In N.D. politics, most oil industry contributions go to Republicans
July 16, 2012 at 1:30 am in Grand Forks Herald
A Forum Communications review of campaign finance reports shows oil companies haven’t been shy with their donations to North Dakota politicians, particularly to Republicans in power. Continue Reading
and they sold their soul to the company store….
Hot debate. What do you think?
21 
30
Well it only makes sense. The libs don’t like oil so why would they receive any money like that? I like how they media makes it sound bad that republicans receive money. Those poor dems….
Hot debate. What do you think?
36 
24
How biased is this article?
Here is a hatchet job thta shows how a Liberal who controls the media can spin things.
Look at this sentence; “campaign finance reports shows oil companies haven’t been shy with their donations to North Dakota politicians, particularly to Republicans in power.”
Particularly to Republicans in power.
Nothing like trying to tie Oil and Republicans together.
Lets look at this from a common sense perspective.
If you were an Oil company, who would get the most of your campaign budget?
The guy currently in Power controlling the states interest or the party who would like to have the seat but hasnt had it for years?
DUH!
If you want to do a story, do one on why Oil companies would give one red cent to the Dems who supposedly hate Oil companies.
Now that would be an interesting story. Maybe you would find out the Dems arent as GREEN as they like to portray themselves.
At least the GOP doesnt try to cover up the fact that they get money from Big Oil like the Dems do.
Hot debate. What do you think?
36 
23
Good! Since energy development is important for state and country, I hope they give plenty to politicans that support energy independence! I hope the coal industry and electric power industry get their message out of affordable energy. We sell our coal to China which does nothing for reduction of carbon emmissions! Cheap energy so China can have cheap energy, a big economic advantage!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
32 
13
John B, have you ever been to a city in China? The air is so black you can barely breathe. I’m glad we send the coal there so we don’t have to breath it.
But seriously, since ND is swimming in oil money, maybe 2013 will be the year we do not have record numbers of children getting free lunches because their parents can’t afford to feed them like we did in 2012.
Hot debate. What do you think?
24 
17
johnb: I’ve felt that way for a long time, but you can’t win thIS battle. Comedian turned respected Democrat Bill Maher actually believes that China has a better handle on pollution than the U.S. Many Democrats agree. How can common sense Republicans compete with that? We do more for clean air and water than anyone in the world, except maybe bankrupt Europe. To coal companies, every Democrat looks like Bill Maher. They need Republicans in office just like wind and solar energy people need Democrats in office. There’s nothing sinister here.
Like or Dislike:
14 
10
And the “Hollywood Left” donate their multi millions to Democrat candidates! So how is any of this different? You get the donations from the people you pander with. If I was an Oil company, I certainly would not donate to the likes of a party who’s administration is doing everything it can to shut your industry down.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
15
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
16 
27
But the Dems are not for development of oil at all, same with coal. The Dems want to shut it all down for green energy, which is neither cheap or reliable. Green energy also does have a negative environmental impact. It has less of an impact than oil/coal at a much higher cost, but is not neutral as many try to push it as. We need a balanced approach to energy, not put all our efforts in one place.
Like or Dislike:
11 
2
There really isn’t an ounce of truth to saying the Democrats want to shut down oil and coal. Obama has OPENED new oil fields and has repeatedly said coal is a necessary part of our energy program. I get so tired of this kind of mindless, factless, and inaccurate parroting of what Democrats believe. If you listen to certain news and opinion outlets, then you deserve the misinformation you get.
Like or Dislike:
5 
13
I guess I need to stop watching NBC, CBS, ABC, and MSNBC because that is where I got the impression
Like or Dislike:
11 
2
realist: I have never heard Obama speak well of coal, but, let’s agree that he has. His EPA employees are literally shutting down coal generated electricity. You are simply not paying attention. No cliche, here. Call any electric company and you will apologize for your lack of info. Please, please….make the call, my friend. Make the call!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Like or Dislike:
9 
1
Alvin, check out the Obama’s energy policy website and you will see that he has a whole section about clean coal technology as an integral part of his comprehensive energy policy. FYI. The EPA is following the law that Congress passed. If they want EPA to do something else, they’ll have to repeal the Clean Air Act, but of course, that would be political suicide so it’s easier to poke at EPA for just doing their job.
Like or Dislike:
3 
6
Across the board companies give to the right and to the left for one primary reason….They expect favor in return. The trouble is that in any industry the favor often come at a cost to us all. We shouldn’t blindly accept this business as usual on either side anymore because while they play the system it generally means we end up paying the system….The taxes they get exempted …we pay, The less safety measures they can run on…..We pay…..None of this big money going to either party is a good deal for us the public…..It’s time to stop falling for it as just good old business because it’s generally going against our own best interests in the long run one way or other….
Like or Dislike:
13 
15
This article is very misleading. It reinforces the misperception that democrats are the underdogs in campaign finance when just the opposite is true. With regard to the top campaign contributions you have to reach number 73 before you get to the first oil company. You have to reach number 17 before you reach the first contributor that gives primarily to republicans. The top 20 are:
Rank OrganizationTotal Dem % Repub % Tilt
1 ActBlue
$66,300,166 99% 0%
2 AT&T Inc
$48,936,003 43% 55%
3 American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees
$48,227,288 92% 1%
4 National Assn of Realtors
$43,720,142 45% 47%
5 National Education Assn
$41,463,316 74% 5%
6 Goldman Sachs
$39,150,254 57% 39%
7 Service Employees International Union
$38,853,147 75% 2%
8 American Assn for Justice
$36,260,178 88% 8%
9 Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
$35,514,725 96% 2%
10 American Federation of Teachers
$34,056,816 87% 0%
11 Laborers Union
$32,981,140 87% 7%
12 Teamsters Union
$32,724,278 87% 5%
13 Carpenters & Joiners Union
$31,644,910 86% 10%
14 Communications Workers of America
$31,529,777 92% 0%
15 Citigroup Inc
$29,617,269 49% 49%
16 United Food & Commercial Workers Union
$28,232,055 93% 0%
17 American Medical Assn
$28,201,519 40% 59%
18 United Auto Workers
$28,080,432 98% 0%
19 National Auto Dealers Assn
$27,860,008 32% 67%
20 Machinists & Aerospace Workers Union
$27,630,227 98% 1%
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
3
That’s right folks, that icky evil Goldman Sacks is the top ranked Wall Street firm on the list and, in contrast to what the media and democrats would like you to believe, it gives more to democrats than republicans.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
5
and as an interesting side note, look at how many people on Obamas team are former Goldman Sachs top executives.
Of all the companies on the list, this is the one people should be paying attention to.
Their ex-executives write the financial laws for the administration and those laws benefit GS very much.
I am not going to say the same thing wasnt happening during Bush’s term because i haven had time to look into it but i have heard that the Bush admin also held court with Goldman Sachs.
These are the puppetmasters and no one wins except Goldman Sachs.
Like or Dislike:
16 
5
On this we too agree…….Strange huh?
Like or Dislike:
7 
3
I really get a little tired of folks knocking ‘Big Business’…..who the heck do you think employs people?
I’ve never gotten a job from a poor man, but of course most libs have no concept of this fact….’big brother’ will always be there to take care of me.
Like or Dislike:
21 
8
Historically as well as today we’ve seen mega business with little or no regulations has and does have little regard for anything other than the profit….These kind of employers have and still do all over the world concidered anything under management as little more than machinery. Corporations really have no soul because of their very nature of being profit driven and nothing else. Not like some of the industry giants from the golden age of the American industrial revolution who built companies with the idea that the company did better if the employees did better.
Not all business is evil, but there’s been a lot of effort from mega business to keep cutting back on failsafe regulations that have kept us safe, and has until recently kept the economy from running to ground because of greed at the top.
