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
Listen Live: US Supreme Court Hears Outrageous Argument That Trump Is Above the Law
"The American people deserve a Supreme Court that does not hesitate to declare that no one is above the law, including a former president," said one campaigner.
Apr 25, 2024
After months of delay, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday will hear oral arguments in a closely watched case on whether former President Donald Trump should be immune from criminal charges stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss—an argument that legal experts say is both absurd and dangerous.
Listen live to the oral arguments, which are set to begin at 10:00 am ET:
Thursday's proceedings mark the high court's final argument of its current term, and pro-democracy campaigners are calling on the justices to quickly reject the former president's sweeping immunity claim so he can face trial on federal election subversion charges before his November rematch with President Joe Biden.
As Bloomberg's Greg Stohr noted earlier this week, Thursday's oral arguments give "Special Counsel Jack Smith only a narrow window to put the former president in front of a Washington jury before voters go to the polls on November 5."
"With the trial on hold until the high court rules," Stohr added, "Smith needs a clear-cut victory, and he needs it quickly."
Sean Eldridge, founder and president of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, said in a statement Thursday that "the Supreme Court's right-wing majority has already handed Trump a temporary victory by stalling this case for months, allowing him to delay accountability for his criminal attempts to cling to power."
"With so much at stake for our democracy, the Supreme Court should rule swiftly and decisively in this case," said Eldridge. "Accountability delayed could mean accountability denied."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grand Jury Indicts Top Trump Aides, 11 Arizona Republicans Over 'Fake Electors' Scheme
Had it succeeded, said the state's attorney general, the scheme would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
Apr 25, 2024
A grand jury in Arizona on Wednesday charged seven aides to Donald Trump and nearly a dozen Republican officials over a "fake electors" scheme in the state that aimed to keep the former president in power after his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden.
Trump, who is currently facing nearly 90 charges across four criminal cases as he runs for another White House term, was described as "unindicted co-conspirator 1" in the 58-page indictment, which was announced by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes.
"The people of Arizona elected President Biden," Mayes, a Democrat, said Wednesday. "Unwilling to accept this fact, the defendants charged by the state grand jury allegedly schemed to prevent the lawful transfer of the presidency. Whatever their reasoning was, the plot to violate the law must be answered for."
The indictment names former Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward, sitting state Republican Sens. Jake Hoffman and Anthony Kern, former U.S. Senate candidate Jim Lamon, and seven others as the "fake electors" who sought to declare Trump the rightful winner of the state's presidential contest.
The names of other individuals indicted by the state grand jury are redacted, but the document's descriptions make clear that former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, and top Trump legal strategist Boris Epshteyn are among those facing felony charges—including fraud, forgery, and conspiracy.
"In Arizona, defendants, unindicted coconspirators, and others pressured the three groups of election officials responsible for certifying election results to encourage them to change the election results," the document reads. "Discussions about using the Republican electors to change the outcome of the election began as early as November 4, 2020. Those plans evolved during November based on memos drafted by [an attorney for the Trump campaign, Kenneth Chesebro]."
Mayes said Wednesday that had the fake elector scheme succeeded, it would have "deprived Arizona's voters of their right to have their votes counted for their chosen president."
"It effectively would have made their right to vote meaningless," said Mayes.
A state grand jury, made up of everyday, regular Arizonans, has handed down felony indictments in the ongoing investigation into the fake elector scheme in Arizona. pic.twitter.com/Nu8GcD4ZqJ
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) April 24, 2024
Alex Gulotta, state director of All Voting Is Local Action Arizona, said Wednesday that "the indictment of the eleven fake electors is one of the first steps required in holding these election deniers accountable for their alleged attempts to take power away from voters by disrupting our free and fair elections."
"Arizonans deserve to trust the election officials responsible for administering our elections and preserving our democracy," said Gulotta, "and this is a positive step forward as we continue to strengthen the foundations of our democracy and restore faith in our elections."
The Arizona Republicreported Wednesday that "several of the Arizona electors have previously claimed they were merely offering Congress a backup plan, though nothing in the documents they sent to Congress and the National Archives backs up that assertion."
"The indictment includes several statements the false electors made on social media that contradict those claims," the newspaper observed.
Jenny Guzman, director of Common Cause's Arizona program, said the indictment "marks the start of a new chapter for the fake elector scheme that has plagued Arizona."
"Arizonans are still dealing with the fallout from the false electors and the Big Lie about the 2020 elections," said Guzman. "We are relieved that the investigation by Attorney General Mayes has concluded and Arizonans can now know that what comes next is accountability. These efforts by these fake electors to undermine the will of Arizona’s voters have had implications far beyond their failed attempt to overthrow the 2020 election."
"This indictment can reassure all Arizonans that if anyone, regardless of their political affiliation, attempts to undermine their vote, consequences will follow," Guzman added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Urges FEC to Investigate Trump Campaign Over Scheme for Legal Fees
"By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much."
Apr 24, 2024
A campaign finance watchdog on Wednesday filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign, affiliated political groups, and an accounting firm of violating U.S. law in a scheme "seemingly designed to obscure the true recipients of a noteworthy portion of Trump's legal bills."
The Washington, D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center (CLC) said that "evidence appears to show an illegal arrangement between several Trump-affiliated committees and a compliance firm named Red Curve Solutions that is designed to obscure the identities of those providing legal services and how much they are being paid."
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money."
CLC alleges that the Trump campaign, Trump's political action committee (PAC) Save America, and three affiliated organizations "violated federal reporting requirements based on a scheme in which the committees reportedly paid over $7.2 million—described as 'reimbursement for legal' costs or expenses"—to Red Curve.
The watchdog also said that Red Curve appears to be "making or facilitating illegal contributions that violate either federal contribution limits or the prohibition on corporate contributions."
According to CLC:
Red Curve is a domestic limited liability company that offers compliance and FEC reporting services but does not appear to offer any legal services. It is managed by Bradley Crate, who also serves as the treasurer for each of the five Trump-affiliated committees concerned in this complaint, as well as over 200 other federal committees.
According to filings with the FEC, Red Curve appears to have been fronting legal costs for Trump since at least December 2022, with Trump-affiliated committees repaying the company later. This arrangement appears to violate FEC rules that require campaigns to disclose not only the entity being reimbursed (here, Red Curve) but also the underlying vendor. By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much they are being paid—through this arrangement.
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money," CLC senior director of campaign finance Erin Chlopak said in a statement. "When campaigns and committees obscure that information from the public, not only do they make it difficult to determine if the law has been violated, but they deny voters the ability to make an informed choice when casting a ballot."
"The steps taken by the Trump campaign, its affiliated committees, and Red Curve Solutions concealed information about how campaign funds were used to pay former President Trump's legal expenditures, including the amounts and ultimate recipients of these expenditures—and the FEC must investigate immediately," Chlopak added.
Trump—who is the presumptive 2024 GOP presidential nominee—faces 88 federal and state felony charges related to his role in the January 6 insurrection and his organization's business practices. He is currently on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The twice-impeached former president has been open about his use of campaign donations to pay his legal costs.
The new CLC filing comes a day after the watchdog filed separate FEC complaints urging investigations into a pair of Trump-affiliated "scam PACs," which "pretend to fundraise for major candidates or issues while secretly diverting almost all of their donors' money back into fundraising or the fraudsters' own pockets."
Correction: This article originally said Trump faces 91 federal and state felony charges. The correct number is 88.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular