Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is (still) a bad idea

The main talking points of Keystone advocates are that it's a big project, ready to go, and it will create jobs.

The main replies by Keystone opponents are that being a big project has nothing to do with being a good project; it may be ready, but we, as a country, are not ready for its consequences; it may create jobs, but they are not permanent jobs or green, sustainable jobs.

Keystone XL will produce more greenhouse gases because tar-sands gas consumes more energy than it delivers, tar-sands gas has byproducts so dirty that they must be shipped to China to burn, and much of the profit will go to Koch Industries, a company that has consistently tried to undermine our democratic institutions. We may not be able to stop the Koch brothers from spending vast sums of money to influence public opinion, but we should be able to stop allowing their egoistic schemes.

President Obama should look Keystone advocates in the eye and say, "You have opposed every single project I proposed to create jobs. You have given me nothing in return for this project. I can't stop the federal government from giving you tax breaks and subsidies, but I can sure stop you from building this pipeline."

Take a stand, President Obama. You speak for all of us.

Libertarian fantasies: Life without the Constitution

You can have your own theories but you can't have your own facts.

Charles Koch doesn't seem to agree with this maxim. He wants to have his own theories and back them up with his own facts as well. In 2012, Koch stated that only countries with economic freedom can create widespread prosperity. He says the poorest people in the most-free societies are 10 times better off than the poorest in the least free.

This is probably true, but there's no way to prove that the poor are better off because of economic freedom. The most-free economic societies, as determined by a subjective formula, are also among the richest, including Hong Kong, Singapore and Australia. The poorest countries are countries truly devoid of economic assets of any kind: North Korea, Zimbabwe, Eritrea, Cuba. The poor in the most wealthy countries are undoubtedly better off than those in the poorest. For one thing, the richest countries have a social safety net that cares for the poor.

Koch also fails to note that the Heritage Foundation, which makes up this list of most-free countries annually, has received support from Koch of up to $500,000 a year. So Koch is able to buy a think tank to support his controversial views. He hasn't received a good return on his investment, however, since the theory of most-free economies proved nothing at a cost of over a million dollars.

Koch claims that the U. S. government, by its subsidies, has forced the cost of energy up. Energy from wind energy, he says (without attribution), has been pushed up 5 times. The U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA), on the other hand, estimates the cost of wind-generated energy from new plants at approximately the same as energy from new coal plants. EIA's estimate includes subsidies for wind and the cost of building the power plants.

Koch is just flat wrong about what he calls “cronyism”, which is where the government picks winners in the economic marketplace. He's wrong because many of the most important U.S. industries were started by “cronyism”. The railroads were started by government subsidies in the decades after the Civil War. The demand the railroads created for steel and coal boosted those industries as well. WWI gave great impetus to the airline industry, which went from the fragile biplanes built by the Wright Brothers to planes that could fly higher, faster, and with greater maneuverability. These planes were financed by the government.

The jet engine, rocket-propelled flight, and advanced telemetry came out of WWII, along with the electronic computer, which was developed by the government to help target powerful, longer ranged cannon shells. During the Cold War, the U.S. developed guided missiles and miniaturized guidance systems that put a man on the moon. These miniaturized systems were refined into silicon chips that made America the world leader in computers and electronic technology for decades. The internet was designed by government projects to keep communications open during a nuclear attack. In fact, one could easily argue that the problem with American technology after the development of the world-wide web was that the government was not spending enough money on research and development of the kind that Koch calls crony capitalism.

Koch ignores the pollution caused by coal, here as elsewhere. He apparently believes that air pollution, not to mention greenhouse gas production, should not be considered as a factor in choosing between wind or fossil fuels. The fact that Koch Industries buys petroleum coke, a particularly dirty fuel, and sells it to China, proves that China's air pollution problems are less important to Koch than company profits. Koch insists in the same post that trouble begins when “companies take their eyes off the needs and wants of consumers”. Koch Industries hasn't considered the “needs and wants” of Chinese consumers when it sells dirty fuel to them, or the health of residents of Detroit and Windsor, Ontario, when Koch Industries dumps a heap of petroleum coke 40 feet high on a city block beside the Detroit River.

