SELVA: WHISPER OF THE PINK DOLPHIN
Big oil spent a stunning $445m throughout the last election cycle to influence Donald Trump and Congress, a new analysis has found.
That figure includes funding from January 2023 and November 2024 for political donations, lobbying and advertising to support elected officials and specific policies. Because it does not include money funneled through dark-money groups – which do not have to reveal their donors – it is almost certainly a vast understatement, says the report from green advocacy group Climate Power, which is based on campaign finance disclosures and advertising industry data.
Fossil fuel interests poured $96m into Donald Trump’s re-election campaign and affiliated political action committees, the report found. Much of that was covered by megadonor oil billionaires, such as the fracking magnate Harold Hamm, the pipeline mogul Kelcy Warren and the drilling tycoon Jeffery Hildebrand.
Additional contributions came from lesser-known oil and gas interests, including fossil fuel-trading hedge funds, mining corporations and the producers of offshore-drilling ships and fuel tanks.
Fossil fuel companies and their trade groups spent another $243m lobbying Congress. Those donors stand to profit from priorities set by Senate-confirmed Trump cabinet appointees, such Chris Wright, the fracking CEO who was tapped to head the Department of Energy, and Lee Zeldin, the former New York representative who has accepted more than $400,000 in fossil fuel-tied campaign donations and who will lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
Big oil also spent some $80m on advertising to support their interests. That includes funding for ad campaigns run in swing states, such as one from the refining lobbying organization American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, which railed against Joe Biden’s pro-electric vehicle policies, or another eight-figure ad blitz from top US oil lobbying group the American Petroleum Institute that promoted the idea that fossil fuels are “vital” to global energy security. Neither campaign directly endorsed Trump, but both targeted audiences in swing states.
Additionally, oil and gas companies and trade groups spent more than $25m on Republican down-ballot races, including $16m on House races, $8m on Senate fights and more than $500,000 on GOP gubernatorial candidates.
These investments are “likely to pay dividends”, the report says, with Republicans holding control of the White House, House and Senate – as well as some key states. Trump unleashed dozens of pro-fossil fuel executive actions on his first day in office and is expected to pursue a vast array of others with cooperation from Congress.
It’s a sign the US must “free ourselves from Big Oil’s grip and invest in the clean energy of the future”, the Climate Power report says.
Trump campaigned on a promise to “drill, baby, drill”, remove limits on the already booming fossil fuel industry and reverse Biden’s climate policies.
“We have something that no other manufacturing nation will ever have, the largest amount of oil and gas of any country on Earth, and we are going to use it,” Trump said in his inaugural address on Monday. “We will be a rich nation again, and it is that liquid gold under our feet that will help to do it.”
Dharna Noor
Source: The Guardian
Editorial Comment:
The revelation that Big Oil spent a staggering $445 million in the last election cycle to influence President Trump and Congress raises significant concerns about the future of critical global ecosystems, including the Amazon rainforest. This colossal investment underscores the fossil fuel industry’s intent to shape policies in its favour, often at the expense of environmental protection and sustainability.
The Amazon plays a vital role in regulating global climate patterns and serves as a critical carbon sink. It is home to unparalleled biodiversity and provides essential ecosystem services. Yet, the Amazon faces increasing threats from deforestation, much of it driven by industrial activities, including oil and gas extraction.
If Big Oil’s financial influence translates into lax environmental regulations and expanded drilling rights, the repercussions for the Amazon could be catastrophic. Already, oil exploration and extraction have begun encroaching on pristine areas of the rainforest, leading to habitat destruction, water contamination, and increased greenhouse gas emissions. The injection of hundreds of millions of dollars into political campaigns could exacerbate these trends by securing legislative support for policies that prioritize corporate profits over environmental stewardship.
