Connect with us

Politics

Beto O’Rourke: Presidential Hopeful Lies, Accepts Over $500,000 In Oil and Gas Donations

Steven Li

Published

on

beto o'rourke

Climate change is a huge priority for a lot of Democratic candidates. In fact, the left tends to be unhappy with their colleagues on the Republican side, who often disagree with the notion that human activity contributes to climate change. Beto O’Rourke is one such politician who has been fairly vocal about the importance of tackling climate change head-on.

Despite the frustration surrounding certain Republican politicians dismissing climate change as a priority, at least it’s reasonable that said politicians take campaign contributions from big oil and gas companies. Arguably much worse are the Democrats who put on the guise that they care deeply about the issue of climate change or promise to not, yet still, take money from big oil and gas.

As the 2020 election is coming up, many prominent Democrats have announced their candidacy. Trust is always a huge part of our democracy; after all, Trump is hounded all the time for not being a president of his words.

So today, we dive into the actions of former Congressman, Beto O’Rourke, who has a serious problem keeping his word on raising funds from oil and gas.

Now, a lot of people like Beto O’Rourke. His run against Ted Cruz was an election to follow. Despite losing at the end, O’Rourke proved to be a force to be reckoned with. When he ran for president, the support was real. In fact, O’Rourke raised some $6.1 million within 24 hours of announcing his run.

The Numbers

All that said, O’Rourke has a serious problem with accepting money from oil and gas. At an event at the College of William and Mary, he said: “Not only do we not take PAC money, we don’t take any lobbyist money either…we won’t take any lobbyist money from oil and gas corporations.”

“Not only do we not take PAC money, we don’t take any lobbyist money either…we won’t take any lobbyist money from oil and gas corporations.”

Beto O’Rourke at an event at the College of William and Mary

But upon closer examination of campaign finance, O’Rourke has taken some $546,344 from individuals in oil and gas; that makes him the politician that raised the second most amount of money from oil and gas, after Ted Cruz. Now, you might think that O’Rourke might still be telling the truth about not taking lobbyist money (or from CEOs).

According to the Federal Election Commission, O’Rourke took money from the CEO of Sanchez Energy.

fec
Donation From the President and CEO of Sanchez Energy – Federal Election Commission

And according to Sludge, the O’Rourke campaign received $22,400 from eight executives associated with the Sanchez family businesses. Also, he’s taken $250 from a Chevron lobbyist. Now, that’s not a lot of money by any means, and O’Rourke plans to return the money, but it still shows the importance of keeping politicians accountable for their words.

Other 2020 Democratic candidates have taken from oil and gas too, including Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders. Kamala Harris, in particular, is a co-sponsor of the Green New Deal resolution.

Conclusions

Although it’s the duty of public servants to be honest to their constituents, the black box of campaign finance will make media and constituent involvement crucial. If a politician says something, he or she should act accordingly. And if not, they should be exposed. Constituents have every right to know who they’re truly voting for.

Politics

Australia Gets Flamed For Neglecting The Climate Emergency In The Pacific

Rich Bowden

Published

on

Australia gets flamed for its climate inaction

Former Tuvalu Prime Minister Enele Sopoaga has re-opened the controversy over Australia’s high-handed approach at this year’s Pacific Islands Forum. Australia has been accused of trying to silence Pacific leaders, like Sopoaga, who are demanding it to do more to combat climate change.

Tuvalu hosted the Pacific Islands Forum in August. 

At the forum, Australia pressured Sopoaga among other pro-climate action leaders from the Pacific, to accept a watered-down communique. Many leaders believe it would do little to combat the climate emergency in the Pacific.

Australia not tackling the Pacific’s unique climate challenges

Sopoaga told Australia’s SBS News he thought hosting the PIF forum in Tuvalu would highlight the challenges facing smaller Pacific nations. He said he sought to show countries like Australia the existential threat climate change poses to low-lying countries like Tuvalu.

However, he regretted that support was not forthcoming. Further, he didn’t like that Pacific leaders who spoke out on climate change had the chance to accept hush money.

“Putting this money on the table … and then expecting Pacific Island countries like Tuvalu to say ‘OK, we’ll stop talking about climate change’ … is completely irresponsible,” he added.

Sopoaga said action was needed at domestic level in countries such as Australia to have any effect.

“Any amount of money that is coming with the Step-Up [Pacific aid program] cannot be seen as an excuse for no action at a domestic level to cut down on greenhouse emissions.”

Climate change poses an existential threat to Tuvalu

Tuvalu, like a number of low-lying Pacific micro-nations, is under threat from climate change. The sea has almost claimed two of the nine islands. And with the highest point only 4.6 meters above sea level, locals fear they will one day be completely swamped. 

Home to just 11,000 people and an average of just 6.6 feet above sea level, Tuvalu is in danger. In fact, its people are already making plans to evacuate should sea levels rise further.

Sopoaga has previously rejected offers to relocate the people, saying it won’t make a significant difference.

“Moving outside of Tuvalu will not solve any climate change issues,” Sopoaga says. He adds, “If you put these people in the middle of industrialized countries it will simply boost their consumptions and increase greenhouse gas emissions,” as he told The Guardian in May. 

Sopoaga’s term as Tuvalu PM came to an end last month after losing a vote in the country’s parliament. The expectation is that his successor, Kausea Natano, will continue the call to action from the world on climate change.