You might be confusing say a good company that makes money with real wealth. I think Chris Rock described it best, “Opra is one of the highest paid women on tv…Shes a very rich woman who makes a lot of money every year…..If one day Someone like Bill Gates seen that all he had in his accounts was the money Opra has….He’d claim he was broke” That’s the difference between your local well to do business and the real wealth barrons who are really controlling way too much of our politics
Like or Dislike:
6 
15
Tundra: I’ve enjoyed many of your comments, even though my opinion is exactly opposite of this comment. You are wrong about profits being the only thing that matters to big business. Well-run big business is about customer service, price point, developing employee skills, advertising, smart purchasing, cost controls, etc. Profit is very likely about 10th on the list and a result of doing the other things well. Most companies, especially power companies, probably spend 15% of their employees time on regulation. It’s no coincidence that most big business turn to Republicans, who, by nature tend to lean toward Libertarian when it comes to new regulations. Even Republicans feel capitalism needs control. Democrats are unwittingly stifling (actually killing) the ability to do business in the great country. Business is our only hope.
Like or Dislike:
19 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
20
You practically make my point by mentioning the Great Lakes and the bald eagle. I even said Republicans agree with some regulation. Big business got big by doing all those things I mentioned. Great businessmen consider their employees their greatest asset. Of course everything they do and do well is for greed, but the collateral impact (probably 98% of their gross volume) is employment and contribution to a robust economy. Profit has to be down the list of priorities or there is no chance of making profit. The good times of the Clinton era were the result of day trading and extremely misguided consumer confidence. Most popular stocks were overpriced by 25 times. Heck, Governor Ventura was given credit for a huge reserve. Think about that for a minute. I see what you see, but come to different conclusions.
Like or Dislike:
15 
4
Realist, President Clinton took office in January of 1993 and by January of 1994 the republicans held both houses of congress. To attribute the economic boom of those years to a lame duck president is more than a little disingenuous. Additionally, virtually every economic expert (republican leaning or democrat leaning) attributes President Clinton’s repeal of Glass-Steagal as the primary cause of the financial crisis; Glass-Steagal was enacted after the great depression precisely for the purpose preventing financial institutions from getting too big to fail. It is also disingenuous to argue the economic growth during President Clinton’s tenure is attributable to a lame duck President but that somehow all of the current economic problems are attributable the prior President rather than President Obama; President Obama had control over both houses of congress during the first two years of his presidency. The two major parties share the blame in detrimental economic policy. The democrats seem intent on continuing down a path of unsustainable government entitlement programs and the republicans appear equally unable to propose realistic changes to government spending.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
16 
1
Realist, I should have answered your question more directly. You asked why businesses boomed during the Clinton Presidency which started in 1993 and extended through 2000. From 1994 through 2000 the republicans controlled both houses of congress.
Like or Dislike:
15 
4
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
2 
12
I suspect that most here would agree that the best “system” to live under is a secular democratic republic where sensibly regulated capitalism is the basis of the economic engine. That’s what the USA is supposed to be!
The problem is when greed and the quest for power over others distorts the debate about what “sensibly regulated” is. That’s what is happening now, and we will all be nauseated by it over the next four months.
Why don’t we all see if we can set a good example — and encourage others to do the same?
Like or Dislike:
9 
5
justasec: Your first paragraph is a complete home run. The “sensibly regulated” debate would fill volumes and is far to complicated to sum up in one sentence. That term is THE difference in the two parties. One guy here thinks big business is against clean water and the bald eagle. Try find some middle ground with that.
Like or Dislike:
10 
6
Look at our own Red River….It’s hard to tell because it’s so muddy looking, but it’s fairly clean now days from all the nasty chemicals from farms and factories that used to pollute the river to a point that there was warnings not to eat the fish. These factories (Yes you Crystal) and the rest didn’t clean up because it was the right thing to do….Hell…They knew they were doing the wrong hing a long time ago, but they could get by with it and it was cheaper. They were forced to clean up and same with farm chemicals. I think that the real force behind all this was probably Canada. They didn’t want our pollution running up to them. That’s the real shame….It took another countries pressure to make our’s behave…Blottom line…Although no all business is like that…Without regulations many will get away with what they can…..Same with laws in general
Like or Dislike:
7 
7
I agree. If you look at history, human nature is quite greedy and nasty. We need to be regulated. There’s such a difference of opinion in what we think is sensible and that’s what makes the two parties so far apart.