One of the most immediate threats involves the potential for increased deforestation and land degradation. Oil companies often require significant infrastructure, including roads, pipelines, and drilling platforms, which fragment ecosystems and open previously inaccessible areas to logging and agricultural expansion. This domino effect accelerates the loss of biodiversity and undermines the Amazon’s ability to function as a carbon sink, further fueling climate change.
Furthermore, the socio-political influence of Big Oil could undermine international climate agreements and efforts to protect the Amazon. For example, weakening enforcement of conservation laws or cutting funding for reforestation initiatives could erode the progress made by environmental advocates and Indigenous communities who have long fought to preserve the rainforest.
This scenario raises profound ethical questions about the disproportionate influence of corporate money on democratic processes. The $445 million figure symbolizes more than just a financial investment; it represents a deliberate effort to skew policymaking in favour of an entrenched industry that has historically resisted transitioning to renewable energy. Philosopher John Rawls, in his theory of justice, emphasizes the importance of fairness in institutions and decision-making processes. From this perspective, the oil lobby's ability to dominate policy debates undermines the principle of equal representation by granting undue weight to corporate interests over the voices of citizens and indigenous communities.
Evidently donations from oil companies comes at an exceedingly high cost. For example during President Trump’s first term, his administration implemented significant policies benefiting oil companies. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) reduced the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, allowing oil companies to achieve record-low effective tax rates. It also introduced immediate expensing of capital investments, further lowering taxable income. Additionally, longstanding deductions for intangible drilling costs were preserved, avoiding a projected $13 billion revenue gain for the government over ten years.
Other measures included royalty rate reductions and lease suspensions during the COVID-19 pandemic, which allowed companies to pay minimal royalties on public land operations or pause production without penalties.
Furthermore, the opening of 1.5 million acres in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for drilling offered lucrative new opportunities. Collectively, these policies reduced tax burdens, protected existing subsidies, and expanded access to valuable resources, bolstering the financial standing of the oil industry.
Moreover, the influence oil corporations gain through campaign donations, poses a grave threat to the democratic ideal, as highlighted by thinkers like Noam Chomsky, who have long argued that concentrated wealth often translates into political power, distorting public priorities and eroding trust in institutions. Politicians and philosophers alike have warned that when governments prioritize corporate interests over the collective good, they risk subverting the very foundations of democracy.
The battle for the Amazon’s future, therefore, is as much about safeguarding democratic integrity and the public's right to self-determination as it is about addressing the urgent environmental crisis. It serves as a stark reminder that genuine political will is not only a matter of policy but also of confronting and dismantling entrenched structures of power. Within this context SELVA believes that the battle for the Amazon’s future is as much about political will as it is about environmental science.
Public awareness and pressure can play a critical role in countering the influence of Big Oil. SELVA calls on Governments, NGOs, and civil society to work together to demand transparency, hold corporations accountable, and prioritize policies that protect the Amazon and address climate change.
In conclusion, the infusion of Big Oil money into political campaigns threatens to exacerbate the environmental crisis facing the Amazon. The stakes are extraordinarily high—not just for the rainforest itself but for the global fight against climate change and biodiversity loss. Vigilance and advocacy are essential to ensure that corporate interests do not override the imperative to preserve one of the planet’s most vital ecosystems.
🌿 CELEBRATING 40 YEARS ON THE FRONTLINES OF THE AMAZON 🌿
"SELVA: WHISPER OF THE PINK DOLPHIN" – The Official Blog of SELVA-VIDA SIN FRONTERAS (SELVA)
To mark four decades of action in the Amazon Rainforest, our blog has been renamed "SELVA: WHISPER OF THE PINK DOLPHIN."
With operational bases deep inside the Ecuadorian Amazon -recognized by UNESCO as "Amazon Reserves for Peace"- and offices in Ecuador and The Netherlands, SELVA has spent 40 years defending the rainforest and its ancestral inhabitants.
Follow our journey, stay informed, and be part of the movement.
"I AM SELVA. WE ARE THE AMAZON"
Comments