Major Companies Distance Themselves From U.S. Chamber Campaign Against Obama’s Climate Plan

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/06/03/3444143/member-companies-chamber-climate/

BY JOSH ISRAEL JUNE 3, 2014

Days before President Obama’s EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy announced sweeping new rules to limit the amount of carbon pollution that existing power plants can dump into the atmosphere, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce released a report blasting the then-unreleased regulations as certain to raise electricity prices, kill jobs, and slow the economy. But leading climate-friendly members of Chamber don’t want to be associated with its anti-climate report. Several member companies, contacted by ThinkProgress, declined to endorse the Chamber’s efforts against the administration’s move to address a direct cause of climate change.

ThinkProgress reached out to several dozen of the major corporations that have either contributed to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or had executives currently serving on its board of directors. None endorsed the new report.

A spokeswoman for Intel directly distanced itself from the Chamber’s position. ...

While less explicit, other company spokespersons also distanced themselves from the report. While not addressing the specific issue, UPS told ThinkProgress that it “belongs to many organizations and while we share common views on some issues, we do not share the same views on all issues.” Verizon, reaffirming its commitment to sustainability and environmental responsibility, said, “While we are members of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, we generally are not involved in policy issues that do not directly affect our business, such as the regulation of power plants.” Coca-Cola said it has no position on the Chamber’s report, 3M said it is still reviewing it, and Lockheed Martin said that it “has not evaluated the chamber’s report,” noting, “and it’s our understanding that the proposed regulations do not apply to us as it involves power plants.” MGM Resorts, while noting its commitment to clean energy, said it is not able “to claim the authority to comment on the issue of power plant emissions.”

Prudential wrote: “The Chamber does not speak on behalf of Prudential.”

-----

Sam Jewler, communications officer for Public Citizen’s U.S. ChamberWatch program, told ThinkProgress that even some of the fossil fuel utilities have been more open to greenhouse gas regulations and clean energy than the Chamber. “There are a number of companies that are part of the Chamber that would rather lobby than adapt to the urgency of climate change and the fact that we could have economic growth in the clean energy sectors,” he observed. Jewler added, “On the other hand, there’re also utilities that are major players in American energy and are part of the Chamber that think these regulations are fair and flexible enough for them to work with. It’s another case of the Chamber not doing what’s best for the economy or the American people and not representing the full range of businesses in the economy.”

In 2009 and 2010, Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft and Best Buy distanced themselves from the Chamber over its opposition to climate change action. Several other companies, including Apple, Pacific Gas & Electric, and Yahoo left the trade association over its environmental policies — as did Exelon (the nation’s largest utility). One such former member, Nike, joined with more than 100 other companies in support of the new EPA carbon standards.

-----