Karl Rove's 2011 Election Priority: Busting Public-Sector Unions in Ohio

Original Link: http://www.thenation.com/blog/164168/karl-roves-2011-election-priority-busting-public-sector-unions-ohio

By John Nichols

Mitt Romney swept into Ohio Tuesday to talk about how much he agrees with Republican Governor John Kasich’s aggressive approach to budget issues. He even visited a call center where Republicans were trying to stir up support for Kasich’s signature initiative: a sweeping assault on labor rights so controversial that it faces a “citizen veto” in a November 8 statewide vote.

But, with new polling showing that Ohioans are overwhelmingly opposed to Kasich’s law (a fresh Quinnipiac University poll has voters favoring the repeal of the anti-labor law by a 57–32 margin), Romney blurred the message. Instead of the expected encourargement of a “yes” vote to keep the law on the votes, Romney praised Kasicg and then waffled on the referendum—saying he’s leave the issue up to the voters. It was a messy moment in a messy campaign.

So what the heck was Romney doing in Ohio? Why was the Republican presidential contender veering off his own campaign trail to spend time in a state that won’t hold its presidential primary until June of 2012? And why was he struggling to play all sides of the labor fight?

What’s happening in Ohio this fall is about more than Ohio.

The vote on Kasich’s anti-labor law—which was scheduled after 1.3 million Ohioans signed petitions supporting a repeal effort—is a key contest in the “Karl Rove” primary. Rove has not endorsed a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. But he’s pretty obviously leaning toward Romney—just ask the recently affronted Herman Cain. Romney wants to be where Rove says to go; he also wants Kasich’s endorsement, as part of a strategy that seeks to reprise the game plan Rove constructed for George W. Bush in 2000, which counted on the backing of Republican governors to help secure the GOP nod.

Rove has for months been indicating that Republicans had better put Ohio on their schedules this fall if they want support next fall.

Since March, when Governor Kasich and his legislative allies moved to strip away the collective-bargaining rights of Ohio’s state, county and municipal employees, as well as teachers—and to render their unions politically dysfunctional—Rove has led the cheering section.
The former White House political czar, who promises he that groups he controls will spend $250 million nationally in the upcoming election cycle, has:

• set up a Government Union Reform Action Center to coordinate anti-labor work in states such as Ohio and Wisconsin
• written columns for the Wall Street Journal about the Ohio and Wisconsin fights
• appeared frequently on Fox News to talk up the importance of what Kasich—an old political ally—has done
• launched a cable advertising campaign attacking the unions that have fought Kasich and the Democrats who have aligned with them
• made Ohio a regular stop on his speaking and political consulting schedule, visiting as recently as late September.

Why the fascination?

Rove has always been obsessed with breaking up and breaking down public-employee unions. On the list of the issues that his heavily funded group Crossroads GPS ranks as top priorities, the highest-ranking specific fight is against organized labor in the states. “It’s time,” declares the message from Rove’s Government Union Reform Action Center, “government stood up for American taxpayers, not the unionized bureaucrat elite.”

Ohio’s November 8 referendum vote has become mission-critical for the people who pull the strings in the national Republican Party, and the network of conservative groups that has powered the party’s surge since the US Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling allowed for unlimited corporate donations to supposedly “independent” organizations.

Rove has made no secret of his determination to protect Kasich and the anti-labor law that was enacted in March despite mass demonstrations by unions and their allies. The Ohio law is actually more draconian in its efforts to diminish the role of unions in the workplace and in political campaigns than the measure that was enacted at the behest of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, and that excited Rove. “Both sets of reforms give local and state governments flexibility to deal with budget shortfalls and looming deficits, rein in unfunded pension liabilities, return control of personnel policies to elected officials, and end counterproductive workplace practices demanded by unions,” chirped Rove in March. “Yet all in all, labor law experts consider Ohio’s new law stronger, broader and more wide-ranging than Wisconsin’s.”

Rove didn’t just talk up the Ohio labor law change. He put his money where his mouth was.
In March, Rove’s Crossroads GPS group launched a $750,000 cable television advertising campaign that demanded to know, “Why are Democrats shutting down state capitols to protect a system that pays unionized government workers 42% more than non-union workers?”

That was a false claim; an Economic Policy Institute study found that public employees were actually under-compensated in comparison with their private-sector counterparts.

