Texas Oil Companies Oppose California...

Texas Oil Companies Oppose California Climate Change Law

There are 156 comments on the www.nytimes.com story from Apr 8, 2010, titled Texas Oil Companies Oppose California Climate Change Law. In it, www.nytimes.com reports that:

Several Texas oil companies are bankrolling a petition drive to suspend California’s path-breaking climate change law in a move that may prove a bellwether for national efforts to address global warming.

The Valero Energy Corporation, a San Antonio-based company that is one of the nation’s largest independent oil refiners and retailers, has contributed $500,000 to a ballot initiative that would halt the carrying out of the California climate law known as Assembly Bill 32, which Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, signed in 2006...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.nytimes.com.

First Prev
of 8
Next Last
Middle-of-the-ro ad

Fresno, CA

#146 Apr 18, 2010
skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
I once held cards in 5 locals of three different unions. ALL donated to political candidates and NONE ever sought my opinion. In fact “thugs” from one UAW local physically threatened some of us “college boys” who refused to “voluntarily” contribute to COPE. Luckily there were enough of us quite healthy and ready to fight to continue to refuse. That money was food for our families!!!
I’ve also been a member of AARP from back when it was the “American Association of Retired People” and they never sought my opinions either.
Now you’re an outright LIAR! NO company can give only one vote to ANY person or group holding 1000 shares and 1000 votes to another! That is STRICTLY AGAINST the law stupid! EACH would get 1000 votes! They can and do give 1000 votes to a person holding 1000 shares and 1 vote to a person holding only 1 share.
The largest shareholders of most corporations ARE “groups of people”…the organizations that “run money” for retirement plans. They vote those shares in what they feel are best for owners of THEIR shareholders and any of them are quite free to express their opinions! Many (all?) of those open to all investors publish how they voted for any shareholder to read, study and comment on.
Two large ones are CALPERS (California Public Employee’s Retirement System) and TIAA-CREF (College Retirement Equities Fund, but now open to other investors). Their representatives often are quite vocal at meetings of shareholders but the holder of just a few shares can speak and ask questions as well.
Sorry that YOUR unions never asked you butt CSEA and SEIU asked my permission before they ever contributed to any political activity.

And EXXON Mobil, Union Pacific. Mid South, Huntington Bank, Puget Sound Water and Power and Washington Water and Power to name a few stocks I owned NEVER once asked for permission to use corporate funds for political purposes, never!

The California Public Employees Retirement System (Pers) has been fighting for years to have each of their members counted as individual votes so they could get people elected to the board of directors on corporations they own stock in butt the corporations have fought it tooth and nail.

Please provide a link to the L:AW you accuse me of lying about.

And please provide some proof that any “union thug” ever threatened you.
skeptic

Houston, TX

#148 Apr 18, 2010
Middle-of-the-road wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry that YOUR unions never asked you butt CSEA and SEIU asked my permission before they ever contributed to any political activity.
And EXXON Mobil, Union Pacific. Mid South, Huntington Bank, Puget Sound Water and Power and Washington Water and Power to name a few stocks I owned NEVER once asked for permission to use corporate funds for political purposes, never!
The California Public Employees Retirement System (Pers) has been fighting for years to have each of their members counted as individual votes so they could get people elected to the board of directors on corporations they own stock in butt the corporations have fought it tooth and nail.
Please provide a link to the L:AW you accuse me of lying about.
And please provide some proof that any “union thug” ever threatened you.
Stupid, all you had to do to speak up at ANY of those corporations was to use that proxy they sent you to attend the annual meeting of shareholders. You are even free to give your proxy to your union or any other organization you chose to represent you at any of those annual meetings. You could even propose a shareholder resolution yourself…even if you own only ONE share.

Corporations make political contributions for what they perceive as the good of the corporation and that IS for their shareholders. Unions do PRECISELY the same for what they perceive as the good of THEIR members.

CALPERS votes ALL of the shares they hold (without consultation with their members). The total number of shares wouldn’t change one iota were they voted by individuals so their influence on the corporation would be NO greater. In fact it would be LESS since 100% of their members would NOT agree with their “official” position CALPERS WOULD prefer cumulative voting and huge majorities consistently reject that proposal. Why would other shareholders want a disruptive director?

