Well, first of all, some of the actual working class has been depending on the
fossil fuel industry for jobs. And then there's the fact that if we truly
understood what is involved in getting rid of fossil fuels, we would have to
support a complete change in our social and economic systems and we'd have to
give up a lot of things while the readjustment is taking place. One of the
things that you, Carl, might not want to give up is meat. But unless factory
farms are replaced by a totally different system of food production, climate
change will continue to destroy us. It's not just fossil fuels. It's the way in
which we produce our food. And by the way, are you ready to give up plastic?
It comes from oil.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, November 1, 2020 11:55 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: The Fossil Fuel Industry's Dark Money Is Getting
Even Darker
Of course Corporate America is going to act in its own best interest, as short
sighted as it is. But what astounds me are the working class men and women who
support the Corporations right to plunder. Even the most lowly of life forms
know what to do to protect themselves. But not the working class Americans.
I've never seen a young Stag run out in front of a hunter's rifle, allowing
itself to be shot. But us working class folk seem to enjoy opening our bank
accounts and retirement funds to "help the poor Rich".
Carl Jarvis
On 11/1/20, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The Fossil Fuel Industry's Dark Money Is Getting Even Darker By David
Sirota and Andrew Perez, Jacobin
31 October 20
A fossil fuel company admitted it made $9.5 million worth of political
expenditures to advance its corporate interests - and a Delaware court
is helping hide the details.
In its landmark Citizens United ruling, the Supreme Court insisted
that "independent expenditures, including those made by corporations,
do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption," and
conservative justices added that such political "expenditures do not
lead to, or create the appearance of, quid pro quo corruption."
But a little-noticed court case involving the fossil fuel industry
recounts a much different reality - and now the judiciary is trying to
make sure the public can never see the ugly details.
The situation is unfolding in a Delaware federal court, where
Extraction Oil & Gas declared bankruptcy earlier this year. State
records show the company has spent more than $4 million on political
causes since 2015. However, during the bankruptcy proceedings, the
Denver-based company asked the judge for permission to redact - and
keep sealed - information about $9.5 million worth of political
donations it has made since 2018. That's an average rate of more than
$12,000 of political spending every single day.
Extraction has been active in Colorado elections and ballot measure
fights, and it has fought "setback" efforts that would require oil and
gas wells be sited further away from homes and schools. According to
Reuters, nearly three-quarters of Extraction's land in Colorado could become
"nonviable"
under new setback rules proposed by Colorado regulators.
Many of the political contributions at issue do not appear to be
disclosed in state or federal records, according to an analysis by the
Denver Business Journal and data compiled by the National Institute on
Money in Politics - suggesting some of the money may have gone to
"dark money" groups, or politically active nonprofits that aren't
required to publicly disclose their donors.
"Such Political Donations Are Made by Corporations Anonymously"
In trying to prevent the public from learning exactly which candidates
or political groups received the money, Extraction explicitly says
that its executives make political donations "as part of their
business strategy" to protect their corporate interests.
"Such contributions are made to protect both the current interests of
the debtors as well as the debtors' long-term interests," wrote
Extraction's lawyers. They said:
It is likely that the disclosure of the specific recipients of the debtors'
contributions would jeopardize many of the debtors' business
relationships, which in turn would adversely affect the debtors'
business. The public disclosure of certain contributions (or the lack
thereof) would also adversely affect the debtors' longstanding
relationships with both state and local governments.
For years, ethics advocates have unsuccessfully pushed financial
regulators at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to require
basic disclosure of corporate political spending. Extraction favorably
cites the lack of such requirements as proof that "such political
donations are made by corporations anonymously" - and then the company
says that being forced to disclose the donations could let its
competitors buy up its political relationships.
"Competitors would be able to exploit the debtors' lost business
relationships while continuing their own political contributions,"
Extraction wrote.
The regional office of the U.S. Public Trustee, a Justice Department
watchdog program that oversees bankruptcy cases, objected to
Extraction's request, writing that the "debtors offer no evidence that
either support these allegation(s) or that otherwise overcome the
strong presumption of public disclosure."
However, the judge who oversees Delaware's federal bankruptcy court
ruled for Extraction, allowing the donations to remain anonymous.
Shutting Down One of the Few Ways to Discover Political Money
There are two takeaways here.
First, the case proves what a complete sham Citizens United really is.
The Supreme Court pretended that corporate independent expenditures on
politics don't corrupt anything, and now Extraction openly admits that
political expenditures are used to advance business interests.
Second, dark money may have just gotten a lot darker. Delaware is home
to thousands of corporations, and now its federal bankruptcy court has
ruled that companies can keep their dark money expenditures on
politics secret in bankruptcy proceedings.
In a sense, it is a special carveout for records that document
influence
buying: while companies' day-to-day financial records remain available
for public scrutiny in bankruptcy, now there's a ruling that allows
those companies to hide exactly which politicians and political groups
they are bankrolling.
That's no small development: bankruptcy cases have been one of the few
venues where the public can learn about dark money political donations.
Last
year, the Intercept reported that coal company Cloud Peak Energy had
donated to a host of conservative dark money groups - including the
Koch network's political arm, Americans for Prosperity - using
documents filed in a bankruptcy case presided over by the same
Delaware judge.