The advertising Rove aired in March attacked not just public-employee unions but President Obama, claiming that he was aiding unions that—through their political activities—pose “a threat to democracy.”

It was an absurd charge.

But Rove wasn’t worried about truth or falsehood.

The political strategist was putting his marker down, identifying the Ohio fight as central to the Republican and conservative causes.

He hasn’t backed off. According to the Columbus Dispatch, the shadowy group that was set up to preserve Kasich’s anti-labor law—Building a Better Ohio—expects to spend as much as $20 million on this fall’s campaign. And it is Building a Better Ohio that has been a Rove-style campaign to confuse Ohio voters, and to demonize public employees and their unions.

Building a Better Ohio is running a big-budget campaig. And so are other groups, such as Make Ohio Great—which is backed by Republican operatives and donors around the country—and Liz Cheney’s Alliance for America’s Future, which are playing big in a campaign that will see the same level of spending as a hotly contested gubernatorial or US Senate contest. In fact, the tens of millions spent in Ohio will rival what was spent to win the state in recent presidential elections.

How much of that money is coming from Rove and the billionaire CEOs and hedge-fund mangers associated with his American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS groups? Building a Better Ohio isn’t saying. The group was established as a nonprofit 501(c)4 organization, so that it doesn’t have to reveal its donor list.

The same goes for Make Ohio Great, Cheney’s Alliance for America’s Future and other groups that are backing Kasich’s position.

But no one imagines that Rove—whose Crossroads groups were big players in Ohio in 2010, who promises that they will be even bigger players in 2012 and who has been so outspoken in his support for Kasich’s anti-labor initiative—has been sitting on the sidelines.

Thousands of Ohioans have signed petitions asking Building a Better Ohio to reveal the sources of its funding. “The voters of Ohio—while deciding on which side of Issue 2 they will fall—need to know who is finding the distortions Building a Better Ohio is running other television sets. They deserve to see the list of corporate-backed allies supporting the anti-worker referendum as they make their decision on November 8th,” reads the petition. “The very integrity of our democracy relies on such principles of transparency.”

True enough. But Karl Rove, American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS are not about transparency. Nor is there any indication that Building a Better Ohio will open its books.
Still, the Rove connection is on display this week.

With his criticisms of Rick Perry and Herman Cain, Rove has left little doubt of his leanings in the Republican presidential race. (Rove claims to “have no personal favorite” in the race, but Cain says Rove’s helping Rpmney as part of “a deliberate attempt to damage me because I am not, quote unquote, the establishment choice.”)

As for Romney, he has made no secret of the fact that he would like to enjoy the support of Rove and the network of political organizations that Rove says will spend $250 million in the 2012 election cycle.

So it won’t come as any surprise that Romney’s visiting Cincinnati Tuesday to pump up Republican campaigners for a a “yes” vote on Issue 2—even as the wishy-washy candidate tries to have things both ways by avoiding an express endorsement of Building a Better Ohio’s campaign.
As bumbling as it was, Romney’s was an orchestrated visit, organized and encouraged by the Republican establishment and the corporate infrastructure that sustains it.

Karl Rove has let every Republican know that he is all about Ohio. The question is whether his money and manipulations will succeed in saving an anti-labor law that Rove has been hailing since March—and that has become the top priority of the conservative movement in this year’s election cycle.

Right-Wing Funds State News Source

Original Link: http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/10/10971/franklin-center-right-wing-funds-state-news-source

By Sara Jerving

As newsrooms across the country shave off staff due in part to slipping ad revenue and corporate media conglomeration, the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, is rushing to fill the gap. The group has 43 state news websites, with writers in over 40 states. Its reporters have been given state house press credentials and its news articles are starting to appear in mainstream print newspapers in each state. Who funds Franklin and what is its agenda?

The Funding Trail Leads to Bradley, Koch, and Other Right-Wing Groups

The websites started sprouting up in 2009. Some of these new sites go by the moniker "Reporter" as with the Franklin Center's Wisconsin Reporter that was launched in January as a website and wire-like service. Others have taken the shared name of "Watchdog.org," or "Statehouse News." The websites all offer their content free to local press -- many of the news bureaus send out their articles to state editors every day. The sites also offer free national stories that media can receive daily by subscribing.

