The Chamber's Inconvenient Truth

Faced with a wave of bad publicity over his organization's obstructionist role in the climate debate, US Chamber of Commerce president Tom Donohue is fighting back. "We don't have regrets about our position, and we're not going to change it," he told reporters yesterday. The National Journal also published a letter from Donohue in which he told Chamber members that he wasn't opposed to tackling climate change and urged them to stand united for a business-friendly solution. But many of the claims he and other Chamber officials are making are contradicted by interviews with Chamber board members and its own lobbying record.
Speaking to reporters yesterday, Bruce Josten, the Chamber’s executive vice-president for government affairs, said that its climate policy—which led Nike and Apple to quit the group—came out of its energy and environment committee. But that assertion was flatly contradicted by the committee chair, Donald Sterhan, in an interview with Mother Jones last week. "There was no vote," Sterhan said, describing the committee's role. "It's just a discussion about the concerns, the risks, the potential threats. It was really more of an information discussion." He added that "there was no action taken" on the committee to approve any of the Chamber's positions on climate change.
Josten also said that Nike was the only Chamber member to question how its policies were made But according to a spokesman for a company that participated on the Chamber’s energy committee, several companies sought a forum to change the Chamber’s approach and were rebuffed. (He requested that his company not be named because it was concerned about the Chamber's response to its criticism.) Members of the energy committee that questioned the Chamber's climate stance "were told that basically this was not the forum to do it," he says. "There's basically no outlet for changing the policy."
Advertisement
Advertisement
In a "President’s Update" sent to the Chamber board on October 2, President Donohue insisted that "the Chamber supports strong policies to address climate change, including comprehensive federal legislation." But in addition to opposing the climate bills now being debated in Washington, the Chamber has waged a cynical campaign to downplay the impacts of global warming. As Mother Jones' Kate Shepard reported on the same day, the Chamber told the EPA that a global temperature increase would "on balance, be beneficial to humans" because fewer people would die during the wintrer. Similar denialist arguments abound in the Chamber's 86-page filing opposing EPA greenhouse gas regulations.
Donohue often says that the Chamber would support climate regulations if they were international in scope, thereby preventing American businesses from losing their global competitiveness. As evidence of his commitment to the idea, his letter mentioned the Chamber's role in convincing a group of international business organizations to sign "a strong statement supporting vigorous action to address climate change." However, that statement, issued on September 22, makes no commitment to support any binding cap on emissions. (A week earlier, 181 investment companies had signed a much stronger agreement calling for a 50 to 85 percent reduction in emissions by 2050).
Donohue wraps up his letter with a swipe at his adversaries, who, he says, "will even resort to personal attacks against those who they see standing in their way." He might be referring to how the National Resource Defense Council and other groups have questioned his substantial financial ties to the Union Pacific railroad, a major opponent of climate legislation. Donohue may be the only person who knows whether this relationship affects how he steers the Chamber’s climate policy. But given all of the other inconvenient truths he seems to be ignoring, it’s a reasonable question to ask.
Comments
COC
The Chamber of Commerce is more interested in supporting the right wing political agenda of totalitarianism, corruption, and incompetence than promoting American Commerce. They have become a dumping ground for right wing politicians who are out of office. I dropped by a COC office in a major city to find out what the economic multiplier was for that city, but no one knew. Amazing! Many of the private/charitable agencies that are supposed to be beneficial to the county are not, they have become right wing politicized. The Red Cross is one example, and even the YMCA in one conservative city was politicized for the benefit of right wingers.
I am genuinely curious and
I am genuinely curious and would encourage you to report on just how Nike can be considered as doing its part in global warming.
Now, my bias is that I've long been pissed at Nike for exploiting child labor and destroying American manufacturing, but in terms of global warming, we also have to consider the carbon footprint of making shoes in China and shipping them all around the world to where they are sold.
What is Nike ACTUALLY doing in its factories or its manufacturer's factories to fight global warming?
climate change
Nike does a great job of making sure that the level of carbon dioxide stays low on the planet. They pay salaries that are so low that nobody who works for them can afford to buy a car and pollute. After all, walking releases a minimal amount of carbon dioxde. Nike sure looks after the planet more than most people think. Thank you so much Nike. Thanks Phil Knight, you are a great human being.
The Creel Committee, the corporate media, and systematic deceit
"Members of the energy committee that questioned the Chamber's climate stance 'were told that basically this was not the forum to do it,' he says. 'There's basically no outlet for changing the policy.'
"Josten also said that Nike was the only Chamber member to question how its policies were made But according to a spokesman for a company that participated on the Chamber’s energy committee, several companies sought a forum to change the Chamber’s approach and were rebuffed. (He requested that his company not be named because it was concerned about the Chamber's response to its criticism.)"
Policy--quote-unquote--is a PR-managed affair, with the Truth going to the highest bidder, i.e., via K Street.
The imperial trajectory of our "nation" went into warp speed with the advent of Wilson's public relations cabal, i.e., the Creel Committee. The outcome of that dubious "think tank" was the realization that "influencing" the opinions, beliefs, and "politics" of the masses--what was referred to as "the bewildered herd"--was a simple matter of creative media management.
It worked flawlessly in 1917--German-Americans got their heads handed to them, with the connivance of the State--and it works today.
To address the perennial all-American concern, "Why Johnny Can't Read" check with Johnny's dopey, gullible, TV-watching parents. For example, Obama got the Nobel because "they" knew that Johnny's parents would not only approve--they'd be thrilled!
(continued...)
ahj
Timberland Classic
Timberland Classic Boots
Kids Timberland Boots
Mens Timberland Boots
Womens Timberland Boots
Tiffany Jewelry
Ya can't really blame Donahue
Ya can't really blame Donahue for his lashes and actions. He's behaving naturally as any frightened person would when they've painted themselves into a corner. Scared, he is attempting to be defiant; it is a self-inflicted posture one puts on themselves when the sails in their stance is about to be shredded.
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.



