Fossil fuel industry continues to dwarf environmental groups in election-related spending – Industry gives millions to Trump Victory and Trump Make America Great Again Committee
By Yue Stella Yu
24 September 2019
(Center for Responsive Politics) – Following a global climate strike over the weekend, climate activists in Washington, D.C., raged on and flooded the district Monday as the United Nations Climate Action Summit took place in New York.
Participating groups issued several demands, including the passage of the Green New Deal, the halt of deforestation by 2030 and an end to fossil fuel extraction.
The protest, dubbed “Shut Down D.C.,” aimed to bring the city to “a gridlocked standstill.” While the protesters may have successfully shut down downtown D.C.’s rush-hour traffic, environmental advocacy groups cannot shut down — or even rival — the fossil fuel industry’s multi-million-dollar spending to shape energy policies.
The groups’ demand for government action against climate change stands in contrast with the Trump administration’s recent plan to roll back federal oversight on the emissions of methane gas, a huge contributor to global warming. The proposal drew opposition from environmental activists and even some carmakers and fossil fuel companies.
Faced with a pressing climate crisis, the country’s political climate is shifting as many Democratic presidential hopefuls are rejecting contributions from fossil fuel executives. Within the energy industry, some companies are investing in clean energy research and carbon removal.
But oil extraction and exploration shows no signs of slowing down, as fossil fuel companies are set to add hundreds more natural gas power plants, USA Today reported. Meanwhile, the industry has contributed millions to President Donald Trump’s joint fundraising committees, Trump Victory and Trump Make America Great Again Committee.
Trump Victory received $2.9 million from the oil and gas industry, including a total of $721,200 from CEO of Energy Transfer Partners Kelcy Warren and his wife, Amy Warren.
The energy and natural resources industry has given almost $30 million — more than twice as much as the environmental groups’ spending during the same period — to mostly Republican candidate campaigns, party committees and outside spending groups during the 2020 election cycle. [more]
Fossil fuel industry continues to dwarf environmental interests in election-related spending
![Effect of political contributions from oil and gas companies on U.S. legislators that vote against the environment. Coefficients and 95 percent CIs for tests of investment (Left) and influence (Right) hypotheses and their corresponding metaanalytic effects for the years 1992 to 2018. In 13 out of 14 analyses, lower LCV scores (i.e., more antienvironmental votes) in one election cycle predicted significantly increased contributions in the following election cycle. For example, the strongest result was observed for the 2016 election: For every additional 10 percent of congressional votes against the environment in 2014, a legislator would receive an additional $5,400 in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies in 2016 (b = −0.54, SE = 0.12; P < 0.001; 95 percent CI [−0.77, −0.31]). This is an especially strong relationship considering that many elected officials vote against environmental policies nearly 100 percent of the time, thereby compounding the cycle of antienvironmentalism and increasing rewards in the form of contributions. Graphic: Goldberg, et al., 2020 / PNAS](https://desdemonadespair.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/image-8-1200x675.png)