Lord you’re dumb…NOT worth the time it takes to reply to your garbage! Certainly NOT worth researching laws ANYONE at all familiar with corporate economics is WELL aware of. Rest assured that the lawyers for those corporations do…and are FAR more intelligent than you. CEO’s CAN limit the time shareholders can speak but can NOT prevent them from either speaking or offering shareholder resolutions.

Nor do I owe you (or anyone)“proof” of ANYTHING. You certainly post LIES with NO evidence much less proof!
Middle-of-the-ro ad

Fresno, CA

#149 Apr 18, 2010
skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
Stupid, all you had to do to speak up at ANY of those corporations was to use that proxy they sent you to attend the annual meeting of shareholders. You are even free to give your proxy to your union or any other organization you chose to represent you at any of those annual meetings. You could even propose a shareholder resolution yourself…even if you own only ONE share.
Corporations make political contributions for what they perceive as the good of the corporation and that IS for their shareholders. Unions do PRECISELY the same for what they perceive as the good of THEIR members.
CALPERS votes ALL of the shares they hold (without consultation with their members). The total number of shares wouldn’t change one iota were they voted by individuals so their influence on the corporation would be NO greater. In fact it would be LESS since 100% of their members would NOT agree with their “official” position CALPERS WOULD prefer cumulative voting and huge majorities consistently reject that proposal. Why would other shareholders want a disruptive director?
Lord you’re dumb…NOT worth the time it takes to reply to your garbage! Certainly NOT worth researching laws ANYONE at all familiar with corporate economics is WELL aware of. Rest assured that the lawyers for those corporations do…and are FAR more intelligent than you. CEO’s CAN limit the time shareholders can speak but can NOT prevent them from either speaking or offering shareholder resolutions.
Nor do I owe you (or anyone)“proof” of ANYTHING. You certainly post LIES with NO evidence much less proof!
Yes I did get ballots in the mail for all the stocks I owned and I did vote, NO because none of the people represented my needs/thoughts! I don’t know about you but I had to work to feed my family and couldn’t afford to go sit in a shareholders meeting for days on end without pay just so I could be voted down by the big boys. Pers asked me every time I voted for their board who I wanted to invest in.

So ends the conversation with your accusations and no proof to back them up. Says a lot about you.
skeptic

Quinlan, TX

#150 Apr 18, 2010
Middle-of-the-road wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I did get ballots in the mail for all the stocks I owned and I did vote, NO because none of the people represented my needs/thoughts! I don’t know about you but I had to work to feed my family and couldn’t afford to go sit in a shareholders meeting for days on end without pay just so I could be voted down by the big boys. Pers asked me every time I voted for their board who I wanted to invest in.
So ends the conversation with your accusations and no proof to back them up. Says a lot about you.
Stockholder meetings last only part of ONE day, stupid! IF you just voted “NO” you must have voted AGAINST resolutions offered by, for example, CalPERS. I’m beginning to doubt you even owned stocks. I certainly doubt your honesty!

Plus one can get audios of many of them on your computer during or after them…at any hour of day or night.

I haven’t the slightest idea who “Pers” is so no idea as to how you invested. I’ve invested both in individual stocks and in funds including one that merely attempts to match the S&P 500.

I retired in 1990 but worked from late in WWII until then. Provided support for a wife and four wonderful children, including their college educations, and still managed to save a bit.

I DID make an error in one earlier post. One must own $2,000 worth of stock and have held it for a year to submit a shareholder’s resolution. That is a rule by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Holding a single share won’t qualify.

Here are details on my statement on proxies,“Every state requires public companies incorporated within it to hold an annual meeting of shareholders to elect the Board of Directors and transact other business that requires shareholder approval. Notice of the annual meeting must be in writing and is subject to a minimum notice period that varies by state. In 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission voted to require all public companies to make their annual meeting materials available online. The final rules required compliance by large accelerated filers beginning on January 1, 2008, and by all other filers beginning on January 1, 2009. The "e-proxy" rules allow two methods for companies to deliver their proxy materials, the "notice only" option or the "full set" option. Under the notice only option, the company must post all of its proxy materials on a website, and send shareholders a notice that the materials are available online. This notice must be mailed at least 40 calendar days before the shareholder meeting.”

I’ll be glad if you’re truly gone. Rarely have I encountered one so ignorant yet so arrogant! Attempting to equate reserves of fossil fuels to volume of the earth…Hellooooo! What you know of energy could easily be written on the head of a pin, pinhead!
skeptic

Houston, TX

#151 Apr 19, 2010
Middle-of-the-road wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I did get ballots in the mail for all the stocks I owned and I did vote, NO because none of the people represented my needs/thoughts! I don’t know about you but I had to work to feed my family and couldn’t afford to go sit in a shareholders meeting for days on end without pay just so I could be voted down by the big boys. Pers asked me every time I voted for their board who I wanted to invest in.
So ends the conversation with your accusations and no proof to back them up. Says a lot about you.
My insomnia has been keeping me awake so I decided to take a look at CalPERS. I now suspect you referred to them as “Pers.” These tidbits will take more than one post.

Unless you owned stocks OTHER than through CalPERS you did NOT vote stock yourself!

You may select investments from those offered by CalPERS but you cannot voted stock held for you by CalPERS any more than I can vote stocks held by the Vanguard Indexed 500 Fund I’ve been invested in. CalPERS and Vanguard vote those stocks, NOT those invested in them. I believe you LIE yet again!

Vanguard DOES put information on how they voted “on-line.” I have no idea whether CalPERS does or not.

I took a quick look at the CalPERS Internet site. They give details of their investments but they are “read only” and cannot easily be downloaded. However as of 4/13/2010 the Total Market Value of ALL their investments was $212.9 Billion.

They hold many different investments of several types, including stocks of both US and foreign companies. Lists can be read at:
http://www.calpers.ca.gov/index.jsp...

Select “US Equities” and “International Equities.”
skeptic

Houston, TX

#152 Apr 19, 2010
Page 2
Interestingly enough CalPERS has been accused of violating a CA law:
http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-02-25/bay-are...
“California's giant public pension funds remain invested - and have even increased investments - in companies doing business in Iran despite a 2-year-old law mandating that the state sell its holdings in those companies.
Lawmakers from both parties angrily questioned leaders of the funds and vowed further action to force compliance with the law at a Capitol hearing Wednesday. Managers of the funds said they are following the law by putting the financial interests of retirees first.
‘I'm concerned that you have completely thumbed your nose at the Legislature," said Assemblyman Joel Anderson, R-Alpine (San Diego County), who wrote the 2007 law calling for divestment of state retirement funds in Iran. It passed the Legislature without a single no vote. He said the pension fund managers are ‘wrong on so many levels on this issue.’
The U.S. Department of State lists Iran as one of four countries that sponsor international terrorism, and the Iranian government has faced international condemnation for its deadly crackdown on reformists after the contested presidential election there last year.
The California Public Employees' Retirement System has holdings worth just under $900 million in 23 companies that have energy- or defense-related operations in Iran. The California State Teachers' Retirement System has 18 such investments, but officials there said they have not tracked the value of those. Together the funds oversee about $374 billion in assets. CalPERS is the largest public pension investment fund in the country.
Officials at the funds pointed to a state constitutional provision that says the funds are not obligated to take an action ‘unless the (pension fund) board determines, in good faith, that the action ... is consistent with the fiduciary responsibilities of the board.’
CalPERS commissioned a report on the cost of divestment that found doing so could cost between $5.8 million and $23.3 million in transaction costs, and between plus or minus $127 million and plus or minus $194 million after reinvesting the funds.
‘For a fund of the size and complexity of CalPERS, these aren't easy issues to balance,’ said Joseph Dear, chief investment officer of the retirement fund. He said the fund has followed all the provisions of the law, such as identifying companies doing business in Iran, except for divesting in companies.”
skeptic

Houston, TX

#153 Apr 19, 2010
Page 3
Now the Feds are also investigating CalPERS.
http://www.redding.com/news/2010/mar/27/repor...

