[CRNMC] Oil Lobby sets new spending record in Sacramento

Sun May 4 11:57:05 PDT 2014

Sorry folks,

I forgot to put my signature on this.

Ed Oberweiser

On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 11:11 AM, karinajoy <karinacotler at gmail.com> wrote:

> Once again, a post without a signature. Just so everyone knows, there is a
> way to trace every email sent -- so don't think you can yank our chains and
> be invisible. I know who sent that mysterious post...
>
> Saw Gasland II last night. A must see!! The oil industry is illegally
> using PsyOps on the American people - treating us as "insurgents" and
> "eco-terrorists" for protecting our water, air and property rights. And
> they are blatantly teaching the use of lies to create uncertainty and
> confusion. We need to find a way to buy the rights to show this film all
> over the county.
>
> Blessings on this beautiful spring day!
>
> Karina
>
>
> On May 4, 2014, at 4:17 AM, Community Rights Network wrote:
>
> Western States Petroleum Association spent $6.1 million in 3 months
>
>  by Dan Bacher
>
>  The new numbers for the amount of money spent on lobbying in Sacramento
> in the first three months of 2014 just came in from the Secretary of
> State's Office and guess who finished first?
>
>  Yes, holding fast to number one is that august body of environmental
> stewardship known as the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA),
> "making sure lawmakers don't forget about the Big Oil little guy,"
> according to Stop Fooling California. (http://www.stopfoolingca.org)
>
>  The Western States Petroleum Association, the most powerful corporate
> lobbying group in Sacramento, spent $6.1 million in just 3 months.
> Amazingly, this is more money than the association has spent in any one
> year over the past five years!
>
>  The organization spent $5,331,493 in 2009, $4,013,813 in 2010,
> $4,273,664 in 2011, $5,698,917 in 2012 and $4,670,010 in 2013.
>
>  In spite of all of this money spent, a bill imposing a moratorium on
> fracking and acidizing for oil extraction in California passed through the
> Senate Environmental Quality Committee on April 30 by a 5 to 2 vote.
> Senators Mark Leno, Jerry Hill, Loni Hancock, Hannah-Beth Jackson and Fran
> Pavley voted for Senate Bill 1132, while Senators Ted Gaines and Jean
> Fuller voted against it.
>
>  Authored by Senators Holly Mitchell and Mark Leno, SB 1132 would require
> the Natural Resources Agency to facilitate an "independent scientific
> study" on well stimulation treatments (fracking and acidizing) and their
> hazards and risks to natural resources and public, occupational, and
> environmental health and safety by January 1, 2015.
>
>  “People must come before profits,” said Senator Mitchell after the vote.
> “My community needs jobs, but those jobs need to be safe for workers and
> surrounding communities.”
>
>  Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum
> Association and former Chair of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA)
> Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force to create so-called "marine protected
> areas" in Southern California, wasn't very happy with the results of the
> Committee vote, especially after her organization spent $6.1 million
> lobbying at the Capitol over the past three months. You can bet that her
> association and the oil companies will spend many millions more attempting
> to defeat this bill in the Legislature in coming months.
>
>  In her blog on the WSPA website (
> http://www.wspa.org/blog/post/where-and-whom-we-stand-sb-1132),
> Reheis-Boyd stated:
>
>  *"The passage of Senate Bill 1132 from the Senate’s Environmental
> Quality Committee is neither a surprise nor an indication that this poorly
> written legislation is gaining support. *
>
>  *While the theater of SB 1132 plays out in Sacramento, SB 4 is already
> the law of the land throughout California. Last year, Governor Brown signed
> into law regulations that received strong bipartisan support in the
> Assembly and Senate. Many of those 'rallying' around SB 1132 voted for SB
> 4, the strongest and most stringent regulation on hydraulic fracturing in
> the country. *
>
>  *Anti-oil activists are attempting to push hydraulic fracturing
> moratoriums in Sacramento and in local governments throughout the state – a
> strategy that just suffered a major setback. Their tactics include
> spreading misinformation about water use, chemicals, industry transparency,
> and jobs. *
>
>  *Shockingly, the anti-oil camp’s attacks on oil production reached new
> lows last week when several of the leading anti-oil groups took aim at
> petroleum industry workers when they dismissed as unwanted and unworthy the
> hundreds of thousands of jobs our industry supports. This disappointing
> tactic was summed up in the headline of a recent letter to the Los Angeles
> Times: 'Some jobs aren’t worth it.' *
>
>  *Of course the petroleum industry cares about California’s environment
