TigerSwan Solutlons to Uncertainty? THE WHEN YOU REALLY NEED TO UNDERSTAND, FOLLOW THE MONEY.
THE An exclusive group of wealthy individuals, directs the far-left environmental movement. The members of this elite liberal club funnel their fortunes through private foundations to execute their personal political agenda. Their agendas are centered around restricting the use of fossil fuels in the United States. They have established a dozen prominent private foundations with huge sums of money at their disposal to spend on environmental causes. Members put a premium on access to the complex environmental infrastructure that has evolved to leverage substantial assets towards achieving defined policy outcomes.
CLUB DONATIONS Members also donate directly to 501(c)(3) public charities. Generally, the public charity is considered the preferred status under the tax code, based on the greater tax benefits and protections on donor disclosures. Public charities attempt to provide the maximum amount of control to their donors through ?scal sponsorships, which are a legally suspect innovation unique to the left, whereby the charity actually sells its nonprofit status to a group for a fee. Nearly all of the public charities discussed in this report have an af?liated 501(c)(4) that engages in activities designed to in?uence elections and have no restrictions on their lobbying efforts. The funding of a 501(c)(4) by a 501(c)(3) af?liates lS provocative in light of the legal restrictions on public charities from participating in political campaigning, either directly or indirectly, while permitting a 501(c)(4) to significantly engage in campaign activities. Members of the Billionaire?s Club peut a premium on access to the complex environmental infrastructure that has evolved to everage substantial assets towards achieving defined policy outcomes.
CLUB PHILANTHROPY Many far-left environmental foundations and groups have pledged to divest in fossil fuels and invest in renewable projects as well as ?philanthropy." There is a narrow set of individuals whose careers are part of the fabric of the far- left environmental movement. These individuals exercise outsized in?uence regarding the distribution of funds. Public charity activist groups propagate the false notion that they are independent, citizen-funded groups working altruistically. In reality, they work in tandem with wealthy donors to maximize the value of the donors? tax deductible donations and leverage their combined resources to in?uence elections and policy outcomes, with a focus on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Far-left environmental activists, while benefiting from nonprofit status, essentially sell a product to wealthy foundations who are seeking to drive policy and political outcomes.
CLUB PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS As depicted in the chart, there are roughly a dozen prominent private foundations created by the Billionaire?s Club with vast sums of money at their disposal to spend on environmental causes. A US. Senate Committee report on the Environment and Public Works completed in 2012, focused on several extremely active private foundations including; Billionaire?s Club Private Foundations Foundation Total Assets - 2012 David and Lucile Packard Foundation $6,299,952,716 Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation $5,697,258,026 Heinz Family Foundation $117,095,904 Marisla Foundation $51,482,397 Park Foundation $3 66,405,008 Rockefeller Brothers Foundation $800,956,943 Schmidt Family Foundation $46,542,559 Sea Change Foundation $124,350,435* Walton Family Foundation $1 ,999,066,3 69 William and Flora Hewlett Foundation $7,735,371,l39 Assets from most recent IRS Form?990-PF available (2011)
IRS 501 (3) ORGANIZATIONS In exchange for the generous tax benefits donors receive, limits exist on 501(c)(3) activities. For instance, donors must not directly or indirectly participate in political campaigns. The IRS clearly articulates the restriction on political activities, advising that ?501(c)(3) organizations are limited in their ability to lobby, absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office." Breaching this provision may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Further, 501(c) (3)s as they cannot devote more than an ?insubstantial? between 5 and 10%) portion of their resources to lobbying activities.
5 0 1 (C) (3) PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS AND PUBLIC CHARITIES Members of the Billionaire?s Club who want a seat at the environmental policy table have the option to fund a 501(c)(3) private foundation or public charity. Importantly, by funding a 501(c)(3), they obtain the added benefit of making contributions on a tax deductible basis. In 2010, tax deductions for charitable contributions to 501(c)(3) organizations resulted in an estimated $40 billion loss to federal revenue. While the rules for disclosing donations received by private foundations and public charities differ, both organizations are required to file an annual IRS 990-form to maintain its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status. Moreover, both a public charity and a private foundation must disclose contributions to other entities if the amount exceeds $5,000.
