Cross-Posted from DeSmogBlog
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) - known by its critics as a “corporate bill mill” – has hit the ground running in 2013, pushing “models bills” mandating the teaching of climate change denial in public school systems.
January hasn’t even ended, yet ALEC has already planted its ”Environmental Literacy Improvement Act“ - which mandates a “balanced” teaching of climate science in K-12 classrooms - in the state legislatures of Oklahoma, Colorado, and Arizona so far this year.
In the past five years since 2008, among the hottest years in U.S. history, ALEC has introduced its “Environmental Literacy Improvement Act“ in 11 states, or over one-fifth of the statehouses nationwide. The bill has passed in four states, an undeniable form of “big government” this “free market” organization decries in its own literature.
ALEC’s ”model bills” are written by and for corporate lobbyists alongside conservative legislators at its annual meetings. ALEC raises much of its corporate funding from the fossil fuel industry, which in turn utilizes ALEC as a key - though far from the only - vehicle to ram through its legislative agenda through in the states.
A Frankenstein Co-Created with Heartland Institute
A DeSmogBlog investigation last year found that the Environmental Literacy Improvement Act’s origins date back to 2000.
The Act’s creation is directly connected to the ongoing efforts of another corporate-funded group, the Heartland Institute – of “Heartland Institute Exposed” fame – a group well plugged into the climate change denial machine.
ALEC’s Natural Resources Task Force, now known as its Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force, adopted this model at a time when the Task Force was headed by Sandy Liddy Bourne. Bourne, who served in this capacity from 1999-2004, would eventually ascend to the role of Director of Legislation and Policy for ALEC in 2004.
Upon leaving ALEC in 2006, Bourne become Heartland’s Vice President for Policy Strategy. Today she serves as Executive Director of the American Energy Freedom Center, an outfit she co-heads with Arthur G. Randol. Randol is a longtime lobbyist and PR flack for ExxonMobil, a corporation which endowed the climate change denial machine for years.
Heartland’s website still lists Bourne as one of its “experts,” stating that ”Under her leadership, 20 percent of ALEC model bills were enacted by one state or more, up from 11 percent.”
Importantly, Heartland is still a member of ALEC’s Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force that originally passed the Environmental Literacy Improvement Act.
According to internal documents leaked to and published by DeSmogBlog in Feb. 2012, Heartland obtained funding for a “Global Warming Curriculum for K-12 Classrooms” project beginning in 2012. This curriculum aims to teach that there “is a major controversy over whether or not humans are changing the weather.”
If this sounds similar to ALEC’s model bill, it should, given the fact that the two outfits share funding from the same honey pot. In fact, Heartland actively promotes the ALEC model on its website.
Model Bill Introduced in OK, CO, and AZ
Oklahoma and Colorado came first and within just over a week, Arizona followed suit in proposing the ALEC climate science “mis-education” bill.
Oklahoma: Sooner Rather than Later
On Jan. 18, the Sooner State’s legislature took the lead for 2013 in pushing the ALEC climate change education model in the form of HB 1674, the “Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act.”
HB 1674 calls for the teaching of “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories,” including of global warming, saying it’s a theory steeped in “controversy” - not that the actual scientific record thinks so.
This is necessary, the bill states, “to help students develop critical thinking skills they need in order to become intelligent, productive, and scientifically informed citizens,” going on to explain that it’s important to explore “differences of opinion on scientific issues.”
The ALEC model similarly calls for the teaching of “critical thinking so that students will be able to fairly and objectively evaluate scientific…controversies.” The model also mandates creation of “an atmosphere of respect for different opinions and open-mindedness to new ideas” in the scientific sphere.
The OK bill is sponsored by Rep. Gus Blackwell (R-61), unsurprisingly a dues-paying member of ALEC. According to a Dec. 2012 report published by the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) titled, “Buying Influence,” Blackwell has paid for his attendance at least one ALEC meeting with taxpayer money.
National Institute on Money in State Politics‘ data demonstrates that Blackwell’s largest pool of campaign funding for his 2012 electoral victory came from the oil and gas industry, which gave him $28,800. This includes taking $7,500 from shale gas industry giant Chesapeake Energy, $2,350 from ConocoPhillips, and $1,000 each from Koch Industries and coal industry giant Duke Energy, among others. All of these corporations also fund ALEC.
