Obama slams influence of dirty energy money in Congress

Published by

Climate Progress

President Barack Obama disparaged dirty energy money being pumped into political campaigns in a speech before Binghamton University on Friday, saying that members of Congress’s energy committees didn’t have the public’s best interest at heart because they were bought and sold by “fossil fuel industries.”

“What we’ve seen too often in Congress,” Obama said, “is that the fossil fuel industries tend to be very… influential, let’s put it that way, on the energy committees in Congress.”

He’s right. According to numbers on OpenSecrets.org, the members of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources have received political contributions totaling $6,219,543 from oil and coal industries, with Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) topping the list with $1,155,084 donations.

This undue influence, Obama went on, has contributed to Congressional resistance to increasing energy efficient appliances, and investing in new clean energy technologies.

“In some cases we’ve actually been criticized that it’s a socialist plot that’s restrict restricting your freedom for us to encourage energy-efficient light bulbs, for example,” Obama said, mocking some members of Congress like Reps. Michael Burgess (R-TX) and Joe Barton (R-TX), who have said essentially that. “I never understood that. But you hear those arguments.”

Overall, the President’s remarks on the environment struck a strong note on climate change and clean energy. “Climate change is real. The planet is getting warmer. And you’ve got several billion Chinese, Indians, Africans and others who also want cars, refrigerators, electricity,” Obama said. “As they go through their development cycle, the planet cannot sustain the same kinds of energy use as we have right now.”

Unfortunately, though, Obama’s policy has lagged behind his rhetoric. While his new climate action plan has indicated that he will take environmental issues more seriously in his second term, the public is still waiting for a final decision from Obama on approving or discontinuing the Keystone XL pipeline, a hotly debated tar sands pipeline set to cut from Canada through the Midwest to Texas. He has also moved to expand fracking projects on public lands despite known environmental and health risks. The U.S. government has also remained a key purveyor of coal under Obama’s administration, despite his detractors’ assertions that he has a war on the fossil fuel.

This article was originally published on Climate Progress

Share
Published by

Recent Posts

South Korea auto giant bets $A8 billion on AI, hydrogen and solar-powered industrial future

South Korean car and EV maker invests nearly 9 trillion won in an “innovation hub”…

3 March 2026

Queensland LNP adds four-hour Bundaberg big battery to proposed call-in list

Another big battery proposal heads to Queensland planning purgatory following requests to call in the…

3 March 2026

Networks seek rule change to cut investment “red tape,” critics spy a new door to gold-plating

A rule change request from Energy Networks Australia seeks to shift some projects out of…

3 March 2026

Strikes on Iran show why quitting fossil fuels is more important than ever

Reducing oil dependence and boosting renewables and electric transport is often framed as climate policy.…

3 March 2026

Windy February sets new generation records, big batteries put the squeeze on gas

The Australian electricity grid has closed out the summer of 2025-26 with a month of…

3 March 2026

Australian renewables pipeline “running laps” around net zero targets. It’s the pace that is lacking

New data on Australia's solar, wind and battery development pipeline confirms that the constraint has…

3 March 2026