FOUNDATIONS AND CHARITIES CONTINUED The circumstances surrounding the ?ow of money from 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups, and the likelihood of lax oversight, raises questions as to whether 501(c) (3) nonprofit foundations and charities are indirectly funding political activities. 501(c)(4) Green Tech Action Fund receives millions of dollars from green 501(c)(3) organizations, then distributes the funds to other 501(c)(4) groups that donate to political campaigns. Many of the large environmental organizations form both 501(c) (3) and 501(c)(4) nonprofits that are publically advertised as separate and independent entities. In reality, they are closely associated groups that transfer money from the Billionaire?s Club to nonprofits, and eventually into social activist?s political campaigns such as the global climate change agenda.
ENVIRONMENTAL FUNDING 0ND UI TS Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) is a place where wealthy donors meet and coordinate the distribution of grants to advance the environmental movement. EGA encourages the use of prescriptive grant-making. EGA is a secretive organization, refusing to disclose their membership list to Congress. Democracy Alliance (DA), a facilitator for wealthy donors seeking to advance a broader far-left agenda, does not disclose the details of any transaction it facilitates, and its members and donor-recipients cannot speak publically about the organization. - Environmental activist groups are well aligned with the greater far-left agenda. One of acclaimed successes in the last year includes President Obama?s executive actions on climate change.
THE CLUB DIRECTACCESS Finally, the success ofthis movement is hinged on direct access to policy makers who are loyal to the cause and work to implement the far-left environmental agenda when they occupy government positions. Relationships with policy makers provide the opportunity for the Billionaire?s Club and activists to change public policy and obtain government grants. The Committee demonstrates how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under President Obama?s watch has installed an audacious green-revolving door, which has become a valuable asset for the environmental movement and the Billionaire's Club.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY The Obama Administration has installed an audacious green-revolving door among senior officials at EPA, which has become a valuable asset for the environmental movement and its wealthy donors. In one example, senior EPA officials planned to use Michelle DePass?s position on the Board of Directors of EGA, her eminent employment at EPA, and her relationship with former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, to enhance her in?uence with EGA Former far-left environmentalists working at EPA funnel government money through grants to their former employers and colleagues, often contributing to the bottom line of environmental activist groups. Under President Obama, EPA has given more than $27 million in taxpayer-funded grants to major environmental groups. Notably, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense Fund - two key activists groups with significant ties to senior EPA officials have collected more than $1 million in funding each.
EPA CONTINUED EPA Region 2 Administrator ]udith Enck appears to be inappropriately and personally involved in the allocation of EPA grants to favored groups. Enck is also the subject of an inquiry led by the EPA Office of Inspector General. EPA also gives grants to lesser-known extreme groups. For example, the Louisiana Bucket Brigade received hundreds of thousands of grants under former Administrator Lisa Jackson despite challenges by state regulators over the use of such grants. Valued services activists provide the Billionaire?s Club includes promulgation of propaganda, which creates an artificial echo chamber; appearance of a faux grassroots movement; access to nimble and transient groups under fiscal sponsorship arrangements. Distance and anonymity between donations made by well-known donors and activities of risky activist groups; and above all the ability to leverage tens of millions of dollars in questionable foreign funding.
THE MODIS OPERANDI Foundations finance research to justify desired predetermined policy outcome. The research is then reported on by a news outlet, oftentimes one that is also supported by the same foundation, in an effort to increase visibility. In one example, a story reporting on a Park Foundation-supported anti-fracking study was reproduced by a Park-funded news organization through a Park-funded media collaboration where it was then further disseminated on Twitter by the maker of Park-backed anti-fracking movies. Another service provided to the Billionaire?s Club is the manufacturing of an artificial grassroots movement where it is not the citizen?s interest that drives the movement; rather, it is part of a well-funded national strategy. In New York and Colorado, a pseudo grassroots effort to attack hydraulic fracturing has germinated from massive amounts of funding by the NY?based Park Foundation, as well as CA-based Schmidt Family Foundation and Tides Foundation.
PUBLIC TYAC TI VIS GROUPS Valued services activists provide the Billionaire?s Club includes promulgation of propaganda, which creates an artificial echo chamber. The appearance of a faux grassroots movement as well access to nimble and transient groups under fiscal sponsorship arrangements. Activist Groups allow distance and anonymity between donations made by well- known donors and activities of risky activist groups. Activist Groups above all provide the Billionaire's Club the ability to leverage tens of millions of dollars in questionable foreign funding. Activist Groups work in tandem with wealthy donors to maximize the value of the donors? tax deductible donations and leverage their combined resources to in?uence elections and policy outcomes, with a focus on the EPA.
ARTIFICIAL GRASSROOTS MOVEMENTS General characteristics of a grassroots movement include natural, spontaneous and volunteer-based action that originates locally with citizens who unite around a common issue or cause within their community. Environmental groups have misleadingly used the grassroots label to gain credibility among the populace and to hide, among other things, their substantial funding, well- organized structures and powerful in?uence. In the case studies discussed herein, the movement sprung from the efforts of the Billionaire?s Club, and not from local concern as is the grassroots? spirit. Critically, it is not the localized citizen affinity group?s interests that drive the movement; rather it is part of a well-funded national strategy. Groups represent themselves as local efforts, but the real direction comes from agenda-driven far-left elites hundreds of miles away on the East and West coasts.
BOLD NEBRASKA MOVEMENT Bold Nebraska is an example of faux grassroots where a purportedly local organization is, in fact, an arm of the Billionaire?s Club. It is nothing more than a shield for wealthy and distant non-Nebraskan interests who seek to advance a political agenda without drawing attention to the fact that they, too, are outsiders with little connection to the state. Underlying Bold ebraska?s homespun, grassroots facade is a significant, growing, well-funded and well-organized financial support network originating from wealthy far-left environmental interests thousands of miles away. A brief but revealing portion of a May 2014 article on Kleeb in The New York Times Magazine documents both her efforts to attract rich out-of?state donors to Bold Nebraska, and her carefully crafted strategy for selling the ?grassroots" charm of the group to the moneyed elites.
IANE FLEMING KLEEB BOLD NEBRASKA Bold Nebraska IS a 501(c) (4) nonprofit whose primary cause is opposing the Keystone XL av 4" ?i -47? i eline? lanned ath throu Nebraskawas founded in 2010 by Jane Fleming Kleeb, a . South Florida native who was educated in NEBRASKA . Washington, DC. She first moved to Nebraska in 2007 when she married Scott Kleeb, an energy company CEO who lost bids to represent Nebraska in Congress in 2006 and in the Senate in 2008 as a Democrat. Outside of Nebraska, Kleeb is clearly the face, voice and driving force of Bold Nebraska. She has been prominently featured in national media outlets that include The New York Times and
BOLD NEBRASKA FINANCIAL SUPPORT Kleeb and Bold Nebraska succeeded in attracting the attention and deep pockets of the big foundations. Tom Steyer, an out of state billionaire funder, had a strong con?ict of interest in opposing Keystone XL due to his financial stake in a competing Kinder Morgan pipeline project. In 2012, the San Francisco-based Tides Foundation gave it $50,000, and Tides? San Francisco-based 501(c)(4) group, The Advocacy Fund, gave $15,000. These two donations equaled one-third of Bold ebraska?s total contributions received in 2012. In 2013, Tides Foundation grant was $90,000. Out-of-state environmental groups have also used Bold Nebraska to in?uence local elections through its New Energy Voter initiative. The program was created to mobilize Nebraskans to vote for candidates opposing the Keystone expansion.
