Showing posts with label Big Business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Business. Show all posts

Monday

MSM Fails Again on $MON


It’s no different than Fox, NBC, CNN, or ABC refusing to cover the DARK ACT which would give Monsanto legal immunity and disallow states to demand GMO labeling.

You would think that coverage of something the whole world wants to see – the first step toward the successful downfall of Monsanto –would be a hot news item; a newsworthy tidbit that every paper, radio station, and blog would want to spread across their pages with double bold headlines. But wait. . . just six corporations own ALL of the media in America, so there isn’t much luck there.
That’s why you have to go to sites like Russia Insider or Al Jazeera to find real news outside of certain alternative news channels in the US, and even those are white-washed from Facebook pages, and given secondary ratings on Google pages.

Matthew Phillips, the attorney suing Monsanto in California for false advertising on Roundup bottles, has asked the LA Times, New York Times, Huffington Post, CNN, and Reuters, one of the world’s largest news agencies to report on the lawsuit (Case No: BC 578 942), and most enforced a total media blackout.
When I spoke with Phillips over the phone, he said that he has tried posting the suit in Wikipedia’s Monsanto litigation section, but it keeps ‘disappearing.’ He says that he has also noticed posts on Facebook about this lawsuit get removed.
Phillips points out that as long as Monsanto can keep this lawsuit off of most of America’s radar, then his client base would be relegated to just the citizens of California.

If other attorneys were to follow his template-style lawsuit, which he wrote in English, devoid of extraneous legal-speak to encourage others to also take action against Monsanto, then suddenly the plaintiff count could be closer to several million. That is if you were to tally up all the citizens in the US who have purchased a bottle of Roundup from their local DIY store (Lowe’s, Home Depot or Ace Hardware, for example) in the last four years, not suspecting it could demolish their gut health.

Another possibility, according to Phillips, is that Monsanto could try to bump the case up to federal court in order to try to side-step a likely adverse judgment. But in this case the class action suit would also be open to residents other than those of just California. This is surely an idea that Monsanto doesn’t want seeded in the American psyche.

Phillips is extremely confident he has the goods on Monsanto in this case, and barring a sold out judge:

“This is a slam-dunk lawsuit that exposes Monsanto for LYING about Roundup. Contrary to the label, Roundup does indeed target and kill enzymes found in humans — in our gut bacteria — and this explains America’s chronic indigestion!”

His enthusiasm is palpable, as many well-known scientists and professors emeritus have offered to be key witnesses in this suit when it goes to trial. The attorney says he refuses to ‘settle’ the case and hopes that 49 additional attorneys in 49 states use his case as an example. He joked:

“When we allege that Roundup’s targeted enzyme is found in humans, it’s like alleging that the Golden Gate Bridge is found in California.”


The facts of the case really are that obvious.

Phillips also states that ‘false advertising’ and ‘misleading’ are synonyms in California law, so the fact that Monsanto has stated that there are enzymes in its product that don’t target humans – well that’s beyond just misleading. This obvious misjudgment by Monsanto is a well-known secret among many anti-GM scientists. This enzyme is definitely found in humans.

Here is how ‘misleading’ Monsanto’s statement that, “Round Up targets an enzyme only found in plants and not in humans or animals,” truly is:

EPSP synthase, also known as (3-phosphoshikimate 1-carboxyvinyltransferase) is found in the microbiota that reside in our intestinal tracts, and therefore the enzyme is “found in humans and animals.” It is partly responsible for immunity activation and even helps our gut and our brains communicate with one another.
EPSP synthase is among other beneficial microbes that produce neurometabolites that are either neurotransmitters or modulators of neurotransmission.

“These could act directly on nerve terminals in the gut or via ‘transducer’ cells such as enterochromaffin cells present throughout the intestinal tract and are accessible to microbes and in contact with afferent and efferent nerve terminals. Some of these cells may also signal and therefore modulate immune cell activity.”