> and water supply. This is why we believe SB 4 provides important and
> necessary oversight. Hydraulic fracturing is not just a new industry fad
> that was concocted for the sole purpose of harming humanity. The reality is
> quite the opposite. Lost in the hysteria is the historic fact that
> hydraulic fracturing has been employed in California for nearly six decades
> without environmental incident or hazard. It is why the United States is
> experiencing a welcome and rewarding energy renaissance that is benefiting
> consumers nationwide and dramatically improving our nation’s energy
> security."  *
>
>  Yes, Reheis-Boyd and her industry really "care" about California's
> environment and water supply. That's why she and her cohorts on the MLPA
> Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force made sure that the questionable "marine
> protected areas" created in Southern California under her "leadership" fail
> to protect the ocean from fracking, oil drilling, pollution, corporate
> aquaculture, military testing and all human impacts on the ocean other than
> fishing and gathering. (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/mpa/brtf_bios_sc.asp
> )
>
>  Reheis-Boyd, state officials and MLPA advocates ensured that these
> alleged "marine protected areas" were good for big oil and ocean
> industrialists - and bad for fishermen, tribal gatherers and the public
> trust.
>
>  In one of the biggest conflicts of interest in recent California
> history, Reheis-Boyd also "served" on the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Forces to
> create so-called "marine protected areas" on the North Coast, North Central
> Coast and Central Coast. She also currently sits on a federal "marine
> protected areas" panel.
>
>  As she was serving on these panels, the oil industry was engaging in a
> frenzy of environmentally destructive fracking operations off the Southern
> California coast, as revealed in an Associated Press and Freedom of
> Information Act investigation last year.
>
>  The process that Reheis-Boyd oversaw created "state marine reserves"
> that violate the traditional gathering rights of the Yurok Tribe and other
> California Indian Tribes to harvest seaweed, mussels and fish, as they have
> done for thousands of years. In addition, the privately funded process
> rejected numerous requests by Yurok Tribe scientists and lawyers to present
> scientific studies that countered the terminally flawed and incomplete
> "science," based on flawed assumptions. (
> http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2011/07/15/lop_yurok_6-29_11.pdf)
>
>  As Frankie Joe Myers, Yurok Tribe member and Coastal Justice Coalition
> organizer, said before a direct action protest against the MLPA Initiative
> in Fort Bragg in July 2010, “The whole process is inherently flawed by
> institutionalized racism. It doesn’t recognize Tribes as political
> entities, or Tribal biologists as legitimate scientists.” (
> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/07/24/18654645.php)
>
>  More recently, the industry that Reheis-Boyd says "cares about
> California's environment and water supply" was engaged in over 100
> violations of California’s new public disclosure rules for fracking and
> other dangerous oil production methods. The violations were uncovered by a
> Center for Biological Diversity analysis of records from the state, the oil
> industry and South Coast air quality regulators.
>
>  In a letter to Governor Jerry Brown, the Center pointed out that state
> regulators with the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources have
> failed to disclose legally mandated reports for 47 frack jobs and notices
> for more than 100 uses of other risky oil production techniques.
>
>  “This lack of disclosure underscores the failure of current regulations
> and the need for strong action that will protect public health and safety
> and the environment,” the letter says.
>
>  “Californians are in the dark about dangerous fracking in their
> communities because Gov. Brown’s oil regulators won’t follow their own
> minimal notification rules,” said Center attorney Hollin Kretzmann in a
> statement. “These regulatory failures are another reminder of the urgent
> need to halt fracking to protect our air and water from contamination. Gov.
> Brown must recognize that halting fracking and the other dangerous well
> stimulation methods is the only way to protect Californians."
>
>  The problems revealed by the Center’s analysis include the following:
>
>  • Missing Fracking Reports: At least 47 frack jobs conducted in Southern
> California in January and February do not have a well stimulation report on
> DOGGR’s website, despite a requirement that such documents be posted 60
> days after the fracking event.
>
>  • Late posting: Dozens of other fracking reports were posted late — and
> only after the Center informed state officials of the unlawful delay.
