|
WORD COUNT
705
MAY 14, 2008
LAWMAKER INVESTMENTS
NOT SO GREEN – by Lindsay Renick Mayer
When environmental
lobbyists and eco-friendly citizens come a-knockin' on lawmakers' office
doors, Democrats (and some Republicans) can detail efforts to pass
legislation that directs taxes collected from the oil and gas industry
towards renewable energy initiatives. But the politicians probably won't
mention that while they're encouraging the country to invest in
alternatives, they themselves aren't doing so with their own money.
According to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, members of
Congress have more money invested in each of the top five oil and gas
companies, individually, than in 305 green stock companies combined.
The most recent
personal financial disclosures show that members had at least 45 times
more money invested in the oil and gas industry (at least $20.6 million)
than in public companies that provide “green” products and services (at
least $452,100). This includes companies that develop renewable energy
projects, manufacture energy efficiency products, recycle material or
create wind or solar products. The amount of money members have plunked
down on these green stocks, as listed in the newsletter Progressive
Investor, has actually decreased 23 percent since 2004, while their
investments in oil and gas have increased by 30 percent.
"Every purchase that we
make, whether to buy a car or a piece of clothing—and that includes
stock in our portfolio—we're making a strong statement about what we
want," said Rona Fried, editor and publisher of Progressive Investor.
"If you invest in clean energy stock, you're making a statement that
that's where you want to see the world going. If you invest in
fossilized companies, you're going to be stuck with the dinosaurs.”
Democrats, who have
tried repeatedly in the last year to pass legislation that would tax oil
companies and use the money for wind and solar energy subsidies, had
even less money invested in green stocks than Republicans in 2006—at
least $59,300 compared to at least $392,600. (Members of Congress
annually disclose their investments in ranges, making it impossible to
determine their exact value.)
Of course not all
members of Congress agree that renewable energy is the way to go—and
even if they do, they might not be comfortable buying stock in such
companies yet, because the industry is young and the stocks can be
volatile, Progressive Investor’s Fried said.
Indeed, between 2004
and 2006, lawmakers were not getting rich off of their green
investments. On average, individual lawmakers earned at least $2,700 on
these investments over the three-year period, through dividends, capital
gains, royalties and interest, the Center found. They made an average of
$24,200, however, on their investments in the oil and gas industry.
Because the most recent personal financial disclosure data available is
from 2006—2007 reports are due mid-May—it’s still impossible to say
whether members have become more or less invested in these companies in
the last 15 months.
Then Again some
investments in alternative energy aren’t considered to be healthy. Last
year President Bush signed an energy bill that doubled the use of
corn-based ethanol, a controversial biofuel that is driving up the price
of food worldwide. In 2006, lawmakers had at least $825,400 invested in
the companies that stand to profit the most from corn-based ethanol
production, including agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland.
Democrats owned 75 percent of those investments (though Sen. John Kerry
and his wife, Teresa, own 60 percent alone).
Democrats may have less
of their own money invested in green stocks, but those companies have
invested more in the campaigns of Democrats than Republicans. Of the
total $242,900 that the companies’ employees and PACs have given to
federal candidates, parties and committees so far in the 2008 election
cycle, 68 percent has gone to Democrats. The oil and gas industry,
however, has traditionally supported Republicans. This election cycle,
Republicans have received 73 percent of the total $11.5 million from the
oil and gas industry.
Addressing global
warming and investing in clean technologies and renewable energy is not
a partisan issue, said Doug Stingle, membership and outreach coordinator
of the Midwest Renewable Energy Association. "This is something that
everyone should be invested in. It's not an ideological issue," he said.
"If global warming severely alters our ecosystem in such a way that we
can't live our lives, it won't matter if you're Republican or Democrat.
It's beyond that."
--
Lindsay Renick Mayer
writes for Capital Eye, the online newsletter and blog of the Center for
Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research organization in Washington,
D.C., that tracks the influence of money on elections and public policy
at its website, OpenSecrets.org.
# # # # #
|
