The League Of Conservation Voters (LCV) is a partisan organization whose goal is electing Democratic candidates. During the 2010 election cycle, the group spent $5.5 million in independent expenditures – 98% of which went toward aiding Democratic candidates. In the final weeks of the 2010 special election in Massachusetts, they spent $350,000 attacking Scott Brown.
Beyond their partisan nature, the specific claims in this ad are extremely misleading. The votes cited in the ad were bipartisan in nature; in all instances, Senator Brown had the same position as multiple Democratic Senators who believed that the votes would have been job killers. Last month, even President Obama came out against new proposed regulations from the EPA, citing the nation’s weak economy.
Furthermore, the scorecard the LCV uses to grade Brown includes votes that were unrelated to the environment, including votes against higher taxes and one for the construction of a border fence.
“Brown Sided With Big Oil, Taking Thousands From Oil Companies Just Weeks Before He Voted To Keep Their Special Tax Breaks.”
Senator Brown Has Said He Would Be Willing To Support Ending These Tax Breaks As Part Of Comprehensive Tax Reform That Lower Rates For Everyone. “While I am willing to consider any serious tax reform proposal, major changes to the tax code must be part of a comprehensive tax reformpackage. In this period of economic uncertainty, I believe that keeping the tax burden on individuals and families low is one of the most powerful ways to restore investment, job growth, and the financial stability of our economy. Lowering the American corporate tax rate, which is currently the second highest in the industrialized world, would help American businesses attract more capital, invest in equipment, and create new jobs.” (Scott P. Brown, United States Senator, Constituent Letter)
The Opposition To The Oil Tax Break Repeal Was Bipartisan, And Ultimately Senate Democrats Were The Ones Who Preserved The Tax Breaks For Big Oil. “Senate Democrats have jettisoned President Obama’s proposal to help pay for jobs legislation by eliminating billions of dollars in oil-and-gas industry tax breaks. Obama had proposed stripping roughly $40 billion over a decade in industry tax incentives as one of the offsets in his $447 billion jobs package. But the Senate Democratic leaders, who are struggling for votes, have altered the offset plan by pushing a surtax on millionaires to pay for the jobs bill. A Senate Democratic leadership aide confirmed that the changes leave the oil-and-gas tax-break repeals on the cutting room floor. Going after industry tax breaks has been a pillar of Democratic messaging, and Obama attacks the incentives frequently in speeches. But leaving them out could help Senate Democratic leaders corral votes from conservative oil-state Democrats.” (Ben Genman, “Senate Dems’ Jobs Plan Won’t Eliminate Oil Tax Breaks, The Hill, 10/5/2011)
“And Brown Voted Repeatedly Against Protecting Our Environment And Public Health.”
Aisle On Bipartisan Legislation To Protect Our Communities From Harmful Pollutants.
- Last year, Brown worked with Tom Carper (D-DE) and others on a bill aimed at keeping our air clean by restricting emissions of harmful pollutants from power plant
- Brown co-sponsored the Oil Spill Prevention and Mitigation Improvement Act with Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) that required oil companies to have plans for responding to an oil spill before getting an offshore drilling lease.
- Brown cosponsored legislation with Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and others to provide tax credits and rebates for home energy efficiency improvements.
- This Congress, Senator Brown has supported legislation that promotes energy conservation in our vehicles and homes that would both help the environment and start to wean us off of foreign oil.
- He has worked to protect Massachusetts’ natural resources by co-sponsoring legislation to protect estuaries and worked to ensure that money from oil and gas leases are directed to funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
- In the State Senate, he strongly advocated for energy efficiency and recycling efforts and supported legislation to advance the development ofrenewable energy in the Commonwealth.
“No Wonder Brown Got A Rating Of Zero For The League Of Conservation Voters.”
The League Of Conservation Voters Have A History Of Cherry-Picking Votes To Artificially Influence Their Scorecards. “By Choosing To Score Only Issues With Overwhelming Liberal Support, And Little If Any Support From Conservatives, The LCV Delivered Artificially High Marks To Liberals And Artificially Low Ones To Conservatives [In 2001].” (The National Center For Public Policy Research Website, www.nationalcenter.org, Accessed 7/14/10)
The LCV Includes Non-Environmental Votes Taken By Senator Brown, Including His Support For A Border Fence & His Vote To Keep Taxes Low.
- Senator Brown Voted With Six Democrats To Permit Consideration Of An Amendment That Would Require The Completion Of A 700-Mile Border Fence Along The Southern Border. “DeMint, R-S.C., motion to suspend Senate Rules to permit the consideration of the DeMint amendment no. 4177 that would require completion of a 700-mile southern border fence to restrain all pedestrian traffic. It also would instruct the Homeland Security secretary to submit a report to Congress within 180 days of the bill’s enactment detailing progress towards the fence’s completion.” (H.R. 4899, CQ Vote #172: Motion rejected 45-52: R 39-1; D 6-49; I 0-2, 5/27/10, Brown Voted Yea)
- Senator Brown Voted With 15 Democrats Against The Sanders Substitute Amendment Which Would Have Increased Taxes For People Who Make More Than $200,000 A Year. “Sanders, I-Vt., motion to suspend Rule 22 to permit the consideration of a Sanders amendment no. 4809 that would extend 2001 and 2003 tax rates on most income up to $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for married couples filing joint returns. It also would set an estate tax at 2009 rates for two years with a 45 percent tax rate on the value of estates in excess of $3.5 million.” (H.R. 4853, CQ Vote #275: Motion rejected 43-57: R 0-42; D 42-14; I 1-1, 12/15/10, Brown Voted Nay)