor of the U.S. Senate and criticized Republican legislators who wanted to permanently end funds for the organization that supports some 6 million Palestinian refugees in countries across the Middle East, including around 2 million in Gaza.
During his speech, he pointed out that the Netanyahu government had not shared the underlying evidence that UNRWA staffers participated in October 7 with either UNRWA itself or the U.S. government. He also urged his colleagues to read a classified Director of National Intelligence report on Netanyahu's claims of UNRWA complicity with Hamas.
On "Face the Nation," Van Hollen said that the person in charge of operations on the ground in UNRWA was a 20-year U.S. Army veteran.
"You can be sure he is not in cahoots with Hamas," the senator told Brennan.
He also repeated claims that Netanyahu has wanted to eliminate UNRWA entirely since at least 2017.
"Netanyahu has wanted to get rid of UNRWA because he had seen them as a means to continue the hopes of the Palestinian people for a homeland of their own," Van Hollen said, adding that the right-wing Israeli leader's "primary objective" was preventing the formation of a Palestinian state.
However, the dismantling of UNRWA would be especially catastrophic amid Israel's ongoing bombardment and invasion of Gaza, which has killed more than 31,000 people and put the survivors at risk of famine. No other organization has the infrastructure in place to distribute the necessary aid.
"If you cut off funding for UNRWA in Gaza entirely, it means more people will starve, more people won't get the medial assistance they need, and so it would be a huge mistake," Van Hollen said.
He also said that only 14 of the agency's 13,000-strong staff in Gaza had been accused of participating in the October 7 attack.
"We should investigate it, we should hold all those people accountable, but for goodness' sake, let's not hold 2 million innocent Palestinian civilians who are dying of starvation... accountable for the bad acts of 14 people."
Van Hollen also repeated his call for President Joe Biden to condition the sale of offensive military weapons to Israel on the country obeying international law and allowing aid into Gaza. While Israel sent the U.S. a letter saying it was in compliance with the law, "the day it was signed, clearly the Netanyahu government is not in compliance, because we see that they're continuing to restrict humanitarian assistance," he told Brennan.
Also on "Face the Nation" Sunday, United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) Chief Executive Catherine Russell described the impact that a lack of aid was having on the children of Gaza.
"We know now that children are dying of malnutrition in Gaza," she told Brennan.
Russell said that not enough aid was reaching those who needed it, calling both air drops and sea deliveries "a drop in the bucket."
She also called for greater transparency into what was actually happening in Gaza and the difficulties of delivering aid.
"The world should be able to see what's happening and make their own judgments about what's going on," Russell said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Gore Calls Out Fossil Fuel Industry 'Shamelessness' in Lying to Public
"They are continuing to do similar things today to try to fool people and pull the wool over people's eyes just in the name of greed," the former vice president said.
Mar 17, 2024
In reflecting on nearly 50 years of climate advocacy, former Vice President Al Gore said that he had "underestimated" the greed of the fossil fuel industry.
The remarks came in an interview published in USA Today on Sunday. When asked if he had any regrets, Gore responded that he had "put every ounce of energy" he had into climate advocacy, but added:
"I was pretty slow to recognize how important the massive funding of anti-climate messaging was going on. I underestimated the power of greed in the fossil fuel industry, the shamelessness in putting out the lies."
"They are continuing to do similar things today to try to fool people and pull the wool over people's eyes just in the name of greed," Gore continued.
"What's at stake is so incredible."
Gore, who tried to raise awareness about the climate crisis in the U.S. House of Representatives as early as 1981 and brought the issue to national attention in 2006's documentary An Inconvenient Truth, has taken a harsher tone against oil, gas, and coal companies in recent months. In August 2023, he said that the "climate crisis is a fossil fuel crisis," and in September, he implored the industry to "get out of the way." In December, he lamented that the industry had "captured the COP process," referring to the appointment of the United Arab Emirates national oil company CEO Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber to preside over the United Nations' COP28 climate conference in that country.
In the USA Today interview, Gore also named the fossil fuel industry when asked about his greatest frustration.
"Well, that we haven't made more progress," Gore answered, "and that some of the fossil fuel companies have been shameless in providing, continuing to provide lavish funding for disinformation and misinformation."
"What's at stake is so incredible," he added.
However, Gore told USA Today that he tried not to focus on his anger, but instead on continuing to raise awareness about the crisis and what can be done about it. And he remained hopeful that his grandchildren would live in a world in which people had come together and acted in time.
"We've got all the solutions we need right now to cut emissions in half before the end of this decade," he said. "We've got a clear line of sight to how we can cut the other 50% of emissions by mid century."
He also encouraged more people to get involved with the climate movement.
"I would say the greatest need is for more grassroots advocates because the most persuasive advocates are those in your own community," he said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular