(By Sheldon Whitehouse and Elizabeth
Warren, Washington Post, 09 August 2016)
The writers, both Democrats, represent Rhode
Island and Massachusetts, respectively, in the U.S. Senate.
For years,
ExxonMobil actively advanced the notion that its products had little or no
impact on the Earth’s environment. As recently as last year, it continued to
fund organizations that play down the risks of carbon pollution. So what did
ExxonMobil actually know about climate change? And when did it know it? Reasonable questions — particularly if
ExxonMobil misled its investors about the long-term prospects of its business
model or if the company fooled consumers into buying its products based on
false claims.
So now the attorneys
general of Massachusetts and New York are investigating whether ExxonMobil
violated state laws by knowingly misleading their residents and shareholders
about climate change. Those investigations may be making ExxonMobil executives
nervous, and their Republican friends in Congress are riding to the rescue.
House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) and his fellow committee Republicans
have issued subpoenas demanding that the state officials fork over all
materials relating to their investigations. They also targeted eight
organizations, including
the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Rockefeller Family Fund and Greenpeace,
with similar subpoenas, demanding that they turn over internal communications
related to what Smith describes as part of “coordinated efforts” to deprive ExxonMobil of its First
Amendment rights.
Take a breath to
absorb that: State attorneys general are investigating whether a fraud had been
committed — something state AGs do every day. Sometimes AGs uncover fraud and
sometimes they don’t, but if the evidence warrants it, the question of fraud
will be resolved in open court, with all the evidence on public display. But
instead of applauding the AGs for doing their jobs, this particular
investigation against this particular oil company has brought down the wrath of
congressional Republicans — and a swift effort to shut down the investigation
before any evidence becomes public. So far, both AGs and all eight
organizations have refused to comply. We say, good for them.
Let’s call this
what it is: a master class in how big corporations rig the system. According to the Center for Responsive
Politics, Smith has
received nearly $685,000 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas
industry during his career. Now he is using his committee to harass the
investigators and bully those who dare bring facts of possible corporate
malfeasance to their attention. Undoubtedly, the oil industry wants no further
attention, much less court-supervised discovery, into whether it has spent
decades deliberately deceiving the public about the harms associated with its
product. So here come Smith and his Republican colleagues with threats of legal
action designed to sidetrack state investigations and silence groups
petitioning the government to address potential wrongdoing.
There’s plenty
for the AGs to investigate. The Union of Concerned Scientists, for example,
issued a 2015 report, “Climate Deception Dossiers: Internal Fossil
Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation,” and a 2007 report, “Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil
Uses Big Tobacco’s Tactics to Manufacture Uncertainty on Climate Science.” Both
reports document how the industry has protected its bottom line by funding
front organizations and scientists to put out junk science contradicting what
peer-reviewed scientists, and even the industry’s own experts, were saying
about how its products affected the environment.
Union of
Concerned Scientists President Ken Kimmell rightly dismissed the committee’s request, saying, “Mr. Smith makes no allegation
that UCS violated any laws or regulations, and his claim, that providing
information to attorneys general infringes on ExxonMobil’s rights, is
nonsense.” Massachusetts Attorney
General Maura Healey and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman are also
fighting back. In separate letters, they told Smith that they have no intention of complying
with the committee’s request. “The Subpoena brings us one step closer to a
protracted, unnecessary legal confrontation which will only distract and
detract from the work of our respective offices,” Schneiderman wrote.
Smith is not the
first fossil-fuel-backed Republican in Congress to come to the industry’s
defense. In May, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Jim
Inhofe (R-Okla.), recipient of $1.8 million in oil and gas industry contributions since 1989,
called the state AGs’ investigation a “misuse of power” and “politics at its worst.” The greater abuse comes when
congressional committees appear to operate at the behest of the industries they
are meant to oversee.
Congressional
investigations and hearings have a unique ability to focus a nation’s attention
and bring facts of public importance to light. As committee chairmen, Smith and
Inhofe can direct their committees’ authority as they see fit, but using that
power to stifle lawful state investigations doesn’t advance the First
Amendment, it tramples on it. So we have
an alternative suggestion. If Chairmen Smith and Inhofe are concerned about the
First Amendment rights of ExxonMobil, they should each call a hearing, ask
ExxonMobil executives to testify, and give them the opportunity to set the
record straight. A committee chairman could do little more to protect any
person’s right to speak freely than to give that person the chance to testify
before Congress. We would love to hear what they have to say.
No comments:
Post a Comment