In the motion picture classic "Casablanca," the Vichy prefect of police, Captain Louis Renault, pronounces himself shocked to find out that gambling is going on at Rick's American Café. At that very moment, a croupier hands Renault his winnings, which the captain pockets with a straight face.
But it came as absolutely no shock when the Center of American Progress Action Fund reported this week that members of the US House of Representatives who received the major portion of campaign contributions from the oil industry, voted overwhelmingly against legislation that would have stripped the industry of $16 billion in tax breaks.
The industry isn't buying votes, of course. That would be crass and illegal. What industry is doing is supporting members of both parties who serve on committees with jurisdiction over oil and gas issues; members with industry operations in their districts; members with an ideological bent that would incline them to support industry as well as broader business interests; and members in close races, or even holding safe seats, for any of the above reasons.
For their largess, big donors expect and usually get access to members or their staffs, and the opportunity to influence legislation. They are not "buying," a specific vote, although a member's past voting record is a usually reliable indicator of future votes. That's the way the political money game is played, like it or not, by all interest groups of every political stripe.
Th oil industry, like many US industries, has a great deal of money to spread around, which gives it an advantage. And the more reliable and powerful the member, the more generous are the contributions. According to the study, members who voted against the energy bill received an average of $109,000 in industry contributions between from 1989 to 2006 (not all members served in the House over that entire span, of course). Members who supported the legislation received an average of $26,277 over that same time span.
Representative Joe Barton (Republican-Texas), topped all recipients with $1.1 million. Of course, not only is Barton from the leading oil producing state in the US, but he was chairman of the House Energy Committee, and is now the committee's senior Republican. The current chairman, who was chairman before Barton's tenure, and ranking member during, is Representative John Dingell, Democrat-Michigan. Dingell is a far more reliable supporter of the automobile industry than the oil industry, but you can't ignore this powerful congressman. He received about $336,000 since 1989 from the oil industry.
Even Representatives Ed Markey, Democrat-Massachusetts, and Henry Waxman, Democrat-California, who could reliably be counted on to oppose industry interests, received a few coins. Markey and Waxman, past and current chairmen of Energy Committee subcommittees, received about $59,000 and $29,000 respectively.
The oil industry also supported a number of candidates in close races (where winners received less than 55% of the votes cast). Winners who voted against the energy bill received an average of $101,270 from the industry since 1989;winners who supported the energy bill received an average of $9,800. Of the 38 winning candidates in close races who received industry contributions, 33 voted against the legislation. Which is a pretty fair return on the investment.
Leave a comment