KLEEB 0N DAPL PROIEC ?One of the most prominent voices among opponents of Keystone XL is now taking on the battle against the Dakota Access Pipeline, which has faced hurdles in North Dakota and Iowa.? ?14fter organizing grassroots e??orts against TransCanada Corp.?s Keystone XL through Bold Nebraska, an activist group, lane Fleming Kleeb has turned her attention to Energy Transfer Partners project.? ?Bold Nebraska has since evolved into Bold Alliance, a group led by Kleeb, that focuses on corporations "threatening land and water, she said in a telephone interview.? "It?s easy to forget that tribal nations and farmers and ranchers have very long histories together, Kleeb said. While opposition to Dakota Access has similar themes and tactics to Keystone, the movement hasn?t reached the same intensity.?
WHO REALLY STOPPED KEYSTONE XL .7 Tides Foundation, which distributes the funds (from other Ten TOP Donors to Tides (2003-201 1) foundatlons) to NGOs mos mm $26 Million and groups. The number one funder of the WMJM mm Tides Foundation leading up to and during this time was the One of the biggest donors to NoVo Foundation, founded on Tides is the NOVO Foundation, monies provided by Warren w, Mum," funded exciuswelv by Warren Buffet Buffett. Foal Foundation It is maintained by Warren demm Buffett?s son, Peter Buffett (co- chair) and Peter?s partner, Jennifer Buffett (president and co- . . . Chair). so $10,000,000 noncomo 90,000,000 F-nly Won. he.
TIDES FOUNDATION AND TIDES CENTER Many of the large environmental organizations form both 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) nonprofits that are publically advertised as separate and independent entities. In reality, they are closely associated groups that transfer money from the Billionaire?s Club to nonprofits, and eventually into political campaigns. Between 2010 and 2012, Tides Foundation gave over $10 million to Tides Center, and Tides Center gave over $39 million to Tides Foundation. It is unclear what purpose the transfer of funds between these two organizations serves, other than obscuring the money trail. Tides Center is a fiscal sponsor to over 200 groups, which are subject to Tides Center?s oversight and direction in important aspects that include forming a governing board, managing payroll, and monitoring risk.
FOLLOW THE MONEY A CASE STUDY ?lane Kleeb then emerged as the director of Change That Works Nebraska, an effort to pressure then -Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska to vote for health care reform. As the campaign wound down, she approached Omaha philanthropist Dick Holland about ?mding a progressive activist group.? ?Kleeb envisioned an organization that would elbow its way into conversations about the state?s policies. Holland was sold, both by the pitch and the plucky 5-foot-5 woman with the sharp elbows.? ?She has no reluctance to step into the battle,? Dick Holland said. ?Bold Nebraska o?icially launched in March 201 ?Kleeb joined forces with national environmental groups to apply political pressure on President Barack Obama. She also built alliances with Native American groups working to protect tribal lands.?
THE CLUB IN ACTION ?24s one of Bu?ett?s earliest investors, Holland reaped gains that made him and his wife, Mary, among Omaha?s wealthiest people and most generous philanthropists. - While their net worth wasn ?t public, their private charitable foundation reported assets of $158.8 million in 2014. - ?He was a wonderful friend and partner for 60 years and an outstanding citizen both in respect to local and national activities.? Warren Bu?ett - ?The main contributor to Bold Nebraska is Dick Holland, who has ?nancially supported this progressive political movement in its opposition to the KXL pipeline. Bold Nebraska ?5 NIMBY approach will only cause further delays in completing the ?Mr. Holland is a good friend of Warren Bu?ett, the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, and one of the world ?s most successful investors.? ?14ny delay in the process by the (1.5. State Department in recommending approval for the completion of the full route of the KXL by the President of the United States, will solely benefit the
THE BUFFETT TIME LINE lune, 2006: Warren Buffett pledged to donate most of his wealth to the Gates Foundation as well as other philanthropic organizations, including NoVo. - 2007: Warren Buffett?s Berkshire Hathaway begins to acquire the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad stock. 2007: 60% of Marmon Holdings (Union Tank Car Co.) was acquired by Buffett?s Berkshire Hathaway, with the remaining 40% to be acquired in the next ?ve to seven years. - Aug 19, 2008: Warren Buffett and Bill Gates make a quiet visit to the Alberta tar sands. August 2009: US State Department approves Enbridge?s Alberta Clipper Pipeline, a key tar sands pipeline. 350.0rg et al are silent. Nov 3, 2009: Warren Buffett?s Berkshire Hathaway proposes to purchase BNSF Railway as a wholly owned subsidiary for $34 billion in the largest deal in Berkshire history. Feb 4, 2010: 86 US organizations call on President Obama to reject the pipeline. 2010-2014: Warren Buffet succeeds in building a let century rail empire with no dissent. Crude via rail soars.