Furthermore, although this will not be addressed in Phillip’s lawsuit:

“There is increasing evidence that exposure to Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, may be an underlying cause of autism spectrum disorders (see [19]).  Glyphosate, the active ingredient, acts through inhibition of the 5-enolpyruvylshikimic acid-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS synthase) enzyme in the shikimate pathway that catalyses the production of aromatic amino acids. This pathway does not exist in animals, but it does exist in bacteria, including those that live in the gut and are now known to be as much a part of our body as our own cells. A widely accepted dogma is that glyphosate is safe due to the lack of the EPSPS enzyme in our body. This however does not hold water now that the importance of our microbiota to our physiology is clear.”


Though Monsanto is only being sued for false advertising in this case, it is an important precedent to set in order to eventually take down one of the biotech giants that is poisoning the planet. It should send a clear message to Dow, Bayer, Cargill, and Syngenta as well.

Please show the corporate media that we will not be silenced, and pass this information along however you can. If you live in California, consider being a part of the suit yourself. If you are an attorney, Phillips is happy to discuss his suit with you in hopes that you will add your state to the growing list of those standing up to Big Ag.

You can read more about Phillips’ his case, here. The plaintiff also has a go fund me site for this lawsuit.

This article (Major Lawsuit Against Monsanto Completely Blacked out by Media) originally appeared on NaturalSociety.com 

Stock Tips: $MON

Wednesday

Another BigBusiness Bailout in Missouri

$ buys Politicians More #BigBusiness financial support on the "backs" of the People

Only this time its a #DirtyCoal burner who gets the bailout and not the Banks, Wallstreet, or the Auto Industry.

What really irks me is that: MoLeg sells public to the same  Electric Company who doesn't want Missourian's to have #Solar

That's right more SOLAR + Energy Storage wouldn't require Ameren to buy it burn coal for 20years!

$80 million of one company's electric costs onto the backs of other ratepayers MBEF Statement on MoLeg PSC Vote 

Jefferson City, MO - Missourians for a Balanced Energy Future (MBEF) expresses sincere disappointment with the perceived bailout for Noranda Aluminum granted today by the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC).

Executive Director Irl Scissors released the following statement:

"To shift approximately  $80 million of one company's electric costs onto the backs of other ratepayers in Ameren's service territory is simply unfair and unjust."

"We remain encouraged that the order is expected to contain significant consumer protections to the benefit of Missourians.  The Commissioners' comments also indicated that this should be the last handout granted to Noranda and anything beyond this rate shift should be addressed by the General Assembly and the Department of Economic Development.”

News Tribune: Noranda gets rate cut, other Ameren consumers see increase

Post-Dispatch: Rates rising for Ameren Missouri customers, except Noranda

$ buys Politicians http://klou.tt/gdvk4y5 More #BigBusiness financial support on the "backs" of the People. 

Tuesday

Yes Old Dog New Tricks-DirtyEnergyDuke and Solar

Another Dirty Coal Company jumping on Clean Energy from Solar Bandwagon 'proof' that Solar Energy has been adopted as the preferred energy source of the Future.

2 Universities in DC Make Deal to Buy Solar Power (abcnewshidden in the text of the document: 'Duke Energy Renewables'


"Whats this I asked?" 


I know Duke Energy is known for #DirtyCoal... 


a quick google search on Dirty Duke Energy led me to a page that downplays the Dirty Coal aspects of Dirty Duke Energy Company and preaches clean energy aspects.  They even downright admit clean energy is best for all.

 Coal Company jumping on Clean Energy from Solar Bandwagon 

'proof' that Solar Energy has been adopted as the 

preferred energy source of the Future. Scotty

What I found most interesting is: "This Dirty Coal company has jumped on the #Solar bandwagon-which means that even dirtydukeenergy has realized the importance of clean energy production from non-polluting sources." Further proof that #SolarEnergy has been adopted as the preferred energy source of the Future.
Even here in #StLouis the local #DirtyCoal company #Ameren is building a big solar energy plant. Once again proof that #cleanenergy from solar is both profitable for the owner and is the Future!
  • Do you realize that the same #BigBusiness #dirtycoal  companies that are fighting and supporting negative ad campaigns with #dirtyenergymoney against #CleanEnergy  are then investing $$$ #Money   ' IN ' #solarenergy  .  This should show you what is going on behind closed doors (in the Energy Industry) in regard to the future of energy and where it will come from.  
  • Solar is the Future.  Dirty Energy realizes it and soon you will too. 

