Sunday, December 31, 2006

How Foundation Grants Affect Public Policy

An Open Letter to the Signers of “Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action” and Others Concerned About Global Warming

Endorsers of“A Call to Truth, Prudence, and Protection of the Poor:An Evangelical Response to Global Warming"

State Global Warming Laws
How Foundation Grants Affect Climate Policy
By David Hogberg and James Dellinger

The Bush Administration has opted in-stead to promote voluntary agreements. One,dubbed the “Asia-Pacific Partnership on CleanDevelopment and Climate,” encourages the transfer of greenhouse-gas reducing tech-nologies between the U.S., India, Australia,China, Japan and South Korea and would involve the private sector in reducing green-house gases.

But that’s not good enough for the envi-ronmental movement. With its global warm-ing agenda stalled on the national level, greengroups are trekking to state capitals to pres-sure lawmakers to require mandatory caps onthe emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Funded heavily by major philanthropic foundations, particularly the Energy Foundation and, to a lesser extent, the Pew Charitable Trusts, the big guns of the environmental movement have won an im-pressive victory:

In 2005 seven states in the Northeast agreed to limit greenhouse gases by participating in a Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI. Green groups are nowmoving to create similar state and regionalagreements on the West Coast and in the South and Midwest.
Page 2
Foundation Watch 2June 2006 Editor: Matthew Vadum Publisher: Terrence Scanlon Foundation Watch is published by Capital Research Center, a non-partisan education and research organization, classified by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) public charity. Address:1513 16th Street, N.W.Washington, DC 20036-1480 Phone: (202) 483-6900Long-Distance: (800) 459-3950E-mail

Web Site: Reprints are available for $2.50 prepaidto Capital Research Center.

Critics in the scientific community ob-serve that there is not enough hard evidence to justify the drastic policies proposed by global warming alarmists. But advocacy groups and their foundation funders are stampeding local communities and state lawmakers into taking actions they will regret.

New York and New England Take the Pledge In December 2005, the governors of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire and Vermont arrived at a far-reaching agreement. They said that by the year 2019 their states would cut theirgreenhouse gas emissions by ten percent below 1990 levels using a “cap-and-trade”system. Under “cap-and-trade” every power plant in the RGGI states would have a fixed limit on the amount of greenhouse gases itcould emit. Power plants that exceeded the amount could purchase “credits” from power plants that emitted less than their prescribed limit. Although RGGI currently applies only to about 180 power plants, it is estimated thatit eventually could include some 600 electricity generators that emit greenhouse gases.

Interestingly, the governors of Massachusetts and Rhode Island declined to join the agreement, arguing that the price their power plants would have to pay to purchase the credits was too high. According to the agreement, each state legislature has to pass laws by December 31, 2008 to conform to RGGI,which is set to take effect on January 1, 2009.RGGI is the culmination of much pushingand pulling in Northeastern state capitals. ...

Page 3
3 June 2006 Foundation Watch For frequent updates on environmental groups,nonprofits, foundations, and labor unions, check out the CRC-Greenwatch Blog at


Targeting Freedom
Capital Research Center’s recently published book, The Green Wave: Environmentalism and its consequences by Dr. Bonner Cohen was reviewed in the Washington Times.


No comments: