March, 03 2021, 11:00pm EDT
As Energy Committee Votes on Haaland Nomination, Opposition Is Coming From Members Who Have Taken More Than $8 Million From Big Oil
Republican members of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) Committee have been staunch opponents of the confirmation of Congresswoman Deb Haaland to lead the Department of the Interior.The same members opposed to Haaland have collectively taken millions from the oil and gas industry, including over $1.4 million from the 2020 cycle alone.These senators have oversight of the very same industries that have bankrolled their campaigns with millions of dollars, including the fossil fuel industry that they have so adamantly defended throughout the hearings.
WASHINGTON
Today, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) Committee will vote on the confirmation of Congresswoman Deb Haaland for secretary of the Department of the Interior. After a long battle including days of hostile hearings and smear campaigns in the media, Accountable Senate War Room is calling on Senate Republicans to support Haaland's nomination once and for all, and to stop obstructing her confirmation to appease their Big Oil donors.
"In her confirmation hearings, Congresswoman Haaland showed the country who she is: an environmentalist, a fierce advocate for her community, and a proven bipartisan leader who has earned the support of some of her most conservative colleagues, including Rep. Don Young from Alaska, and will bring that same willingness to work with others as Interior secretary," said Mairead Lynn, spokesperson for Accountable Senate War Room. "Combined with the enormous sums of money Senate Republicans have taken from the oil and gas industry, it's easy to see why the outrageous attacks launched against her fell flat. Haaland has already earned bipartisan support and those who continue to oppose her nomination in the name of their Big Oil donors shouldn't be taken seriously."
Below are the contributions that top Republican members of the ENR Committee have accepted from the oil and gas industry:
Those same Senate Republicans have been publicly against Haaland's confirmation:
Ranking Member John Barrasso (R-WY):
- Said he was "troubled by many of Representative Haaland's views," which he characterized as "radical" [The Guardian, 2/26/2021]
- "[Haaland's] radical views are squarely at odds with the responsible management of our nation's energy resources." [WaPo, 2/9/2021]
- Got hostile with Haaland during her confirmation hearing and "shouted over" her, then accused the congresswoman of "wanting to legalize drugs to replace tax revenue from oil and gas" [WaPo, 2/25/2021]
Senator Steve Daines (R-MT):
- Daines claimed he was "deeply concerned with the Congresswoman's support on several radical issues that will hurt Montana, our way of life, our jobs and rural America."
- The Billings Gazette Editorial Board deemed Daines' attacks as a racist, sexist "dogwhistle" [2/21/2021]
- Even before the hearing, Daines threatened to block her nomination, citing her support for the Green New Deal and a pause on new oil and gas leases on federal land, as well as her opposition to Keystone XL. [The Guardian, 2/26/2021]
- Called on Haaland to "respect the science," after previously denouncing the role humans have in climate change [WaPo, 2/25/2021]
Senator James Risch (R-ID):
- Risch repeatedly badgered Haaland on her stance on the Keystone XL pipeline after she had answered the questions several times over. [WICZ, 2/24/2021]
Senator Mike Lee (R-UT):
- Lee's questioning of Haaland, what was referred to as a "lecture" by the Salt Lake Tribune, revolved around her thoughts on the designation of Bears Ears as a national monument, and aggressively cut the Congresswoman off while she was giving the state of Utah a compliment.
Senator John Hoeven (R-ND):
- Criticized Haaland for her past environmental advocacy relating to the Dakota Access Pipeline, which risks leaking dirty oil into the water supply and sacred lands of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe. [The Guardian, 2/26/2021]
- Hoeven said he was concerned for his state's economy but failed to disclose his own substantial investments in the oil and gas industry, including in North Dakota. [The Guardian, 2/26/2021]
Senator James Lankford (R-OK):
- Lankford went after Haaland for her previous comments about fracking and the construction of pipelines, and justifying his decision to vote against Haaland because of her "commitment to an unrealistic energy reality." [James Lankford, 2/24/2021]
- In 2010, Lankford called global warming a "myth" and said it will eventually be "exposed" as "a way of control more than anything else." [Business Insider, 2/24/2021]
Senator John Cassidy (R-LA):
- The Senator took every opportunity to throw Haaland's previous comments about Republicans not believing in science back in her face, asking her "will your department be guided by a prejudice against fossil fuel or will it be guided by science?" [HuffPost, 2/24/2021]
- He went on to accuse the Biden administration of rejecting science, claiming "clearly the Biden administration is not guided by science, and Republicans are guided by science."