Build Green,
Scotty

Dirty Coal jumping on Solar Bandwagon for profits from clean energy production
Solar-Good Enough for Dirty Coal Company good enough for me!

Thank You for stopping by-Share and Comment below. If additional information in needed or you have a question let me know. Together we can make a difference. Build a Green StLouis Get Your Green Building Tips and Resources at St Louis Renewable Energy Green Blog
-->

Wednesday

Exxon hates your children

Exxon Hates Your Children YouTube video: http://youtu.be/uXV6FW9Vg0I


MAKE EXXON PAY FOR CLIMATE CHANGE — NOT OUR CHILDREN!

The time is now to stop fueling climate disaster on US taxpayers’ dime. We demand Congress and the President work together to eliminate ALL subsidies to fossil fuels. We, and our children, cannot afford the more than $10 billion per year in handouts from the US government to Big Oil, Gas and Coal.

 As Congress debates what actions to take to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff” perhaps no programs are less worthy of government support than those which subsidize Big Oil, Gas, and Coal. Read on to understand:
  • How oil, gas and coal companies undermine your children’s futures,
  • Why these subsidies are a waste of taxpayer dollars, and
  • What you can do to stop them.

Imagine if your government gave a company a sweet deal to build your local playground. Then, that company dumped toxic waste underneath where your kids play everyday, just because it was the most profitable thing for them to do.
What would you do? Obviously you’d protect your children and demand that the company fully pay to clean up their mess. You’d demand that the company pay for any medical help needed by your kids. Finally, you’d demand that your government immediately stop sending your tax dollars — subsidies — to that company.
That company is Exxon, the playground is our planet, and the sweet deal they get is by way ofmassive government handouts. But Exxon is not alone; their competitors and industry friends in the fossil fuel game are all running their businesses in a way that is ruining our children’s futures.
In short, if you judge Exxon and other fossil fuel companies not by the words on their press releases, but by their actions and predictable consequences, Exxon really must hate your children. The facts speak for themselves.
Consider the following:
  1. Exxon must hate your children because their business model depends on drilling for more and more of the fuels that cause climate disruption, even though fossil fuel companies havealready discovered significantly more oil, gas and coal than scientists say we can safely burn. They are creating climate chaos every day — and they’re getting rich doing it.
    Even the International Energy Agency now agrees that in order to have even chances of limiting global warming to just 2 degrees Celsius (beyond which the worst impacts of warming will kick in), two-thirds of the current proven reserves of fossil fuels must remain in the ground by 2050.
  2. Exxon must hate your children because, for years, they spent millions funding a coordinated campaign to create confusion about climate science, which slowed the move towards a more sustainable future. Now Exxon (finally) admits that climate change is a problem, but…
    • They say they can’t predict what will happen, and
    • Therefore they will continue business as usual.
    In June 2012, Rex Tillerson, the CEO of Exxon, acknowledged that burning of fossil fuels is warming the planet, but said society will be able to “adapt”. Tillerson blamed a public that is “illiterate” in science and math, a “lazy” press, and advocacy groups that “manufacture fear”for misconceptions around the oil and gas industry.
    Exxon's report, "Energy and Carbon - Managing the Risks" published on March 14, 2014, flatly states "we do not anticipate society being able to supplant traditional carbon- based forms of energy with other energy forms, such as renewables, to the extent needed to meet this carbon budget".
  3. Exxon must hate your children because they and other fossil fuel companies send campaign contributions to candidates for Congress, and in turn, they get massive subsidies…at the expense of more important causes. For every one dollar Big Oil spends on political contributions, they get $59 back in subsidies — a 5800% rate of return. Meanwhile, they make record profits — in 2011, just the 5 biggest oil companies alone (including Exxon) made roughly $135 billion in profits. The at least $10 billion annually in our tax dollars that goes to supporting these rich fossil fuel companies should instead go to building a safe future for all our children.
  4. Exxon must hate your children because climate change threatens the future of all of our children, and they seem to just ignore it. Even before Superstorm Sandy hit the East Coast of the United Stateswe were witnessing climate impacts on a daily basis, and they’re only getting worse. Just this summer, we’ve seen drought engulf the breadbasket of America. We’ve seen freak storms ravage the Midwest and east coast. All of these impacts are consistent with scientific predictions of climate change. Yet Exxon continues drilling and funding Congressional campaigns, in order to get more subsidies to feed their addiction to their climate-destroying profits.
So, to Exxon, your children’s safe futures stand in the way of their massive profits. They peddle influence, throw their money around, and lobby their way to more subsidies, more obscene profits…and a more dangerous future for the rest of us.
Exxon, and all other oil, gas and coal companies, talk a good game. Their slick ads — which they have the money to place almost everywhere thanks to record profits supplemented by government handouts — promise jobs, prosperity, energy security and a brighter future. Unfortunately, the only promise that they are likely to deliver on is the promise of profits — which won’t matter for your children, who will have to pay the price.
This is not a problem we will solve overnight. To start though, we can demand that Exxon, and all other oil companies, stop using our money to fund climate destruction.