>
>  • Missing chemical data - Other fracking reports are missing critical
> information, including the chemical composition of fracking waste fluid and
> where this fluid was disposed of. A Kern County oil company was recently
> fined for disposing of such fracking wastewater in an unlined pit.
>
>  • Missing Acidizing Notices: The state’s website does not show notices
> for 57 uses of acidization in Orange and Los Angeles counties. Acidizing
> uses high quantities of hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids in combination
> with other harmful chemicals to dissolve oil-bearing formations
> underground.
>
>  • Missing Gravel Packing Notices: Gravel packing, a well stimulation
> method that uses dangerous chemicals, has occurred in Orange and Los
> Angeles counties approximately 51 times so far this year, according to the
> South Coast Air Quality Management District. Yet state oil regulators have
> not posted a notice of a single instance of gravel packing from anywhere in
> the state, despite regulations requiring such notification.
>
>  A recent Center report also found that fracking, acidizing and gravel
> packing operations employed 12 dangerous “air toxic” chemicals hundreds of
> times in the Los Angeles Basin over a period of a few months.
>
>  For more information, go to:
> http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/fracking-04-30-2014.html
>
>
>  If the petroleum industry really "cares about California’s environment
> and water supply" like Reheis-Boyd claims it does, why did the industry
> engage in 100 violations of California’s new public disclosure rules for
> fracking and other dangerous oil production methods, as documented in the
> Center for Biological Diversity's report?
>
>  You can bet that Reheis-Boyd's group and Big Oil will continue to spend
> millions this year to defeat Senate Bill 1132 and any other bill that
> challenges their plan to frack California. A ground breaking report
> released on April 1, 2014 by the ACCE Institute and Common Cause reveals
> that Big Oil spent $123.6 million to lobby elected officials in California
> over the past 15 years, an increase of over 400 percent since the 1999-2000
> legislative session, when the industry spent $4.8 million.
>
>  The report also examines historical campaign contributions by the
> largest firms in the oil and gas industry. Over the last fifteen years, Big
> Oil has spent $143.3 million on political candidates and campaigns – nearly
> $10 million per year and more than any other corporate lobby. (
> http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/14/how-big-oil-bought-sacramento/)
>
>  When combined, Big Oil's lobbying spending and campaign spending in
> Sacramento amounts to $266.9 million over 15 years.
>
>  Yet this is mere pocket change, the "cost of doing business" for the oil
> industry, since the industry makes many billions of dollars in profits
> every year as gas prices soar for consumers at the pumps. The oil industry
> has made over $31 billion in profits in 2014 to date. (
> http://www.stopfoolingca.org/)
>
>  Take Action Now!
>
>  As the oil industry plans the expansion of fracking under Senate Bill 4
> and gas prices soar at the pumps to boost oil industry profits, Governor
> Jerry Brown is fast tracking the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to
> build the peripheral tunnels. The proposed tunnels would divert Sacramento
> River water for use by corporate agribusiness interests, Southern
> California water agencies and oil companies expanding fracking and steam
> injection operations.
>
>  The construction of the twin tunnels would hasten the extinction of
> Central Valley salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other
> fish species, as well as imperil salmon and steelhead populations on the
> Trinity and Klamath rivers. The tunnels would not create one single drop of
> new water - and would do nothing to alleviate the current drought if they
> were in place right now.
>
>  On March 4, Restore the Delta and Food and Water Watch revealed that
> much of the area that the oil industry could frack for oil and natural gas
> in California is located in and near toxic, drainage-impaired land farmed
> by corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin
> Valley. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/03/05/18751984.php)
>
>  To sign a petition urging Governor Jerry Brown to ban fracking in
> California, go to the Food and Water Watch action alert:
> https://secure3.convio.net/fww/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=193
>
>   _______________________________________________
> crn mailing list
> crn at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> crn mailing list
> crn at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/options/crn
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/crn/attachments/20140504/2a4f2179/attachment.html 