Koch's agenda is astonishing. He wants to abolish the federal government.

Subsidies and mandates are just two of the privileges that government can bestow on politically connected friends. Others include grants, loans, tax credits, favorable regulations, bailouts, loan guarantees, targeted tax breaks and no-bid contracts. Government can also grant monopoly status, barriers to entry and protection from foreign competition.¹

Two of the powers Koch mentions (tax credits, targeted tax breaks) rely directly on the government's ability to tax, granted by Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution. One of the main reason the Constitution was ratified in the first place was that the central government under the Articles of Confederation had no power to tax. Without the power to tax, the federal government will be powerless to do anything. Even a standing army would be out of the question. All the powers would devolve to the states.

The sovereign states would have much more power, of course, if they chose to use it. Those states which choose to follow the libertarian principles of Koch will likely have very weak governments. Government services would be minimal. Social safety nets would be nonexistent. These states would most likely be the southern and mountain states that currently vote reliably Republican.

The other states would continue to have strong governments with social services. They would be wealthier, because they would not have their federal taxes redistributed to the poorer states, as they do now.

Koch would also repeal the commerce clause of the Constitution, which permits the government regulation of business. This clause was used to prevent private businesses from discriminating against minorities. Repeal of the commerce clause would end civil rights in this country, or rather, in the new countries that would be organized from the former red states.

Koch would not oppose such a move, even though it would mean the return of segregation and Jim Crow laws. Koch gives tens of millions of dollars to his various charities, he has seldom, if ever, given a dime to a charity that benefits minorities or supports civil rights. His views on this subject are clear.

Koch ends his post on “corporate cronyism” by announcing that

If America re-establishes the proper role of business in society, all kinds of benefits will accrue. Our economy will rebound. Our liberties will be restored. And when President Obama tells an entrepreneur “You didn’t build that,” everyone will know better.

If Koch's plan to suppress the taxation and commerce clauses of the Constitution were successful, only giant corporations could afford to conduct business in America because they are the only ones that could afford to build the roads, pipelines, and electrical lines that would be necessary to build anything. We are indeed fortunate that Koch's array of fake grassroots organizations with their phony statistics and well-paid shills has not yet succeeded. Do not believe this man. He wishes us all ill.

1Charles Koch, Corporate Cronyism Harms America, Wall Street Journal, Sept. 9, 2012, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443847404577629841476562610.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop.

Snopes.com committed a major blunder

Snopes.com committed a major blunder when it rated as false a rumor that Koch Industries (Koch) was paying the defense attorney's fees in the Trayvon Martin murder trial. Koch.com, a website owned by Koch Industries, still publishes Snopes's judgment on the front page of its web site, although the article was published back in April 2012. KochFacts.com implies that Snopes backs up its other claim, that MSNBC falsely accused Koch of supporting the Florida stand-your-ground statute that let Martin's killer go free. This judgment puts Snopes squarely on the side of an organization, Koch Industries, that routinely spreads disinformation about climate change, its own activities, and the reputations of others.

Snopes did not investigate the issue thoroughly enough and was too willing to take the word of company spokespersons. They also wrote that Mark O'Mara, the defense lawyer, said something he didn't say. Snopes went to the Koch web site, kochfacts.com, where it found that Koch denies having anything to do with "stand-your-ground” laws. This is a completely false assertion. Koch-financed groups gave $75,000 to ALEC between 2005 and 2008, a period when ALEC and  the NRA were promoting stand-your-ground laws to state legislatures. ALEC resident fellow Michael Hough explained in a 2008 interview that NRA and ALEC were working together to push stand-your-ground laws to state legislatures.

Koch had two representatives from its Koch Companies Public Sector on the Public Interest and Criminal Law study group at American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in Cincinnati in 2011. Michael K. Morgan of Koch Industries has been on the board of ALEC since 1999.

