CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world. Subscribe today!


Climate Change Rick Santorum

Published on January 6th, 2012 | by Ravinder Casley Gera

3

Rick Santorum Receives the Least Oil & Gas Money of All Remaining Republican Candidates

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

January 6th, 2012 by  

Rick Santorum

…but still vehemently denies the existence of climate change

Everyone’s jumping up and down: who is Rick Santorum? Who is Rick Santorum?!

The former Senator from Pennsylvania seemed all but invisible over the last year as a series of candidates stole the position of ‘person most likely to be the Republican nominee if it isn’t Mitt Romney.’ First Trump, then Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain, then Gingrich. All fell away after a few weeks in the spotlight, and now it’s Santorum — along with Ron Paul — who’s getting all the attention after he nearly beat Romney in the Iowa primary on Tuesday.

We’ll leave it up to The Washington Post, the BBC, et al to give you a primer on Santorum’s general take on things. One particular detail about Santorum caught our attention: he has received the least donations from oil & gas companies of any of the remaining Republican candidates.

That’s according to recent figures from the Federal Election Commission, as compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. Santorum has received a measly $5,250 from oil & gas companies and their employees so far in this election cycle, it says. Newt Gingrich has received $18,650; Michelle Bachmann, who ended her campaign after coming sixth in Iowa, $37,290; and front-runner Mitt Romney $313,200. The champion, though? Rick Perry, with a whopping $750,408.

Of course, Santorum has received less donations overall, too, as he’s widely been seen as a minor candidate. But if we divide this figure by the candidates’ overall fundraising, we can see roughly what percentage of their funding comes from the oil & gas industry. The results are striking: Rick Perry has got 4.3% of funding from oil & gas; Romney, just under 1%. Rick Santorum? Just 0.4%.

(This extremely unscientific, as the overall fundraising figures are for only the first three quarters of 2011, while the oil & gas figures reach into November. But it’s enough to get the gist.)

You might think, given this massive disparity, that Rick Santorum might be considerably less of a shill for oil & gas interests than his rival candidates. Sadly, not so much. As Grist pointed out earlier this week, Santorum is a denier of the grade-A class:

Mitt Romney has expressed qualified concern about climate change over the years, and then vacillated about how much of it is human-caused and whether we should try to do anything about it.

No wobbling of that sort from Santorum — he’s an out-and-out denier. “There is no such thing as global warming,” he told a smiling Glenn Beckon Fox News in June 2011. That same month, he told Rush Limbaugh that climate change is a liberal conspiracy: “It’s just an excuse for more government control of your life and I’ve never been for any scheme or even accepted the junk science behind the whole narrative.”

The only difference, it seems, between Santorum and other oil-loving politicians is that Santorum’s dirty fuel of choice is coal.

Santorum made a point of announcing his presidential candidacy this spring near the coalfields where his grandfather worked — so that’s your first clue as to how he feels about the dirtiest of all fossil fuels. During his 16 years as a member of Congress and then senator from Pennsylvania, Santorum was a big coal booster — and he’s continued to play that role even after his defeat in a 2006 Senate race…

But Santorum’s an equal-opportunity fossil-fuel lover. “Drill everywhere” is his philosophy when it comes to oil, he told [Glenn] Beck.

Oh well. At least we can say in the case of Santorum that he’s a denier because he means it, not because he’s been paid to be.

Source: Center for Responsive Politics | Picture: WikiMedia Commons

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.



Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , , ,


About the Author

is a London-based freelance journalist passionate about climate change, development and technology. He has written for the Daily Express, Excite.co.uk, and the Fly. He blogs at ravcasleygera.wordpress.com.



  • http://www.kompulsa.com/ Nicholas

    Whether Rick Santorum receives a little or plenty oil money, he is still disgusting and evil, and it is wrong for politicians to receive donations from corporate interests. So he cannot be excused.

  • Scott

    You might want to check this NY Times article; Santorum worked as a consultant to Consol, a gas and coal company, after he left the Senate and before announcing his presidential bid:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/06/us/politics/after-senate-santorums-beneficiaries-became-benefactors.html?_r=1&hp

    • http://ravcasleygera.com/ Rav Casley Gera

      Thanks. Unfortunately, the FEC doesn’t provide industry-level information for coal like it does for oil & gas, so it’s hard to assess the level of coal funding he’s getting. One suspects it’s high.

Back to Top ↑