Prosecutors say friend of ‘Big Oil’ was on the take – and lied about it
Long time Republican Senator Ted Stevens, perhaps best known today for his advocacy of federal funding for the “bridge to nowhere” and his reference to the internet as a “series of tubes,” has been indicted by a federal grand jury on corruption charges. Stevens faces seven counts of making false statements involving an investigation about VECO, the oil services company in Alaska, and renovations done on his home.
From May 1999 to August 2007, prosecutors said Stevens concealed “his continuing receipt of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of things of value from a private corporation.” The indictment released Tuesday said the items included: home improvements to his vacation home in Alaska, including a new first floor, garage, wraparound deck, plumbing, electrical wiring; as well as car exchanges, a Viking gas grill, furniture and tools, the Associated Press reports.
VECO was once the dominant force in Alaska oil services industry. Its founder, Allen, and vice president, Rick Smith, have pleaded guilty to bribing state lawmakers to push legislation to help the company. While it is unclear what, if any, direct relationship there may have been between VECO and the push to drill in ANWR, the implications do not bode well for the Republican, who was thought to be a shoe-in when he faced re-election this November.
Not exactly a friend of the environment
Earlier this month Stevens had the dishonorable distinction of being named to the League of Conservation Voters’ “Dirty Dozen,” an annual compilation of current and former members of Congress who consistently vote against the environment.
Stevens has been one of the biggest global warming deniers delayers in congress over the last several decades. Last September, he told the people of Shishmaref, a village that has lost hundreds of feet of coastline to rising sea levels, not to worry, because “We’re at the end of a long, long term of warming. 700 to 900 years of increased temperature, a very slow increase. We think we’re close to the end of that.”
“For forty years in the Senate, Ted Stevens has stood in the way of progress. Today, he literally lives in the house that oil built,” League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski said. “With his scandalous ties to the oil industry finally exposed, Alaska has the chance to let Mr. Stevens retire to that nice house.”
The indictment stops short of charging Stevens with bribery or other traditional corruption crimes. Had prosecutors been able to prove any special treatment for VECO, much stronger charges would have been filed.
Stevens has maintained he didn’t do anything for VECO that he didn’t do for any other constituent or pro-Alaska interest.
Related Posts:
- Bush Administration Proposes Fire Sale of Rocky Mtns. for Oil Shale Development
- Bush Blames Congress for High Electricity, Food, and Gas Prices
- The Big Oil Company Scam
- Big Oil and the Loggers Continue to Play for a Sellout Croud
Photo: Wikimedia
About Timothy B. Hurst
Dave M-
First, let's try to keep this civil. I'm not a big fan of the name-calling strategy, and frankly it makes your argument that much weaker. My concern is with the political process that put ANWR on the table to begin with. Stevens support for ANWR has been clear from day one – it is essentially one of the primary planks of his political platform.
I want to know how much his support for opening up ANWR is directly related to the money being stuffed in his pockets (i.e How many hearings were held because of it? How many other energy bills, the kinds with extensions of renewable energy tax credits and improved CAFE standards were obstructed because of it? etc.)
This is problematic on so many different levels it's not even funny.
Dave, You are correct. We should definitely use our own resources instead of sending our cash overseas. There are plenty of wind, solar, tidal, geothermal, etc. options right here at home that can create more energy than drilling in ANWR ever could. If only renewable energy had the same financial (read: political) clout as the coal and oil industry…
So, you are half way there–you are all for energy independence, and need only to jump on the renewable-energy-powered bandwagon.
PS-Your hostility is misdirected–Big Oil is not looking out for your best interests–quite the opposite…
Apparently you don't understand who Stevens is alleged to have taken services from. The company was VECO, it was a oil field service company,, NOT a oil producer. They had no control over where drilling was done. The company doesn't even exist any longer. And if you think wind or solar are going to replace oil at the same cost your smoking something funny. Maybe sometime in the distant future but not anytime soon. To try to run this country and have it prosper and to do it with wind and solar is a joke, it will only drive costs up more for the consumer.
Also just because I call you a pin head it does not change the facts of my argument and if it hurts your feelings it's not my problem it's yours, get some thicker skin..
Dave-
Please, spare me the spoon-fed talking points. I know what VECO is and where they made their money. Ironically, it seems you are simultaneously missing my point and making it for me.
