Oil and Gas Firms Reward Politicians When They Vote Against the Environment, Finds New Study

image_50427649
on

It is no secret that many members of Congress particularly on the Republican side are in the pockets of their fossil fuel funders. The strategy of these special interests is to keep loyal lawmakers in their pockets through hefty campaign contributions, according to a new study exploring the purpose of oil and gas companiesโ€™ political campaignย spending.

That study, published Monday and conducted by researchers at Yale University and the University of Cambridge, found that oil and gas companies spend more on congressional candidates who consistently vote against environmental protection and climateย action.

โ€œThe key takeaway from our study is that thereโ€™s little evidence that oil and gas companies use campaign contributions to influence the voting behavior of members of Congress, but rather they invest in legislators that have a proven anti-environment voting record,โ€ explained Matthew Goldberg, lead author of the study and a Postdoctoral Associate at the Yale Program on Climate Changeย Communication.

Researchers analyzed campaign contributions based on data from the Center for Responsive Politics, along with congressional voting records on environmental issues based on scores by the League of Conservation Voters. They found that the more anti-environment votes a legislator casts, the more contributions they would take in the following election cycle from oil and gasย interests.

โ€œFor every additional 10 percent of congressional votes against the environment in 2014, a legislator would receive an additional $5,400 in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies in 2016,โ€ the study finds. On average, researchers found a 10 percent decrease in pro-environment votes is associated with an additional $1,700 in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies in the following election cycle. The evidence supports what the researchers call the โ€œinvestment hypothesisโ€: โ€œThe more a given member of Congress votes against environmental policies, the more contributions they receive from oil and gas companies supporting theirย reelection.โ€

And these companies are investing millions of dollars to reelect lawmakers who support their anti-environment agenda. The researchers note that oil and gas companies spent more than $84 million on congressional candidates in 2018, and this year they have already contributed more than $40 million, with the overwhelming majority going to Republicanย candidates.

โ€œThe oil and gas industry is going to support candidates supportive of their agenda, which often runs contrary to the environmental agenda,โ€ said Tyson Slocum, energy program director at consumer advocacy nonprofit Public Citizen. He said the study shows how the industry โ€œseeks to financially reward opponents of action on climate changeโ€ and acts as a roadblock to legislative and regulatory climateย action.

โ€œIn a system where candidates are extraordinarily dependent on private corporate contributions, donations by oil and gas companies is going to play a big role in stopping action on climate,โ€ Slocumย said.

โ€œThese findings are troubling, considering that Congressional candidates are much more likely to win if they raise more money than their opponents,โ€ Goldbergย added.

Grassroots actions are already working to counter this political paralysis on climate action powered by oil and gas money. Goldberg noted that more Americans are engaging in climate activism and increasingly view global warming as a voting issue. The youth-led Sunrise Movement is building a broad coalition to help elect candidates not beholden to fossil fuel interests, organizing around the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge. Candidates who take that pledge say they will refuse contributions over $200 from fossil fuel PACs, lobbyists, orย executives.

According to Slocum, these efforts are encouraging, given the undeniable role of oil and gas campaign spending on legislators favorable to theirย interests.

โ€œIt gives great legitimacy to broad efforts for candidates to reject fossil fuel money,โ€ heย said.

Main image: Former U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis, left, and Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe April 26, 2018. Sen. Inhofe has received more than $2 million in donations from the oil and gas industry. Credit: U.S. Department of Defense/Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Dominique A. Pineiro, publicย domain

image_50427649
Dana is an environmental journalist focusing on climate change and climate accountability reporting. She writes regularly for DeSmog covering topics such as fossil fuel industry opposition to climate action, climate change lawsuits, greenwashing and false climate solutions, and clean transportation.

Related Posts

on

The boss of the UKโ€™s largest gas supplier is listed as a representative of an African NGO.

The boss of the UKโ€™s largest gas supplier is listed as a representative of an African NGO.
Analysis
on

With spotlight on politicians and their pledges in Baku, fossil fuel lobbyists are racking up private meetings with Trudeauโ€™s government.

With spotlight on politicians and their pledges in Baku, fossil fuel lobbyists are racking up private meetings with Trudeauโ€™s government.
on

An open letter from climate scientists and campaigners warns of the dangers associated with false climate claims.

An open letter from climate scientists and campaigners warns of the dangers associated with false climate claims.
on

Zeldin is part of the America First Policy Institute, a pro-Trump think tank Dunn founded that pushes anti-climate policies.

Zeldin is part of the America First Policy Institute, a pro-Trump think tank Dunn founded that pushes anti-climate policies.