Consider the sweetheart deals and contracts that have come the way of some of President Obama’s biggest fundraisers:

• Financier David Shaw has raised $1.08 million for Obama’s reelection so far.  Shaw’s firm D.E. Shaw is heavily invested in two wind projects that received taxpayer money:  $115 million for First Wind,  and $117 million for Kahuku Wind.
• Financier John Rogers is a board Exelon board member has raised $1.2 million,  and Frank Clark, an executive Exelon,  has raised $153,000 thus far.  Exelon has been approved for $646 million in Department of Energy loan guarantees for a project called AV Solar Ranch One.  They also received a $200 million Department of Energy cash grant through a company they own called Peco Energy for smart-grid work.
• Financier Steve Westly has raised $302,000 so far.  Westly has held large investment stakes in numerous companies that have received stimulus grants,  including Amyris Biotechnologies ($24 million), Tesla Motors ($465 million),  as well as Edeniqu and Recyclebank.
• Bruce Heyman of Goldman Sachs, who has had three energy projects approved for taxpayer money  Cogentrix ($90 million),  First Solar ($4.7 million), and U.S. Geothermal ($96.8 million) has already raised $366,884 for the Obama 2012 reelection campaign.
• Daniel Weiss of the Angelino Group has raised $39,000 so far.   Weiss’ firm is a major equity holder in Powerspan,  we received a $100 million cash grant for smart grid projects.
• Steve Spinner has raised $31,900 to this point.   Spinner is a green energy investor who worked at the Department of Energy as a “strategic advisor” to the loan program.

Other recipients of energy stimulus money have continued cutting checks.  Ian Cumming of Leucadia,  which has had several large projects approved,  has given $10,000 so far to Obama for America and the Obama Victory Fund 2012.

Others are not serving as campaign bundlers,  but are rainmakers on an entirely different level. Financier John Doerr has held a series of held a private pow-wow bringing together big financiers to meet with President Obama,  including a February 17, 2011 dinner at his home with the late Steve Jobs,  Zuckerberg of Facebook,  and John Chambers of Cisco Systems.  Doerr and his firm have investments in sixteen green energy companies that have received taxpayer grants and loans.

The cronyism continues, and only outrage from the American people can stop it.

The deals announced Friday include a $1.5 billion loan guarantee to Florida-based NextEra Energy and other investors that bought a planned 550-megawatt solar farm on federal land in Southern California from First Solar, as well as $646 million to Illinois-based Exelon Corp. for a 230-megawatt solar plant near Los Angeles. Next Era Energy Resources and GE Energy Financial Services bought the Desert Sunlight project from First Solar, while Exelon bought the Antelope Valley project. First Solar will continue to build and operate both projects.

A third project, worth $1.2 billion, will help San Jose-based SunPower Corp. build a 250-megawatt solar plant in California, while $1.4 billion will go San Francisco-based Prologis Inc. to support installation of about 750 solar rooftop panels in 28 states.

The loan program expires on Friday.

Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., chairman of a House energy subcommittee that is investigating Solyndra, called the rush to approve loans unseemly.

“In a last-minute mad dash to beat the stimulus deadline, DOE rushed out an unprecedented tidal wave of taxpayer dollars—and the question still remains, `Where are the jobs?’ `’ Stearns said Friday. “American taxpayers are already on the hook for half a billion dollars for the sins of Solyndra. What surprises does DOE have in store from (Friday’s) rush job?”

Read the whole thing here.

From ClimateWire (subscription required):

Nuclear operators announce offset purchase (07/06/2011)

NEW YORK — The operator of two upstate New York nuclear power plants yesterday announced a purchase of carbon offsets in the state.Entergy Corp., a power generator in Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and elsewhere, says it has completed the purchase of slightly less than 35,000 tons’ worth of greenhouse gas emission reduction credits certified by the nonprofit American Carbon Registry (ACR).

The company runs the controversial Indian Point nuclear power plant near New York City along with the James A. Fitzpatrick nuclear power plant on the southeastern shore of Lake Ontario [NB: to clarify this emphasis, the utility actually gets less than half its production from nuclear, with half coming from gas and coal].

The company says it bought the offset credits to boost its environmental credentials, using money from its designated environmental initiatives fund….

“We first set up this environmental initiatives fund back in 2001. We funded it at a level of about $5 million a year for a …[total of] $20 million…” (emphases added)

So. $20 million taken out of the hides of ratepayers, and that means the economy, in a posturing won’t you please love me scheme cooked up with the greens — that is, agreed by no one who actually paid the tab — for ‘green’ posing.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg that is already being inflicted on the economy, before Obama’s ‘other ways to skin that cat’ kick in. Incidentally, Entergy, like AEP, and Duke Energy, Exelon and some other utilities desirous of a state-managed wealth transfer are behind the agenda to mandate ever more of this, but designed (by them) to line their pockets instead of just paying for their posing.