THE END RESULTS ROOTS OVEMEN TS Berkshire Hathaway, purchased Burlington Northern Santa Fe for $34 billion four years ago. FORBES estimates its value has doubled since then. Part of the reason: hauling oil out of the Bakken formation of North Dakota. - has been hauling Bakken crude out of the Williston Basin area for over five years. ?In that time, we have seen the volume increase nearly 7,000 percent, from 1.3 million barrels in 2008 to 88.9 million in 2012," said Dave Garin, BNSF group Vice President of Industrial ?Tariffs on grain railcars have increased from $50 to nearly $1,400 per car. These cost increases can carve up to $1.00 from every bushel of corn shipped. The Bakken Pipeline will help ease transportation shortages for agriculture and other industries."
ENVIRONMENTAL GRANTMAKERS ASSOCIATION Environmental Grantmakers Association; command central of the environmental movement. ?According to its website, EGA has nearly 200 members and ?works with members and partners to promote effective environmental philanthropy by sharing knowledge, fostering debate, cultivating leadership, facilitating collaboration, and catalyzing action." In 2011, EGA member organizations collectively donated approximately $1.13 billion, or 40% of all foundations, to environmental causes. EGA is a very secretive organization, withholding its membership list from the public. In fact, EGA even refused to disclose their membership list to Congress.
TOP ENVIRONMENTAL GRANT MAKERS Top 10 EGA Donors to Environmental Causes in 2011 Foundation Total Dollars Awarded No. of Grants Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation $134,438,760 251 David and Lucile Packard Foundation $121,016,258 207 Walton Family Foundation, Inc. $76,218,045 105 William and Flora Hewlett Foundation $53,439,469 1 15 Rockefeller Foundation $43,809,793 1 17 Sea Change Foundation $43,149,911 42 Richard King Mellon Foundation $29,080,000 41 Robertson Foundation $28,507,000 16 John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation $24,204,500 60 Ford Foundation $23,922,840 108 Total: $577,786,576 1,034
PUBLIC TYAC TI VIS - ODIS OPERANDI The ultimate recipients of donations from the Billionaire?s Club include far-left environmental public charities. Primarily, the public charity serves as the face of the environmental movement. Public charity activist groups propagate the false notion that they are independent, citizen-funded groups working altruistically. In reality, they work in tandem with wealthy donors to maximize the value of the donors? tax deductible donations and leverage their combined resources to in?uence elections and policy outcomes, with a focus on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Far from their propaganda, these activist groups merely provide a service to wealthy ?investors," who pay a sizable sum for specialized services.
ENVIRONMENTAL AC TI VIS ORGANIZATIONS Natural Resources Defense Council Sierra Club NRDC Environmental Defense Fund MMBESTD FOUNDED 1892 EDFL A A DEFENSE ?9 WILDLIFE Finding the wa that work - World Wildlife Fund WWF League of Conservation Voters Center for Biological Diversity National Wildlife Federation These organizations and other environmental activist organizations serve as the face of the movement and provide cover for where the secretive foundations direct their resources.