It doesn't matter that VECO is "NOT a oil producer" and only an oil field service company.. Where do you think their profits come from? And the fact that the company is now defunct is irrelevant.
Keep in mind, Halliburton is an oil field service company and there's no way they had any sweetheart deals with the feds that netted them billions, right? They won all of their contracts fair and square through open bidding processes, right?
My point is Stevens has proven himself to be a crook beholden to the interests of the oil INDUSTRY – not just the oil producers – and that his bias has gotten in the way of the U.S. forging a sound energy policy.
Sorry Timmy,, the only people in the way of a sound energy policy is the lib's who think if you bend a blade of grass the world will come to a end….
As much as I enjoy poking you lib's I do have better things to do. I'm also realistic, no matter what I or any common sense thinking person has to say it will never change your way of thinking. So go ahead and put your Macintosh away, slip on your Birkenstocks and enjoy your day….
What is it that you people don't get about drilling offshore in the U.S.? There will be no immediate drop in gas prices. There probably never will be a drop in gas prices! It'll be 10 or more years b4 any of this gets to our markets. By the time the oil companies charge us for the cost of drilling, transporting and refining this oil you can expect to be paying even more for gasoline. This is just a political trick by Republicans to get you to vote for them because they are gonna save us!! How are you doing so far?
Wow. A politician lied about big oil? Really? How shocking. It reminds me of all of the people who want to drill here to "reduce our reliance" on foreign oil. Are people really naive enough to think that OPEC is just going to let us off the hook from thier lucrative trade arrangements?
Republicans, Democrats, Democrats, Republicans..The majority of all the pols are full of feces on one point or another, and supported by special interests. I am an Independent and support drilling in ANWAR and off our continental shelf. Yes, it will take years to develope, and yes ,the fact we are seriously test drilling will drop the price of oil. In the mean time,we work the alternatives, and nuclear. How are we going to charge the millions of electric cars? They are clean and thier end source is dirty………
In addition, wind power. Not off my view in Nantucket, etc. Left Ca several years ago. The wind machines on the highway from Stockton to the bay area were operating maybe 20 percent total. Many broke, most on standby except when extra power was needed. Why, more expensive to produce power that way. And, God forbid, the wind turbine might kill a bird !!I am all for common sense solutions to our energy needs.I agree with some of the Green ideas, but,your environmental idiots need to go, continued……..
Until you get the extreme elements in the green movement to join those of you with common sense, I have to oppose much of what you try to do. I am a lifelong hunter and fisherman, enjoy the sport and do not harvest anything I do not eat. Grow most of my own veggies. Am the Aircraft Maintenance Manager at a large facility that does completions on large Biz jets, plus major maintenance and overhaul. The owners of these private jets pay $8.64 a gallon last aircraft we fueled. Do they care? NO
OK,, explain to me why we shouldn’t use our own resources instead of sending our cash overseas just because some politician has allegedly had some work done on his house that he didn’t pay for? What a bunch of pin heads,, lol..
@Ralph Q–
I think people with your background and interests have a ton of "common sense" to contribute to the movement… we need more like you talking to us (and we need to be listening). In short, I'm glad you commented… I hope you continue to do so.
Jeff
What kind of people write this stuff. Having lived in Alaska for the last 30 years, it seems like every outsider who owns a pen has decided how the last frontier should be environmentally developed. Terms like bridge to "no where", ignore the last 100 years in their own state, where all of their own bridges that were built in the past were bridges to "no where". After being built, surprise, people with pens started moving in to that newly developed area, and began writing about new "bridges to no where".
As far as the house built by oil, if this writer were able to get his head out of his A–, he would find that Senator Stevens, not only was instrumental for oil development in Alaska, but has done more than this writer, in reducing the money sent to foreign soils, to people who hate every vestige of the political freedoms, we here in the US enjoy. The same freedoms, these pen heads (owners) enjoy to express their demented views. I invite Mr. Pen writer, to come to Alaska, not Anchorage, where there are paved streets like he is used to, but the real Alaska. Let him look at this pristine frozen tundra, and the thousands of animals, suffering from both being half eaten by predators, hunger because they can't find enough food to survive on. After traveling the Alaska Pipeline, and seeing all of the shelter it provides to wildlife, these Pen owners might decide that they would prefer to go back to their comfortable state, sit in their nice warm dry living room and watch their favorite soaps again. Maybe they will write a novel or who the next Paris Hilton will be.