The websites are coordinated and funded by a new non-profit group that calls itself the "Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity." The Franklin Center told the Center for Media and Democracy that it does not disclose its funders, but some of its funding can been uncovered from foundation reports. Franklin acts as a hub that distributes funding that it receives from right-wing institutions such as the Wisconsin-based Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation and the Chicago-based Sam Adams Alliance. The North Dakota and DC-based center works with reporters embedded in conservative think tanks and others who have their own news bureaus.

According to Media Transparency, a media watchdog group that was acquired by Media Matters Action Network in 2008, the Bradley Foundation's clear political agenda and network has allowed it to have extensive influence on public policy. The media group notes that while the Foundation's "targets range from affirmative action to social security, it has seen its greatest successes in the area of welfare 'reform' and attempts to privatize public education through the promotion of school vouchers." The Bradley Foundation gave the Franklin Center $190,500 last year.
The Franklin Center was launched with the help of Sam Adams Alliance, which calls itself "SAM." The CEO of SAM, Eric O'Keefe, has been featured at events funded by David Koch's right-wing group called "Americans for Prosperity" (AFP). As the Center for Media and Democracy/PRWatch.org has previously noted, O'Keefe frequently and positively profiles the Tea Party and attacks health care reform and other progressive ideas. He also helped launch the "American Majority" group which trains conservatives to run for office. He sits on the Board of Directors of the Club for Growth Wisconsin, which ran divisive ads in support of Scott Walker's radical overhaul of collective bargaining rights for Wisconsin workers. He previously worked for David Koch's AFP predecessor group named "Citizens for a Sound Economy," among other roles.
O'Keefe's latest enterprise, SAM, gets part of its funding from the State Policy Network (SPN), which is partially funded by The Claude R. Lambe Foundation. Charles Koch, one of the billionaire brothers who co-own Koch Industries, and his wife and children, along with long-time Koch employee Richard Fink, comprise the board of this foundation. SAM is named after Founding Father Sam Adams, one of the leaders in the Boston Tea Party tax protests.

In its first year, the Franklin Center had a budget of $2.9 million, much of it from O'Keefe's SAM.

"Franklin Center" Staffed by Right-Wing Activists

Many Franklin staffers have ties to conservative activist groups and the GOP. The Franklin Center’s president, Jason Stverak, is the former Regional Field Director for SAM, and former Executive Director of the North Dakota Republican Party.

In late July, Erik Telford, the Director of Membership Online Strategy for Koch's AFP, announced that he would take on the position of Vice President for Strategic Initiatives Outreach for the Franklin Center. He had worked at AFP for four and a half years. In his farewell letter, he minced no words in explaining the activist role he will play in his new position, "As I move on to a new challenge, I look forward to staying involved with AFP, but now in an even more important capacity: that of a member and grassroots activist."

The Franklin Center's Director of Donor Relations, Matt Hauck, is a former Associate at the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation. The center's Chief of Staff, Gwen Beattie, is the former Director of Development and Operations at America's Future Foundation, an organization committed to "identify and develop the next generation of conservative and libertarian leaders." The Franklin Center's 2009 IRS 990 form lists Rudie Martinson as director and secretary. He formerly worked as the assistant state director for North Dakota's chapter of Koch's Americans for Prosperity.

The Franklin Center was one of the sponsors of the Western Republican presidential candidate debate in Las Vegas this month, along with Americans for Prosperity and other right-wing groups.

Interestingly, unlike traditional journalistic outlets, the screening process for writing for websites like the Wisconsin Reporter asks applicants ideological questions. As the Poynter Institute, a Florida-based school and resource for journalists, has reported, Wisconsin Reporter applicants must answer questions like: “How do free markets help the poor?” and “Do higher taxes lead to balanced budgets?” Such queries likely have optimal answers to a group like the Wisconsin Reporter, just as some of its stories have been criticized for being results-oriented in ways that are consistent with its funders' world view.

The address listed on the Franklin Center's 2011 nonprofit disclosure form is a UPS Store Post Office box, as reported by a North Dakota political blog. The North Dakota phone line on the Franklin Center contact page is re-routed to the DC office.