- Cassidy is on the record rejecting the idea that human activity is "a significant contributor" to climate change even though this is well-established by the scientific community [HuffPost, 2/24/2021]
- Cassidy is also on the record defending Trump's erroneous claim suggesting that you can treat COVID-19 by ingesting disinfectants, obfuscating Trump of any responsibility claiming that "The president speaks in such a way, people are not going to inject themselves [with Lysol]." [HuffPost, 2/24/2021]
Accountable Senate War Room released an analysis that reveals that Republican senators targeted nominees of color with harsher language, often referring to them as "radical" compared to their white counterparts, and another report revealing that Biden's Cabinet nominees of color face tougher scrutiny throughout the confirmation process than their white colleagues.
Senate Republicans' attacks of Haaland have largely fallen flat:
- E&E News: 'Work my heart out': Deb Haaland makes her case
- Billings Gazette: Gazette opinion: Give Haaland a fair hearing
- Accountable Senate War Room: New Research Highlights the Nearly $8.8M in Oil Contributions Fueling GOP Smears of Climate Champion Haaland
- E&E News: Haaland's allies gird for tense confirmation hearing
- HuffPost: Rep. Deb Haaland Fends Off Republican Attacks At Contentious Confirmation Hearing
- Las Vegas Sun: GOP smears of Interior nominee are of no service to American people
- POLITICO: Tribes see familiar pattern in Haaland opposition
- E&E News: 5 things to watch at Deb Haaland's confirmation hearing
- HuffPost: GOP Senators Attack Biden's Interior Secretary Pick For Wanting To Protect Land, Air
- The Guardian: Republicans criticizing Haaland's nomination have ties to fossil fuels
- Roll Call: Haaland faces GOP opposition that other Biden nominees did not
- Accountable Senate War Room: Daines Favors Special Interests Over Montanans By Opposing Haaland for Interior Secretary
- Accountable Senate War Room: Top Environmental Voices, Members of Congress Call Out GOP Senators For Putting Special Interests Over Public Lands by Opposing Haaland for Interior
- Accountable Senate War Room: ROUND-UP: GOP Senators Attack Becerra, Haaland to Prove Loyalty to Special Interests
- Accountable Senate War Room: New Research Highlights the Nearly $8.8M in Oil Contributions Fueling GOP Smears of Climate Champion Haaland
- HuffPost: Montana Senator Backed An Extremist At Interior But Rejects A Native American Woman
Nonpartisan watchdog group Accountable.US recently launched the Accountable Senate War Room to fight back against those lawmakers who seek to overturn the will of the people by standing in the way of the smooth transition of power and the swift approval of nominees to ensure that the government can function and advance the interests of all American people, not just the rich and powerful.
LATEST NEWS
TMZ Confronts Hegseth Over Whether He's on a 'Power Trip' When Ordering 'Extreme Level of Violence'
"I’ve never seen the corporate media hacks even dream of having the courage to ask something like this," said one journalist.
Apr 24, 2026
At the latest press briefing at the Pentagon on Friday, in addition to issuing his latest threat to journalists who publish classified information obtained from sources, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth peppered his comments with the violent rhetoric that's become commonplace in his public remarks.
The US military will "shoot and kill" if Iranian boats are found trying to disrupt passage through the Strait of Hormuz, which remains closed following the extension of a ceasefire this week, said Hegseth.
He added, "We will shoot to destroy, no hesitation, just like the drug boats in the Caribbean"—a reference to strikes that have killed at least 180 people the US has accused of trafficking drugs, in an operation that has been widely condemned as one of extrajudicial killings or murder.
"The War Department stands ready for what comes next, locked and loaded," said the secretary, who has also denigrated what he refers to as "stupid" rules of engagement meant to protect civilians. "We'll use up to and including lethal force if necessary."
Amid Hegseth's escalating efforts to control the media's coverage of his department, including the Pentagon's firing on Thursday of the ombudsman of the military newspaper Stars and Stripes and his demand that journalists agree to a policy prohibiting coverage that the department has not approved, an outlet that's new to Capitol Hill made its way into the press briefing room Friday—and asked the top military official a question that hadn't previously come up about the deadly attacks he's ordered in recent months.
“I’ve heard you talk a lot about bombing people and places," said Jacob Wasserman of the celebrity news outlet TMZ, which has recently expanded its political coverage by opening an office in the nation's capital. "And when you give these orders to carry out this extreme level of violence, what’s going through your mind and your body? Do you have, like, an adrenaline rush? Are you scared? Do you feel like you’re on a power trip?"
