Anti-alternative energy campaign bankrolled by big oil

PR efforts for estate tax repeal was funded by a handful of America's richest families. The Prescription drug plan was written by pharmaceutical corporations, and the bankruptcy bill was the product of credit card companies. On to alternative energy research. Big oil has been sending out the flaks and funding right-wing think tanks to encourage global warming deniers, but now they're getting a little more "proactive" in their efforts. And spending tens of millions more dollars.

Up until now, as New York Times columnist Tom Friedman points out, “oil companies in California have paid a very low extraction fee compared with those in other states — a rip-off they want to keep.” Chevron lobbyist Jack Coffey even admitted that Prop. 87 is “worth a lot of money” to the oil companies. These companies have launched the massive, deceptive “No On 87″ campaign to defeat Prop. 87. Some lowlights:

– Oil companies have concealed their funding of No On 87. According to No. on 87 campaign ads, “a coalition of taxpayers, educators, public safety officials, businesses, energy producers, Chevron Corporation and Aera Energy LLP” are funding the effort to defeat Prop. 87. But in reality, oil companies are bankrolling more than 99 percent of the $35 million campaign against initiative. Chevron and Aera have contributed more than $25 million.

– Oil companies claim that Prop. 87 will force them to raise gas prices. The No On 87 campaign’s website claims that the burden of higher production taxes will force oil companies to raise gas prices for consumers. This claim is false. The head of the American Petroleum Institute recently told Congress “big oil is powerless to control prices at the pump.” Additionally, the California Attorney General has confirmed that Prop. 87 makes it illegal for oil companies to raise gas prices to pass along the cost to consumers.