"The Franklin Center" Supports the American Legislative Exchange Council

At the 2011 American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) annual conference in New Orleans, The Franklin Center was listed as a "Vice-Chairman" level sponsor of the ALEC conference. In 2010, this equated to a gift of at least $25,000. It was also one of about 60 companies and institutions represented in the conference exhibition hall. ALEC brings corporations, such as Koch Industries, and state legislators together in task forces to vote on so-called “model legislation” that benefits the corporate bottom line or ALEC's ideological agenda. These bills are then introduced by legislators in state houses across the country, without any mention that corporations previously approved such legislation behind closed doors, as the Center for Media and Democracy has reported.

Sloppy Reporting, or Manufacturing News?

In August 2010, the West Virginia Watchdog blog reported that an unnamed source said that the former Democratic Governor Joe Manchin's office had been subpoenaed as part of a federal grand jury investigation. The story said that the subpoenas asked for contracts and records for businesses that have done work at the governor’s mansion. "The target may be Manchin himself, according to a source who asked to remain anonymous," the original story said.

The governor’s office responded saying that “Neither subpoena was directed to Governor Manchin or the Governor’s Office. No individual in the Governor’s Office was served with a subpoena…. The State has not been informed that Governor Manchin or any other state employee is under investigation.” The West Virginia Watchdog updated its site with these statements then reported that their "source was ultimately wrong about the purpose of the subpoenas." But the damage had been done. The article was picked up by the Associated Press, Charleston CBS affiliate, Charleston Daily Mail, and other news sites. The story also was reported in outlets like Politico and CNN. The reporter who broke the story is stationed at the Public Policy Foundation of West Virginia. While this group does not disclose its funders, some outlets have alleged it to be linked to the Koch brothers.
The timing was convenient. Manchin had announced in July of that year he would run to fill the unexpired term of U.S. Senator Robert Byrd, who passed away in 2010. Despite the controversy, Manchin did end up taking Byrd's seat.

In February, the Franklin Center's Wisconsin Reporter sponsored a questionable poll asserting that 71% of state residents thought Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's budget proposal to cut the collective bargaining rights of most of the state's public sector workers was "fair." Several local and national news outlets cited the poll without investigation, including MSNBC. The result seemed completely out of whack with other polling leading some to question the source. The same month, We Ask America, largely owned by the Illinois Manufacturing Association, a leading business organization in the region, conducted a similar poll surveying 2,400 Wisconsin residents and found that 52 percent opposed Walker's plan. The Franklin Center's poll was conducted by Pulse Opinion Research.

In 2009, the New Mexico Watchdog reported that based on data from Recovery.gov, millions of dollars were spent in non-existent congressional districts in the state. The story picked up steam among reporters, even turned into a Colbert Report segment called "Know your Made-up District." The Franklin Center released a national report that said $6.4 billion in stimulus money had been spent in hundreds of “phantom” congressional districts. There was truth to the New Mexico Watchdog report, but it turned out, as reported by the Associated Press, that the culprit was an error-ridden government database. The funds were actually distributed to the right recipients, but errors, such as zip codes entered incorrectly, accounted for the "phantom districts." The money had not, as the report suggested, been unaccounted for or misused.

Even with this new information on the shortfalls of the Recovery.gov site, the Franklin Center failed to set the record straight. In its 2010 Annual report, the Center boasted it broke the story that federal stimulus money was allocated to 440 non-existing congressional districts. It did not mention the errors in the database, but let the record stand as a story of government waste.

Franklin Center Comes Under Fire From Journalism Watchdogs

The journalistic integrity of these sites has been called into question by media watchdog groups. Laura McGann, assistant editor at the Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard University, wrote in a 2010 piece in the Washington Monthly, that the Franklin Center sites are engaging in distorted reporting across the country.

"As often as not, their reporting is thin and missing important context, which occasionally leads to gross distortions," wrote McGann, who pointed to several instances where the Watchdog websites wrote stories that turned out to be misleading or untrue.
"This sort of misleading reporting crops up on Watchdog sites often enough to suggest that, rather than isolated instances of sloppiness, it is part of a broad editorial strategy," she wrote.
The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, using a sliding scale of highly ideological, somewhat ideological and non-ideological, ranked the “Watchdog.org” franchise "highly ideological." Not surprisingly, Glenn Beck, a controversial conservative FOX talk show host, has touted the Franklin Center's network as a nonpartisan trusted source of news and information.
Writers affiliated with Franklin Center groups are asking for accreditation in various legislatures.
Responding to criticisms from the Neiman Foundation, Jason Stverak said: "Obviously, there is skepticism coming from some in the traditional legacy media…. We write for the people, and the content that we produce is at such a high-quality level that it is continually being embraced by consumers in each community."

