Barton, Bachmann, and BP, oh my!

It's ironic that when voters think the President isn't getting enough done, they often use the off years to make it harder for him. Logic goes out the window - and if it happens this time...?

Veteran Texas Congressman Joe "BP" Barton is the ranking GOP member (and former chair) of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.  That means if the Republicans gain a simple majority of seats in the House, Barton is the heir-apparent for the chairmanship. You can bet your BP that big oil is looking forward to that day, even if they only make it partway in November of 2010.

Consider the 2^nd District in Minnesota, where a below-the-radar Congressman, John Kline, is hoping nobody will notice how closely his votes parallel Bachmann and Barton's.  As his challenger Shelley Madore (a former MN House Rep) has been saying since she announced her campaign for U.S. Congress in January of this year, Kline is no less extreme than Michelle Bachmann of the 6th District if you look at his votes. Kline, on the opposite side of the Twin Cities metro from the infamous Bachmann, is just Michelle in sheep's clothing.

And I use "sheep's clothing" with all seriousness, because John Kline has done almost nothing but follow the GOP herd during his entire time in office.

We all know that the "off years" are when the party that doesn't hold the presidency traditionally gains traction. People realize the President can't actually get done everything they hoped he could, and so they decide to make it harder for him.

What? You were expecting logic from the voters?

Here's a simple truth: Most folks vote for a gut reason, not a head reason.  They can cite reasons that sound logical, but the truth is they mostly vote for politicians they like, or they think they'd like to have a beer with.

Here's more simple truth: The GOP is about to spend a lot of money in key races, including big oil money, and the more headway they make the less Washington stands up to Wall Street, big oil, big mining, the insurance companies, or any other big business.

The GOP has decided to prove that government is ineffective, as part of their "small government" platform that sounds so good until you realize that only our elected leaders -- our government -- has sufficient power to hold BP accountable.  The Free Market economy sure the heck can't do it, as we proved by deregulating Wall Street (with predictable, and now well-documented, results.)

Will voters pick the party of Joe "BP" Barton and Michelle Bachmann, with their faithful flock of followers such as John Kline to take on the aftermath of the disaster in the Gulf?  Opinions vary, but I'd rather see folks running the government who not only know how to get things done, but who believe there's more to being in Congress than saying the government should apologize and get out of BP's business.

That's why I like Shelley Madore's track record, and leadership, and her chances running against a "below the radar" extremist in Minnesota (where, let's face it, all eyes are on the Bachmann~Clark contest, and massive amounts of money are being raised and spent.) It's time for proven, effective leadership that knows how to partner with small businesses, not bail out and apologize for big business.

I hope voters like that kind of candidate this time around.

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, journalist, political staffer, and photographer who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.

Chevron accuser paid $200K to Ecuador court's economist

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget!



On YouTube.com

 

Ecuador's President Rafael Correa - does he know about this?

As you may or may not know, San Ramon, Ca-based Chevron is in a legal battle against an organization called "The Amazon Defense Coalition" (ADC) which represents a group of citizens in the Amazon River Delta region of Ecuador that the ADC charges were the victims of environmental damage caused by oil production by Chevron from 1968 to 1992, when Chevron / Texaco sold it's facilities to the state-run organization PetroEcuador.

One of the key claims made by ADC was that an economist, Richard Cabera, appointed by the court in Ecuador where Chevron's being sued, discovered damage estimated at $16 billion; Cabrera then updated his study to $27 billion. While Chevron has long dsiputed that study, the ADC, and much of the media, used those numbers in articles and blog posts to dramatize the extent of Chevron's alledged impact. But a new finding has been reported, one that should alter the course of events in this case; Cabrera was paid $207,000 by the ADC, according to the work of blogger Bob McCarty.

Normally, an expert is called as a witness during a trial and represents one side, either the plaintiff or the defense. In this case, Ecuador had a court-appointed economist who's by that title is supposed to be non-biased. But the discovery that Cabrera was paid $207,000 - and McCarty has photos of the check to prove it right on his blog - effectively tosses out any claim that Cabrera's unbiased. The ADC disputes this idea.

Karen Hinton, the terrific PR and communications representative for the ADC told McCarty it's common for such expertise to be paid for both in Ecuador and in America. But in the USA, expert witnesses are paid for by either side to present their case, not an unbiased view, unless supeonaed by the court to testify. But in that case if one is using the English system and this appears to be the case in Ecuador, the expert witness is required to be unbiased, so this revalation of payments goes against even the English code.

