American Energy Alliance (AEA)
The American Energy Alliance is a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit organization founded in May, 2008. It is the advocacy arm of the 501(c)(3) nonprofit Institute for Energy Research (IER). According to its website, the AEA “engages in grassroots public policy advocacy and debate concerning energy and environmental policies.” 
While the stated aim of the AEA is to “educate and mobilize citizens in understanding, promoting and helping to solve America’s most pressing energy and environmental policy problems,” this education has taken the form of attack ads against political candidates and messages such as “stand with coal” and “vote no on Obama's failing energy policy.” This has led to some questions on the validity of the AEA's nonprofit status, especially given the AEA's own statement that their group is “not political.” 
The American Energy Alliance once declared that it “has no ties to any political party, and it has no interest in supporting the agenda of any particular political party.” However, Brad Johnson at the Wonk Room noted that all of AEA's employees at the time were former House Republican staffers and AEA's website, EnergyTownHall.org, was also run by a former GOP house staffer. , 
AEA has also spent millions of dollars on media advertising through Republican-orientated vendor Mentzer Media for its stated nonpartisan activities. 
Greenpeace reports that IER and AEA worked together on a $3.6 million anti-Obama gas price advertising campaign funded by Koch Industries. The American Energy Alliance has also received over $3.8 million from Freedom Partners, including $1.5 million in 2012, a 501(c)(6) group directed by many of the Koch brothers' “inner circle” such as Richard Fink, Marc Short, Wayne Gable, and Kevin Gentry. 
Both the American Energy Alliance and its parent organization, the Institute for Energy Research (IER), are run by Tom Pyle, a former lobbyist for Koch Industries.  Politico reports that Pyle regularly attends the mega-donor summits organized by the Koch brothers, including the 2012 winter summit in Indian Wells, Calif., where the Kochs raised more than $150 million to be directed to groups ahead of the general election. 
Nancy Pfotenhauer, another lobbyist for Koch Industries, is listed as a Director on AEA's 2014 990 tax return. Pfotenhauer, formerly Nancy Mitchell, was an advisor to Senator John McCain during his presidential election campaign, and a former director of Koch Industries’ Washington office. Pfotenhauer was Koch Industries’ chief in-house lobbyist from 1996 to 2001 with a focus on gas pipelines.  In 2001, Nancy Pfotenhauer left Koch Industries to become the President of the Independent Women’s Forum (IWF) and later president of both Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and the IWF. She was also executive vice president for Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE) a group co-founded by David H. Koch. , 
Many of Pfotenhauer's organizations have received significant funding from Koch Industries. For example:
- Independent Women's Forum — At least $894,000 from Koch foundations. 
- Citizens for a Sound Economy — Founded by the Kochs, and received $7.9M between 1986 and 1993. 
- Americans for Prosperity — At least $8,266,250 from Koch Foundations. , 
Stance on Climate Change
“At a time when the Obama administration is pushing an aggressive climate agenda in Paris, public concerns about the economy and terrorism far outpace anxieties about climate change. Rather than forcing more costly climate policies on the public, world leaders should focus their attention on the economic and national security issues that matter most to people.” 
“Even if the apocalyptic vision painted by Al Gore and others is perfectly true—which it’s not—measures limiting the emissions from individual cities are utterly absurd. They epitomize the prevalence of symbolism over science in our climate change policy debates.” 
“[A]ccording to official climate models, even if the U.S. enacted an immediate and total ban on all human emissions of greenhouse gases, the difference in global temperature by the year 2050 would be a mere five one-hundredths of a degree Celsius. And that’s the most that the U.S. government could possibly achieve, even if it relied on a ridiculously draconian ban on all future emissions.” 
“The morally superior choice is for people to be free to use energy to make their lives better. Today, that means having access to the abundant energy resources of coal, oil, and natural gas. Those are the technologies that lifted the developed world out of poverty, and they continue to lift millions out of poverty while they power the high-energy lives of those of us fortunate enough to live in the developed world.” 
“Carbon dioxide is not dirty, and is not poisonous to humans in concentrations we observe in the atmosphere. In fact, carbon dioxide is the natural product of combustion–whether that combustion occurs within our cells (which is why humans exhale carbon dioxide), or whether carbon dioxide results from the combustion of natural gas. Carbon dioxide is essential to life on Earth because vegetation requires carbon dioxide to survive and thrive.”