New Breed of Reporting

Graeme Zielinski, Wisconsin Democratic Party spokesperson, accused the Wisconsin Reporter of using off-the-record comments, butchering quotes, and not correcting the record when errors were called to its attention.

Zielinski told the Center for Media and Democracy that he's never worked with a news outlet that operates like the Wisconsin Reporter. He acknowledges that other outlets across the state are biased, but the difference, he said, is that the Wisconsin Reporter's content is ideologically-motivated and passed off in newspapers across the state as "straight-shooting reporting." He calls their methods of journalism "ambush reporting." He said he has received calls late in the evening and early in the morning on weekends from their reporters, given a short deadline to comment on slanted and inflammatory statements.

Yet, this newsource is gaining traction in the state. Wisconsin Reporter's stories have been picked up by a host of local media outlets in the state, such as La Crosse Tribune, Eau Claire’s Leader Telegram, Wausau Daily Herald, Steven's Point Journal, Chippewa Herald, and Beloit Daily News.
Dave Zweifel, co-founder and long-serving president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, and editor of the Madison-based Capital Times, told the Center for Media and Democracy that the Wisconsin Reporter is a new breed of news reporting. "Of course, many news organizations are owned by corporations or supported by politically active donors, but most keep a hands off approach when it comes to covering the news," he said. "This outfit masks itself as an investigative journalism service that provides free content to newspapers, many of which are cash-strapped these days, and eager for such a product.... You have to give these guys credit for capturing the moment when the press is particularly vulnerable."

This manner of producing and distributing 'news' is such a clever idea that its inspired other right-wing think tanks to devote resource to news production. The Heritage Foundation launched the "Scribe," a blog that features reports complimentary to the Foundation's stance on policy issues. It cites the Franklin Center's successes in expanding think tank journalism as a reason for its launch.

Will you help Senator Sanders Expose the Koch Echo Chamber?

Original Link: http://www.bravenewfoundation.org/2011/06/press/video-will-you-help-senator-sanders-expose-the-koch-echo-chamber/

By GottaLaff

EXPOSE THE KOCHS: The Koch brothers fund multiple think tanks and academic centers to promote their ideology and grow their profits, a Brave New Foundation investigation reveals. Let’s create an echo chamber of truth by using YouTube’s SHARE tools above to protect Social Security and counter the Koch billions. http://KochBrothersExposed.com/socialsecurity

The FACTS:

1. Social Security belongs to you—the workers who contribute to it—not the politicians in Washington.
2. Social Security will never go bankrupt. Its major source of income comes from the contributions of workers and employers; as long as there are workers, Social Security will have income. Closing tax loopholes for wealthy individuals will increase the long term financial health of the program, and protect it for decades to come.
3. Raising the retirement age is a terrible idea and a large benefit cut. If you were claiming benefits as a 66 year-old retired worker and the full retirement age was changed from 66, where it is today, to 69 your benefits would be cut 20 percent. A typical benefit would drop from $14,000 a year to $11,200 a year.
4. Privatizing Social Security would be a disaster. Social Security is so valuable because it provides a guaranteed benefit. Privatizing Social Security would remove this guarantee and have people gamble their retirement savings in the casinos of Wall Street. If the recent financial crisis taught us anything, Wall Street is the last place where our money is safe.
5. For more information, check out the Strengthen Social Security Campaign.

The 1% Loves Socialism

Original Link: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article31244.html

By Scott Cruickshank

You’ll notice if you’ve been paying attention to the war of propaganda that the 1% and their obedient lickspittles are going all out to frame the 99% VS. 1% showdown as a battle between Capitalists and Commies. Capitalism of course being good, socialism bad. I laugh every time I hear it because logic and common sense just doesn’t support the spin.