So, keep admitting these things, my rent-seeking crony capitalist friends. Keep talking.

To invoke a favorite greenie phrase, it is inevitable that those whose pockets you are picking for these schemes will demand common sense responses like, say, that their lawmakers agree to ban the practice of passing such stunts through to the ratepayer.

You want to fund some ‘green’ scheme, or build a bunch of windmills with their extraordinarily expensive transmission schemes on top and then an otherwise redundant gas plant for (chuckle) ‘backup’?

Great. But you can only pass through to the ratepayer what it would have cost to build something that works. The waste and folly all comes out of your and your shareholders’ hide.

At which point we will ask, still interested in these schemes? And the answer — well, on second thought, not so much — will put an end to this economic drain on the path to far worse.

The orchestrated spectacle, with a cast expected to be in the dozens and which all involved appear convinced will persuade you of the justness of their cause, is in fact a manifestation of all that is wrong with Washington and what Americans have become increasingly enraged by.

At this press conference, Sens. Kerry and Lieberman have both already indicated, they will insist that their scheme isn’t “cap-and-trade” because they aren’t going to use that term this time around. Kerry has even said that “this is not an environment bill.” It seems that the public aren’t buying that argument, either, so it’s really about whatever appeals to you. Just not what it was about the previous four times they’ve tried to slip this Power Grab past you. Except I’ve seen a copy of the bill. Yes it is cap-and-trade. And worse.

For this latest effort to hide an enormous tax and wealth transfer — a unilateral move that guarantees jobs will be shipped to China, India, Philippines, Mexico and elsewhere — – these lawmakers will be surrounded by numerous representatives of Big Green. That includes not just the wealthy pressure group industry but many among “Big Business”, numerous of whom are the benefactors enabling those pressure group chiefs’ huge salaries and vast PR budgets to scare you into accepting an agenda that uses the state to, oddly enough, enrich these same companies. Huh.

Sen. Lieberman has repeatedly teased the breadth of the organized scrum as proof that the scheme is now a good idea.  Absent from his cheerleading is the fact that you are not represented at the table when your wealth and future prospects were being divvied up.

The reason for so many businesses leaping onto the stage today is also the dog that surely will not bark when the media report on industry’s touting of an enormous energy tax and wealth transfer from individuals: why do they support this?

The answer is because they have been promised a slice of the spoils taken from the average taxpayer and ratepayer. I detail who these companies are and how they hope to cash in on this scheme in my new book “Power Grab“. For example, consider Exelon. This Chicago-based utility, which today is expected to be represented both individually by its CEO and by its trade association the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), expects more than one billion dollars in increased profits for no additional capital investment if the scheme announced today passes. Their only cost would have been the lobbyists.

That’s just one company. But the windfall, arranged by politicians, comes from average American families. The company even admits the whole sordid mess in a Forbes article from earlier this year:

“Exelon needs that legislation to happen sooner rather than later. Without a carbon price of some sort, Exelon’s fortunes aren’t so bright…. ‘The conundrums are real,’ [Exelon CEO John] Rowe acknowledges. ‘There’s nothing that’s going to drive Exelon’s profit in the next couple of years wildly. It just isn’t going to happen.’

Except, of course, carbon legislation. And because of that, the company views spending on lobbying for legislation almost like a capital expense….

Exelon has very deep ties to the Obama Administration. Frank M. Clark, who runs ComEd, helped advise Obama before he ran for President and is one of Obama’s largest fundraisers. Obama’s chief political strategist, David Axelrod, worked as a consultant to Exelon. Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, helped create Exelon. Emanuel was hired by Rowe to help broker the $8.2 billion deal between Unicom and Peco when Emanuel was at the investment bank Wasserstein Perella (now Dresdner Kleinwort). In his two-year career there Emanuel earned $16.2 million, according to congressional disclosures. His biggest deal was the Exelon merger.”

The article details how Exelon wrote the provisions allocating the energy use “allowances”, or ration coupons. Others, including (according to Sen. Kerry) BP, wrote the provisions applying to oil companies, to ensure costs are passed straight through to you.

I lay the particularly odious example of Exelon — and those of others on the dais, ranging from Duke Energy to GE to “Chicago Climate Exchange” members — bare in “Power Grab“. Before your elected representatives impose this on you later this year, as soon as by the July 4 congressional recess, educate yourself on the rhetoric and ruses employed to part you from your money and, if history is any guide, threaten your family’s lives and indeed your livelihood altogether.

