Collusion exposed between Governors, White House, and Tom Steyer's climate advocacy groups

E&E Legal Releases Report Exposing Coordination Between Governors, the Obama White House and the Tom Steyer-“Founded and Funded” Network of Advocacy Groups to Advance the “Climate” Agenda

Washington, D.C. — Today, the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal), a 501 (c) (3) watchdog group, released an investigative report, Private Interests & Public Office: Coordination Between Governors, the Obama White House and the Tom Steyer-“Founded and Funded” Network of Advocacy Groups to Advance the “Climate” Agenda (and an appendix of source documents), revealing a vast, coordinated, three-track effort by public officials and private interests to promote EPA’s expansive, overreaching and economically devastating greenhouse gas rules, specifically the section 111(d) regulation to shut the nation’s fleet of existing coal-fired power plants, as well as the December Paris climate treaty President Obama is expected to sign to replace the Kyoto Protocol.

“Our report pulls the curtain back on a carefully planned and heavily funded ‘orchestration’ by individuals who have placed their personal interests ahead of the public interest,” said Chris Horner, E&E Legal’s Senior Legal Fellow and the report’s author.

The report is the product of open records requests over the course of a year at the federal level and nearly 30 offices in over a dozen states. The exposé contains appendices with over a hundred pages of source emails and attachments. It details a campaign to use public offices, in very close collaboration with wealthy benefactors, to advance and defend President Obama’s climate change regulatory and treaty agenda. This quasi-governmental campaign involves more than a dozen governors’ offices, with a parallel advocacy network and political operation funded and staffed by activists paid through ideologically , economically and politically motivated donors.

The report released today points to emails obtained by E&E Legal’s campaign without litigation, but also in federal district court; others are the subject of oral arguments made last week in court in Richmond, Virginia, and a new suit just filed against the Governor of Kentucky. The latter complaint objects to a false “no records” claim — about records that this report proves do in fact exist, and even quotes from, but which are being kept from the public by a governor who claims to be appalled by EPA rules his office was quietly a “core group” promoter of for the past two years.

This report is timely given President Obama’s ongoing tour to promote the same EPA rules that these governors and “major environmental donors” scheme to promote in the correspondence released today. This includes a stop today at Harry Reid’s “clean energy economy” conference, curiously also sponsored by the same donors as those playing a leading role in today’s report.

Indeed these emails E&E Legal uncovered also show this campaign was developed with the early, active support and participation of the White House, which went beyond enthusiastically embracing the plan and follow up meetings and calls, to even directing the governors to what one green trade-press outlet calls a “shadowy group” affiliated with then-Chief of Staff John Podesta. The White House’s followup actions , as one governor’s aide praised them, were “moving dials”. Podesta also convinced the governors’ offices that their plan should be broken into separate, complementary pillars. The latest email obtained, from May of this year, shows the governors’ campaign arranging to coordinate with the State Department.

The scheme took shape at a meeting in the White House in December 2013, after which the Obama administration launched coordinated with the “core group” of activist Democrat governors to design one of what we see are three tracks to promote the climate agenda. One was run by the Steyer network and left-wing foundations. Another is run by governors with green groups, which are “useful” but whose “standard NGO shaming strategy might not deliver”. A third, run by the White House includes, in the words of a senior aide, “a few other tracks with private sector and unusual allies”.

Nearly every aspect of this effort, from the key early players to the funders and even the director the governors’ campaign hired — housed by some state’s taxpayers in the Hall of States in Washington, DC, overhead paid for by as-yet unknown means — has direct ties to a scandal involving “clean energy” donors and conflicts of interest, one which felled Oregon’s sitting governor earlier this year.

In what is possibly the most intriguing element, seemingly out of an episode of “House of Cards”, Democratic governors’ aides repeatedly reference a plan of “creative engagement” to “compel” certain electric utilities — those subject to their jurisdiction whose businesses cross lines into states led by Republicans — to bring “red state” governors around to support the EPA rules: “[B]ecause there are key utilities whose service territories cross red and blue states Governors in these states could quietly engineer a breakthrough strategy that compels utilities in key red states to lead the charge to win over a key Governor, rather than rely on a standard NGO-shaming strategy that might not deliver.”

The “core group” of governors also coordinated with Democratic mega-donor Tom Steyer and his managing partner, Ted White, who directed them to “affiliated groups that we founded and fund (such as NextGen Climate Action, or Next Generation, or AEE [Advanced Energy Economy]” . Those groups in turn underwrote consultants and activists to hand-hold governors through implementing the Obama EPA’s rules, keeping them from the clutches of the “just say no” states.