What happens when a new 10,000 unit section 8 HUD complex is built in Chicago or Cleveland or Baltimore, wherever? First thing the government does is borrow the money. Who do they borrow it from? Bankers. Bankers love interest payments, bankers love socialism. Next thing they do is take bids from construction companies to build it. Who builds it. The nation’s largest construction contractors. Construction contractors love high paying, built-by-the-lowest-bidder jobs. Construction companies love socialism. Once the structure is built it must be made habitable. The place needs 10,000 stoves, 10,000 refrigerators, 20,000, ceiling fans 5 million miscellaneous electrical fixtures and about 1 million light bulbs. Who provides all that stuff? General Electric. General Electric loves socialism. General Electric loves socialism so much it even went as far as buying the National Broadcasting Company in 1986 to sing its praises throughout the land 24 hours a day 7 days a week. They love it even more when they don’t have to contribute to the socialist state by paying taxes.

Socialism is the last thing the 1% want to see driven out of America. It makes them so much money. The bankers are such fans of socialism that they have so far donated more money to the Obama re-election campaign than to all other Republican hopefuls combined, according to the Washington Post. Those people don’t want to see and end to big government. Big governments borrow money. And it isn’t just socialism, they love the full monty. The last 20 years the Capitalists have been running into communist China as fast as their little feet can take them. Odd for a bunch of dedicated Capitalists isn’t it? The truth of the matter is the 1% don’t care either way. They do whatever it takes to make money. They don’t believe in Capitalism or communism. They believe in interest. Naked self serving interest… and money. That’s all they believe in. Their morals and beliefs are purely situational. If your home sits on a parcel of land they need to build a warehouse for their communist made imports, they have the government force you out of it. They tell you it’s all for the collective good of society that you got the boot. Total by the book Karl Marx communism. The sanctity of private property, they don‘t care. As long as it’s not their property. Talk about nationalizing one of their businesses and all of the sudden then it’s all about private property and freedom... Ayn Rand said ... blah, blah, blah.

Even the blowhards on FOX do their best to support the ripoff system. Only they work on the other angle, keeping the big government tax and borrow and spend war on terrorism and military rackets operating at peak profit generating capacity. There are no small government, balanced budget beliefs in that bunch.

It’s time we took a lesson from the 1%. They gave us communism and capitalism to keep us happy while they looted the place. We can pick one we like and thank god or man we have it, because if we didn’t things would be even worse. The 1% Communists blame all their problems on the bourgeois pigs, the 1% Capitalists blame all theirs on commie pigs. And the 99% eat the crap sandwich they are handed and are grateful to have it. That’s the way the 1% has always liked it. They rip you off and you blame someone else. It‘s time the 99% put aside the foolish isms and started looking out for their own interests. Nothing but pure, naked, self serving interest. What’s good for the 99% is good for America. So what if eliminating child labor is a plank of the communist manifesto. It’s good for you. You don’t want your 10 year old kids working in coal mines and you don’t want them driving down the price of your labor. And if the city smoking ban has killed business at the restaurant you work at, then work to kill the smoking ban and return the right to decide who smokes and when to the owner of the property. That’s capitalism. So what, it’s good for you. From now on you do what’s good for you, period. It’s worked for the 1% pretty well.

The Koch Brothers

Original Link: http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/peopleandpower/2011/10/2011102683719370179.html

By Bob Abeshouse

People & Power asks if the tycoon duo's fortune could put the radical right into the White House.

Charles and David Koch are each worth about $25bn, which makes them the fourth richest Americans. When you combine their fortunes, they are the third wealthiest people in the world. Radical libertarians who use their money to oppose government and virtually all regulation as interference with the free market, the Kochs are in a class of their own as players on the American political stage. Their web of influence in the US stretches from state capitals to the halls of congress in Washington DC.

The Koch brothers fueled the conservative Tea Party movement that vigorously opposes Barack Obama, the US president. They fund efforts to derail action on global warming, and support politicians who object to raising taxes on corporations or the wealthy to help fix America’s fiscal problems. According to New Yorker writer Jane Mayer, who wrote a groundbreaking exposé of the Kochs in 2010, they have built a top to bottom operation to shape public policy that has been "incredibly effective. They are so rich that their pockets are almost bottomless, and they can keep pouring money into this whole process".

Koch industries, the second largest privately-held company in the US, is an oil refining, chemical, paper products and financial services company with revenues of a $100bn a year. Virtually every American household has some Koch product - from paper towels and lumber, to Stainmaster carpet and Lycra in sports clothes, to gasoline for cars. The Koch’s political philosophy of rolling back environmental and financial regulations is also beneficial to their business interests.