Voters are Responsible for Shutdown~Lesson Learned~BlameGame

Yes I said and do mean that.  The Tea Party and their fellow GOP cronies were elected by the People.  So I point the finger in the blame game back at 'We the People' the Voting Public for electing these clowns into office.

I will admit that when I first learned about the Tea Party. I believed they were making a few valid points.  Though it was not enough for me to contribute $Money$ to support their political endeavors.  Some of the info was at least worth looking into.

Like any informed Voter studying the Issues that are affecting the USA and its Interests.  I want the facts-not the hype from the Media Networks.  I learned long ago when I started studying the effects of Climate Change that it was the Humans Fault. (IPCC-The IPCC report shows the Man Made CO2 is creating warming temperatures Worldwide )

I've written many green blog posts on Climate Change and the Causes and never understood why more efforts to end wars over Oil, Clean Energy Jobs, and protecting America's Greatest asset "We The People" were not adopted and enacted by our Elected Officials.

I had to know why wouldn't any elected official who campaigns on what's best for the American Public and then FAIL to:create and enact laws and regulations to support the endeavor.  To understand and research this topic I luckily found the websites: Open Secrets and Follow the Money.

I had the Ah-hah Moment

I honestly couldn't believe the amount of money Big Business and the Oil Industry was giving to our Elected Officials.  And when I look at the Government Shutdown created by the GOP and the Tea Party Members.  I realized these are the same people who are taking the most money from the Fossil Fuel Industry.

Coincidence or Fact learn for yourself from the people at: Open Secrets and Follow the Money.

I rest my case.

Sincerely,
Scotty
Scotts Contracting, StLouis Renewable Energy


Roy Blunt Missouri Senator is a perfect example of Big Business and Dirty Energy Money in Politics
Roy Blunt Missouri Senator is a perfect example of Big Business and Dirty Energy Money in Politics
Roy Blunt Missouri Senator is a perfect example of Big Business and Dirty Energy Money in Politics





Thank you for stopping by St Louis Renewable Energy. Feel free to comment in the section below or contact Scotts Contracting- St Louis Home Improvement Projects and Energy Reducing Needs Get Your Green Building Tips and Resources at St Louis Renewable Energy Green Blog

Thursday

Res 37 Toxic Air Bill by Sen J.Inhofe


I am writing you today in vehement opposition to the toxic air bill offered by Senator James Inhofe, S.J. Res 37.

The Online Petition I signed via the Environment Defense Action Fund is listed to follow and emailed to Sen R.Blunt and Sen C.McCaskill.