This core group soon expanded to more than a dozen states, coast-to- coast, embracing a four-point plan which they soon called the Governor’s Climate Compact or GCC, which was ultimately rebranded as the Governors’ Climate Accord or GCA and now goes by the name of the Governors Clean Energy Initiative (none of which have any internet footprint whatsoever, and begging the question who is indeed paying for its director and other overhead). The emails do reflect an awareness that the agenda’s lack of popularity in the “flyover states” necessitated a flexible timeline and keeping some offices’ involvement quiet, specifically citing elections as a concern.

“This is the 5th transparency report in a series that E&E Legal has published on the ‘green movement’ and its network of public, private, and business interests, and what is clear is that 1%-ers are using ‘climate’ policies to destroy politically disfavored industries in order to transfer wealth to the politically preferred,” said Craig Richardson, E&E Legal Executive Director. “The campaign by self-serving individuals must be made known to the public as policymakers consider this plan that will destroy parts of our economy and ruin the most efficient, affordable, and clean energy system ever created.”

__________________________________________________________________________________

The Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal) is a 501(c)(3) organization engaged in strategic litigation, policy research, and public education on important energy and environmental issues. Primarily through its petition litigation and transparency practice areas, E&E Legal seeks to correct onerous federal and state policies that hinder the economy, increase the cost of energy, eliminate jobs, and do little or nothing to improve the environment.

-30-

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

172 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
James at 48
August 24, 2015 9:12 am

And when they encounter a governor who is less wild and crazy, the same cabal go and find your friendly neighborhood state legislative president pro tem and sponsor an economically disastrous voter proposition.

empiresentry
August 24, 2015 9:39 am

Collusion has been going on for four years. EPA and agenda folks meet, determine the goal, outline the lawsuit. The Agenda group (some non-profit with a Green name and heavy propaganda advertising expenses) then sues the EPA to force them to shut down or curtail someone.
.
The worst part is this move into governor offices and across state lines. For example, if California sues Duke Energy for electricity it ships to California from Texas, or otherwise strong arms Duke to raise costs across all of its states…I say Duke should pull its long extension cord and let California do without, thank you Brown.
.
Or if one state sues another because of something ludicrous like c02 traveling across the state’s border and the Obama tules and other states are colluding (along with media) with intent of shutting down a business or price fixing a market, now its getting into serious law breaking beyond RICO and collusion. And this is definitely what this article has demonstrated: we are already there.

empiresentry
August 24, 2015 9:45 am

here is another example of collusion between Obama admin and others. The “most transparent” and “most scientific” admin ever phhhht!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/05/lawmakers-take-aim-at-epa-sue-and-settle-collusion/

Doug Bunge
August 24, 2015 9:53 am

As a Kentuckian, I would like to thank you, very much, for sharing this.

EOM
August 24, 2015 10:08 am

Specifically, which states are involved in this? Mine?

Resourceguy
Reply to  EOM
August 24, 2015 10:44 am

OR, WA, CA, MN, RI, IL, CT, VA, VT, NY, CO, MD, DE, KY, TN
That’s basically a who’s who of administrations with experience in scheme management, dirty deals, and public awareness management.

PiperPaul
Reply to  Resourceguy
August 24, 2015 2:21 pm

“public awareness management”. Gee, I wonder what that translates to in real language?

RACookPE1978
Editor
Reply to  PiperPaul
August 24, 2015 3:20 pm

“public awareness management”. Gee, I wonder what that translates to in real language?

Unaccountable, un-observeable, highly-paid but totally unprofitable (ie, useless and unproductive) government job. Specializing in gathering the next year’s higher budget. Forever.
Professional scare-monger, propagandist, “priest” in thrall to the CAGW religion.

Barbara
August 24, 2015 10:44 am

Has anyone done much digging in Michigan? The voters there turned down a proposition for 25% renewables by 2025 by a 2/1 margin in Nov.2012. Now renewables are right back on the agenda in the legislature and by environmentalists pushing this.

Barbara
Reply to  Barbara
August 24, 2015 2:24 pm

Model D Media, Detroit, Nov.4, 2014
‘Powering the Mitten: As coal plants shut down, where will our electricity come from?’
Union of Concerned Scientists and Michigan Environmental Council are mentioned in this article.
http://www.modeldmedia.com/features/powering-the-mitten-110414.aspx

Barbara
Reply to  Barbara
August 24, 2015 5:31 pm

E & E Legal
‘Private Interest & Public Office’, Report of Aug.24, 2015
P.49, Mentions the Gov.of Michigan along with some other Governors.

