Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumGaius Publius: Is Clinton Still a Carbon Candidate? The Data to Date
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2015/11/is-clinton-still-carbon-candidate-data.htmlHillary Clintons carbon-connected bundler network http://littlesis.org/maps/814-oil-gas-lobbyists-bundle-for-clinton
Ive been trying to get a handle on Hillary Clintons climate and carbon policies. I know, for example, that in 2013 she looked for all the world like a carbon candidate based on these remarks in upstate New York:
In Oneida County, Hillary Clinton touts U.S. oil-and-gas production
Late into the lecture portion of Clintons Oneida County appearance, she referenced a report that the U.S. in on track to surpass Russia in domestic oil-and-gas production.
Thats good news, Clinton said.
What that means for viable manufacturing and industrialization in this country is enormous, she said to the crowd of 5,800 in Hamiltons athletic field house.
Natural-gas extraction has been a hotly debated issue in New York as Gov. Andrew Cuomos administration weighs whether to open its portion of the gas-rich Marcellus Shale to hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
The increase in domestic U.S. production has been tied directly to the rise of large-scale fracking, which has allowed drillers to target shale formations that were once thought unreachable.
Late into the lecture portion of Clintons Oneida County appearance, she referenced a report that the U.S. in on track to surpass Russia in domestic oil-and-gas production.
Thats good news, Clinton said.
What that means for viable manufacturing and industrialization in this country is enormous, she said to the crowd of 5,800 in Hamiltons athletic field house.
Natural-gas extraction has been a hotly debated issue in New York as Gov. Andrew Cuomos administration weighs whether to open its portion of the gas-rich Marcellus Shale to hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
The increase in domestic U.S. production has been tied directly to the rise of large-scale fracking, which has allowed drillers to target shale formations that were once thought unreachable.
So its fair enough to say she is, or was, pro-fracking and pro-natural gas (methane, a greenhouse gas, that when burned, becomes CO2, another greenhouse gas). Is she still pro-fracking and pro-methane?
In an attempt to determine Hillary Clintons climate policy to date, I looked at four sources her bundler network (see the graphic above), her statements from the first two Democratic debate, and the proposals on her web page. The close of this piece contains a comment on Clinton and the disastrous 2009 Copenhagen climate conference, which Clinton is now painting as a victory for herself and Obama.
Oil & Gas Lobbyists Bundle for Clinton
First, there are plenty of connections to the oil and gas industry (the carbon extraction industry) in the Clinton bundler network. From a piece at LittleSis published in July 2015:
Oil & Gas Lobbyists Bundle for Clinton
In a campaign finance filing yesterday, Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton disclosed the registered lobbyists that have bundled donations from people in their personal networks for her campaign. $2.1 million of the money Clinton has raised so far was bundled by registered lobbyists.
Clinton, an ally of the oil and gas industry during her tenure as Secretary of State, brought in $811,828 from lobbyists that work for oil and gas companies. Another $321,950 came from lobbyists who dont advocate for industry clients themselves, but who work for firms that lobby for industry clients.
Clintons biggest bundler, Jackson Dunn, raised $231,554 for the candidate. Dunn, a lobbyist for Dow Chemical and for Noble Energy, is a senior managing partner for the firm FTI Consulting, which has long managed the Independent Petroleum Association of Americas Energy in Depth public relations campaign. Energy in Depth employs a variety of tactics, including attacking environmental activists and distributing incorrect and misleading research to local policymakers in order to advance the petroleum industrys agenda.
In a campaign finance filing yesterday, Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton disclosed the registered lobbyists that have bundled donations from people in their personal networks for her campaign. $2.1 million of the money Clinton has raised so far was bundled by registered lobbyists.
Clinton, an ally of the oil and gas industry during her tenure as Secretary of State, brought in $811,828 from lobbyists that work for oil and gas companies. Another $321,950 came from lobbyists who dont advocate for industry clients themselves, but who work for firms that lobby for industry clients.
Clintons biggest bundler, Jackson Dunn, raised $231,554 for the candidate. Dunn, a lobbyist for Dow Chemical and for Noble Energy, is a senior managing partner for the firm FTI Consulting, which has long managed the Independent Petroleum Association of Americas Energy in Depth public relations campaign. Energy in Depth employs a variety of tactics, including attacking environmental activists and distributing incorrect and misleading research to local policymakers in order to advance the petroleum industrys agenda.
Keep in mind, this was July, so the numbers have likely grown larger. Also, since bundler information is much less public than announced positions, its easier to hide support here than in campaign declarations. If I had to guess her level of support for emissions based on just these two data points, Id say, Yes, shes still a pro-carbon candidate, since frankly, it matters where she (or any candidate) gets her money. But lets look at announced positions as well. Perhaps well be happily surprised.
Debate Statements on Climate Change
In the two Democratic debates, climate change was discussed, much more so in the first than the second. From the first debate:
CLINTON: (From the opening statement)
Ive put forward specific plans about how were going to create more good-paying jobs: by investing in infrastructure and clean energy, by making it possible once again to invest in science and research, and taking the opportunity posed by climate change to grow our economy
.
(From the back-and-forth) You know, we know that if you are learning, youre gonna change your position. I never took a position on Keystone until I took a position on Keystone. But I have been on the forefront of dealing with climate change, starting in 2009, when President Obama and I crashed (ph) a meeting with the Chinese and got them to sign up to the first international agreement to combat climate change that theyd ever joined.
