By Phil Kent, SLF President
As appeared in Investors Business Daily, May 24, 2002
As Aesop observed: "We often give our enemies the means of our own destruction." Nowhere is this more evident than in the litigation-frenzied world of corporate America, where industrial giants and their charitable foundations provide tens of millions of dollars a year to radical environmental groups bent on tearing down the very institutions funding them.
The question is: Why do corporations and foundations give to those who would destroy them? The answer: to shield themselves against the certain wave of costly, image-shattering environmental lawsuits.
In recent months, Jesse Jackson has come under fire for soliciting tax-deductible contributions from corporations against which he promised to campaign on alleged employment diversity issues.
Environmentalists have taken the same approach to corporate blackmail. Their sophisticated political strategies involve direct lobbying, public opinion surveys based on headline-grabbing junk science, and a constant churn of court cases based on clean air and water laws, as well as wetlands statutes.
Extorting 'Grants'
By implied threats of litigation, based on pseudo-scientific studies with emotionally polarizing titles such as "Death, Disease, and Dirty Power," "Darkening Skies," and "Children at Risk," radical environmentalist groups extort "grants" from energy and industrial corporations to fund their activities.
The cost of new taxes, fees and regulations advocated by these groups is ultimately paid by the American consumer. In many instances, energy companies and alleged industrial polluters are not even the direct defendants in litigation; the Environmental Protection Agency and the various state environmental agencies are.
The moving standards of air quality involving rates of particulate matter, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, argued and won in various legislatures, provide ample questions about acceptable levels for courts to consider.
A little-known fact is that air and water quality are much better today than they were 20 years ago, and are better overall than they were a decade ago.
Nevertheless, as standards become more stringent and corporations spend billions to comply, the green lobby must agitate for more complex, costly standards to keep the formula rolling.
Scare Tactics
The formula is indeed profitable. The threats of headlines, distorted public opinion findings, and lawsuits drive the charitable giving considerations of many top corporations.
According to Capital Research Center, a nonpartisan think tank, for every dollar given to center-right, free enterprise advocacy groups, $4.41 was given to center-left advocacy groups, including the environmentalists. Clearly, the corporate blackmail formula works.
The environmental movement has done some good, just as the civil rights movement that gave rise to Jackson's career achieved much-needed legal guarantees for Americans of all races. Yet, to foster the thriving victim industry in America, the radical environmental movement similarly relies on scare tactics and implied threats of public relations and litigation terror to survive.
Sadly, it's practically impossible to find the golden kernel of worthy endeavor in the shrill panoply that surrounds today's environmental movement.
As the boy who cried wolf learned, the long-term cost for declaring a daily crisis is that we may ignore a legitimate problem when one arises. If the radical environmentalists succeed in their current game, no one will have the means to answer the call if it comes.