“SACRAMENTO - Federal prosecutors have started a criminal investigation into the investment activities of the California Public Employees' Retirement System, a newspaper reported Friday.

The Wall Street Journal, citing unnamed people familiar with the matter, said Justice Department officials in Los Angeles are examining potential influence-peddling within CalPERS, the nation's largest public pension fund.

At issue is whether the investment decisions of fund managers were influenced by bribes rather than the best long-term interests of pensioners.

Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles, declined to comment to The Associated Press. Brad Pacheco, CalPERS' chief spokesman, told the AP his office was not aware of any criminal investigation.

CalPERS serves 1.6 million active and retired public employees and holds about $200 billion in investments. The fund lost more than a quarter of its value during 2008.

CalPERS transactions are under investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Pacheco said.

Part of that investigation is believed to revolve around the use of so-called placement agents. Those are middlemen hired by investment firms or hedge funds to find large institutional investors, such as Cal- PERS, who may be interested in their business.

Placement agents can earn millions of dollars in fees if they help one of their clients secure a contract with a major investor.

In New York, a pay-to-play scandal involving state pension fund managers has led to six people pleading guilty and an inquiry from the SEC.

So far, no charges alleging improper kickbacks have been filed against any CalPERS official or placement agent.

CalPERS has hired a Washington, D.C., law firm, Steptoe and Johnson, to conduct an internal investigation of how the fund has used placement agents over the past 15 years.

Pacheco, the fund spokesman, said that investigation was triggered by revelations that the New York pension funds were improperly influenced by placement agents. At that time, CalPERS asked for voluntary disclosures from its external investment managers about the fees they paid to placement agents.

CalPERS decided an investigation was warranted when they heard back from those investment managers and learned the size of some of the payments, Pacheco said. The top 10 agents were paid more than $125 million over the past 15 years.

"We're looking to make sure that CalPERS wasn't victimized in any way," Pacheco said. "It could be related to things like kickbacks, those things that have surfaced in the New York investigation."

According to the information submitted, the top placement agent for CalPERS investments was Arvco Financial Ventures, a company based in Stateline, Nev., that is run by former CalPERS board member Alfred Villalobos. He had been paid $58.9 million in fees.

CalPERS adopted a policy last May that requires fund managers to report the use of placement agents and the fees they paid to them for any new investments or for changes to existing investments.”
frank miller

United States

#154 Apr 19, 2010
For God's sake you filthy TROLL 'skeptic Houston TX
#150 to #154', as in my #147 post, and others EXECUTIVES are not concerned about 100 years old
shareholders proxy votes, or CALPERS, the largest Californian mainly civil servants Science/Technology IGNORANT retirees who took a huge hit from your filthy Wall Street CABAL money handlers financiers, who by God will end up in prison after this Goldman Sachs Civil suit is over, from losing 1/2 of their hard-earned 401K's, IRA's,SEP's, Roth's, discreet defined pension plans
value from a high Dow Jones of ~14.500 in May 2008, to a low of ~7500 in around November 2008, when those filthy Alan Greenspan loving Hedgefunds/AIG Insured bogus 2.5 million subprimes
doomed to fail in 5 years, as opposed to solid 30 years FICO's above 750!

Now if you are one of these filthy lawyers, staff aides trying to discredit me with your garbage about proxy votes, I'll have you frigging disbarred, you hear me arshole,'skeptic'!!
Now get off this Thread cabal bitch, or jerk bully!
F.M.
Ex Liberal

United States

#155 Apr 19, 2010
Thank God someone is opposing this ridiculous AB 32 Cap and Tax garbage propaganda. But when the really big money is to be made following the phony Al Gore Man Made Global Warming Hoaxsters, even big oil begins to look like minor leagers when it comes to potential profit taking from the carbon tradding hoax!
frank miller