Such unseemly whimpering is about as credible as the greens’ phony “hacked emails!” outrage, over what was from all appearances a whistleblower releasing “ClimateGate” email evidence of dirty green tricks. These are the same crowd whose slimy green tactics include stealing my trash on a weekly basis and working with, e.g., the Guardian to dishonestly cobble together unrelated, out-of-context (unlike ClimateGate) excerpts from emails to paint a false picture. (“Greens involved in journalism process!”; sadly, the Guardian never called me for their “story” about, well, me, so I must confess I wasn’t involved).

Specifically, E&E notes how:

“the Washington Post reported yesterday that [Bracewell & Giuliani's Jeff Holmstead] and another former EPA official, Roger Martella, ‘helped craft the original amendment Murkowski planned to offer on the floor last fall.’…

Environmentalists pounced on the reports as evidence that coal and oil interests are behind Murkowski’s efforts. ‘We now have proof that lobbyists for Big Oil, dirty coal and other special interests are directly involved in recent attempts to bail out big polluters and gut the Clean Air Act,’ said a Sierra Club press release. ‘What’s more, these big polluter lobbyists are the same former Bush administration officials who completely disregarded the Clean Air Act and even disobeyed the Supreme Court for years.’

Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, said, ‘It’s pretty clear who’s supporting and behind Murkowski. It’s clearly the coal cabal and others who would try to block EPA from taking action.’”

Ahem. Yes, it’s pretty clear who’s behind what. Shall we set up shop outside the Environment and Public Works’ Majority offices to see who’s working on things, kids? To discover the horror that your team goes to the unconscionable lengths of asking outside experts for their expertise?

So, on top of raising again that uncomfortable little Enron thing, allow me refresh the greens’ memories about how terrible it is that industry be involved in the process:

United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP) is a “Baptists and bootleggers” coalition of pressure groups like NRDC with mostly rent-seeking industry. like Duke Energy, Exelon and other energy players who’ve crafted a scheme for windfalls at your expense as their price for pushing Gang Green’s agenda.

Together, USCAP companies seek a pact with the governing class and ideologues to secure their own future and was even credited with providing the “blueprint” for the Waxman-Markey House cap-and-trade bill.

This according to that right-wing rag the Los Angeles Times in the article titled “Industry leaders join Obama on emissions limits: Companies want to help shape global warming legislation in Congress, figuring the right plan could help profits. Their support could be key to pushing it through”.

The paper acknowledged how USCAP companies helped to push this enormous energy tax hike past the finish line in the House, singling out Duke Energy and Alcoa for “marshaling votes on Capitol Hill, working behind the scenes with committee negotiators and providing what House leaders call a blueprint for compromise.” In his victory lap, bill co-author Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts cited this cynical profiteering-slash-toadying, calling their support “indispensable.”

E&E News failed to mention such matters. It does seem, however, that Big Green is very upset about the practice by its Big Business wing to be a key player in the Greens’ effort to impose the biggest tax increase in American history, and that we should renew our efforts to tell the public about this.

The hearing actually has devolved into something of an effort to rehabilitate certain Members who are now imperiled by their vote for the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, particularly Tom Periello of Central Virginia (my Congressman, who has been hoodwinked by someone into stating, in defense of his vote, that the reason we are losing jobs to India and China is because they’ve already passed Waxman-Markey-type laws. Really. I agree we need to find out who is spreading such scurrilous tales to our lawmakers).

So, Rep. Periello will open the proceedings with a statement. The hearing was already delayed once because he refused to let anyone see what he was going to say in advance. They might ask questions. I don’t think that’s much of a threat.

Anyhow, it seems that pointing out how, where and by whom this practice of AstroTurfing and otherwise of deceitful industry lobbying in the “global warming” context was invented, how it’s been engaged, and employing (with substantiation) inconvenient words like “Axelrod” and “Enron” was deemed non-germane. It addressed AstroTurfing by companies and people pushing this agenda, as opposed to by those opposing it. That’s just not relevant. Anyone can see.

In the face of this objection, on Wednesday evening the principals met. In very brief, the minority has agreed to agree to the majority’s wishes. The hearing will go on with no need to sully things by allowing you to hear the following. I believe that the Republicans will seek to introduce my written statement into the record. But of course, they also… well, never mind.

In the event that lightning strikes twice and the grave offense of introducing contrary thought in the form of my written, substantiated testimony is also objected to by the majority, here’s my slightly shorter oral testimony that would have been delivered. Apparently there’s something very, very dangerous about it. I cannot figure out what that might be given the umbrage being taken at AstroTurfing and the solemn vows to expose the wantonness, so I leave it to you.