WATCH: @TMZ’s first question at a Pentagon briefing...@jacob_wass: “I’ve heard you talk a lot about bombing people in places. And when you give these orders to carry out this extreme level of violence, what’s going through your mind and your body? Do you have, like, an… pic.twitter.com/94IHsMHP1D
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 24, 2026
Hegseth appeared perplexed before smirking and dismissing the query as "a very TMZ question." He quickly denied that a "power trip" plays into his decisions to strike targets in places including Iran, where at least 3,375 people have been killed in US-Israeli strikes, including at least 200 children; the Caribbean Ocean and Pacific Ocean, where the boat bombing campaign is continuing; and Ecuador, where US troops launched a joint campaign with the nation's military last month, targeting suspected drug traffickers on land.
He said his "only thought process is to ensure that our war fighters have everything they need to be successful, defeat and destroy the enemy," before adding some more of the violent rhetoric Wasserman had alluded to about bringing "maximum violence to the enemy."
Some scoffed at Wasserman's question, but others, including Drop Site News journalist Julian Andreone, applauded the reporter for publicly suggesting and confronting Hegseth about the possibility that he enjoys ordering US troops to kill people in foreign countries, including many civilians, in operations that legal experts say violate international law.
"I’ve never seen the corporate media hacks even dream of having the courage to ask something like this, yet they continue to shove the fancy name of their organization in everybody’s faces while looking down their noses at TMZ," said Andreone.
Wasserman's colleague, Charlie Cotton, followed up with a question about whether Hegseth, who has claimed the Department of Defense has been renamed the Department of War—although congressional approval would be needed for such a change—would consider again rechristening the agency as the Department of Peace, "since that's what we're all after."
The question prompted Hegseth, moments after demanding "maximum violence," to remark that "the one institution that should win the Nobel Peace Prize every single year is the United States military, because we are the guarantor of the safety and security, not just of our country, but of a lot of people in this world."
TMZ's first appearance in the briefing room and its arrival in Washington, DC come at a time when the corporate media's coverage of the Iran war and other military operations has been compared to the drumbeating tone in the national press ahead of the George W. Bush administration's invasion of Iraq in 2003, and as some have called for more adversarial coverage of the White House and the political establishment.
The outlet, which is more accustomed to publishing celebrity gossip, spent recent weeks publishing photos of federal lawmakers vacationing during the partial government shutdown, with TMZ founder Harvey Levin interviewing one Transportation Security Administration worker who had been reporting to work for weeks without pay on the company's weekday show, "TMZ Live."
Levin urged viewers to who saw members of Congress on vacation during the shutdown to "take a picture and send it to us at TMZ. We will post that picture on our website, on our social media, and we will put it on our television shows. We want to show what they are doing at your expense.”
Levin told The Hollywood Reporter earlier this month that TMZ's presence in Washington will “sometimes be fun, sometimes intensely serious."
The headline the outlet chose for its brief write-up of Wasserman's question to Hegseth on Friday was, "TMZ DC to Pete Hegseth: Do You Get Off on Dropping Bombs???"
Journalist Krystal Ball of the online news show "Breaking Points" said that if Wasserman's question to Hegseth was a "'TMZ question,' I’m excited to see more of what TMZ will bring to the table."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Maine Gov. Mills Ripped for Veto of Landmark AI Data Center Moratorium
One critic said Mills “demonstrated a shocking disconnect with the people of Maine, their elected legislators, and a large and growing national movement against the reckless explosion of this highly problematic industry.”
Apr 24, 2026
Maine's Democratic Gov. Janet Mills is facing criticism from lawmakers and environmental groups after vetoing a bill that would have enacted the nation's first statewide moratorium on artificial intelligence data centers.
The bill, LD 307, which passed both chambers of Maine's Legislature with bipartisan support earlier this month, would have stopped state and local governments from issuing permits for data centers with electric loads of 20 megawatts or more until November 2027, giving the state time to study their effects.
Mills opted to veto the bill after lawmakers voted down an amendment that would have carved out an exception for a proposed data center project in the town of Jay.
“A moratorium is appropriate given the impacts of massive data centers in other states on the environment and on electricity rates," Mills wrote to the Legislature on Friday. "But the final version of this bill fails to allow for a specific project in the Town of Jay that enjoys strong local support from its host community and region."
While there has not been much organized opposition to the Jay project, proposals in other towns, like Lewiston and Wiscasset, have been met with furious resistance from locals who fear sharp rises in utility costs.
The moratorium's sponsor, Rep. Melanie Sachs (D-48), said that by vetoing the bill, Mills was “resisting the will of a majority of Maine people."
“While a veto might protect the proposed data center project in Jay, it poses significant potential consequences for all ratepayers, our electric grid, our environment, and our shared energy future,” she told the Portland Press Herald. “This decision is simply wrong.”