ENVIRONMENTAL AC TI VIS FUNDING Billionaire?s Club Funding to Key Environmental Activists (2010-2013) 137 Organization Grants Received American Lung Association $4,816,481 BlueGreen Alliance $5,280,000 Center for American Progress $8,390,861 Earthjustice $3,533,683 Environmental Defense Fund $53 ,695 ,816 Environmental Integrity Project $2,098,000 Greenpeace $1,980,000 League of Conservation Voters Education Fund $13,175,000 National Audubon Society $1 1,192,475 National Wildlife Federation $14,490,613 Natural Resources Defense Council $25,512,125 Nature Conservancy $58,633,374 Sierra Club Foundation $17,263 ,612 Union of Concerned Scientists $8,195,448 World Wildlife Fund $26,614,320
NAT SIM 0N5 PRESIDENT FOUNDER SEA CHANGE FOUNDATION "To get it done, quickly, is going to take a Herculean effort from all sides. Because it?s not really a question of whether we move to a low carbon economy. I think SeaChange it?s clear we?re moving question is how (2007'20'3) quickly." ?The role of philanthropy is really to facilitate that It?s not going to be ramming something down the throats of certain people. We know that Amef;:;e;;:;ress that?s not going to work. We?ve seen that, we?ve - . nergy Foundation watched that mov1e before. $65,485,000 ?We know it?s not going to happen. We can?t take this momentum and let it stall. So philanthropists, . Southern Alliance for Energy] NC Sustainable NCSEA NC Clean Energy foundations, they have a huge responsibility.? energwagc?mcsm 3?
SEA CHANGE FOUNDATION Sea Change Foundation is a private foundation based in San Francisco, California. In 2011 Sea Change Foundation was the sixth largest donor to environmental causes, giving $43,149,911 in grants to environmental and far-left environmental activists. It is clear Sea Change is a major player in funding the environmental movement, the foundation offers almost no information to the public. Little information is available on Sea Change, it is limited to a review of it?s IRS Form- 990 for 2010 and 2011. It?s 2012 IRS form is not publicly available. Sea Change?s website is sparse with only it?s logo and three-sentence mission statement. Inside Philanthropy: ?No more fundraising, just lots of check writing to some of the top organizations in the environmental world. Big checks, too. And all without dealing with the infamous bureaucracies of the large legacy foundations. Sea Change dispenses millions of dollars in grants each year to organizations that promote clean energy and work to reduce carbon emissions.?
SEA CHANGE GRANT RECIPIENTS Sea Change Funding for Major Environmental and Far-Left Activists Organization Total Grants 2010-2011 I League of Conservation Voters Education Fund $10,700,000 I Sierra Club Foundation $6,950,000 I Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. $4,187,500 I Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. $1,162,500 I American Lung Association $400,000 I National Wildlife Federation $3,400,000 I World Wildlife Fund, Inc. $4,500,000 Center for American Progress $2,500,000 I TOTAL: $33,800,000 Source: 2010 and 2011 990-PF Forms lmportantly, Sea Change?s funding reveals massive amounts of grants to almost all the major environmental and far-left activists previously discussed in this report. ?rv LEAGUE OF DEFENSE FUND CONSERVATION Finding the ways that work VOTERS Center for American Progress
FOREIGN CORPORATIONS - KLEIN LTD. Klein Ltd., an overseas company contributing tens of millions to organizations dedicated to abolishing the use of affordable fossil fuels through a US. private foundation is highly problematic. This is only compounded by the fact that it is deliberately and completely lacking in transparency having no website and withholding its funders. The Billionaire?s Club knowingly collaborates with questionable offshore funders to maximize support for the far-left environmental movement. Klein Ltd., a foreign corporation, has risen to prominence in the far-left environmental community doling out tens of millions to favored charities via Sea Change Foundation. In fact, none of this foreign corporation?s funding is disclosed in any way. This is clearly a deceitful way to hide the source of millions of dollars that are active in our system, attempting to effect political change.
THE ENERGY FOUNDATION The Energy Foundation is a quintessential example of a pass through frequently employed by the Billionaire?s Club. Energy Foundation receives money from several key foundations and redirects it to activists. In doing so, they are providing two services: distance between the donor and the activist, and enhancing the clout of the donors as their individual in?uence is maximized by pooling resources. One of the major funders of the Energy Foundation is Sea Change, which has gone to great to hide the source of its money. This is especially concerning in light of recent revelations that environmental activists do not appear to be morally con?icted over where their money comes from - so long as it supports their goals.
PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS Typically, the most wealthy far-left individuals have elected to fund their own 501(c)(3) private foundation. In fact, each member of the Billionaire?s Club has a private foundation that is extremely politically motivated and holds considerable sway over the environmental community. By creating a private foundation, they can make a substantial contribution to their foundation and enjoy a sizable tax break of up to 30% of their adjusted gross income (AG1), while the foundation itself does not pay a tax on this income. Private foundations must disclose all donors on its IRS Form 990-PF, and so starting a private foundation allows the donor to associate his or her family name with the foundation?s work.
CLUB PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS As depicted in the chart, there are roughly a dozen Billionaire?s Club Private Foundations prominent private foundations created by the Billionaire?s Club that have huge sums of money at their disposal to spend on environmental causes. - A US. Senate Committee report on the Environment and Public Works completed in 2012, focused on these extremely active private foundations. Foundation Total Assets - 2012 David and Lucile Packard Foundation $6,299,952,716 Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation $5,697,258,026 Heinz Family Foundation $117,095,904 Marisla Foundation $51,482,397 Park Foundation $3 66,405,008 Rockefeller Brothers Foundation $800,956,943 Schmidt Family Foundation $46,542,559 Sea Change Foundation $124,350,435 Walton Family Foundation $1 ,999,066,3 69 William and Flora Hewlett Foundation $7,735,371,139 Assets from most recent IRS Form-990-PF available (2011)
TOP PUBLIC CHARITY FOUNDATIONS A public charity may be characterized as a foundation or an otherwise nonprofit organization. Some of the most active public charities in the far-left environmental sphere are characterized as foundations. These include the Tides Foundation, Energy Foundation, ClimateWorks Foundation and the Sustainable Markets Foundation. Other public charities represent themselves as activists, such as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), League of Conservation Voters (LCV), Greenpeace, Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), National Wildlife Federation (NWF), and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), which act as the public face of the environmental movement.
CLIMATE CHANGE CHARI TYASSE TS Top Public Charity Foundations Organization Total Assets - 2012 ClimateWorks Foundation $219,543,071 Energy Foundation $32,212,733 I Pew Charitable Trusts $735,245,419 Sustainable Markets Foundation $2,056,007* ?55'3? Tides Foundation $141,039,613 *Assets from most recent IRS Form-990 available (2011) ClimateWorks 20 -. FOUNDATION 2 PE . ENERGY FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUSTS 131M111g11l?o
PRESENTATION RESEARCH FINDINGS Information presented in this presentation was derived in part from the United States Committee on the Environment and Public Works, Minority Staff Report; The Chain of Environmental Command, published July 30, 2014 178 websites and articles referenced to source check the information presented. At present there are 11 1 activist groups self-identifying as supporting the anti-DAPL and the Global Climate Change agenda, these groups are closely associated in their causes. Research has identified 181 Foundations and Charities that support through their funding the Global Climate Change agenda. Ture believers in Global Climate Change are condemning the use of the movement for profiteering by the Billionaire?s Club. The practices of the Billionaire's Club are documented and continue with government acquiesces and major media acceptance as a whole.
OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS There is no evidence to suggest the Climate Change Activists? targeting of the Oil and Gas Industry will diminish in the future. Strategic planning and action across the industry may help counteract the onslaught by the Climate Change activists movement against the fossil fuels energy industry. A coordinated media campaign about safe environmentally friendly practices of fossil fuel extraction and transportation could off set the negative narrative. - Establish a social media information campaign to aggressively counteract false narrative. Develop relationships with and coordinate early on with law enforcement agencies in areas believed to be targeted for disruptive protest activities. Have developed security management plans in place for projects identified for protest activity by opposition groups and organizations.
COMMENTS 0R SUGGESTIONS - Please contact: - Deputy Program Manger Intelligence Analyst