Like or Dislike:
11 
2
Your’re a thoughtful guy, alvin and I appreciate that. I really think that the knee-jerk reaction we see from Republicans about any sort of regulation is a reflexive one. It doesn’t seem to matter how much sense a regulation makes, the partisans are always holding up some over the top regulation to illustrate why all regulation is bad. That frustrates me to hear intelligent people argue for, let’s say, letting banks do anything they want, or lowering water pollution standards for mercury and many more. If the Repubicans were to support reasonable regulations, then there really wouldn’t be a problem, but the reality is that ANY regulation is seen as an incursion into the rights of business to do what they want. Does it cost more money to take toxic waste to a dump rather that pour it into a river? Of course, but that’s the cost of doing business. I don’t understand the doctrinaire quality of the opposition to any regulation proposed no matter how obvious it is that a regulation is needed.
Like or Dislike:
2 
9
When you mention some “over-the-top” regulation, it makes your side sound so dismissive. Another buzz word is “scare tactics”. Yet, in 2011, I witnessed a 35% increase in Minnkota Power electric rate. 35%!!!!!!!!!! It was mostly due to the burden of wind energy and the several hundred million dollar “fix” to potential haze at the boundary water canoe area. What’s scary is that not only did we not march on St. Paul, but nobody cares. When the utility company screams bloody murder, their called greedy capitalists. Each over-the-top regulation that the partisans can’t agree on adds to the load on the camel’s back. You and I can be opposites forever. I’m glad we can be civil about it. I swear that I’m not opposed to responsible regulation.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Alvin, were you aware that one of the main reasons Minnkota raised their rates was because they screwed up big time and locked in their rates for wind power for 25 years and then the bottom dropped out of that and now they are selling wind power for less than they are paying for it. Customers make up the difference. That’s why your rates went up. This was a decision they made that lost them money so it’s not all regulations for sure.
Like or Dislike:
1 
7
Oh, my goodness, realist, I’ve completely underestimated you. Please, please call the manager of PKM Electric in Warren, Mn. and say what you just said. Oh, my goodness. You might change parties if you seriously listen to the truth according to PKM. I don’t talk trash, my friend. Make the call and get back to me. If I’m wrong, I’ll tell you. Make the call, my friend.
Like or Dislike:
8 
0
Makes sense. The GOP is bought and paid for by corperations. There are no bigger corporations than the big oil companies. They continue to vote for subsidies to big oil when they are making record profits. Talk about Socialism. It’s alive and well in the USA.
Like or Dislike:
5 
9
Wow. What a string of completely original catch words and phrases. But alas, now you’ve used them all up and won’t have anything left to follow up with.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
I guess I need to stop watching NBC, CBS, ABC, and MSNBC because that is where I got the impression.
Like or Dislike:
7 
1
Glenn: Get your news from Entertainment Tonight. It’s less political and about the same amount of fluff.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1
On this we agree
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Since the earliest days of North Dakota statehood, it’s never surprised industries that they can buy politicians, it’s just been a surprise for how little they can buy politicians.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
Stop the presses. Republicans benefit from their association with big business. What a headline. ***Insert Sarcasm***
The environment is one of the few areas in modern politics where there is a clear demarkation between the parties. I may be wrong, but I do not recall any Dems screaming “drill baby drill” at campaign rallies during the last big election or going on national TV questioning whether or not global warming is even real.
If all issues were this clear cut it would be much simpler to vote your beliefs.
Like or Dislike:
1 
5
Politicians are like diapers. They both need changing regularly.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
Kind of a stink bomb lurking in both most of the time too….
Like or Dislike:
1 
2