TRUTH TEST: Examining Schaffer's ties to 'big oil'

DENVER - Throughout the 2008 election season, 9NEWS is committed to holding those who take out political commercials on our station accountable for what they say.

The following is a Truth Test about an ad called "Comes Through." It is running on stations throughout Colorado, including on 9NEWS and My20, in opposition of former Congressman Bob Schaffer, the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate. His opponent is Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colorado). They are running for the seat being vacated by Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colorado).

The commercial is paid for by a group called the League of Conservation Voters. The organization's stated goal on its Web site is "to secure the environmental future of our planet. . .to advocate for sound environmental policies and to elect pro-environmental candidates who will adopt and implement such policies." It states it is "the independent political voice for the environment."

By law, the group cannot have any direct communication with any candidate for office or his/her candidate committee.

The organization announced in April it would team with other environmental groups like Clean Water Action, the Sierra Club, Environment America and Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund for a coordinated campaign targeting U.S. Senate seats in Colorado, New Hampshire and New Mexico. (Source: Associated Press, April 25, 2008, Rocky Mountain News, April 25, 2008). In January, the LCV named Schaffer to its "dirty dozen" list of politicians and candidates the group found to be polluter-friendly.

Schaffer Campaign Manager Dick Wadhams called LCV a "partisan, leftist front group" that had broken federal election laws in 2006 and would be using "its scandal tainted funds to help… Mark Udall attack Bob Schaffer in Colorado. The group was fined $180,000 by the Federal Election Commission in December 2006 for raising money that "clearly indicated the funds received would be targeted for the election or defeat of specific federal candidates." (Source: Los Angeles Times, Dec. 14, 2006).

QUOTE: When you look at Bob Schaffer's resume, one thing comes through. Oil. In Congress, Bob Schaffer voted to give $13 billion in tax breaks to gas and big oil.

TRUTH: This is true.

The vote in question stems from the 2001 Energy Bill, that in addition to setting aside $15 billion over 10 years for research on renewable energy, conservation, clean coal and nuclear technology, it also set aside $33.5 billion in tax breaks over the following decade, $13.995 billion of which went to "energy producers." Energy companies also received billions more in subsidies in the legislation. (Source: Congressional Quarterly Bill Analysis of H.R. 4, April 25, 2002).

QUOTE: Schaffer then became an executive at a big oil company. . .

TRUTH: It is true that Bob Schaffer went to become an executive at an energy company after he left Congress. Whether Aspect Energy is a "big oil company" depends on how you define big.

It is a privately-run company, so its complete financials are not available to the public, but the company's revenues have been reported by the media and by a company executive as between $100 and $150 million per year. (Source: Denver Business Journal profile and Presentation to the Independent Petroleum Association of America by Aspect President and CEO Donald Wolf on April 18, 2005).

To put the numbers in context, there are 18 "energy" companies in the Forbes list of the country's 1,000 biggest companies with the largest being Constellation Energy (#117 out of 1,000) which reported nearly $22 billion in revenues in 2007 and the smallest being USEC (#912 out of 1,000) which reported nearly $2 billion in revenues for 2007. (Source: Fortune 1000 ratings).

For further context, there are 14 "petroleum refining" companies in the Forbes 1,000 with the largest being Exxon Mobil (#2 out of 1,000) which reported nearly $373 billion in 2007 revenues and the smallest being Calumet Specialty Products (#996 out of 1,000) with revenues of roughly $1.6 billion for 2007. (Source: Fortune 1000 ratings).

Denver Post Business Columnist Al Lewis said, "Big oil is measured in the billions, not in the millions." (Source: Phone conversation, 6/16/08).

Aspect describes itself on its Web site as a "privately held independent exploration and energy investment company." It has invested in drilling new wells worldwide as well as renewable technologies such as wind power. (Source: Aspect Energy Web site). Todd Neugebauer, the Principal with the firm, said it's "very important to note Aspect is a small independent (hardly large) and that over 80 percent of Aspect's current production is (not in oil but) from the production of clean burning natural gas." (Source: E-mail to 9NEWS, 5/21/08).

QUOTE: And went to Iraq to secure a contract for Iraqi oil.

TRUTH: This is also true.

Schaffer traveled to Kurdistan, in the northern part of Iraq, with a delegation from Aspect Energy. While there, he met with Adnan Mufti, the head of parliament in Kurdistan and they "discussed Kurdistan's economy and politics," according to the Iraq News Monitor Web site from November 27, 2006. The Web site also reported "Aspect Energy showed interested in participating in investment projects in various fields." (Source: Iraq News Monitor, Nov. 27, 2006)

The Aspect Energy visit was later reported in the Rocky Mountain News column by the paper's Editorial Page Editor, Vince Carroll. (Source: Rocky Mountain News, April 30, 2008).

Roughly a year later, in November 2007, Aspect Energy was awarded a production sharing contract by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) to explore 269 square kilometers in the Dohuk Governorate. The news release from the KRG states that "if commercial discoveries are made, (Aspect Energy) will provide an estimated aggregate return/profit of over 85 percent to Iraq and around 15 percent to the contractors." (Source: Kurdistan Regional Government News Release, November 12, 2007).

Aspect Energy Chairman Alex Cranberg told Vince Carroll for that Rocky Mountain News story that "if we're going to be successful over there (in Iraq), we've got to do more than send bullets," Cranberg said. "We signed a deal. We have a wildcat exploration block with no wells or production on it. We're years and years from making a profit." (Source: Rocky Mountain News, April 30, 2008).

QUOTE: So, it's no surprise that Schaffer's campaigns have taken $150,000 from gas and big oil.

TRUTH: This is true.

The $150,000 figure of oil and gas interest donations to Schaffer is over the course of his political career, starting in 1996 when he was first elected to Congress. He would leave office voluntarily in 2003 after three terms. LCV acquired its data from the non-profit Campaign Money Watch which analyzed data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. LCV reported the data as follows: 1996: $20,750, 1998: $21,900, 2000: $15,876, 2002: $2,000, 2004: $5,550 and 2008: $85,250). Massie Ritsch, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics confirms the LCV data to be accurate. (Ritsch e-mail to 9NEWS, 5/21/08).

Campaign Money Watch Director Dave Donnelly identifies oil and gas interest donations as money coming from specific companies in the industry, its employees and its political action committees. Donnelly said "anything over $100,000 (signifies) a lot of money from an industry. When you hit that threshold, it's a significant amount of money." (Source: Phone conversation with 9NEWS, 5/21/08). Donnelly also says there are numerous members of Congress who have received a significant amount more than Schaffer in oil and gas interest donations.

QUOTE: Doesn't Colorado deserve cleaner representation in the Senate?

TRUTH: This is opinion.