I am glad that the issue of political influence on energy policy is being discussed, but there is a need apply additional critical thinking and understanding of how the world of economics works.
People like to lump “big oil” into a single entity, but the fact of the matter is that not all oil companies have the same interests – in fact they are quite competitive in many areas. Think about this carefully – IF there is enough oil in ANWAR to have a moderating impact on world oil prices, who stands to lose the most if that resource is developed? (Hint: if you are selling 1-10 million barrels of oil per day, every dollar decrease in the price has a significant impact on your daily income.)
Secondly – claiming that renewable energy companies have little political influence is simply ignoring reality. Some of the biggest names in business are huge beneficiaries of renewable energy subsidies like the Production Tax Credit.
GE, Siemens, BP, ADM, Cargil, Chevron all have large renewable energy divisions. Who do you think manufactures wind turbines? How about CFLs? Where does the 51 cent per gallon ethanol credit end up? If there is a feed in tariff for solar, who gets the money when the home owner buys his solar panels?
One more thought about the interests of “big oil” when it comes to drilling in hard to reach areas – here is a quote from Amory Lovins from a recent appearance on Amy Goodman’s Democracy Now!
“You know, I’ve worked for major oil companies for about thirty-five years, and they understand how expensive it is to drill for oil.”
Perhaps some of the oil companies really do not want to drill, but they would prefer for the government to tell them no. That way, they continue to make their $8-12 billion in profits each quarter selling oil from old wells, save the money that they would have to invest in challenging new production, and get to put the blame on “the environmental lobby” for preventing them from drilling.
The world is a complex place full of corporations and individuals who do not always reveal their complete motivations.
Disclosure – I am a nuclear advocate with significant (at least to me) investments in companies that will profit if the use of atomic fission increases. I also happen to breathe from our common atmosphere and believe that will also improve if my investments succeed.
No wonder Ted supported oil developmnt all these years, and still supports them. Thru front man Bill Allen they rebuilt his house. He traded his integrity and career for a little pork of his own.
F. Knossen
Gary-
I’m not exactly sure what your point is. But I’m going to do my best to respond.
The answer to your first question (what kind of people do they get to write this stuff?), is people who are very knowledgeable, active, and experienced members of their niche community. If you’d like to learn more about my own background and credentials, I invite you to read my bio.
Although I do not live in Alaska, and although you may consider me an “outsider,” keep in mind what the “N” stands for in ANWR. As much as it may seem like to you, the ANWR is not owned by the state of Alaska, it is owned by the federal government. That means the decisions involving whether or not the land is developed must be made in a way that takes national interests into account. And as much as you apparently have a distaste for people who live on paved roads (and I can assure you, my road is just as unpaved as yours), they have just as much a right to oppose oil development in ANWR as you do to support it.
You are probably right that Senator Stevens has done more than I in reducing money sent to foreign soils, on a macro level. But on a micro (personal) level, I would argue that I have sent a lot less money overseas than ANY member of the U.S. Senate.
But keep in mind, Gary, that the country exporting the most petroleum to the United States is not Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Iraq – nor any of the other “people who hate every vestige of the political freedoms, we here in the US enjoy” – it is Canada. And I’m sure my Canadian readers will back me up when I say, I’m pretty sure Canada does not hate our political freedoms.
I want to be certain there is fairness in the political process that gets our energy policy constructed. Without a fair (and legal) political process, how can we expect the political system to produce an energy policy that a majority of the people will be happy with.
With all of that said, let me say I agree with you when you write:
“Terms like bridge to “no where”, ignore the last 100 years in their own state, where all of their own bridges that were built in the past were bridges to “no where”.”
But I was not hear 100 years ago, and if I were, I’m pretty sure I would be taking a similar stance. It is not our duty, nor our obligation, to develop every square inch of this country – and THAT is the point.
So, if you don’t mind, I’d like to take you up on your invitation to come to Alaska. And I can guarantee you that I would prefer being there with my fly-rod in hand my dog by my side, than sitting in any living room watching soaps or writing about “who the next Paris Hilton’ will be.”
Thanks for your comment.