16.1k Shares 0



16.1k

0







Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is facing controversy after she erupted on a Greenpeace activist who questioned her on massive campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry.

“Regarding climate change, can we have your word that you’ll reject fossil fuel money in the future for your campaign?” Greenpeace activist Eva Resnick-Day asked.

Clinton’s response was twofold. She both vaguely denied the accusations and blamed Democratic rival Senator Bernie Sanders’ supporters for bringing forth such claims.

“I don’t have,” said Clinton before restarting her comments. “I have money from people who work for fossil fuel companies. I am so sick. I am so sick of the Sanders campaign lying about me. I’m sick of it."

Resnick-Day has no affiliation to the Sanders campaign and asserts that the non-partisan environmental activist group treats all candidates equally. “Let's be clear. I do NOT work for the sanders campaign,” wrote Resnick-Day on Twitter. “I work at @greenpeaceusa & we asked all candidates to reject fossil fuel money.”

The Pledge to #FixDemocracy is an initiative sponsored by Greenpeace USA along with 20 other organizations, to hold all candidates responsible for connections to the fossil fuel industry, an industry which decimates the environment on a daily basis.

It asks candidates to defend “the right to vote for all” and support “common-sense measures like public funding for campaigns and overturning Citizens United to ensure a government by and for the people, not the biggest donors.”

On the environment, it calls on candidates to “prove that I work for the people by refusing money from fossil fuel interests and by championing these solutions for a people powered democracy on the campaign trail.”



Clinton has still failed to sign the pledge while Sanders signed it immediately upon release in January.

A Greenpeace document from 1 April titled “These Are the Facts on Fossil Fuel Money Going to the Clinton and Sanders Campaigns” outlines the semantic differences between PACs or corporations and lobbyists, board members and executives.



“Fifty-eight lobbyists that work for the coal, oil and gas companies have given $138,400 directly to the Clinton campaign,” the document reads. “Forty-seven of those lobbyists gave the maximum allowable amount — $2,700.”

“Eleven oil and gas industry lobbyists also bundled $1,327,210 for Clinton’s campaign as of the end of 2015,” Greenpeace continues. Because there is a legal cap on donations from an individual, lobbyists often employ their family members to maximize household donations. The fact is this: lobbyists equal influence.

Greenpeace adds that Clinton’s campaign has accepted $309,107 from fossil fuel companies through lobbyists who work for them, according to OpenSecrets.org.

All of this is in addition to fossil fuel industry donations to Clinton’s Super PAC, which is not technically affiliated with the candidate, as per the law. Priorities USA Action, the “main super PAC supporting Secretary Clinton,” has received $3.25 million from employees of fossil fuel companies.

As for Clinton’s claims that Sanders has received money from fossil fuel companies, Greenpeace cites the $53,760 Sanders has in fact taken from employees of oil and gas over his career. While this is still a fraction of Clinton’s money, it is likely that this money was received well before Sanders took the Greenpeace pledge.

Sanders’ campaign has rejected big money donors, instead relying on individual contributions and a massive grassroots organization.

Clinton tactitly supported the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, which has recently been under heavy debate and pressure from environmental groups, before changing her position to reject the pipeline. Sanders opposed it early on.

Resnick-Day reflected on Clinton’s vitriolic response and the since viral campaign.

“I was genuinely shocked by her response,” she said. “But I want to make sure we are focused on the issue at hand: asking our candidates to take a stand to fix our democracy. Rejecting fossil fuel money sends a strong signal.”