United States

#156 Apr 19, 2010
California does not want another Key Laye Texas based Enron electricity fleecing! Nor does California want another 1980's Texas based oil/gas Boon Pickens speculative junk bonds monopoly take-over of oil/gas power sources, whence THRICE including the latest 2.5 million doomed to fail in 5 years sub-prime foreclosures Hedgefunds/AIG Insured Derivatives naiive/fiduciary trusting civil servants retirements safety nets, and inheritances to their children, and grand-children
CALPERS 'mutual funds' deposits {remember many State Service employees don't get Social Security..} were fleeced!
F.M.
frank miller

United States

#157 Apr 19, 2010
Correction to my #156 post:'...Ken Laye Texas based Enron.."
F.M.
skeptic

United States

#158 Apr 19, 2010
frank miller wrote:
For God's sake you filthy TROLL 'skeptic Houston TX
#150 to #154', as in my #147 post, and others EXECUTIVES are not concerned about 100 years old
shareholders proxy votes, or CALPERS, the largest Californian mainly civil servants Science/Technology IGNORANT retirees who took a huge hit from your filthy Wall Street CABAL money handlers financiers, who by God will end up in prison after this Goldman Sachs Civil suit is over, from losing 1/2 of their hard-earned 401K's, IRA's,SEP's, Roth's, discreet defined pension plans
value from a high Dow Jones of ~14.500 in May 2008, to a low of ~7500 in around November 2008, when those filthy Alan Greenspan loving Hedgefunds/AIG Insured bogus 2.5 million subprimes
doomed to fail in 5 years, as opposed to solid 30 years FICO's above 750!
Now if you are one of these filthy lawyers, staff aides trying to discredit me with your garbage about proxy votes, I'll have you frigging disbarred, you hear me arshole,'skeptic'!!
Now get off this Thread cabal bitch, or jerk bully!
F.M.
Got your dander up Franky Boy? I’ll remain on this thread as long as I wish.

I also lost money with the decline in the stock market but blame ONLY myself rather than trying to put the blame on others. The stock market has NEVER been risk free.

We in Texas suffered a real estate market disaster in the 1980’s. Values declined 30-50% and scores of banks went under. We learned however and are suffering much less this time. Perhaps it’s time Californians learned a few things as well!

I’ve never been a lawyer or worked for one but HAVE been retired for nearly 20 years so AM one of those old fogies who own stocks.
skeptic

United States

#159 Apr 19, 2010
frank miller wrote:
California does not want another Key Laye Texas based Enron electricity fleecing! Nor does California want another 1980's Texas based oil/gas Boon Pickens speculative junk bonds monopoly take-over of oil/gas power sources, whence THRICE including the latest 2.5 million doomed to fail in 5 years sub-prime foreclosures Hedgefunds/AIG Insured Derivatives naiive/fiduciary trusting civil servants retirements safety nets, and inheritances to their children, and grand-children
CALPERS 'mutual funds' deposits {remember many State Service employees don't get Social Security..} were fleeced!
F.M.
The name was Lay. Certainly Skilling and nearly as surely Lay WERE out and out crooks. The ENRON employees, mostly Texans, suffered more than anyone in California.

T. Boone is sometimes referred to as an oilman but actually is a corporate raider. He stays within the law but (through financial houses he controls) buys lots of stock in and threatens an unfriendly takeover of companies. They often run for a “White Knight” instead who pays more per share than the stock cost Pickens to take them over. When crude prices neared $150/Barrel he touted a scheme to spend a large sum building windpower facilities in Texas (from where California ALREADY gets quite a bit of electricity as well as gasoline, diesel fuel and natural gas) but demanded rights of eminent domain to run roughshod over ranchers and farmers. That scheme seems to have folded with the decline in oil and gas prices.

California has its share of crooks as well.

Though probably false there is a story that, when asked,“Why do you rob banks?” Willie Sutton replied,“Because that’s where the money is.” Now there is even more money in business and especially governments! Crooks DO go where there is money.

CalPERS chooses both those to run that money and the investments they will make. Texans have absolutely NO say in those decisions!

Save your bleeding heart for someone who gives a damn! California is merely getting SOME of what they had coming!!!!!