  • My notes to Dirty Oil Roy Blunt are at the bottom of the Post.


This bill would use the obscure Congressional Review Act to block EPA's new emission standards for hazardous mercury and other toxic air pollution from coal- and oil-fired power plants. If enacted, this bill would also forever prohibit the EPA from adopting substantially similar clean air standards in the future.

These standards, which the 1990 Clean Air Act specifically authorizes, have been in the works for more than two decades. They will prevent up to 11,000 premature deaths every year and protect our kids from dangerous exposure to toxic mercury pollution, which can cause brain damage in infants and young children.

They will also save the American economy tens of billions of dollars in avoided health costs while likely leading to the creation of 117,000 jobs installing pollution control technologies between now and 2015.

Last year, more than 800,000 Americans submitted public comments in support of this rule. But now, a few of America's largest corporate utilities have launched an aggressive campaign to block these standards. And Sen. Inhofe's toxic air bill would do just that.

Please stand up for the health and safety of our kids and communities and reject the Inhofe bill.

Please take action today. Help us stop the Inhofe toxic air bill, which would wipe the EPA's life-saving Mercury and Air Toxics Standards off the books and punch a huge hole through our clean air protections.

My Notes:

Mr Blunt in an email I received yesterday from you.  You wrote:
"Job creators in Missouri tell me that overreaching new regulations coming out of the Environmental Protection Agency are one of the biggest obstacles to getting our economy back on track.  Regulations like these threaten to make the cost of electric power skyrocket for most Americans and will sack families and workers with new costs, reducing their disposal income and ultimately threatening their standard of living."  

I'd like to point out the simple fact that-
"All the jobs in the world won't help when Pollution kills the world."  

As you know here in St Louis- Ameren UE (Union Electric) uses Coal for producing our Electricity.  This pollution from Coal Fired Power Plants is a leading cause of Asthma and Cancer.  WebMD just reported last week that St Louis is Number 7 on the list  of leading cities with Asthma Problems.
"The study also points out that recent statistics indicate asthma causes more than 3,300 deaths annually in the U.S. and is a factor in another 7,000."  
It  would seem to me the more healthy people there are working equals more people paying taxes- ie: Income for the US Government.

If you are serious about creating jobs consider this: Energy Efficiency and Renewable "Non Polluting" Energy.

Steve Kidwell, Ameren Missouri Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, said:

"If we went after the potential that we've seen in our own study,  we wouldn't have to build another power plant for 20 years, and we could retire Meramec, and we'd be OK.  But we'd lose  $30 million a year. And we just can't do that. It's that simple."
 (This was a St Louis Post Dispatch Article that talked about making homes energy efficient through weatherization.)

On another note about Energy Efficiency and Nuclear Energy- I'd like to share this info:
"For 1/2 the cost of replacing one nuclear power plant, we can retrofit 1,600,000 homes for "Energy Efficiency" and create 220,000 new jobs- which is 90 times more jobs than you'd get from a power plant replacement."  
ie: how much taxes that are needed for the USA would come from the 220,000 employees?

So basically I'm asking you to do the right thing and leave the EPA alone as the USA is making strides to curb its energy use which reduces the Pollutants in the Air, Land, and Water.

Through the various reporting agencies on Political Contributions. (1 & 2) I know you receive the bulk of your money from Big Oil, Big Coal, and Big Business.  In the future who will be left to buy their products if the population is killed off from Fossil Fuel Pollution.  I'm not even going to mention the fact that we can reduce our reliance on Foreign Oil (which is the root cause of the ongoing wars in the Middle East.  ie: if they don't have any money they cant fight us).

Thank you, looking forward to your Reply.

Sincerely,
Scotty

Help us stop the Inhofe toxic air bill, which would wipe the EPA's life-saving Mercury and Air Toxics Standards off the books and punch a huge hole through our clean air protections.