Maureen Drouin, the executive director for Maine Conservation Voters, said that Mills had "sided with large-scale data center developers over safeguards for Maine people and the environment, leaving communities at risk to higher energy prices and more pollution."
"Across the country, the development of large-scale data centers has far outpaced the ability of policy and lawmakers to properly regulate them and establish sensible protections," she continued. "Maine had a chance to push pause and establish the right regulatory framework to protect its people, their wallets, and the environment from polluting, resource-hungry data centers."
Mitch Jones, the managing director of litigation for Food & Water Watch, which has backed proposals in several other states—including New York, Pennsylvania, California, and Michigan—agreed that Mills' veto "demonstrated a shocking disconnect with the people of Maine, their elected legislators, and a large and growing national movement against the reckless explosion of this highly problematic industry."
"Mainers and people across the country are becoming increasingly fed up with the skyrocketing electricity rates, false jobs promises, and harmful industrialization of small-town communities that hyperscale data centers bring wherever they land," he said.
Mills' veto comes as she is running for the Democratic nomination to challenge Republican US Sen. Susan Collins for her seat in November. The establishment-backed governor is facing increasingly long odds amid the insurgent progressive candidacy of the former Marine-turned-oyster farmer Graham Platner, who leads by wide margins in recent polls.
A leaked Zoom meeting last month showed that Mills was lambasted by voters over her decisions to veto other popular bills that would have strengthened gun control laws, protected tribal sovereignty, allowed farmworkers to unionize, and lowered prescription drug prices.
“It is no wonder that Janet Mills’s political career seems to be limping to a feeble conclusion," Jones said following her veto of the data center bill Friday. "The Maine Legislature must now do what Mills won’t: stand up for the best interests of Mainers and their communities, and override this foolish veto immediately.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Ravages Economy, US Consumer Sentiment Hits Record Low
A Democratic spokesperson said that "Americans are drowning under rising costs, flat wages, high unemployment, and historic layoffs—it's no wonder they're concerned about how they're going to make ends meet."
Apr 24, 2026
As President Donald Trump continues to push his economy-wrecking agenda of tariffs, mass deportations, and military aggression, US consumer sentiment hit an all-time low on Friday, according to the University of Michigan.
The final April figure from the university's Surveys of Consumers was 49.8—slightly higher than the preliminary 47.6 from earlier this month, and the 48 predicted by economists polled by Reuters, but still a record low, down from 53.3 in March.
"Decreases in sentiment were seen across political party, income, age, and education," noted Joanne Hsu, director of the Surveys of Consumers, in a statement. "Expected business conditions declined for both short and long time horizons, nearly matching year-ago readings when the reciprocal tariff regime was implemented."
"After the two-week ceasefire was announced and gas prices softened a touch, sentiment recovered a modest portion of its early-month losses," she continued. "The Iran conflict appears to influence consumer views primarily through shocks to gasoline and potentially other prices. In contrast, military and diplomatic developments that do not lift supply constraints or lower energy prices are unlikely to buoy consumers."
So, it's official: the UMich FINAL Consumer Sentiment reading for April holds at a record low, while stocks are at a record high.
[image or embed]
— Mike Zaccardi, CFA, CMT (@mikezaccardi.bsky.social) April 24, 2026 at 10:01 AM
As Common Dreams reported earlier Friday, as the national average price for a gallon of gasoline sits at $4.059, new Reuters/Ipsos polling shows that fuel costs "are a very big concern" for 78% of Americans, and 77% blame Trump for the recent spikes.
In a social media post about the new University of Michigan record, Groundwork Collaborative highlighted another poll: A Fox News survey found that 52% of US voters questioned April 17-20 believed Democrats would do a better job on the economy than Republicans.
The Fox News poll, released Wednesday, also found that 56% of Americans think Trump's policies are "hurting the economy," and majorities said gas, groceries, healthcare, and housing prices are a "major problem" for their family.
Democrats didn't waste time seizing on the new consumer sentiment finding. Kendall Witmer, rapid response director for the Democratic National Committee, declared that "Donald Trump has tanked the economy for working families."
"Everyday Americans were already struggling to afford rent, groceries, and prescription drugs, and then Trump decided to start a reckless war with Iran and push prices even higher—and for what?" Witmer continued, taking aim at both him and Vice President JD Vance, who has played a key role in negotiations with Iran.
"Americans are drowning under rising costs, flat wages, high unemployment, and historic layoffs—it's no wonder they're concerned about how they're going to make ends meet," Witmer added, "and Trump and JD Vance can't be bothered to make life more affordable for them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular