Hillary Clinton Touted Fracking Across the Globe, and Only Bernie Sanders Can Be Trusted to Save Us From It

Hillary Clinton has yet to address the issue of fracking during her campaign. She recently vocalized her opposition to Keystone XL and Arctic drilling, but only when it was deemed politically favorable to say so.
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

In 2011, the Bulgarian government granted U.S. Oil Company, Chevron, permission to extract oil using the controversial technique known as "fracking." The decision spurred thousands of protesters to stage rallies across the country demanding the government rescind the permission. Bulgaria's officials obliged in early 2012, by revoking permission from Chevron to use the technique known as "fracking," but still allowing the company to extract oil from within the country. Donor records show the company donated between $500,000 and $1 million to the Clinton Foundation.

In a meeting shortly after with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Bulgarian officials were urged to change their minds, according to Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, offering to "bring the best specialists on these new technologies to present the benefits of the technology to the Bulgarian people."One of those specialists sent was Special U.S. Envoy for Eurasian Energy, Richard Morningstar. According to Mother Jones, Morningstar, "touted the technology in an interview on Bulgarian national radio, saying it could lead to a five-fold drop in the price of natural gas. A few weeks later, Romania's parliament voted down its proposed fracking ban and Bulgaria's eased its moratorium." The publication also claims documents they obtained link U.S. diplomatic officials link to the state department have pushed for fracking around the globe while Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State.

Fracking was first used to free natural gas from shale rock through hydraulic fracturing by George Mitchell in 1981. Mitchell, a Texas oil baron whose oil fields were drying up, he was desperately looking for alternative sources. By 1997, one of his fracking wells proved financially viable in the long term, and he sold his company, Mitchell Energy for $3.5 Billion. By then, the drilling technique began to take off as other oil companies adopted it despite its well-documented adverse environmental and health effects.

According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of public and foundation disclosures, at least sixty companies that lobbied the State Department during Hillary Clinton's tenure donated a total of more than $26 million to the Clinton Foundation, including Exxon Mobil, who are currently under investigation by the New York State Attorney General for misleading the public about climate change.

Earlier this year the environmental organization, New Yorkers Against Fracking, wrote a letter to the Clinton Foundation urging Hillary Clinton to oppose the controversial oil extracting technique. "The increased use of this dangerous process has already put many communities in harm's way, causing water contamination, negative health effects, earthquakes, and a host of other disastrous impacts," wrote the organization in the April 2015 letter. "Your use of the office of Secretary of State to tout fracking around the World was gravely disappointing. However, in light of overwhelming and rapidly increasing scientific evidence of harm, we ask you now acknowledge the inherent dangers in shale development and stand with us and the countless families and communities at risk from fracking across the nation."

Hillary Clinton has yet to address the issue of fracking during her campaign. She recently vocalized her opposition to Keystone XL and Arctic drilling, but only when it was deemed politically favorable to say so. Her climate agenda remains filled with holes yet to be plugged as Mrs. Clinton awaits other presidential candidates to test out stances before she chooses the one she seeks to gain the most from. Environmentalists should not trust her when it comes to fracking or other issues regarding the livelihood of the environment, as she has proven through her actions with the State Department, Hillary Clinton favors corporate profits over environmental.

In contrast, Senator Bernie Sanders is completely against fracking. "I'm very proud that the state of Vermont banned fracking," he said in 2014. "I hope communities all over America do the same." Senator Sanders also hasn't been on the fence at all in regards to controversial environmental issues. He has always opposed Keystone XL, Arctic drilling, and an outspoken advocate for climate change initiatives. When it comes to the environment, Senator Bernie Sanders has a much more extensive, honest, and clear record than Hillary Clinton. Any voter who has a penchant for environmentalism in any capacity should take these stark contrasts into consideration when debating between supporting Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.

Go To Homepage

Popular in the Community