Cheers to the DNC for Ditching Fossil Fuel Campaign Donations

Well, what do you know – the Democratic National Committee is taking a great step to help differentiate itself from its conservative counterpart. This past weekend, the DNC voted to stop accepting political donations from fossil fuel companies.

While Democrats are definitely the bigger champions of the environment, that message is undercut by how much money they’ve accepted from oil, gas and coal companies. How earnestly can they stress the need to address climate change while funding their campaigns with money from the very corporations responsible for carbon emissions?

The threat of climate change is dire and immediate; there’s no time to waste appeasing corporate donors with half measures when it comes to environmental action. Accordingly, the DNC has banned all money from PACs with ties to fossil fuel money in order to be “in harmony with [Democrats] stated beliefs and convictions.”

The rule change is the handiwork of Christine Pelosi (who, yes, is the daughter of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.) Christine introduced the idea to the DNC, and the resolution was met with unanimous support from the party’s voting body.

Even better is that the DNC is already considering furthering its commitment to eradicating fossil fuel money. In two months time, a second proposal that would limit personal donations from fossil fuel employees to just $200 is expected to come up at the DNC’s board meeting.

Admittedly, it’s a bit of a gamble for Democrats. Money often tips elections, and few entities have more money to give than fossil fuel companies. At the same time, roughly 90 percent of gas and oil donations went to the GOP in the last election cycle, so is it worth hanging on to that small portion when you could probably win more support by making a statement to your base?

Now if only the DNC makes a bigger deal of this decision. The Huffington Post, the first media outlet to report on this change, actually used the headline “DNC Quietly Adopts Ban on Fossil Fuel Company Donations.” There’s no reason for the DNC to be quiet, however – news like this that will resonate with the American people should be shouted loudly.

It’s not enough for Democrats to be the party that supports corporations less than Republicans – it’s an easy, hypocritical stance to take and drives liberals nuts enough that some become too apathetic to show up to the polls. If Democrats are indeed prepared to start walking the walk when it comes to progressive issues, this move is an important step in the right direction.

Photo credit: Thinkstock


Marie W
Marie W2 months ago

Thank you for sharing.

Chad Anderson
Chad Anderson5 months ago

Thank you.

Shirley P
Shirley P7 months ago


Ann B
Ann B7 months ago

thanks for sharing

Dot A
Dot A8 months ago

One step at a time. The goal is to benefit everyone. Not just more money for Reps. That's not a good goal. We can't do it all instantly. But with a little encouragement instead of hostility, perhaps we can escalate progress. Including all other resources,... Perhaps,...

Carole R
Carole R8 months ago

Thanks for posting.

David F
David F8 months ago

How many gallons of fossil fuel, water and slaughtered animals does it take to keep Vasu Murti's big pet dog alive?

David F
David F8 months ago

Vasu Murti, like so many liberal low information gullible's here, instantly fell for Fake News Mother Jones when she quotes them: "It takes nearly one gallon of fossil fuel and 2,500 gallons of water to produce just one pound of conventionally fed beef. (Mother Jones)"
A gallon of fossil fuel cost about three dollars, a ranchers auction brings about $.50 to a 1.50 a pound for cattle.

Paul B
Paul B8 months ago

Good, more money for Rep candidates. Fossil fuel companies are getting a really bad rap from the left. THey provideu s with the energy needs to have computers, internet and the ability to post stories and comments on sites like this. They also spen incredible amounts of money on alternative sources of energy which when they become economically viable they can adopt a stronger position in those sources of energy as well.
They are energy companies doing a job that keeps our country and the world running. Labeling them as simply fossil fuel companies may serve a liberal/progressive purpose but really isn't an accurate assessment of what they do and their importance to sustaining a growing economy. But then a growing economy is seldom a goal of the left, so I can see why they aren't so thrilled with fulfilling our energy needs.

Freya H
Freya H8 months ago

Good to see that the DNC is starting to get its head out of its collective arse and be more what Democrats SHOULD be.