Thank you for stopping by St Louis Renewable Energy. Feel free to comment in the section below or contact Scotty for any Home Improvement Projects or Energy Reducing Needs and Scotty, Scotts Contracting will respond ASAP. Company Web Address: http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com


Tracking two important EPA pollution rules

Tracking two important EPA pollution rules

In the past few weeks, new information has become publicly available about two important pending rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). One rule would set the first-ever, national standards for greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. Know as the greenhouse gas New Source Performance Standard (GHG NSPS) rule, EPA announced on October 29 that it would undergo further delay before publication. This delay is the third such delay since the GHG NSPS rule was originally due last summer. But this time, the delay is not entirely bad news. Environmental groups and states have agreed to extend the deadline to November 30, 2011. The groups agreed to the delay in a letter sent to the Justice Department and said in the letter that this was reasonable, “In light of the progress made to date.”
EPA proposed another important rule in March of this year. This rule, known as the Mercury and Air Toxics rule or Mercury MACT rule, will set national emission standards for mercury and other hazardous air pollution from coal-fired power plants. EPA also recently announced a new date for finalization of the Mercury MACT rule. Previously, the deadline for the rule was November 16, but EPA now plans to release the final rule on December 16. Once again, this is seen as a generally positive development since it sets a date certain in the very near future. Moreover, utilities and some states were pushing to have the rule delayed by a full year, a proposition that the federal court explicitly rejected.
Mercury emissions from power plants
This minor delay is really a big win against those who are trying to push the rule indefinitely into the future. As currently proposed, the mercury rule will prevent 91 percent of mercury in coal burned at power plants from being released to the air, which will have a significant impact on human health and the environment. Given that the Southeast is home to almost 300 coal units that have collectivelyemitted over 20,000 pounds of mercury into the air in a single year, this rule would be a huge step forward in cleaning up the air and water in numerous states. Meanwhile the GHG NSPS rule would be a crucial first step in reducing our contribution to global climate change.
Together, these two policies represent significant steps forward in protecting human health and the environment. If these minor delays provide EPA with needed time or help to deflect unwarranted criticism, then it is a small price to pay.
Tracking two important EPA pollution rules

Wednesday

MO Sen Roy Blunt votes for Big Oil and Not the Taxpayers



Hold Sen. Roy Blunt accountable for the vote against ending oil subsidies.
Take action!
Clicking here will add your name to this petition to your Senator:
Take action now!
Dear Friend,
Last night, 48 Senators, including Sen. Roy Blunt, put Big Oil before the American people and helped defeat a bill that would have ended tax breaks for the five biggest oil companies.1
How could anyone vote against a bill that would have kept $21 billion of American taxpayers' money out of the pockets of cash-rich oil companies?
One big reason is oil money in our political process. A lot of it. Oil and gas companies spent $39.5 million lobbying congress in just the first quarter of this year,2 and have donated tens of millions of dollars directly to the political campaigns of current Senators, including $697,998 to Sen. Roy Blunt.3
In all, three Democrats joined all but two Senate Republicans to protect Big Oil tax breaks that even a former Shell CEO said weren't needed.4
But make no mistake. Even though we didn't get the 60 votes required for passage, our pressure to end oil subsidies is already working. More and more legislators are acting defensive about their support of Big Oil over the American people.
In February, similar legislation to repeal some oil subsidies got only 44 votes. Yesterday, we got 52 votes. That comes after CREDO Action members sent more than 225,000 petitions to the Senate and made more than 1,000 calls yesterday to 11 key Senators, six of whom flipped their position and voted to end tax breaks to Big Oil.
Senate Majority leader Harry Reid said yesterday that despite this defeat, he will continue to push for ending oil subsides as part of negotiations on the budget and to raise the debt ceiling.5
We need to keep the pressure on. And one key to breaking Big Oil's grasp on our legislators is letting Congress know that we know about the millions of dollars that Big Oil has given them — including the $697,998 to Sen. Roy Blunt.
Let's make sure that voting to protect oil company profits doesn't go unanswered by those of us who actually pay the price.
Thank you for taking action.
Elijah Zarlin, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets
P.S. — Want to find out more about the Big Oil money going to our elected officials? Our friends at the Dirty Energy Money campaign have the scoop. Click here to see how much dirty energy money your Senators and other elected officials have taken.