Colorado’s Same Day Affair
One sure sign of a coordinated, ALEC-lead effort is the fact that Colorado’s state legislature introduced the ALEC model on the same day as did Oklahoma’s. The two states, it’s worth noting, share a border on Oklahoma’s panhandle.
On Jan. 18, 2013, eight representatives and four senators introduced HB 13-1089, coining the bills the “Academic Freedom Acts.”
Paralleling the language in the ALEC model and the Oklahoma bill, the HB 13-1089 aims to ”Inform students about scientific evidence and to help students develop critical thinking skills,” also recognizing that the teaching of the concept global warming “can cause controversy.”
One of the senators co-sponsoring the bill, Rep. Scott Renfroe (R-13) is an ALEC dues-paying member. He’s also attended at least one ALEC meeting paid for by Colorado taxpayers, according to the CMD’s “Buying Influence” report.
Of the $91,000 dollars he raised for the 2012 election, over $5,000 of it came from the oil, gas and electric utilities industry,according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics. This includes taking money from Chesapeake Energy, Anadarko Petroleum, Williams Companies, and the Colorado Oil and Gas Association.
The Arizona (Sun) Devils are in the Details
Eight days later, ALEC’s model bill made its way to Arizona, a state sharing a “corner border” with Colorado.
Arizona’s SB 1213 was introduced on Jan. 26, 2013 by six senators that, as it turns out, are all dues-paying ALEC members. Five of the six have attended conferences totally on the taxpayer dime, according to CMD’s report.
SB 1213 incorporates the “critical thinking skills” operative language, the “scientific controversies” operative language and the ”teaching…global warming” can “cause controversy” operative language.
In short, SB 1213 is the same exact copycat ALEC model bill that’s been proposed in both Oklahoma and Colorado.
ALEC Celebrates Groundhog Day 2013
Groundhog Day is on Feb. 2 and fittingly, ALEC and its corporate patrons continue to sing the same tune, simultaneously promoting fracking, blockading a transition to renewable energy and pushing bills mandating teaching climate change denial on par with actual science.
“It’s the same old schtick every year, the guy comes out with a big old stick, raps on the door,” actor Bill Murray said in the classic film “Groundhog Day.” “They pull the little rat out, they talk to him, the rat talks back, then they tell us what’s gonna happen.”
Replace “guy” with “corporate lobbyist” and “legislators” with “rats” and that’s ALEC in a nutshell, serving as a mere microcosm of the current American political system at-large.



25 Comments

Go after ALEC by boycotting any company or interest of any kind and drying up their funding.
That’s the soft underbelly of the Right. Scare the shit out of the commercial interests that fund them and they’ll retreat like the bunch of cowards they really are.
Avoiding them all could be a full time job.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ALEC_Corporations
So they’re following the anti-evolutionist’s playbook. Stir up a controversy, then mandate the teaching of nonsense in the name of “scientific balance.”
At least with the climate issue, the position of the deniers is demonstrated more ridiculous with each passing day.
They can deny it all they want… it’s here, it’s clear and it’s loud
Before reading the article I guessed Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas. Wow, I’ve seen the effects and know extraction is huge in Colorado but these ALEC front men can’t sell this b.s there, hopefully. The Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas and Arizona legislatures are in the hands of wingnuts. It’s really time to start splitting this Union into regional gov’ts, please. I have nothing in common with these flat earthers.
“…“to help students develop critical thinking skills they need…”
If this is the argument in favor, maybe it’s a good thing the Texas Republican Party Platform clearly states its objection to teaching critical thinking skills.
Maybe a bill could be proposed mandating the teaching of how lobbying front groups and industry “think tanks” operate behind the scenes in all civics classes.
You know – to teach “critical thinking” skills
Just what Oklahoma, Colorado, and Arizona need–more drought and wildfires. Here, clear, and loud indeed.
Just to be clear, I will put our Texas state legislaturds up against ANY in the country for being anti-intellecutal, anti-education, anti-evolution and anti-global warming.
OK, CO, and AZ are NOT crazier than we are. It’s just that our legislaturds is not in session yet. We only meet for 144 daya everyo other year.
Thank God for that.
Just avoiding a few of them — particularly in key areas — would be enough. A number of corporations have already severed ties with ALEC in the past few years.
