3 ms·

Open secrets lists oil & gas at $123 million/year of lobbying, #8th highest spender #3 highest spender is insurance, at $158m, #2 electronics at $221m, pharma

Open secrets lists oil & gas at $123 million/year of lobbying, #8th highest spender #3 highest spender is insurance, at $158m, #2 electronics at $221m, pharma at #1 $373m. I too think we have to try to be reasonable, & there's a lot of factors, and it's hard. They are a gigantic lobbying force, quite close to top 3 though.

NickC25 4y ago
Right - my point exactly. $123m a year is serious coin. A few puff-piece PR releases saying "we're going green! yay us!" are pennies in comparison.
- legitster 4y ago
  Sure - but setting aside lobbying and PR releases their own capex reports show that US domestic companies were seriously cutting back on oil exploration between 2014 and 2020. And the investments they were making were overwhelmingly to (lower carbon) natural gas. To put it another way, in that period they reduced their lobbying budget by $50 million and their production investment by $400 billion. It is the lobbying that is pennies.
  - karmakurtisaani 4y ago
    I've seen enough Climate Town videos (YT channel) to not trust anything that comes the from O&G direction. It may be very well that the exploration was cut back, but that could be for a number of reasons. Without knowing any details, I would blatantly assume they cut back purely out of it being the most profitable thing to do. Seriously, go watch Climate Town, the guy running the channel is a comedy genius (and also has a degree in climate science).
    - legitster 4y ago
      > Without knowing any details, I would blatantly assume they cut back purely out of it being the most profitable thing to do. Yes, that is blatantly what they did. There was an entire speech from President Biden on it: “You should be using these record-breaking profits to increase production and refining, - Invest in America for the American people. Bring down the price you charge at the pump to reflect what you pay for the product... My message to oil companies is this: You’re sitting on record profits. And we’re giving you more certainty so you can act now to increase oil production now.” So again, oil and gas companies found it more profitable to produce less, and it became a national political issue to not let them.
      - karmakurtisaani 4y ago
        Yep, that sounds about right. O&G being O&G and American politicians being American politicians. Rant: I'm so sick of the phrase "what the average citizen pays at the pump" and it's relatives. How about making public transport viable? Nope, everyone's got to have big cars and cheap fuel.
red-iron-pine 4y ago
It's also worth keeping in mind that they don't have to lobby -- US O&G is a strategic source of strength and have had power that went all the way to the top. The Bush family, for example, produced two Presidents, and the Bush fam were all about oil. No need to spend the money when you get it for free. Meanwhile it's clear to the average American that healthcare is broken as shit and is ruining lives daily; takes a lot of money to keep things looking good for Pharma. Ditto for much of the tech world.

NickC25 4y ago

Right - my point exactly. $123m a year is serious coin. A few puff-piece PR releases saying "we're going green! yay us!" are pennies in comparison.

legitster 4y ago
Sure - but setting aside lobbying and PR releases their own capex reports show that US domestic companies were seriously cutting back on oil exploration between 2014 and 2020. And the investments they were making were overwhelmingly to (lower carbon) natural gas. To put it another way, in that period they reduced their lobbying budget by $50 million and their production investment by $400 billion. It is the lobbying that is pennies.
- karmakurtisaani 4y ago
  I've seen enough Climate Town videos (YT channel) to not trust anything that comes the from O&G direction. It may be very well that the exploration was cut back, but that could be for a number of reasons. Without knowing any details, I would blatantly assume they cut back purely out of it being the most profitable thing to do. Seriously, go watch Climate Town, the guy running the channel is a comedy genius (and also has a degree in climate science).
  - legitster 4y ago
    > Without knowing any details, I would blatantly assume they cut back purely out of it being the most profitable thing to do. Yes, that is blatantly what they did. There was an entire speech from President Biden on it: “You should be using these record-breaking profits to increase production and refining, - Invest in America for the American people. Bring down the price you charge at the pump to reflect what you pay for the product... My message to oil companies is this: You’re sitting on record profits. And we’re giving you more certainty so you can act now to increase oil production now.” So again, oil and gas companies found it more profitable to produce less, and it became a national political issue to not let them.
    - karmakurtisaani 4y ago
      Yep, that sounds about right. O&G being O&G and American politicians being American politicians. Rant: I'm so sick of the phrase "what the average citizen pays at the pump" and it's relatives. How about making public transport viable? Nope, everyone's got to have big cars and cheap fuel.

red-iron-pine 4y ago

It's also worth keeping in mind that they don't have to lobby -- US O&G is a strategic source of strength and have had power that went all the way to the top. The Bush family, for example, produced two Presidents, and the Bush fam were all about oil. No need to spend the money when you get it for free. Meanwhile it's clear to the average American that healthcare is broken as shit and is ruining lives daily; takes a lot of money to keep things looking good for Pharma. Ditto for much of the tech world.