[…] The policies that environmental activists advocate for, such as shutting down our nation’s affordable and reliable coal power plants, will make energy more expensive. And as we have seen in countries that have made electricity a luxury good through ill-advised energy policy–like Germany–higher energy costs exacerbate poverty and the negative health impacts associated with it.” 
The American Energy Alliance is registered as a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit organization, which means it is not required to disclose its funding sources and contributions are not tax-deductible. 501(c)(4) organizations, commonly referred to as “social welfare” groups, play an influential role in politics. 
The IRS notes that “a section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity.” The IRS also notes that “The promotion of social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office.” 
When the AEA filed for tax-exempt status in 2008, it told the IRS that it had no interest in supporting the agenda or any particular political party or political candidate,” reports The Center for Public Integrity. While AEA acknowledged “the possibility that some of AEA's publications and communications may be considered ‘political,’” the group asserted that it was a “nonpartisan policy-oriented organization,” not a 'political' organization.” 
Tax documents show that AEA spent over $5 million on “media and advertising” with vendor Mentzer Media, a media buying firm that works primarily with Republicans, receiving $3.9 million of that amount. In 2012, AEA had produced television ads in swing states Virginia and Ohio encouraging voters to “stand with coal” and “vote no on Obama's failing energy policy,” while claiming they were not designed to assist Mitt Romney in unseating Barack Obama. 
Marcus Owens, an attorney who previously headed the IRS’ tax-exempt division, said the American Energy Alliance’s 2013 tax filing “certainly raises a red flag.” 
The following data is compiled from the Conservative Transparency project. Note that as a 501(c)(4) organization, the American Energy Alliance is not required to disclose its donors, so available data is limited. 
View the attached spreadsheet for additional details on American Energy Alliance funding by year (.xlsx).
|Center to Protect Patient Rights||$250,000||$864,960||$1,114,960|
|Americans for Prosperity||$15,000||$15,000|
|Institute for Energy Research||$300,000||$500,000||$800,000|
|Americans for Prosperity||$100,000||$100,000|
|United for Jobs||$15,000||$15,000|
|Americans for Limited Government||$20,000||$20,000|
|Doctors for Disaster Preparedness||$10,000||$10,000|
|Energy Policy Network||$200,000||$200,000|
|Hispanic Leadership Fund||$7,500||$7,500|
|National Black Chamber of Commerce||$15,000||$15,000|
|Taxpayers Protection Alliance||$7,500||$7,500|
|The 60 Plus Association||$37,500||$37,500|
|The Buckeye Institute||$5,000||$5,000|
Greenpeace reports that IER and AEA have received funding from Koch for a $3.6 million anti-Obama gas price advertising campaign. 
According to Greenpeace, AEA received $1.5 million in 2012 funnelled through Freedom Partners, a 501(c)(6) business leaguue directed by many of the Koch brothers' closest connections such as Richard Fink, Marc Short, Wayne Gable, and Kevin Gentry. 
Board of Directors
The following is compiled from publicly available 990 tax forms.
|Dan Kish||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Senior Vice President, Policy|
|Dan Simmons||Y||Y||Y||Y||Vice President, Policy|
|Robert Bradley||Y||Y||Y||IER Executive Officer|
|Scott Alex Beaulier||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Director|
|Benjamin Cole||Y||Y||Y||Director, Communications|
|Chris Warren||Y||Y||Y||Y||Vice President,Communications|
|Dan Kish||Y||Senior Vice President, Policy|
|Daniel R. Simmons||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Vice President, Policy|
|Doug Macgillivray||Y||Y||Director of Federal Affairs|
|Dustin DeBerry||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Director, Donor Relations|
|Genevieve Thornton||Y||Y||Director, Marketing|
|Hubbel Relat||Y||Vice President for State Policy and General Counsel|
|Jeffrey Hubbard||Y||Y||Director, New Media|
|John Mavretich||Y||Director, Communications|
|Kevin Kennedy||Y||Director, Federal Affairs|
|Kris Daniel||Y||Director, Development|
|Mike Morrison||Y||Y||Y||Director, Digital Media|
|Robin Millican||Y||Director, Federal Affairs|
|Thomas J. Pyle||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||Y||President|
“The American Energy Alliance has organized a coalition to proclaim in one unified voice that there should be no expansion of the misguided electric vehicle tax credit,” Pyle wrote in a statement, quoted at The Daily Caller. “There is no question that the electric vehicle tax credit distorts the auto market to no gain.” 
According to Pyle and others who signed the letter, Electric vehicle tax credits “overwhelmingly benefit the rich.” DeSmog's Koch vs. Clean project has systematically debunked this, among other well-rehearsed talking points and misinformation put forward by industry about electric vehicles. 