Barbara
Reply to  Barbara
August 24, 2015 6:16 pm

Detroit Free Press, April 25, 2015
‘What’s next for Michigan’s energy transformation?’
Snyder’s target 24% renewables by 2025.
http://www.freep.com/story/money/business/green-leaders/2015/04/25/snyder-rick-energy-policy-wind-efficiency-renewables-turbines-thumb-huron-county/26308209

Barbara
Reply to  Barbara
August 25, 2015 7:41 am

Private Interest & Public Affairs Report
P. 44, May 1, 2014, Tzeporah Berman
——————————————————
Corporate Knights, June 5, 2014, Summer Issue
Corporate Knights magazine Tom Steyer interview by Tzeporah Berman.
http://www.corporateknights.com/?s=tom+steyer and scroll down to the article.

Barbara
Reply to  Barbara
August 25, 2015 7:47 pm

Tzeporah Berman . com
Biography:
“She is the former co-director of Greenpeace International’s Global Climate and Energy program.”
http://www.tezporahberman.com/biography.html

Barbara
Reply to  Barbara
August 25, 2015 5:13 pm

M LIVE, Nov.7, 2012
“Michigan’s Proposal 3: Voters reject 25 by 25 renewable energy mandate’
Measure lost by 63% to 37%.
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/11/proposal_3_michigans_renewable.html

Resourceguy
August 24, 2015 10:47 am

And for special brownie points you get high speed rail funding, right Jerry?

August 24, 2015 11:16 am

This proves that the Democrats and Republicans really are different…
Democrats know how to run a political party.

Louis Hunt
Reply to  Stephen Rasey
August 24, 2015 11:53 pm

Democrats know how to run a political party like the Mafia. Fixed it for you.

Dan
August 24, 2015 11:26 am

Ok, so who is doing what about all this?

J. Keith Johnson
Reply to  Dan
August 24, 2015 12:51 pm

Don, a very good question. May I suggest that each of us who’s ever served in any branch of the military (enlisted or commissioned) review the following: “I, (state your name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same . . .”
My enlistment expired in January, 1988, but I have yet to find an expiration on the oath I took to defend the greatest document ever created by mere mortals. Together, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States represent something worth taking a stand for even at the price of “our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”
It is up to us to do what we can to defend what is right and true.

J. Keith Johnson
Reply to  Dan
August 24, 2015 12:54 pm

Dan, I apologize for not getting your name correct in my first response. For some reason my bifocals just don’t seem to work as well as they should sometimes.

Jim Hodgen
August 24, 2015 12:09 pm

Independent prosecutor with a mandate for RICO indictments… starting at the White House.

Bruce Cobb
August 24, 2015 12:51 pm

Jail to the chief.

john q public
August 24, 2015 1:49 pm

Actually, any great law firm could do it and just pocket the trillions. I just want to go after the SOB’s and hurt them. I could care less about the money.

kim
August 24, 2015 2:11 pm

Standard hybris: Their grasp(policy) exceeded their reach(science).
============

Resourceguy
August 24, 2015 2:14 pm

For onlookers from other countries, there is a major difference between the two parties in the U.S. One party that thinks it owns government gets away with dirty deals or mistakes 9 out 10 times and has superb skills to manage the one discovered problem. The other party is lucky to get away with two out of 10 and has miserable skills at problem management. The party affiliation of the press and on up the line to editors and publishers tells the rest of the story.

kim
Reply to  Resourceguy
August 24, 2015 3:07 pm

For further amazement see which party holds most power in states and in both houses of Congress. Next, for the bizzare spectacle, compare the strengths of the candidates for President from each party. We are quite surreal, here.
==============

Resourceguy
Reply to  kim
August 25, 2015 6:12 am

International observers will further note how even Americans can be out of date on the new methods of over reach to marginalize Congress and the courts, manipulate CBO cost estimates on major program initiatives, stack labor panels, and form fit science to policy goals of the advocacy controllers.

August 24, 2015 4:32 pm

Msm reporting this?

TheLastDemocrat
August 24, 2015 4:48 pm

Been done before. Merck was campaigning all governors to have Gardasil mandated by the state.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14401
This stopped after Rick Perry tried too hard to steamroll it in Texas.

Curious George
Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
August 24, 2015 8:30 pm

Are you against vaccinations?

TheLastDemocrat
Reply to  Curious George
August 26, 2015 7:37 pm

No. I am against MANDATORY vaccines that are NOT socially, passively communicable.
Jacobson v Massachusetts 1905.
There is no end to other vaccines.