Snopes also took Koch's word that Koch had “nothing whatsoever” to do with the defendant in the Trayvon Martin case. As verification, Snopes posts an interview with the defense attorney, Mark O'Mara. The interviewer asks O'Mara who financed the defense.

Interviewer: Who gave? Who were the people who gave?

O'Mara: It's funny, because we got a lot of $5 contributions, a lot of $100 contributions...

Snopes should have noticed that O'Mara did not answer this question fully. O'Mara has recently asked the court to pay $300,000 for expenses in the case, so O'Mara did not get the entire amount he was seeking in small contributions. Anyone trying to answer the question of whether Koch helped fund the defense cannot give a definitive answer on the basis of this interview, because the interviewer did not ask about Koch Industries, nor did O'Mara volunteer anything about it.

Snopes was faced with this dilemma. There is no concrete evidence the rumor is true, but there is equally as little evidence that it is false. Snopes decided to believe Koch. There is plenty of evidence on Kochfacts.com and elsewhere, however, that Koch is entirely unreliable. The site is a compendium of scurrilous charges and half-truths which must be familiar to Snopes from every other web site in the right-wing echo chamber.

Kochfacts states that “Democratic operative” Karen Finney wrongly accused Koch of a “connection” with Trayvon Martin's death. This is a false statement, in two ways. Finney did not mention Koch as the cause of Martin's death. She excoriated several Republicans for heightening the atmosphere of racial tension through their thoughtless remarks and personal attacks. Finney made no statement about whether Koch had anything to do with Florida's "stand your ground" law, for she was referring to events after Martin's death, not before it. The remark has been repeated out of context on numerous web sites, but mere repetition does not convert falsehood into truth. Furthermore, Finney is now a commentator on MSNBC, not a Democratic operative. Kochfacts.com calling her an operative is simply another falsehood intended to undermine the reputation of MSNBC.

Koch has underwritten numerous false and misleading statements. Greenpeace documents Koch's funding of a polar bear study, a report that claims that polar bears are not endangered by global warming. This subject is important for oil companies, like Koch, who intend to profit from oil in the arctic. The study discloses that it received funding from Koch Industries, the American Petroleum Institute, and Exxon-Mobil Corporation. The study was a fraud, however, because it pretended to be a research paper and it was not. Its authors, one of whom was an astrophysicist, had no professional knowledge of polar bears and did no original research for the article. Subsequently, two actual experts on polar bears published a response that the Koch-funded study did not adequately support its radical claim that non-climate factors were causing the polar bear population decline.¹

Other examples of Koch front groups publishing misinformation are too numerous to mention here.

Snopes had a problem. It wanted to make a decision about whether this rumor, about Koch paying O'Mara's fee, was true or false, but it had insufficient data. Koch said it didn't pay, but Koch is a notably unreliable witness, having told half-truths or outright lies on numerous occasions. O'Mara said he received small donations, but he didn't deny receiving larger ones, or promises of future donations.

Snopes should have given up at this point and said that the truth of the rumor is unknowable. Instead, it made an unwarranted assumption, that the rumor “appeared to be tied” to a coincidence of other popular beliefs. Saying a rumor “appears” to be something proves nothing at all. It is an opinion based on an assumption, not a conclusion based on facts.

Rumors arise from an excess of secrecy and a shortage of facts. The rumors about Koch Industries arise from the fact that Koch has tried for years to hide its political activities behind numerous front groups and conservative organizations. The habit of secrecy is deeply ingrained.

ALEC also has a history of secrecy. It disbanded the Public Safety and Elections study group--which pushed NRA-backed laws--in response to pressure from civil rights groups and its corporate sponsors. ALEC did not stop its activities in these areas, however. It just transferred the assets into other study groups. The NRA continued to be a partner for ALEC.

The net effect of Snopes's rash assumption is that Kochfacts.com now features Snopes.com on its front page, implying that Snopes has verified all the lies and half-truths that follow. Snopes should repair its reputation by removing its flawed opinion from the website and do some more serious fact checking of Kochfacts.com.  

1Koch Industries Secretly Funding the Climate Denial Machine 25, Greenpeace USA, 2010.