Politics

CRP Analysis of Cap and Trade Vote

By Ellen Miller

As always, the Center for Responsive Politics ferrets out the story behind the story when it comes to big votes in Congress. Lindsay Resnick Mayer at CRP?s Capital Eye blog flushes out their analysis of the correlation between how members of the House of Representatives voted late Friday on the Waxman?Markey Cap and Trade Energy Bill and special interest contributions they?ve received.

CRP looked at the contributions all lawmakers received from the energy sector and other business and industry interests, coming from political action committees and employees of these industries since 1989 (to their candidate committees and leadership PACs).

Those lawmakers voting ?no? on the bill received on average over $274,000, and those voting ?yes? received $124,000.

Environmentalists gave on average $21,000 to the lawmakers voting yes, and only $3,000 to those that voted no.

Looking at those numbers makes you wonder how the bill passed. No surprise that the greens got grossly outspent?That?s normal. The surprise, I guess, is that they won this round despite of it.

CRP also broke down how members of each party voted and how much they?ve received from whom. Similar patterns emerged. Those who voted yes received less from energy and other industries and more from environmentalists, and those voting no received more from industry and less from the greens.

Here?s a link to CRP?s complete a list of how the lawmakers voted and how much they’ve received since 1989.

The fight now goes to the Senate. Will the contribution patterns be as indicative there as it was in the House? Sounds like a pretty good bet.

Full post as published by Sunlight Foundation on June 29, 2009 (boomark / email).