July 18, 2018
The American Energy Alliance, represented by Tom Pyle, was among signatories of a letter supporting an anti-carbon tax resolution from House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) and Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va. 
“We oppose any carbon tax. We oppose a carbon tax because it would lead to less income and fewer jobs for American families,” the letter read. “We support the House Concurrent Resolution in opposition to a job-killing carbon tax and urge members to co-sponsor and support this effort.” 
The resolution would call a carbon tax “detrimental to the United States economy.”E&E News reported it was similar to a measure that passed the House in 2016. Rep. Carlos Curbelo of Florida, co-chairman of the Climate Solutions Caucus, said he would not vote for the resolution. 
“Protecting our environment and economic growth are not mutually exclusive,” he said in a statement. “The resolution presents a false choice.”
The American Energy Alliance released the results of a poll asking voter's opinions on electric vehicles (EVs) and fuel efficiency standards. DeSmog, after reviewing the actual poll questions, reported the poll was an example of a “push poll,” defined by the American Association for Public Opinion Research as “a form of negative campaigning that is disguised as a political poll.” , , , 
“Voters want to make their own decisions about what kind of cars and trucks to buy. And they definitely don’t want to pay for the toys of the rich,” the American Energy Alliance said was the takeaway from the results. 
The poll was conducted by MWR Strategies, a lobbying firm whose clients have included Koch Industries and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers. The questions implant the idea that consumers are being pushed to buy certain vehicles and that taxpayers are being forced to pay for the federal programs that support EV sales. 
For example, one question states that every purchaser of an electric vehicle is paid “75 hundred dollars” by the “taxpayer,” which misrepresents the mechanics of the non-refundable electric vehicle tax credit. The tax credit simply lowers the buyer’s tax rate in the year of purchase — functionally the same way that a home mortgage interest deduction or child tax credit works. 
Another question claims that the average income of an electric car buyer is $150,000, and then asks whether the respondent thinks it’s “fair” that the buyer should “be paid 75 hundred dollars.” As of 2016, 54 percent of EV purchasers have a household income above $100,000, not $150,000. Also not noted, nearly 80 percent of EVs are leased rather than purchased, and only 38 percent of leases have a household income above $100,000. 
Below is a sample of one split sample question, where the interviewer uses to different wordings to ask the same question: 
The first question, set up to make respondents feel a direct personal sacrifice, 29 percent answered that this was “way too much” and 25 percent said it was “about right.” The second question, framed without the direct emotional connection, the percentage of respondents that said it was “about right” rose slightly to 27 percent, and those who said it was “way too much” dropped to 19 percent. Both wordings were misleading, considering a tax credit is not a payment from the government and not all buyers of EVs get the full value of the tax credit. 
April 23, 2018
In a speech to the U.S. Senate, a group of Democratic senators identified the organizations as front groups for the Koch Brothers and other wealthy donors, nicknamed the “Web of Deceit.” The senators outlined how, in addition to funding from the Koch network, many of the groups use untraceable “dark money” funneled through groups like Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust to influence legislation, particularly with regards to climate and pollution.
Senator Whitehouse outlined it as “a web of deceit conceived and bankrolled by the Koch brothers and other self-interested billionaires to advocate for very selfish and unpatriotic policies.” Whitehouse added: “This web of deceit has infiltrated and populated the Trump administration, and it is swamping the interests of everyday Americans. 
The full list of pro-Pruitt signatories and their respective organizations is as follows:
- Saulius “Saul” Anuzius - 60 Plus Association
- Fred Birnbaum - Idaho Freedom Foundation
- L. Brent Bozell III - Media Research Center
- Amy Oliver Cooke - Independence Institute
- Wesley Denton - Conservative Partnership Institute
- Viv Forbes - The Carbon Sense Coalition
- Frank J Gaffney - Center for Security Policy
- Steve Goreham - Climate Science Coalition of America
- Phil Kerpen - American Commitment
- Andrew Langer - Institute for Liberty
- Lisa B. Nelson - American Legislative Exchange Council
- Rick Manning - Americans for Limited Government
- Jenny Beth Martin - Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund
- William Perry Pendley - Mountain States Legal Foundation
- Thomas Pyle - American Energy Alliance
- George Rasley - ConservativeHQ.com
- Sandy Rios - American Family Association
- Craig Richardson - Energy & Environment Legal Institute
- Craig Rucker - Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT)
- Dr Jameson Taylor - Missisippi Center for Public Policy
- Kyle Wingfield - Georgia Public Policy Foundation
May 8, 2017
The American Energy Alliance, represented by Thomas J. Pyle is listed on an open letter to President Donald J. Trump urging him “to withdraw fully from the Paris Climate Treaty and to stop all taxpayer funding of UN global warming programs.” 