In 21st century America, anyone with a big enough bankroll and a stupid enough audience can buy his own facts, science be damned.
Ok, I’ll boycot Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., Member of ALEC Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force
Their meatloaf tends to be dry.
In spite of it’s ALEC pedigree, the bill seems spot on. Consider:
If you felt that teaching in the schools was skewed in an anti-scientific manner, how would you word such a bill? Could you do any better? I doubt it. The objections to this bill have to do with a fear that students will become acquainted to evidence that mainstream media (other than Fox news; and there, probably only scantily) will not tell them about.
For example, if you’re just fine with Al Gore’ error-filled “Inconvenient Truth” being show in American classrooms, without the 77 page corrective document which is required to accompany it in the UK, because it satisfies some political or psychological need of yours, then you’re not going to welcome a scientist, like Nir Shaviv does here, calmly and rationally picking about climate sciency – sounding claims. Nor will you welcome his creating a climate model which does not point to catastrophe, with a smaller “residual error” than the IPCC mnodels.
Personally, I think the bill should go further. Citizens should be taught about scientific modelling, both it’s successes and failures. All citizens should know why John Von Neumann, probably one of the greatest mathematicians of the prior, mid-century, said,
They should also be taught about the politics evident (and studied) within scientific communities, and even the irrationality and groupthink. They should also be taught about how scientific paradigms honestly change, and also about different philosophies of science. (So they can decide, for themselves, if Popperian falsifiability is a quaint notion to be dispensed with; or whether it is indispensable.)
It’s simple logic that, generally speaking, liberals hold the moral high ground. Money does not pour in to special interests to ensure fairness. It goes toward gaining unfair advantage. That is why conservative groups are far better funded than liberal ones. Conservatives frequently win because people are easily fooled.
The problem with that is that it ignores overwhelming scientific consensus in order to conflate political and religious controversy with scientific controversy.
“…Texas state legislaturds..”
Didn’t think I needed a snark tag.
“…the bill seems spot on.”
I agree with you as far as your comment refers to the text you highlight. But I am reminded that similar language is typically included in efforts to put “intelligent design” into science classrooms. “Teach the controversy” has become right wing speak for equating opinions with facts and confusing religious precepts with scientific theories.
Do you have an example? AFAIK, you can’t find thousands of scientists who dissent from the evolutionary consensus. I think at least one court case has found that creationist ‘science’ is just dressed up religion, so at least in that court’s district, you can’t pass off your science-y sounding religion as actual science.
You’d be right at home here in OKC. After bringing in all your carbon paid flakes to deny real science you could tackle that pesky “Teachin’ the chilluns to spell taters with a p” conundrum.
Wow, what a rational, insightful comment! Shall we assume that Popperian falsifiability is of no concern or interest to you, and what you call “science” has evolved beyond the means of us lesser mortals to grasp?
In your sciencey world, is omitted variable fraud not fraud, at all, but rather an exciting technique to get the results that real scientists say they must get?
Once again, we get John Galted by Metamars and his War On Science.
The government, corporations, and the bankster billionaires now use COINTELPRO against environmental activists. Just as anti-war protesters have been neutralized, popular protest against our unsustainable energy policies must be suppressed.
It is an impossible task. The most evil people in the world against a motley crew of idealists and old scraggly hippies. Metmars has chosen the side that wants to destroy our fragile planet.
There is one way to win this great battle.
Only in this country. Climate change denial with that ridiculous dinosaurs argument.
The rest of the world, namely the Arctic, is dealing with this realistically.
Take, for sake of argument, that climate change isn’t happening, even though it is. That doesn’t give us a license to blow up the planet. What kind of a world will we be leaving?
Thank you for another important article, Steve Horn.
Let us remember that everyone who says we can have Energy Independence through Fossil Fuels is in Climate-Science Denial.
Amen, brother.
Thanks very much for the post Steve! Who’d have known. Here in CO “I’ve just begun to fight” and am beginning to inform interested parties. As a meteorlogist following the ongoing efforts to discredit sound science, I’m constantly amazed at the actions the “Antis” take. There’s always a new wrinkle. I was looking through our Colorado bill and found the final section astounding:
“SECTION 3. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.”
WTF!? Necesary for the immediate preservation of public peace, health, and safety? How about: Necesary for the immediate preservation corporate profits.
Sheesh