The Kochs rarely talk to the press, and conduct their affairs behind closed doors. But at a secret meeting of conservative activists and funders the Kochs held in Vail, Colorado this past summer, someone made undercover recordings. One caught Charles Koch urging participants to dig deep into their pockets to defeat Obama. "This is the mother of all wars we've got in the next 18 months," he says, "for the life or death of this country." He called out the names of 31 people at the Vail meeting who each contributed more than $1m over the past 12 months.

In the 2010 congressional elections, the Kochs and their partners spent at least $40m, helping to swing the balance of power in the US House of Representatives towards right-wing Tea Party Republicans. It has been reported that the Kochs are planning to raise and spend more than $200m to defeat Obama in 2012. But the brothers could easily kick in more without anyone knowing due to loopholes in US law.

The Kochs founded and provide millions to Americans for Prosperity, a political organisation that builds grassroots support for conservative causes and candidates. Americans for Prosperity, which has 33 state chapters and claims to have about two million members, has close ties to Tea Party groups and played a key role in opposing Obama's health care initiative.

This year, Americans for Prosperity spent at least half a million dollars supporting Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's efforts to cut social spending and roll back collective bargaining rights for public employee unions. The legislation passed by Walker makes it more difficult for unions, which are major backers of Democratic candidates, to secure funds for political purposes. Americans for Prosperity is also very active in a battle against unions in Ohio, another important 2012 presidential state. Its president, Tim Phillips, says that the organisation is winning in Wisconsin and around the country "because on the policies of economic freedom, we're right". He refused to tell People & Power reporter Bob Abeshouse how much the organisation is spending to combat the unions.

The Kochs have also poured millions into think tanks and academia to influence the battle over ideas. According to Kert Davies, the director of research for Greenpeace in the US, the Kochs have spent more than $50m since 1998 on "various front groups and think tanks who ... oppose the consensus view that climate change is real, urgent and we have to do something about it". As operators of oil pipelines and refineries, the Kochs have opposed all efforts to encourage alternative sources of energy by imposing a tax on fossil fuels.

Patrick Michaels, a senior fellow at the CATO Institute, often appears in the media to contest global warming science. CATO was founded by Charles Koch, and the Kochs and their foundations have contributed about $14m to CATO. Since 2009, there has been a sharp drop in the percentage of Americans who see global warming as a serious threat according to Gallup polls. Davies argues that the change can be attributed in large measure to the efforts of scientists like Michaels and others who are funded by the fossil fuel industry.

The Kochs have also promoted their free market ideology and business interests through aggressive lobbying in Washington DC, and financial support of political candidates. Greenpeace has tracked more than $50m that Koch Industries has spent on lobbyists since 2006, when Cap and Trade and other legislation to combat global warming was being considered. The Kochs have been the largest political spender since 2000 in the energy sector, exceeding Exxon, Chevron, and other major players.

The Kochs contributed to 62 of the 87 new members of the US House of Representatives in 2010. Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that the Kochs supported have taken the lead in opposing US Environmental Protection Agency efforts to reduce global warming emissions. Other members backed by the Kochs belong to the right-wing Tea Party bloc that took the US to the brink of default in July by refusing to consider a budget deal that would include tax increases.

In 2012, many believe that President Obama can raise a billion dollars for the presidential race, and break all fundraising records. But as Lee Fang of the Center for American Progress tells reporter Bob Abeshouse, in the end it may not matter "because the Koch brothers alone increased their wealth by $11bn in the last two years".

What's That Smell? Keystone XL

Original Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-brune/keystone-xl-pipeline_b_1007611.html

By Michael Brune

Three months ago, I wrote an op-ed for the L.A. Times that listed the "Koch brothers-backed" Keystone XL pipeline for dirty tar-sands oil as one of the most important environmental issues confronting President Obama. That prompted a stern missive from the Legal Department at Koch Industries, which even got the Times to run a correction saying that Koch Industries "says it has no involvement in the project."

Only problem: It now turns out that three years ago a Canadian subsidiary of Koch Industries said exactly the opposite: That it had "a direct and substantial interest" in seeing the Keystone XL pipeline approved. Whoops.

But, really, I feel like I've been vindicated for observing that "the sun rises in the east." Let's get real here. No reasonable person could have doubted that the Koch brothers, who are in the tar-sands business up to their Windsor-knotted neckties, could possibly not have been in favor of the Keystone XL. (Note to the good folks at Koch Industries Legal Dept: This is called poetic license. I humbly confess that I have no idea how Charles and David knot their ties, so please don't come seize my house.)