DeSmog reported that the 40 groups represented in the letter, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), The Heartland Institute, and the Heritage Foundation, have received a combined total of millions of dollars from the Koch Brothers, ExxonMobil, and other industry groups. 
Analysis also showed that the groups accepted about $80 million through Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust, two groups that have been confirmed is a key financial source for key U.S-based climate change denial groups. 
January 12, 2017
The AEA's Thomas Pyle was a signatory to a January 12, 2017 official letter of support (PDF) for Scott Pruitt, in which numerous groups, including The Heartland Institute, and others, declared that the Senate should “swiftly approve his nomination” for Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Other signatories of the letter included: 
- Michael Needham, Heritage Action for America
- Grover Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform
- Kent Lassman, Competitive Enterprise Institute
- Adam Brandon, FreedomWorks
- David McIntosh, Club for Growth
- Phil Kerpen, American Commitment
- Craig Richardson, Energy and Environment Action Team
- David Williams, Taxpayers Protection Alliance
- Harry Alford, National Black Chamber of Commerce
- Jim Martin, 60 Plus
- Andrew Langer, Institute for Liberty
- Heather Higgins, Independent Women’s Voice
- Independence Institute
- Richard Martin, Americans for Limited Government
- Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes (COAST)
- Brett Healy, MacIver Institute
- Joseph Bast, Heartland Institute
- George Landrith, Frontiers of Freedom
- Randy Eminger, Energy Policy Network
- Paul Gessing, Rio Grande Foundation
- Mike Nasi, Balanced Energy for Texas
- Brent Mead, Montana Policy Institute
- Forest Thigpen, Mississippi Center for Public Policy
Thomas Pyle was chosen to head Donald Trump's energy transition team after Mike McKenna stepped down from the position. 
Shortly before his appointment, Pyle had sent a a memo (see full .pdf)—obtained and published by the Center for Media and Democracy—to a private email list outlining “The Trump Administration's Energy Plan.” Pyle's memo, featuring a banner with both the American Energy Alliance (AEA) and Institute for Energy Research (IER) logos included 14 policy proposals such as: , , 
- Withdrawing from the 2015 Paris Climate agreement;
- Increasing federal oil and natural gas leasing;
- Lifting the coal lease moratorium;
- Eliminating the Clean Power Plan;
- Expediting approvals of LNG export terminals;
- Moving forward with pipeline projects including the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipeline;
- Rolling back federal fuel economy standards;
- Ending the use of the social cost of carbon in agency rulemaking; and
- Reconsidering the “endangerment finding” that found greenhouse gases to be a threat to public health and welfare.
June 13, 2016
The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD/PRWatch) reports the American Energy Alliance (AEA) was named as a creditor in Peabody Energy's recent bankruptcy filings. 
Prominent individuals appearing in the documents include climate deniers Willie Soon, Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer and Richard Berman. The long list of organizations also includes groups such as Americans for Prosperity, American Legislative Exchange Council, CFACT, Institute for Energy Research, State Policy Network, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and dozens more. 
“These groups collectively are the heart and soul of climate denial,” said Kert Davies, founder of the Climate Investigation Center, who has spent 20 years tracking funding for climate denial. “It’s the broadest list I have seen of one company funding so many nodes in the denial machine.”
The company’s filings reveal funding for a range of organisations which have fought Barack Obama’s plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and denied the very existence of climate change. […]
Among Peabody’s beneficiaries, the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change has insisted – wrongly – that carbon emissions are not a threat but “the elixir of life” while the American Legislative Exchange Council is trying to overturn Environmental Protection Agency rules cutting emissions from power plants. Meanwhile, Americans for Prosperity campaigns against carbon pricing. The Oklahoma chapter was on the list. […]
“The breadth of the groups with financial ties to Peabody is extraordinary. Thinktanks, litigation groups, climate scientists, political organisations, dozens of organisations blocking action on climate all receiving funding from the coal industry,” said Nick Surgey, director of research for the Center for Media and Democracy.
“We expected to see some denial money, but it looks like Peabody is the treasury for a very substantial part of the climate denial movement.”