Please forgive typos along the lines of “thank you for allowing me to testify” and the like as they are in the original:

DELIVERED TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER C. HORNER, SENIOR FELLOW, COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE

HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND GLOBAL WARMING, HEARING ON “ASTROTURFNG”

October 29, 2009

Mr. Chairman, thank you for inviting me to testify today, and I would like to thank the Members of this Committee for allowing me to address the long-overdue issue of deceptive practices, specifically “Astroturfing,” in the “global warming” policy arena.

Such practices have existed for years throughout environmental policy, both from inside and coordinated with government, environmental pressure groups and industry.

Examples abound of “Astroturfing” and other deceptive practices to push the global warming agenda. Recently, the Environmental Defense Action Fund used Craigslist to recruit paid “activists” to rally support for cap-and-trade in the guise of a grassroots movement.

We all witnessed last week’s dishonest advocacy effort by the activist group “Yes Men”. About this, Daniel Henninger wrote in the Wall Street Journal:^[1]

“…the cable news stations, wire services and Web sites reported that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had recanted its opposition to climate-change legislation. It was a hoax. Incredibly (well maybe not so incredibly), the hoax was perpetrated by an activist group in a room at the National Press Club in Washington in front of reporters who’ve risen to the top of their industry. The hoaxers had created a fake Web site and faked a Chamber press release. The made-up press conference ran about 20 minutes until someone from the real Chamber of Commerce showed up yelling, ‘This is a fraud!’ Too late. Credulous TV and wire reporters had sent the Chamber’s climate flip-flop into an already confused world.”

The merits of these practices of course do not hinge on whether they agree with one’s position. As AEI’s Ken Green was quoted as saying, however, “When someone else does it, it’s astroturfing; when you do it, it’s community organizing.”^[2]

Astroturfing is no stranger to the energy industry, purportedly perfected by Chicago-based utility Exelon, which hired David Axelrod’s public affairs firm to create a front group to achieve the same end as sought by cap-and-trade, which is a rate increase.

As Newsweek wrote, when an Exelon arm “wanted state lawmakers to back a hefty rate hike”:

“it took a creative lobbying approach, concocting a new outfit that seemed devoted to the public interest: Consumers Organized for Reliable Electricity, or CORE. CORE ran TV ads warning of a ‘California-style energy crisis’ if the rate increase wasn’t approved—but without disclosing the commercials were funded by Commonwealth Edison. The ad campaign provoked a brief uproar when its ties to the utility, which is owned by Exelon Corp., became known. ‘It’s corporate money trying to hoodwink the public,’ the state’s Democratic Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn said.”^[3]

Last year Business Week wrote about this component of Exelon’s $15 million effort to convince ratepayers to agree to pay more for energy, calling the campaign the “gold standard in Astroturf organizing”.

Exelon is of course again in the news of late for leading a campaign, sold by public affairs professionals as an exodus from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce based upon environmental principle but which, upon scrutiny, is a collection of largely “rent-seeking” companies standing to make as much as one billion dollars per year on the backs of ratepayers from cap-and-trade according to media reports.

Most will also recall when gas interest Chesapeake Energy emerged, in the words of a Houston Chronicle writer, as “one of the only companies that has fessed up to funding a recent advertising campaign against Dallas-based TXU’s plans to build up to 11 new coal-fired power plants… with no clear notice of who was behind it. Chesapeake admitted to funding the campaign, at least in part, after reporters did some digging.”^[4]

Several internal memoranda have surfaced about Enron’s pioneering effort in the late 1990s, to leverage green pressure groups to advocate for its new creation called carbon cap-and-trade. One memo in particular stated how:

“Enron now has excellent credentials with many ‘green’ interests including Greenpeace, WWF, NRDC, German Watch, the U.S. Climate Action Network, the European Climate Action Network, Ozone Action, WRI, and Worldwatch.”

“This position should be increasingly cultivated and capitalized on (monitized).”

The misspelling in the parenthetical is in the original but I believe the point is clear. This list is by no means exhaustive, as I note in detail in my written testimony.

As the Journal’s Henninger also wrote, “With fakery everywhere—some of it amusing, some of it not funny—people’s ability to know where things fall on the spectrum between fact and falsity becomes so compromised that they retreat into a shell of cynicism about everything.”

Hopefully today’s effort, allowing an airing however brief of the tactics used to promote the “global warming” agenda, will also assist this ongoing education campaign.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide these remarks today.

[2] “Enviro ad sparks debate — grass roots or AstroTurf?”, E&E Daily, August 27, 2009.

[3] Newsweek June 2, 2008 “Campaign 2008: Obama lobbyist connection”, http://www.newsweek.com/id/138519.

[4]  “The money behind the dirty faces”, Houston Chronicle NewsWatch: Energy blog, February 14, 2007, http://blogs.chron.com/newswatchenergy/archives/2007/02/the_money_behin_1.html  (links in original).