According to the affiable McCarty, Chevron not only didn't pay Cabrera, they were not approached to do so and didn't want to because they asserted his resume was "thin." With this, the Ecuadorian court employed him anyway.

McCarty's investigative work led him to pin-point the writer of the checks:

Similarly, all of the checks were issued by Selviva, a limited-liability company formed in Ecuador in 2004 by Alberto Wray, the lead attorney in charge of the litigation when it began in Ecuador the previous year, and three other individuals.

Wray has been working on the case against Chevron with Donziger as far back as 2003. The fact that Wray has been writing these checks to Cabrera and in turn the economist is Ecuadorian court-ordered, also backs Chevron's fear that the trial is fixed to go against them.

In fact, Chevron's assertion of a "kangaroo court" scenario is such the firm approached the U.S. Department of Commerce earlier this year calling for a "close review of Ecuador’s eligibility under the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA)" according to a letter sent to me just a few days ago by Chevron's media department. At first, the letter seemed of little value so early in the court case process and it came "out of the blue" without request by me; now it's of high value as the ATPA clearly deals with such issues as corruption in trade operations and legal systems.

What is the ATPA?

According to the U.S. Government, the ATPA was:

enacted in December 1991, to help four Andean countries (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru) in their fight against drug production and trafficking by expanding their economic alternatives. To this end, the ATPA provided reduced-duty or duty-free treatment to most of these countries’ exports to the United States.

The ATPA consists of a 20-point set of criteria so loose in interpretation that Chevron could claim Ecuador was not operating in a "fair trade" fashion and indeed, as part of the "Business Community Roundtable" has done so. The portion of the letter sent to U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk and that I have obtained and is the meat of all this reads as follows:

We are writing to urge your close and careful review of Ecuador’s continued eligibility under the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) required by section 208(a)(2) (19 U.S.C. 3206). As you know, ATPA was originally enacted in 1992, and extended by the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA) as part of the Trade Act of 2002, to foster the rule of law and legitimate economic development opportunities in the Andean region. While both Peru and Colombia have successfully used this program to promote economic diversification and new opportunities, while also strengthening their own legal systems and respect for the rule of law, the same cannot be said of Ecuador.

In particular, there are serious concerns within the U.S. business community about breaches of the basic rule of law that are occurring in Ecuador, contrary to the basic eligibility requirements of section 203(c). As found by the State Department in its annual human rights report on Ecuador released in February 2009, there are concerns with “corruption and the denial of due process within [Ecuador’s] judicial system.” U.S. businesses have also continued to see Ecuador’s repudiation of its legal obligations to U.S. investors and a politicization of the judicial system.

Given these basic gaps in the rule of law, we believe that the automatic renewal of Andean preferences for Ecuador would send the wrong message to other developing countries in the hemisphere and throughout the world that have worked to meet the basic eligibility criteria to qualify for U.S. trade preferences. We note that Bolivia has already lost its ATPA benefits as a result of its failure to meet the ATPA eligibility criteria and that Bolivia’s actions continue to worsen.

We urge you, therefore, to closely review Ecuador’s eligibility to continue to receive preferences under the ATPA.

Remember, this letter isn't just from Chevron; it represents a number of U.S. businesses that have experienced problems operating in Ecuador, most notably Occidental Petroleum, which was kicked out of Ecuador in 2006 after an alledged breach of contract with the government, which then took over its oil production facilities and even the luxury cars left behind.

While there's no official indication the U.S. Government will step in and respond to the letter, written June 9th, this new information of payments to Cabrera will change the climate around which the letter was written. Indeed, before the discovery, the Government was clearly aware of problems of corruption in Ecuador:

Ecuador has been reported to suffer from high levels of corruption. Weak judicial institutions, sometimes susceptible to political influence and lack of transparency in regulatory bodies, are frequently cited as root causes of corruption in Ecuador. There are few non-governmental institutions that fight corruption. President Correa has cited fighting corruption as an important administration goal.

What about the Amazon's people?

The main problem of environmental damage caused by oil exploration will not be solved by this trial, and these payments are a great indication this will not happen, if that was ever Ecuador's objective. I think Donziger's a very good man with the right idea, but the wrong focus, and working with the wrong people. Ecuador has shown no real sign of true interest in solving the environmental problems caused by oil exploration.

Oil spills are common in the Amazon to this day, and while Chevron's not been a player in oil exploration there since 1992, many companies from the European Union and Canada have.

Oil is that country's number one revenue-generator. President Rafael Correa has crafted a public image of being an "environmentalist man of the people" and attracted World attention with his request for $4 billion from companies to avoid producing oil in the Yasuni National Park within the Amazon.