Notable organizations listed in the initial documents include:
- 60 Plus Association
- The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity
- American Energy Alliance
- Alliance For Energy And Economic Growth
- American Energy Alliance
- American Legislative Exchange Council
- Americans For Prosperity Oklahoma
- Atlas Economic Research Foundation
- Berman And Company, Inc
- Consumer Energy Alliance
- Center For Clean Air Policy
- Center for Energy and Economic Development
- Center For The Study Of Carbon Dioxide And Global Change
- Coalition for Responsible Regulation
- Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow
- Council on State Taxation
- DCI Group AZ, LLC
- Ducks Unlimited
- Energy & Environment Legal Institute
- Edison Electric Institute
- Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity
- Free Market Environmental Law Clinic
- Frontiers Of Freedom Institute
- George C. Marshall Institute
- Hill Knowlton Strategies
- Hill Knowlton, Inc
- Hudson Institute
- Hunton & Williams
- Independence Institute
- Institute For Energy Research
- Institute for Liberty
- National Association of Manufacturers
- National Black Chamber of Commerce
- National Conference of State Legislatures
- National Mining Association
- National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners
- National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
- NextGen Energy Council
- PACE (May refer to Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy)
- Science & Public Policy Institute
- Sidley Austin LLP
- State Policy Network
- Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute
- Texas Public Policy Foundation
- U.S. Chamber of Commerce
- Western Business Roundtable
Notable individuals named in the initial documents include the following:
The American Energy Alliance is part of a coalition of 60 conservative organizations led by Americans for Prosperity claiming that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) ozone rule will cost jobs and hurt the U.S. economy. 
“The only way EPA could justify the regulation was to use questionable cobenefits,” a letter addressed to House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.) read. “In reducing ozone, there may also be benefits from reductions of other pollutants, in this case particulate matter (PM). However, the EPA already has another set of regulations dealing exclusively with PM. Either the EPA has woefully inadequate standards for PM or it is effectively ‘double counting’ the health benefits of PM reductions to justify the ozone regulation.” 
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) reports that the American Energy Alliance is one of several Koch-funded groups including the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the State Policy Network (SPN) working to “stymie the Clean Power Plan,” President Obama's signature effort to cut carbon pollution from power plants. 
“The point of these riders is to restrict the agency from putting time and attention into this regulation,” said Hubbel Relat, vice president for state policy and general counsel for AEA. “These budget riders exist in the first place because the governors insist on moving forward on a regulation that is held up in litigation and the Supreme Court has questioned its legality.” 
September 1, 2015
American Energy Alliance President Thomas Pyle issued a statement criticizing Michigan's Governor Richard Dale Snyder for his plan to implement EPA carbon regulations: 
“The Snyder administration’s decision to wave the white flag and implement EPA’s carbon regulation is bad news for Michigan families. The governor claims this approach ‘retains control’ for Michigan, yet the opposite is true. Implementing this regulation, when serious legal challenges persist, effectively hands over the keys to Michigan’s energy future to unelected bureaucrats in Washington. Once Gov. Snyder signs away Michigan’s control over its energy future to Obama’s EPA, there is no turning back.
“Obama and EPA want states to think their only choices are to submit a state plan or have a federal plan imposed on them. Gov. Snyder has apparently fallen for this false choice. The real choice is between shielding Michigan from this harmful carbon regulation or helping President Obama carry it across the finish line as the sun sets on his presidency.
“Obama’s carbon regulation is a national energy tax that will burden Michiganders, especially the poor, with higher energy prices and fewer jobs, yet will have no impact on climate change. Michigan voters made clear their stance on higher energy taxes when they overwhelmingly rejected Governor Snyder’s gas tax proposal earlier this year. The governor should listen to the citizens in his state and join the ranks of several of his fellow governors by rejecting the Obama administration’s carbon regulation.” 
August 6, 2015
AEA President Thomas Pyle published an article in Medium responding to a previous post by EPA Chief Gina McCarthy “with his own six reasons as to why states and the American people should be wary of entrusting EPA with their energy futures.” 
Pyle contends in his article that the EPA's power plan, which he entitles a “carbon agenda” will have “no impact on climate change,” will “[hurt] Americans' health,” “relies on threats and bribes,” and “was written by the environmental lobby,” among other criticisms. 