Tom Anderson
August 24, 2015 4:59 pm

You can’t help respecting (even while not admiring) the ruthlessly efficient organization of the elite warmists. Compared to them, we of the dissent are disorganized, unable to command a voice in the mainstream media, lacking in effective federal or state representation, and, no matter how unsettled the real science must be, divided on a common opposing scientific ground (e.g., physicists vs. meteorologists). What a mess! We are a rabble, my friends, associates and spokespeople — easy picking for the green machine to isolate and pick off at will. It doesn’t matter whether they are wrong and we are right. It’s the old advertising principle of there’s more bang in selling the sizzle than the steak. So where is the sizzle on our side? Where is the good grand alliance?
What seems most bizarre is that the sources that would ordinarily support the optimistic alternative view of our planet, the producers of cheap and abundant fossil fuel, have been cowed into silence by sanctimonious Greenpeace thugs and delusional environmental fanatics.
I apologize for belaboring the obvious. The question remains, where and when do we start a concerted response? Any answers?

warrenlb
Reply to  Tom Anderson
August 25, 2015 9:08 am

A starting point would be to create a coherent consistent science based explanation for the warming of the planet, and publish. So far, there is only a disparate collection of individuals with multiple contradictory claims. eg:
1) Earth is not warming, or
2) Earth is warming, but it’s natural. Or
3) Earth is warming, it’s not natural, but the warming is insignificantly small. Or
4) The warming is Man-caused and significant, but its better to adapt than to mitigate emissions.Or
5) The best of all: ‘I don’t care that all of science is against me — it’s all a big (worldwide) conspiracy.
So a consistent physics-based explanation, by Scientists, not amateurs, and endorsed by all on WUWT, would be an answer. If you can do it.

rw
Reply to  warrenlb
August 25, 2015 9:54 am

You could start cutting down your list of hypotheses just by checking out WoodForTrees. (You might also look at the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change volumes. That is, if you’re really serious.)

Reply to  Tom Anderson
August 25, 2015 9:39 am

As usual, warrenlb doesn’t argue using facts and evidence (ie: using science), he argues using his appeal to authority logical fallacy. And his 1 – 5 points are not contradictory as he claims.
Let’s make up #6 that warrenlb conveniently omitted: there is probably some insignificant global warming due to human CO2 emissions. All the available evidence supports that view:comment image
The real world is confirming that, too. There hasn’t been any measurable global warming for almost 20 years. Look at the chart. How much global warming should we expect from the rise in CO2, from 300 ppm to 400 ppm? The answer is easy to see: any warming is too small to measure.
As anyone but warrenlb can see from the chart above, global warming resulting from even a doubling of CO2 from current levels (something that will probably never happen even if all fossil fuels are burned) is so minuscule that it should be completely disregarded. It is too tiny to matter.
But where’s the fun in that? The fun part is running around in circles and clucking that the sky is falling. Sorry to burst warrenlb’s bubble, but human CO2 emissions are simply not a problem.

warrenlb
Reply to  dbstealey
August 25, 2015 5:39 pm

So we now know that DB is in category #3. All he has to do now is convince everyone else on WUWT, including those in categories 1, 2,4, and 5 .. and then submit his paper for peer review and publish.

Stephen Heins
August 24, 2015 5:21 pm

Who is going to save the planet from those trying to save the planet?

Alx
August 24, 2015 5:51 pm

Crony meet capitalism.
Business marry government in unholy alliance.
What could go wrong?

August 24, 2015 6:37 pm

My suggestion to fight these a holes..inform the public ,with pictures ,of dead eagles ,

Chris
August 24, 2015 10:40 pm

ALEC has been doing exactly the same thing for the last 40 years. Why no complaints about them?

Eric Rasmusen
August 25, 2015 6:08 am

There’s nothing wrong with a president coordinating with governors and supporters to support a policy he wants. I was looking for the nefarious motive. It’s probably there, but that’s the story, not that someone is trying to push a policy.

Resourceguy
August 25, 2015 6:53 am

Meanwhile, real issues with lives and property are at stake in agency operations.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/08/150824212258.htm

Paul Courtney
August 25, 2015 9:58 am

A recent post by Tim Ball suggested that explaining the science isn’t enough, if skeptics are to overcome the great GW lie. This article shows how right he is, the other side fights dirty. Most skeptics will not go corrupt like this (or they’d be CliSci’s!). Guess we’re in for a long slog, pressing until public opinion turns enough to get gov’t and corp money to stop funding this ecofarce.

Resourceguy
August 25, 2015 10:19 am

At the rate we are going, we will have no coal plants or rain forests at about the same point in time. This will be declared policy over reach success…..for a short time.