Correa's idea is innovative, but gives pause. He's asking for companies to pay to keep the oil under Yasuni untouched, but there's a problem: oil production's already taken place in Yasuni and there's every indication Ecuador's gotten no takers for Correa's deal because of the knoweldge that the Yasuni's "touched" already. Moreover, and this is little reported, Correa has said that if doesn't get the $4 billion, Ecuador will "drill there anyway" which means Petroecuador expands operations. Correa's real interest has been the continued nationalization of oil production, almost, it seems, by any means necessary.

So much for environmental concerns; Correa's playing genius-level politics. The reality is Ecuador's zoned a whopping 65 percent of the Amazon for oil production according to a recent study you can download here. Who's really watching out for the living conditions of the poor of Ecuador's Amazon region? That's a good question. A very good one, indeed.

"Crude" Movie Lies - The Movie "Crude" Forgets About Ecuador

There's a new movie out called "Crude" which is a kind of documentary about the Ecuadorian oil spill problem. The trouble is, it forgets about how Petroecuador shirked its responsibility in maintaining the oil production facilities left behind after the transfer from Chevron / Texaco in 1998. I explained that in this video:



And now, there's a new website outlining the lies of "Crude" and called "Crude Movie Lies".

Multinational Monitor Erroneously Lists Ford Foundation's Community Friend Chevron as One Of 2008 Worst Corporations

It seems the Multinational Monitor has a habit of writing incorrect and critical news about American Corporations that support it. Support it? With a budget of over $1 million, it doesn't come from people on the street. But it takes that money from corporations and uses it to incorrectly shame them.

This is certainly true with Chevron, the company the "non-profit" organization publication owned by Essential Information, a firm founded by Ralph Nader, who's not involved with it as of this writing. It is Essential Information that receives a grant from The Ford Foundation, which in turn has recognized Chevron as a good company in the matter of community investment in America.

So what does the Multinational Monitor accuse Chervon of that makes it "so bad"? It's attempt to throw out a baseless lawsuit against it by Ecuador regarding oil wells that the country itself is responsible for taking care of and has been for almost 20 years.

Multinational Monitor and Robert Weissman, who made the list, should take Chevron off of it.

Bowoto v. Chevron: White Guilt Clouds The Truth

Today features jury instructions and closing arguments in the trail of Bowoto v. Chevron. In the accounts of the trial, I've noticed an interesting pattern of the perspective of what I know call "White Activist Guilt". From that perspective, Chevron is the rich, bad "white" company, and the Nigerian militant groups attacking that company's employees and facilities are all good, non-violent folks.   This is the kind of view that has been presented by blogger Scott Gilmore, and others.  But his blog's arguably the best one solely dedicated to the Bowoto trial, so I'll start there.

The story he tells of a peaceful demonstration by Bowoto is just not true. But the real story of this case is the poor Nigerian economic development and that government's neglect in making life better for Nigeria's poor, who've formed militant groups to take whatever wealth they can.  

Wayne Berman, Top McCain Fundraiser, Also Lobbyist For Big Oil

Wayne Berman's a key fundraiser for the presidential campaign of Senator John McCain and a member of the government relations staff of Oglivy, a PR firm with a Washington office. 

Berman's a prime example of why people say that McCain's in the pocket of Big Oil.  Wayne Berman's serving as a lobbyist for Chevron in their legal battle against the country of Ecuador.

Berman has taken the incredible step of trying to get the Bush Administration to take special trade preferences away from Ecuador if that country doesn't drop its billion dollar lawsuit against Chevron.

I can personally save Wayne Berman the trouble by telling him Chevron's not at fault to anywhere near the levels charged by Ecuador.  But the other side of this story has nothing to do with Chevron and everything to do with Wayne Berman's key involvement in McCain's campaign. 

With ties like Wayne Berman, it's impossible for McCain to claim he's not a friend of Big Oil.

Steve Donziger Wants Billions From Chevron Not For Ecuador

Steve Donziger Wants Billions From Chevron Not For Ecuador

Steve Donziger, the lawyer representing Ecuador against Chevron in a $16 billion lawsuit, where Chevron is not the actual party at fault, stands to gain over $5 billion, making him one of the richest people in the World -- if he wins.

If the truth prevails, the company Donziger should be suing is Petroecuador, owned by the Country of Ecuador. That firm has been responsible for explosions and oil spills since 1990. If Donziger wins, Petroecudor litterally gets away with murder.

..More to come.