August 3, 2015
AEA President Thomas Pyle issued the following statement criticizing President Obama's Clean Power Plan: 
“The final version of President Obama’s ‘Clean Power Plan’ is somehow more harmful than the proposed rule. It forces states to make even steeper cuts, it guts natural gas in favor of costly renewables, and it still has no effect on climate change. While the EPA touts these adjustments to the rule as a sign of ‘flexibility’, it’s really an admission that Obama needs states to do his dirty work. But state leaders shouldn’t give in to the administration’s bribery schemes. Regardless of these cosmetic changes to the rule, the fundamental flaws remain.
“It’s important to remember that President Obama’s carbon regulation, the crown jewel of his climate legacy, has no impact on climate change. EPA’s own models show that their carbon rule will limit global temperature rise by a mere 0.018 degrees Celsius by 2100. That’s a bad deal for the American people. State leaders should protect their citizens from Obama’s costly carbon rule by refusing to submit a plan.”
July 30, 2015
The American Energy Alliance launched a new initiative at SmartPowerPlan.org, which it describes as “a hub for the latest information on how states and the public are fighting back against the EPA’s so-called Clean Power Plan.” AEA calls it a “one-stop shop” for “the latest news, legal analysis, public comments, and state action against the EPA’s carbon rule.” 
According to their website, the Smart Power Plan consists of three principles that “that should guide both elected officials and regulators when composing energy policy”: 
“1. Make Americans’ Lives Better Not Harder: We support individuals picking the most reliable, abundant, and affordable energy sources free from government interference. Natural gas, oil, and coal, which account for two-thirds of our electricity, enrich our lives and allow families to spend more of their hard-earned income on health care, housing, education, and their pursuit of happiness. We embrace individual choice over government mandates.
“2. Base Policy Decisions on Science and Common Sense: Any public policy that creates new burdens on individuals and families should be subject to rigorous scrutiny that measures the full range of costs and benefits. Unfortunately, the EPA’s Carbon rule fails this basic test. The claimed benefits used to justify the rule are based on dubious science, while the huge costs will diminish Americans’ health, wealth, and environment.
“3. Hold Our Elected Officials Accountable: Our foremost concern is that states, individuals, and markets drive U.S. energy policy. Increasingly, regulators at federal agencies like the EPA have co-opted the decision-making power and circumvented the legislative process. We need binding action from our elected officials to preserve the authority of states over any significant energy tax hikes and new mandates on their states’ residents.”
The AEA began publishing articles linking back to an “initiative” titled “Divestment Truth” (#DivestmentTruth). AEA argues that a “morally bankrupt movement is trying to keep billions of people in poverty, deny people access to energy, and forbid access to the lifesaving products that come from coal, natural gas, and oil […]” and asks readers to “Help us fight against this misguided movement, and take back the reliable, affordable energy that drives America forward.” 
Publications filed under Divestment Truth include a June, 2015 op-ed in Forbes by Institute for Energy Research Founder and CEO Robert Bradley Jr. titled “Fossil Fuel Divestment: Flight From Reality.” According to Bradley, “Divestment is a solution looking for a problem. It is destined to fail […].” 
According to AEA, “The fossil fuel divestment movement […] has it backwards. The morally superior choice is for people to be free to use energy to make their lives better. Today, that means having access to the abundant energy resources of coal, oil, and natural gas. Those are the technologies that lifted the developed world out of poverty, and they continue to lift millions out of poverty while they power the high-energy lives of those of us fortunate enough to live in the developed world.” 
November 4, 2015
AEA released “10 Reasons to Oppose a Carbon Tax” on its Energy Townhall publication. According to AEA, “A carbon tax would impose an indirect tax on [natural gas, oil, and coal] due to their carbon dioxide emissions.” They list the following “ten reasons” they believe a carbon tax should be opposed: 
“1). It is a tax on transportation fuels like gasoline and most forms of electricity
2). It will increase the cost of goods and services
3). It disproportionately hurts low income communities and seniors
4). It damages American economic competitiveness
5). It may increase air pollution
6). It does not impact climate change
7). It is not a market-driven solution
8). It is a tool for politicians to continue wasteful government spending
9). It is not 'revenue-neutral'
10). The American public is opposed to it”
November 21, 2014
“One of the central building blocks of the EPA’s power plant rule is increased use of wind and solar for electricity generation. But wind and solar are uncompetitive without massive taxpayer subsidies and mandated renewable portfolio standards. For wind, that takes the form of the production tax credit. […]
“Congress should reject any attempt by [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid to revive the wind production tax credit in the lame-duck session. It’s clearly a bad deal for Nevadans, enriching out-of-state billionaires at the expense of working families.”