Unfortunately, the hypocrisy of the Koch brothers pales in comparison to the State Department's role in the Keystone XL debacle. Last summer, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that her department would leave "no stone unturned" as it prepared its Environmental Impact report. But when the report appeared, there were unturned stones everywhere:

• No study of the consequences of a raw tar-sands oil spills or the difficulties of cleaning up the inevitable spills was done.
• No analysis of the clean-energy alternatives to the pipeline or of how extracting Canadian tar sands oil would affect their development.
• No serious assessment of alternatives to a route that crosses the Ogallala Aquifer (which underlies more than a quarter of our country's irrigated land).
• No study of how more pollution would affect Gulf refinery towns like Port Arthur, TX, which is already one of our country's most polluted communities.
• No analysis of the impact on wildlife, such as the lesser sandhill cranes that use Nebraska's central Platte River valley as a stopover on their migration north.
• An incomplete and faulty analysis of how extracting and burning tar-sands oil will affect climate disruption.

There's more, but you get the gist. How could the Department of State have gotten it so wrong? Keystone XL, after all, is a 1,700-mile pipeline that will do nothing for Americans except seize their land through eminent domain, expose them to catastrophic oil spills and toxic pollution, and make domestic gas more expensive -- all so a foreign oil company, TransCanada, can ship its tar-sands oil overseas from our ports. It's such a bad idea that, in Texas, the Sierra Club and the Tea Party actually allied to oppose it (I think the sun actually did rise in the west on that day).

Sorry to say, the answer is that this was government at its most tawdry. The Department of State allowed a former Clinton campaign staff member, working as a TransCanada lobbyist, inappropriate access to high level officials within the Department and hired a biased pro-oil contracting firm to do the actual evaluation and run public hearings.

The more Americans learn about Keystone XL and the big-money campaign behind it, the worse the whole thing smells. Whether or not to permit this travesty is still one of the most important decisions facing President Obama. It's time for him to clear the air, kill this Koch brothers-backed pipeline, and let the State Department get back to issuing passports and visas.

Herman Cain: ‘I’m Very Proud Of The Relationship That I Have With The Koch Brothers’

Original Link: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/10/18/346496/herman-cain-im-very-proud-of-the-relationship-that-i-have-with-the-koch-brothers/

By Alex Seitz-Wald

Newly minted GOP frontrunner Herman Cain acknowledged his long relationship with the conservative billionaire industrialist brothers Charles and David Koch yesterday. Cain has “close” and “long ties” to the Koch Brothers, as the AP reported this week, likely making him the conservative political duo’s “favorite presidential candidate,” as ThinkProgress has noted. Yesterday, Cain told CNN he is “very proud of the relationship that I have with the Koch Brothers:”

CAIN: I know the Koch Brothers. The Koch Brothers helped to start to an organization called Americans for Prosperity. And I did some speaking when they were starting that organization, and I’m very proud of the relationship that I have with the Koch Brothers, as well as Americans for Prosperity. I have also attended some of their seminars and have found them very informative. So I don’t have a close relationship with the Koch Brothers, but I know them and I respect them, and they know me and respect me.

Cain’s campaign manager is the former president of the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity’s (AFP) Wisconsin chapter, his former spokesperson worked for the group’s Louisiana chapter, and his economic adviser was on their advisory board. Cain himself used to hold an official position with AFP as well. He also attended the brothers’ influential private biannual meeting, and has spoken at several events they sponsored.

Last night, ThinkProgress’ Scott Keyes appeared on MSNBC’s Politics Nation to discuss Cain’s ties with the Kochs.

Update

Richard Fink, the executive vice president of Koch Industries, offered praise for Cain today, telling the National Review that the company has “long admired Herman Cain”:

“We have long admired Herman Cain for his success in growing jobs and business in this country, and for his long-standing commitment to the values of economic freedom,” Fink says. “Although we have not formally committed to supporting any presidential candidate, we are certainly glad to see Mr. Cain confront the issues of runaway spending and stifling government interference that are holding back the economy and the lives of all Americans. Anyone that has spent time with Mr. Cain, as we have, can tell you he is a man of deep dedication to our nation and his independence of thought is obviously what is appealing to voters.”