When we met in Copenhagen in 2009 and, literally, President Obama and I were hunting for the Chinese, going throughout this huge convention center, because we knew we had to get them to agree to something. Because there will be no effective efforts against climate change unless China and India join with the rest of the world. They told us theyd left for the airport; we found out they were having a secret meeting. We marched up, we broke in, we said, Weve been looking all over for you. Lets sit down and talk about what we need to do. And we did come up with the first international agreement that China has signed. Thanks to President Obamas leadership, its now gone much further.
And I do think that the bilateral agreement that President Obama made with the Chinese was significant. Now, it needs to go further, and there will be an international meeting at the end of this year, and we must get verifiable commitments to fight climate change from every country gathered there.
(From the back-and-forth) You know, we know that if you are learning, youre gonna change your position. I never took a position on Keystone until I took a position on Keystone. But I have been on the forefront of dealing with climate change, starting in 2009, when President Obama and I crashed (ph) a meeting with the Chinese and got them to sign up to the first international agreement to combat climate change that theyd ever joined.
When we met in Copenhagen in 2009 and, literally, President Obama and I were hunting for the Chinese, going throughout this huge convention center, because we knew we had to get them to agree to something. Because there will be no effective efforts against climate change unless China and India join with the rest of the world. They told us theyd left for the airport; we found out they were having a secret meeting. We marched up, we broke in, we said, Weve been looking all over for you. Lets sit down and talk about what we need to do. And we did come up with the first international agreement that China has signed. Thanks to President Obamas leadership, its now gone much further.
And I do think that the bilateral agreement that President Obama made with the Chinese was significant. Now, it needs to go further, and there will be an international meeting at the end of this year, and we must get verifiable commitments to fight climate change from every country gathered there.
Nothing about bringing emissions to zero on any time frame; some mention of her clean energy plan (which echoes, deliberately or not, Obamas pro-methane Clean Power Plan); a reference to her laudable rejection of the Keystone pipeline; and many references to her attempts to engage the Chinese and Indians at the (horribly failed) Copenhagen climate conference in 2009 (more on that below).
Now from the second debate, this lone statement (as near as I can find):
But the differences among us pale compared to whats happening on the Republican side. And if you listen to what they say and I had a chance over those 11 hours to watch and listen, as well as what I see in their debates they are putting forth alarming plans.
I mean, all of us support funding Planned Parenthood. All of us believe climate change is real. All of us want equal pay for equal work.
I mean, all of us support funding Planned Parenthood. All of us believe climate change is real. All of us want equal pay for equal work.
Believing climate change is real is laudable, but tells us nothing about what shed actually do to put an end to it. So lets turn to her campaign Issue web page on climate change. From the introduction, this hints at, yes, more drilling:
Making America the clean energy superpower of the 21st century
You dont have to be a scientist to take on this urgent challenge that threatens us all. You just have to be willing to act.
Climate change is an urgent challenge that threatens all of us. The United States is already taking steps to invest in our clean energy future, but we need to do more. We need to take bold action to combat climate change, create jobs, protect the health of American families and communities, and make the United States the worlds clean energy superpower.
In the coming months, Hillary will lay out a comprehensive energy and climate agenda to help America transition to a clean energy economy and meet the global climate crisis.
You dont have to be a scientist to take on this urgent challenge that threatens us all. You just have to be willing to act.
Climate change is an urgent challenge that threatens all of us. The United States is already taking steps to invest in our clean energy future, but we need to do more. We need to take bold action to combat climate change, create jobs, protect the health of American families and communities, and make the United States the worlds clean energy superpower.
In the coming months, Hillary will lay out a comprehensive energy and climate agenda to help America transition to a clean energy economy and meet the global climate crisis.
The page lists two goals, which have been announced for a while:
Goal: Have more than half a billion solar panels installed across the country by the end of Hillarys first term.
Goal: Generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America within 10 years of Hillary taking office.
Goal: Generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America within 10 years of Hillary taking office.
About these she says:
Through these goals, we will increase the amount of installed solar capacity by 700% by 2020, expand renewable energy to at least a third of all electricity generation, prevent thousands of premature deaths and tens of thousands of asthma attacks each year, and put our country on a path to achieve deep emission reductions by 2050.
The close includes this:
These goals are a critical next step toward making America a clean energy superpower and combating climate change. That is why Hillary will make it a top priority to fight efforts to roll back crucial tools in our national strategy to reduce carbon pollution, increase deployment of renewable energy, and build a clean energy future.
Were on the cusp of a new era. We can have more choice in the energy we consume and produce. We can create a more open, efficient, and resilient grid that connects us, empowers us, improves our health, and benefits us all.
Were on the cusp of a new era. We can have more choice in the energy we consume and produce. We can create a more open, efficient, and resilient grid that connects us, empowers us, improves our health, and benefits us all.
The response from climate scientists and activist has not been favorable. This is James Hansens reaction:
Its just plain silly, said James Hansen, a climate change researcher who headed Nasas Goddard Institute for Space Studies for over 30 years. No, you cannot solve the problem without a fundamental change, and that means you have to make the price of fossil fuels honest. Subsidizing solar panels is not going to solve the problem.
MORE AT LINK
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1021 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Gaius Publius: Is Clinton Still a Carbon Candidate? The Data to Date (Original Post)
Demeter
Nov 2015
OP
I have to admit, seeing the title, my mind at first was jumping to a more figurative notion
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Nov 2015
#1
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)1. I have to admit, seeing the title, my mind at first was jumping to a more figurative notion
rather than a literal one. I expected some sort of analogy about orbital shells and bonding strength.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)2. See the comments at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/11/gaius-publius-is-clinton-still-a-carbon-c
Jim Haygood
November 19, 2015 at 8:00 am
Is Clinton still a carbon-based lifeform? Was she ever?