The American Energy Alliance wrote a coalition letter, signed by 20 organizations, to congress claiming widespread support for “The PTC Elimination Act”, which would cut subsidies for wind energy production, Huffington Post reports. 
The Energy and Policy Institute examined the signatories list and found that 18 of the signatories had signed a similar letter for the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity in June of 201, and that 14 have ties to fossil fuel funders, and 18 have ties to the Koch Brothers' political network. 
“The simple truth: Americans needs jobs,” the narrator reads. “And the Keystone pipeline will create thousands of high-paying jobs.”
“Sen. Mark Udall is siding with Washington lobbyists and special interests to kill it,” the ad states.
The American Energy Alliance launched a $3.6 million ad campaign criticizing President Barack Obama on gasoline prices, and criticizes his decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline, Politico reports. 
Politico notes that both the American Energy Alliance and IER are partly funded by the Koch brothers and their donor network. Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse accused the Koch brothers of “funding yet another shadowy outside group to defend the interests of Big Oil and protect their own tax breaks and profits with Mitt Romney being the ultimate beneficiary.”
Video from the AEI ad campaign below:
The American Energy Alliance set off on a nation-wide campaign “to smear President Barack Obama’s clean energy reform agenda,” reports Thinkprogress. AEA staff rode in the “America Energy Express” bus, claiming that the American Clean Energy and Security act will “cripple our sluggish economy.” 
American Energy Alliance Contact & Location
As of May, 2016, the American Energy Alliance listed the following contact information on their website: 
American Energy Alliance
1155 15th Street NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005
Email: [email protected]
Media Contact: Christopher Warren | 202.621.2947 | [email protected]
- Institute for Energy Research (IER) — Parent Organization
- Smart Power Plan — An “Initative” of the AEA designed to fight the Clean Power Plan. 
Michael Beckel. “Anti-Obama nonprofit tells IRS it's not 'political',” The Center for Public Integrity, November 18, 2013. Archived May 20, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6heWUkJaQ
“Institute for Energy Research (IER) & American Energy Alliance (AEA),” Greenpeace. Accessed May 21, 2016.
(Press Release). “IWF Announces Exciting New Partnership,” Independent Women's Forum, October 28, 2003. Archived November 19, 2003. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.
“Koch Industries Inc. Lobbying Activities,” DeSmogBlog.
“Independent Women's Forum,” Conservative Transparency. Accessed May 20, 2016.
“Americans for Prosperity,” Conservative Transparency. Accessed March 10, 2016.
“Americans for Prosperity Foundation,” Conservative Transparency. Accessed March 10, 2016.
“Earth Day: Continuing a Storied Tradition of Misleading Claims and Outrageous Predictions,” Energy Townhall (AEA publication), April 22, 2016. Archived May 20, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hf8M9d8i
Sean Sullivan. “What is a 501(c)(4), anyway?” The Washington Post, May 13, 2013. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.
Michael Beckel. “Anti-Obama Nonprofit Tells IRS It’s Not ‘Political’,” Huffington Post, November 18, 2013. Archived May 20, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6heWsbi1T
“American Energy Alliance,” Conservative Transparency. Search performed May 20, 2016.
“Staff,” American Energy Alliance. Archived July 27, 2013.
“Staff,” American Energy Alliance. Archived March 20, 2014.
“Staff,” American Energy Alliance. Archived February 2, 2015.
Asha Glover. “AFP-Led Coalition Says EPA Ozone Regulation Will Kill Economy,” Morning Consult, May 9, 2016. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg9VlLeH
Aliya Haq. “Koch Brothers Struggling to Block Climate Action in State Legislatures,” NRDC, May 3, 2016. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg9Ed3bm
Elizabeth Harball. “CLEAN POWER PLAN:Conservative groups claim responsibility for state budget restrictions,” E&E Publishing, April 28, 2016. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg9myVgW
“Six Things Every American Should Really Know About EPA’s Carbon Agenda,” Energy Townhall (AEA Publication), July 12, 2015. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg4IQh2E
Tom Pyle. “Six Things Every American Should Really Know About EPA’s Carbon Agenda,” Medium, August 6, 2015. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog.