WHAT

Bedford, OH

#162 Apr 22, 2010
skeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
The name was Lay. Certainly Skilling and nearly as surely Lay WERE out and out crooks. The ENRON employees, mostly Texans, suffered more than anyone in California.
T. Boone is sometimes referred to as an oilman but actually is a corporate raider. He stays within the law but (through financial houses he controls) buys lots of stock in and threatens an unfriendly takeover of companies. They often run for a “White Knight” instead who pays more per share than the stock cost Pickens to take them over. When crude prices neared $150/Barrel he touted a scheme to spend a large sum building windpower facilities in Texas (from where California ALREADY gets quite a bit of electricity as well as gasoline, diesel fuel and natural gas) but demanded rights of eminent domain to run roughshod over ranchers and farmers. That scheme seems to have folded with the decline in oil and gas prices.
California has its share of crooks as well.
Though probably false there is a story that, when asked,“Why do you rob banks?” Willie Sutton replied,“Because that’s where the money is.” Now there is even more money in business and especially governments! Crooks DO go where there is money.
CalPERS chooses both those to run that money and the investments they will make. Texans have absolutely NO say in those decisions!
Save your bleeding heart for someone who gives a damn! California is merely getting SOME of what they had coming!!!!!
Wasn't there something about water rights also with T. Boone?

Plus, if you watch his investments, he almost always only invests in things were HE gets GOVERNMENT MONEY, in the form of subsidies.
skeptic

Houston, TX

#163 Apr 22, 2010
WHAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Wasn't there something about water rights also with T. Boone?
Plus, if you watch his investments, he almost always only invests in things were HE gets GOVERNMENT MONEY, in the form of subsidies.
First, I am NOT an expert on T. Boone Pickens. I merely read about him in following equity markets, particularly those in energy industries. Windpower IS one of very few alternatives to fossil fuels that can be economically competitive NOW.

I believe water rights WERE one of the things Pickens wanted through eminent domain but he also wanted the rights to run power lines anywhere he wished without regard to how that “broke up” ranches and farms.

I also believe he tried his tricks in Japan and they “handed him his head.” I seem to recall he became the largest single stockholder in a Japanese company and sought a seat on their board. All the Japanese shareholders banded together and denied him that seat and eventually forced him to sell his stock at a LOSS.

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#164 Oct 30, 2011
Middle-of-the-road wrote:
<quoted text>
You say man won’t ever run out of oil. If you truly understand even simple math then you must conclude that if earth is a known volume and you take away a portion of that volume every day, eventually the original volume is gone, right?
Just as time is running in regards to oil production, the time runs out of an hour -glass.
The original questions you said you would answer....LOL

Post # 102 with you responding to my list of questions..........LOL
http://www.topix.com/forum/state/ca/T3VS9F3MO...

Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
Why won’t you answer the question??
What are you afraid of??
Was it floored in California??
Was it prepped in California?
Was it sold in California?
Was it registered in California?
Did a dealer in California make money and pay income tax on it?
Did someone wash it each week that it sat on a lot in California and have a job and pay taxes?
Was it ever run in a TV, Newspaper or radio ad in California and did the advertiser pay taxes on any of that money?
You complain about corporations not paying tax and you do the same thing they do…………….LOL
Typical far left of the road……………..LOL

road toad said
I'll be glad to answer your questions right after you answer the qustion I asked you first.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Construction Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Universal Forest Products closes five plants, p... (Jan '08) 19 hr KARMA GOT RAPHAN 17
News 3 Homebuilders To Avoid, 1 To Consider Now (Feb '12) 19 hr stalk this 8
News pulte homes (Sep '11) 19 hr stalk this 8
News PulteGroup Inc. (PHM) Bond Prices Fall 1.8% Dec 2 zionist swamp 2
News Oversight body approved for Amtrak's $24 bln Ga... Nov 18 SirPrize 2
News a Dna methylation biomarker of alcohol consumption Nov 16 Stephany McDowell 1
News Arnold Schneider's Best-Performing Stocks Oct '16 TRUMP U is evil 1
More from around the web