I’m Sick of Hillary Lying About Fossil Fuel Contributions

The Ring of Fire Network had an excellent interview with Molly Dorozenski, of Greenpeace USA discussing their analysis of the contributions made to Hillary’s campaign and to the Super Pacs that support her.

The issue was brought to a head as a result of Clinton exploding “I’m sick of the Sanders Campaign Lying About me” in response to a Greenpeace activists asking her about the contributions she receives from the fossil fuel industry and requesting that she make a pledge to not take money from their executives or lobbyists, a pledge that both Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley had already made.

Although Clinton cannot directly coordinate with her Super Pac, Greenpeace would like her to publicly ask that her Super Pac refuse to take donations from the fossil fuel industry.

Subsequent to Clinton’s outburst, this issue has become muddied by misleading and dishonest statements by her and her campaign about the contributions she receives, as well as misleading reports on cable news networks. As pointed out by Greenpeace, Clinton’s campaign has directly received over $300,000 from executives and employees of oil companies. In addition, her campaign has received $1.3 million, including bundled contributions, from registered lobbyists who represent the fossil fuel industry. An additional $3.25 million was given to her Super Pac. For some reason, a number of news outlets, including NPR, MSNBC and The Washington Post choose to solely focus on the monies received directly by the Clinton campaign from executives and employees of the Fossil fuel industry, as if the other money would not influence her. NPR even states as it’s source The Center for Responsive Politics, whose analysis clearly details all of the funds that have benefitted the Clinton campaign.

Hopefully the table below will help to clarify this issue:

            Campaign Contributions from the Fossil Fuel Industry

To From Clinton Sanders
Campaign Employees and Executives $309,107 $53,760
Campaign Lobbyists $1.35 Million 0
Super Pac All sources $3.25 Million 0
    Total $4.9 Million $53,760

CNN points out that, in 2008, Clinton had run an ad attacking him for taking $200,000 from executives and employees of oil companies. In fact, according to Center for Responsive Politics, although Obama had taken
$222,309, Clinton actually had accepted $309,363, even more than Obama.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/01/politics/hillary-clinton-oil-gas-donations-obama/

The elimination of contributions from corporations and rich donors has become a corner post of Sanders campaign. Although Sanders has not stated that these donations have directly influenced Clinton in particular, it is clear that they have a significant impact on American politics.

I’ll leave it to each of you to decide if the contributions from the Fossil Fuel Industry influence Clinton, but consider the following from Greenpeace:

• Clinton signed off on the Enbridge pipeline (the alternative to the Keystone XL pipeline), while Secretary of State. Three Enbridge lobbyists contribute to Clinton’s campaign.

• Fracking lobbyists also contribute to Clinton’s campaign. Clinton has said she would not ban Fracking as President, and has a pro-fracking track record which has been well-documented by numerous groups, including pro-Clinton Super PAC Correct the Record.

• While Secretary of State, Clinton pushed fracking in countries around the world.

• Although Clinton has said she supports an investigation into Exxon’s early concealment of what it knew about the risks of climate change and subsequent financing of climate denier front groups, her campaign has taken contributions from at least seven lobbyists working for Exxon.

 

An article in Mother Jones adds that Clinton was paid $990,000 by the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and $651,000 by TD Bank for speaking engagements, both of these banks with an interest in Keystone XL.

Greenpeace also points out that as of 3/21Clinton has taken more from lobbyists in general than any other candidate besides Jeb Bush for a total of $919,477

Hillary Clinton should be honest about the source of funds financing her campaign whether from the fossil fuel industry or lobbyists in general.

YouGov.com poll has Clinton with the lowest honesty rating and highest dishonesty rating of any candidate.

Honest Dishonest
Clinton 27% 56%
Trump 29% 52%
Sanders 47% 24%

Washington Post poll shows that 52% of individuals leaning Democrat have an Unfavorable impression of Clinton and 59% of voters find her not honest and untrustworthy.

Maybe it’s time for Clinton and her campaign to try a new approach – Honesty

 

Stephen M. Maher

Stephen M Maher is an actuary, and currently works as reinsurance intermediary and consultant to the insurance industry. As the Chief Financial Officer of The Hartford Life Employee Benefit Division, he was responsible for their exit from Medical Insurance in response to the threat of Hillary Care. Although not typically involved in politics, the perversion of our democratic system as a result of Citizens United combined with the manner that Bernie Sanders message has resonated with him, he has felt compelled to become actively involved. With 5 children both in and recently graduated from college, many of Bernie’s messages have moved him personally. Furthermore he agrees with Bernie that time is running out. Citizen United and the resultant corrupt campaign financing system are threatening our democracy. Climate change and Income Inequality are threatening our children’s future. Finally, he finds it outrageous that the richest country in the world doesn’t provide universal healthcare, a decent minimum wage, and adequate social security benefits for those in need.

3 thoughts on “I’m Sick of Hillary Lying About Fossil Fuel Contributions

  • April 5, 2016 at 11:35 am
    Permalink

    Bernie Sanders is going to win the nomination and presidency 2016 because he has vast majority of the peoples vote. Hillary is going to lose due to her putting out her hand to help fund her campaign from Wall Street, Coporations, CNN, Time Warner etc. Also, for flip flopping on her stance on wars, policies, hypocrisies on key issues etc.

    • April 8, 2016 at 11:19 pm
      Permalink

      We also can hope for an indictment

      • April 12, 2016 at 3:38 pm
        Permalink

        Indicted or not, the issue will not go away even though Bernie won’t discuss it. They expect to have the results of the investigation just before the convention. If she is indicted, she loses the nomination. If she isn’t indicted her opponents will argue that it was apolitical cover up. There should be such an outcry that she will lose the nomination.

Comments are closed.