(Press Release). “Obama’s Carbon Rule Still a Bad Deal for Americans,” Energy Townhall (AEA Publication), July 3, 2015. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg4e75H5
Whois Record for SmartPowerPlan.org, whois.domaintools.com. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmogBlog
“Divestment Truth: What is Fossil Fuel Divestment?” American Energy Alliance. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg2FtTQ3
“Opinion: Fossil Fuel Divestment: Flight From Reality,” American Energy Alliance, June 16, 2015. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg2stWbH
Gabe Elsner. “American Energy Alliance Leads Front Group Attack on Wind PTC,” Huffington Post, September 3, 2015. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg8z7oRC
Brad Johnson. “GOP Team At American Energy Alliance Runs ‘Energy Town Hall’ Oil Bus Tour,” ThinkProgress, August 22, 2009. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg8UauIZ
Will Evans. “New Group Tied To Oil Industry Runs Ads Promoting Drilling, Attacking Democrat,” NPR, September 22, 2008. Archived May 21, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6hg8GHA0A
Nick Surgey. “Peabody Coal Bankruptcy Reveals Climate Denial Network Funding,” PRWatch, June 13, 2016. Archived June 20, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6iPmXjc4W
“In re: Peabody Energy Corporation, et al. Debtors,” United States Bankruptcy Court Eastern District of Missouri Eastern Division, Case 16-42529, May 27, 2016. Retrieved from DocumentCloud.
Farron Cousins. “Court Documents Show Coal Giant Peabody Energy Funded Dozens Of Climate Denial Groups,” DeSmogBlog, June 13, 2016.
Suzanne Goldenberg and Helena Bengtsson. “Biggest US coal company funded dozens of groups questioning climate change,” The Guardian, June 13, 2016. Archived June 20, 2016. WebCite URL: http://www.webcitation.org/6iPnEUG1o
Julian Spector. “Trump Energy Team Swaps Out Its Transition Team Leader,” Green Tech Media, December 1, 2016. Archived December 7, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/uDcE5
“Pyle-What-to-Expect-From-the-Trump-Administration.pdf” From the Desk of Thomas Pyle. Retrieved from Documentcloud.org. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
Ben Jervey. “Trump Energy Agenda Revealed in Thomas Pyle Memo,” DeSmog, December 7, 2016.
“Dear Senators,” (PDF), Competitive Enterprise Institute, January 12, 2017. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
Brad Johnson. “GOP Team At American Energy Alliance Runs ‘Energy Town Hall’ Oil Bus Tour,” The Wonk Room, August 22, 2009. Archived October 12, 2010. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/tuwhW
“Dear Mr. President” (PDF), retrieved from Competitive Enterprise Institute. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
Graham Readfearn. “Conservative Groups Pushing Trump To Exit Paris Climate Deal Have Taken Millions From Koch Brothers, Exxon,” DeSmog, May 10, 2017.
Susanne Goldberg. “Conservative groups spend up to $1bn a year to fight action on climate change,” The Guardian, December 20, 2013. Archived May 12, 2017. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/TB2yy
“Coalition letter to the President on Scott Pruitt,” (PDF) Heartland Institute. Archived .pdf on file with DeSmogBlog.
“New Survey: Voters (Still) Find Vehicle Subsidies 'Unfair',” American Energy Alliance, June 19, 2018. Archived June 21, 2018. Archive.is URL: https://archive.li/Kw2YF
“MWR Strategies” (PDF), June 2018. Retrieved from AmericanEnergyAlliance.org. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
“Poll by Former Koch Lobbyist Skews Public Support for Clean Cars, Electric Vehicles,” DeSmog, June 20, 2018.
John Siciliano. “Most voters don't like electric cars because of the subsidies, says new poll,” Washington Examiner, June 19, 2018. Archived June 21, 2018. Archive.is URL: https://archive.li/32S7u
“41 Conservative Groups Support Scalise/McKinley Anti-Carbon Tax Resolution,” Americans for Tax Reform, July 18, 2018. Archived .pdf on file at DeSmog.
Nick Sobczyk. “House voting on anti-carbon-tax measure: 'Pass the popcorn',” E&E News, July 16, 2018. Archived Aug 2, 2018. Archive.is URL: https://archive.fo/aTP8h
“Teaching opportunities from House Concurrent Resolution 119 (H.Con.Res.119)” (PDF), Citizens' Climate Lobby, April 30, 2018.
“Dear Senator Grassley, Senator Wyden, Representative Neal and Representative Brady:” May 9, 2019. Retrieved from The Daily Caller.
Christ White. “CONSERVATIVES WARN LAWMAKERS: TESLA’S TAX CREDITS ‘OVERWHELMINGLY BENEFIT THE RICH’,”The Daily Caller, May 9, 2019. Archived May 9, 2019. Archive.fo URL: https://archive.fo/qzvF3