Facebook
Twitter


Sunday

Koch Brothers-Bad?More Drasdardly Deeds Exposed

...donated directly to 62 of the 87 members of the House GOP freshman class...and to 12 of the new members of the U.S. Senate.

You Thought the Koch Brothers Were Bad? Turns Out They're Even Worse Than You Thought
Charles and David Koch's reach into virtually every aspect of political, economic and physical life on the planet is probably greater than you thought possible.
You knew they were big. You knew they were evil. From the union-busting actions of their minions in Wisconsin and Ohio to their war on health-care reform, to their assault on the environment and their attacks on the science of climatology, Charles and David Koch have earned their place as the focus of progressives' scrutiny in the age of the Tea Party -- the destructive and regressive movement they bankroll. But a new report from the Center for American Progress Action Fund shows that, as bad as you thought the Kochs were, they're actually worse. And their reach into virtually every aspect of political, economic and physical life on the planet is probably greater than you thought possible.
In The Koch Brothers: What You Need to Know About the Financiers of the Radical Right, author Tony Carrk, policy director of the CAP Action War Room, lays out a case that is breathtaking in its scope, showing how the Koch brothers are using their billions with the aim of reshaping the global economic system in such a way as to enrich themselves and their heirs at the expense of most other inhabitants of the planet.
While much of the report will have a familiar ring (especially to readers of AlterNet, and CAP Action's own ThinkProgress), The Koch Brothers also addresses elements of the Koch agenda far beyond the well-trodden turf of Americans for Prosperity's organizing against health-care reform or the pollution rap against Koch Industries, the second-largest privately held corporation in the United States, which the billionaire brothers command.
The Kochs and the Global Economy
Consider, for instance, the Kochs' role in the financial business. You thought Koch Industries was just a high-polluting oil-and-gas-based conglomerate? Add in the part played on Wall Street by Koch Supply & Trading, and the depth of the Koch imprint on the economy is revealed. From Carrk's report:
First, the Koch brothers fought efforts to give the Commodity Futures Trading Commission more oversight over speculative trading, whereby companies can artificially inflate prices on things such as oil, during the Wall Street reform debate. One of the Koch companies—Koch Supply & Trading—takes part in oil and derivatives trading. We should point out that oil speculation has reached an all-time high at the same time gas prices continue to skyrocket.
Then look at a recent position pushed by Americans for Prosperity, the Tea Party-allied astroturf group founded and funded by David Koch (and whose sibling organization, the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, he chairs):
Similarly, Americans for Prosperity supports the House continuing resolution that cuts spending by $61 billion. Those cuts would reduce the budget for the CFTC by one-third. Make no mistake: Gutting the CFTC or limiting its authority would be a boon to Wall Street businesses that use complex financial instruments. But while the result is more profits for oil companies, it means everyone else pays more at the pump.
Okay, now have a look at the Kochs' recent direct contributions to political candidates:
The Kochs donated directly to 62 of the 87 members of the House GOP freshman class...and to 12 of the new members of the U.S. Senate.
No wonder, then, how that continuing resolution -- the means for funding the government when a budget has not been passed into law -- managed to get through the House. (It was subsequently rejected by the Senate, setting the stage for a possible shutdown of the government at the end of this week.) Those 62 Koch-backed freshmen are essentially driving the agenda of the House Republicans, because together they form a large enough bloc to prevent House Speaker John Boehner from amassing a majority on any piece of legislation, should they choose to, despite the 2010 Republican victories that handed control of the House to the GOP.


Cross Posted

Connect with Scotts Contracting

FB FB Twitter Google Plus Tumblr LinkedIn Blog Blog Blog Blog Pinterest

Featured Post

Nuclear Waste: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

Thank You for stopping by the Green Blog. If additional information in needed or you have a question let me know by posting a question ...