Continue Reading

Politics

Brexit Is Overshadowing Climate Activism

Haider Sarwar

Published

on

Brexit

Due to the ongoing Brexit crisis in the United Kingdom, discussions regarding climate change legislation has been postponed. The European Union meets four times a year in Brussels, Belgium, and this past week the British Parliament asked for yet another extension on formulating a plan to decarbonize by 2050.

The 2050 Plan

In November 2018, the EU proposed to have its total carbon emissions reach a net-zero by 2050. This was a move unique to the EU, and it sought to motivate other countries such as the US and Brazil to follow its footsteps. Over half the members of the EU, including the UK, have signed onto this plan.

Critics have deemed this plan as ambitious and near impossible. Moreover, there is a lot of pressure on European governments from large industries. Still, there is hope for the EU to reach this goal as many of the members are adamant about decarbonizing all of Europe. The biggest obstacle to this plan, however, is the countries’ internal affairs. The prime example of this is the UK’s notorious Brexit plan.

Brexit’s Prolonged Existence

In June 2016, a referendum on whether to leave the European Union was held in the UK. Then, 51.6% of people voted to leave. Ever since, deals illustrating better ways for the UK to leave the EU have been proposed. Both the EU and the UK have shared and torn apart these deals. Today, the disagreements persist with a very obscure future. 

It is partly because of this ongoing issue that the EU was unable to present a proper plan for decarbonization at the UN climate summit last month. The aforementioned meeting in Brussels also illustrated that the UK won’t adopt the decarbonization plan. Many EU officials have expressed annoyance towards the UK for this reason. Climate activist Greta Thunberg further argued that if politicians and governments were serious about tackling climate change, they would not spend their time “talking about taxes and Brexit.”

The adoption of the 2050 plan from the UK is being pushed to take place in 2020. The EU has little interest in refusing the UK of an extension, too. This is because a chaotic no-deal scenario would be initiated by the EU, which would be less than advantageous. 

Internal issues such as Brexit have been an obstacle to the EU’s proposed climate action for years, now. It is essential for Great Britain to pull itself out of the ongoing issue to create a plan for the future.

Will The UK Set Aside Politics To Focus On Climate Change?

Many activists wish to see countries such as the UK set aside their politics to focus on more important issues like climate change. It is unclear how long it will take for the UK and the EU to finally reach an agreement about Brexit, but there is hope that this extension will be the last one.

Continue Reading

Politics

Congress Unveils First Bill To Address Climate Refugee Crisis

Ari Kelo

Published

on

Climate refugee

On Wednesday, the U.S. House of Representatives introduced a new bill to protect climate refugees.

The Climate Displaced Persons Act, written by Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.), would create a new federal program specifically for refugees displaced by climate change. If enacted into law, the U.S. would take in at least 50,000 climate refugees each year, beginning in 2020.

Although long overdue, backlash from both President Trump and the Republican-led Senate may stall any attempts to turn this bill into law. Regardless, this bill provides an important blueprint for future policies on climate-related migration.

And notably, this bill is the first of its kind to address the growing number of migrants displaced by climate change.

What is the Climate Displaced Persons Act?

Written in reaction to the rising number of people displaced by climate-related catastrophes, this bill would create an action plan on how the U.S. can help.

Since 2009, a climate-related disaster has displaced about one person every second. This rate accounts for extreme weather events, famine, drought, and rising sea levels, among other climate emergencies.

Overwhelmingly, 22.5 million people have been displaced due to climate change in the past decade. And the UN speculates that number could rise to 200 million forcibly displaced people by 2050.

Accordingly, this bill has two major aims. It intends to “establish a Global Climate Change Resilience Strategy and authorize the admission of climate-displaced persons,” according to its first draft.

In particular, the bill entails the U.S. taking on more responsibility in handling the global crisis.

It would create a humanitarian program separate from the U.S. refugee admissions program, specifically for those affected by climate change. The new program would guarantee the same benefits for climate refugees.

The legislation would also task the Secretary of State with devising a Global Climate Change Resilience Strategy. This is turn will create a Coordinator of Climate Resilience position within the State Department.

If made law, the bill will also provide a minimum of 50,000 climate migrants resettlement opportunities in the U.S. each year.

New legislation for climate refugees

To Rep. Velázquez, immigration policy must acknowledge the role of climate change.

“If we are going to meaningfully discuss comprehensive climate equity and climate justice, we must inject security assistance and resettlement opportunities for climate-displaced persons into our conversations,” she said in a press release.

So far, the U.S. has failed in this cause. Just last month, President Trump reduced the maximum refugee cap to 18,000 — a new low. And with his administration tightening up on immigration of all kinds, it’s unlikely he’ll loosen up on climate-related migration, to say the least.

But President Trump’s refusal to support climate science or immigration hasn’t dissuaded Rep. Velázquez.

“Despite this Administration’s efforts to strip the world’s most vulnerable populations of refuge, America will continue to stand tall as a safe haven for immigrants,” she insisted.

After its introduction on Wednesday, the House referred the bill to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. The Committees on the Judiciary and Energy and Commerce will also review the bill before the House continues its deliberation.

Democrat Edward Markey, a key supporter of the Green New Deal, has introduced a companion bill in the Senate.

Continue Reading

Trending

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap