Lamar S. Smith
Lamar Smith earned a a bachelor's degree in 1969 at Yale University and a law degree in 1975 at Southern Methodist University School of Law. 
After leaving Yale University with a law degree, Smith worked as a business writer for the Christian Science Monitor. He was first elected chairman of the Bexar County Republican Party in 1978. He was elected to the Texas House in 1981. He was elected a Bexar County commissioner in 1982 and was re-elected in 1984. Smith was first elected to the U.S. House in 1986. Smith is known for introducing the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in 2011. The bill received opposition from internet freedom advocacy groups and web companies, and was cancelled in 2012. , 
As chair of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Lamar Smith has repeatedly fought against inquiries into what ExxonMobil knew about climate change (#ExxonKnew). Smith has sent letters to several environmental groups and U.S. attorneys general demanding communications regarding their investigations. 
Before his appointment to chair the House Science Committee in 2012, Smith had a history of climate change denial. In 2009, after the “Climategate” hacking of climate scientists' emails from a server at the University of East Anglia, Smith took to the House floor to attack scientists and journalists “determined to advance the idea of human-made global warming.” 
In addition to defending ExxonMobil, Lamar Smith has repeatedly attacked the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and has also fought against the NOAA (National Atmospheric Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) over a study it published showing that climate change had not paused or slowed down, counter to what many climate change deniers have claimed. 
The Guardian describes Lamar Smith as a “climate scientist witch hunter.” Smith's fellow Committee member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) said that during the two years and ten months Smith had served as chair (as of November 2015), the Committee has issued more subpoenas than it had in its entire 54-year history prior. She also noted that Smith had handed over public health data to a researcher with ties to “Big Tobacco” in the past, which says says is “representative of a disturbing pattern.” 
According to the Center for Responsive Politics' OpenSecret.org database, Rep. Smith has received $684,947 from the oil and gas industry since 1998 — making oil and gas his most generous industry contributor throughout his career. 
Stance on Climate Change
“Both the president and Mr. Kerry cited rapidly warming global temperatures and ever-more-severe storms caused by climate change as reasons for urgent action.
Given that for the past decade and a half global-temperature increases have been negligible, and that the worsening-storms scenario has been widely debunked, the pronouncements from the Obama administration sound more like scare tactics than fact-based declarations.
[…] Climate alarmists have failed to explain the lack of global warming over the past 15 years. They simply keep adjusting their malfunctioning climate models to push the supposedly looming disaster further into the future.” 
“I believe climate change is due to a combination of factors, including natural cycles, sun spots and human activity. But scientists still don't know for certain how much each of these factors contributes to the overall climate change that the Earth is experiencing.” 
December 8, 2016
“Make no mistake, while President Obama may soon leave the Oval Office, the environmental extremists who fight against American energy are here to stay. They are determined to stop Americans from using reliable and affordable power. They would rather see America keep our natural resources, as they say, in the ground.” 
“The science is clear and overwhelming but not in the way the president says. For example, statements by President Obama and others continually attempt to link extreme weather events to climate change. These claims are, of course, unfounded. […] The fact is there is little evidence that climate change causes extreme weather events.” 
I look forward to working with the new president, president-elect Trump to restore transparency and reshape the EPA into an accountable science-focused agency dedicated to a core mission of protecting our environment.” 
“It is regrettable that two state attorneys general and several organizations continue to threaten legitimate scientific debate about climate change. The attorneys general have appointed themselves to decide what is valid and invalid regarding climate change. Attorneys general are pursuing a political agenda at the expense of scientists' rights to free speech.” 
“The president’s Paris pledge will increase electricity costs, ration energy and slow economic growth. Congress has repeatedly rejected the president’s extreme climate agenda. The president’s climate pledge is a bad deal for the American economy, the American people and would produce no substantive environmental benefits.” 
”[…]this proposal shrinks space exploration priorities within NASA’s budget, it disproportionately increases Earth Science accounts to more than $2 billion – a seventy percent increase since 2007. This imbalanced proposal continues to tie our astronauts’ feet to the ground and makes a Mars mission all but impossible. This is not the proposal of an administration that is serious about maintaining America’s leadership in space.”
“This week, President Obama is in Paris trying to negotiate climate change regulations. His pledge to cut U.S. carbon emissions by 28 percent in the next 10 years is an attempt to bypass Congress and the American people. But worse, his plan to get us there, the EPA’s Power Plan, will do a world of harm to Americans while doing almost nothing to impact climate change.” 
Lamar Smith made statements at a hearing on the Obama administration's Climate Action Plan and proposed EPA regulations on power plants:
“America cannot afford to drive its economy over a cliff with the hopes that the rest of the world will make the same mistake. The only economy the EPA’s plan will help is that of our competitors.” 
Speaking after the “Climategate” hacking of climate scientists' emails from a server at the University of East Anglia:
“We now know that prominent scientists were so determined to advance the idea of human-made global warming that they worked together to hide contradictory temperature data. But for two weeks, none of the networks gave the scandal any coverage on their evening news programs. And when they finally did cover it, their reporting was largely slanted in favor of global warming alarmists. The networks have shown a steady pattern of bias on climate change. During a six-month period, four out of five network news reports failed to acknowledge any dissenting opinions about global warming, according to a Business and Media Institute study. The networks should tell Americans the truth, rather than hide the facts.” 
December 8, 2016
Lamar Smith was a speaker at the “At the Crossroads III Energy and Climate Summit,” an event co-hosted by the Heritage Foundation and the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF). The event was billed as “the premier energy-and-climate policy event in America,” and attracted a range of prominent climate change deniers as well as a range of names connected to Donald Trump and his transition team. Choice quotes and video below.
“Make no mistake, while President Obama may soon leave the Oval Office, the environmental extremists who fight against American energy are here to stay. They are determined to stop Americans from using reliable and affordable power. They would rather see America keep our natural resources, as they say, in the ground.” [11:20]
“Time and again, EPA officials have dismissed America’s right to know and have advanced expensive regulations without releasing the data they used to justify these burdensome regulations.” [13:07]
“This power plan will cost billions of dollars, cause financial hardship for American families and diminish the competitiveness of American industry around the world with no significant benefit. In other words, it’s all all pain no gain.” [13:45]
“[H]eavy-handed regulations and arbitrary emission targets will do lasting damage to our economy and even the Obama administration admits that the rule will have little or no impact on global temperature.” [13:59]
“Regulations should be based on sound science, not science fiction.” [14:19]
“If all hundred and ninety-one, whatever it is, 87, 90, countries completely implemented the agreement that they submitted and these agreements were in effect the next 85 years it would only prevent a temperature rise of 1/6th of one degree Celsius.” [15:02]
“Regulatory mandates and picking winners and losers in the energy marketplace only benefit this administration and extreme environmental activists. It is time to put an end to regulations that hurt the American people.” [15:52]
“The science is clear and overwhelming but not in the way the president says. For example, statements by President Obama and others continually attempt to link extreme weather events to climate change. These claims are, of course, unfounded.” [16:12]
“The fact is there is little evidence that climate change causes extreme weather events.” [16:28]
“The EPA ignore the facts and advance climate regulations, and put limits on the use of innovative technologies like hydraulic fracturing that could help us safely develop our natural resources.” [17:11]
“And I look forward to working with the new president, president-elect Trump to restore transparency and reshape the EPA into an accountable science-focused agency dedicated to a core mission of protecting our environment.” [18:57]
Doug Domenech, director of the Texas Public Policy Foundation's “Fueling Freedom” project, wrote about the proceedings at The Hill. Domenech outlined the common climate change denial message shared among the speakers: “Is climate change real? Yes, it has happened in the past and will happen in the future. Is man making an impact on the climate? Perhaps but in very small ways. But the overarching consensus remains the climate change we are experiencing is by no means catastrophic.” 
- Brooke Rollins
- Becky Norton Dunlop
- Mike Lee
- Lamar Smith
- Pete Olson
- Gary Palmer
- James Inhofe
- Kathleen Hartnett White
- Stephen Moore
- Bud Brigham
- David Kreutzer
- Patrick J. Michaels
- Mark P. Mills
- Horace Cooper
- Patrick Forkin
- Allen Gilmer
- Dan Byers
- Nicolas Loris
- Richard Lindzen
- Willie Soon
- Andrew M. Grossman
- William Happer
- Craig Idso
- Roy Spencer
- Patrick J. Michaels
- Brooke Rollins
- Becky Norton Dunlop
- David Legates
- James Taylor
October 17, 2016
The San Antonio Express-News editorial board announced that it would revoke its support for Lamar Smith's re-election, despite having supported him in years prior. They cite one of their primary reasons as Smith's “bullying” on the climate change issue: 
“We’ve argued that Smith’s undeniably conservative credentials have been a good fit for the 21st Congressional District. However, Smith’s actions have developed more transparently this last term into an issue that goes beyond the boundaries of his district.
A particular issue is his abuse of his position as chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. Specifically, it is his bullying on the issue of climate change that should concern all Americans. […]
Technically, Smith acknowledges human impact on climate change, but he consistently diminishes its role and essentially says dire climate predictions are exaggerated.” 
The paper notes that “In fact, there is broad and deep consensus in the climate science community that man’s role in global warming is substantive and that left unaddressed, this portends disastrous consequences.” 
September 29, 2016
Lamar Smith expanded his probe of environmental groups and attorneys general to include the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Smith sent a letter to SEC Chair Mary Jo White requesting information the SEC’s investigation into Exxon, including all internal SEC communications regarding the SEC's decision to investigate the oil company. , 
“The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology (the Committee) is troubled by the Security and Exchange Commission's (SEC) recently announced investigation of Exxon Mobil Corporation (Exxon)” the letter reads. “It appears from press accounts that the SEC's investigative actions, which date back to at least August of this year, are couched in concerns related to the science of climate change. […] the AG's efforts, characterized variously as a 'witch hunt' and 'fool's errand,' an 'abuse of powers,' 'pathetic,' a 'schtick,' 7 and an 'uphill battle,' have failed to uncover any indicia of wrongdoing by Exxon. This raises questions as to why the SEC would assume the mantle of the New York AG's fruitless investigation.”
An ExxonMobil company spokesperson, Alan Jefferson, told CNBC:
“The SEC is the appropriate entity to examine issues related to impairment, reserves, and other communications important to investors.
“We are fully complying with the SEC request for information and are confident our financial reporting meets all legal and accounting requirements.” 
September 14, 2016
Attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts both refused to turn over information subpoenaed by Lamar Smith in July. This prompted Smith to announce a September 14 hearing to “affirm” that House Committee on Science, Space, & Technology, which he chairs, had the legal authority to issue such subpoenas. The issue in question is whether a Congressional committee has subpoena power over state attorneys general and non-profit advocacy organizations. 
View the hearing below: 
The inciting subpoena was called “an unprecedented effort to target ongoing state law enforcement 'investigations or potential prosecutions'” by Leslie Dubeck, an attorney in the Office of the New York State Attorney General. 
In addition to the subpoenas sent to the New York and Massachusetts attorneys general, Rep. Smith issued subpoenas to eight non-profit advocacy organizations, foundations and a private law firm that have drawn attention to what Exxon knew about climate science and when the company knew it. 
The Union of Concerned Scientists, one organisation which received such a subpoena, offered to meet with the Committee but had refused to turn over internal records. Their meeting request was refused.
“From the outset, Chairman Smith has overstepped his authority with this investigation,” said USC President Ken Kimmell. “He has consistently mischaracterized our work in repeated, convoluted attempts to justify his efforts. It is telling that after issuing broad, unilateral subpoenas, he is now holding a hearing to figure out if his actions are legitimate…We will continue to stand firm against this abuse of power and defend our First Amendment rights.”
“However Chairman Smith stacks this hearing with friendly witnesses, it's clear that he's on shaky legal ground,” Kimmell continued. 
Lamar Smith's witness include Ronald Rotunda, who has connections to both the Cato Institute (visiting legal scholar in 2000) and the Heartland Institute where he is a Policy Expert. His second witness is Elizabeth Foley who has ties to the Cato Institute, the James Madison Institute, and the Federalist Society. 
The Heartland Institute has received at least $676,500 directly from Exxon since 1998, including $140,000 in grants that were earmarked for climate change work. The Cato Institute was co-founded by oil and gas billionaire Charles Koch, and also receives funding from various Koch affiliated organizations, including the David H. Koch Charitable Foundation. The James Madison Institute is funded in part by the Donors Capital Fund, a supporting affiliate of Donors Trust for donors of more than $1 million. The Donors funds are advertised as a way for donors to remain hidden when “funding sensitive or controversial issues.” 
The Federalist Society, an influential conservative group that has published numerous essays and articles claiming the lawsuits against ExxonMobil and related requests for records from other groups are a threat to free speech, a “chilling campaign to establish ‘consensus’ through intimidation,” a “witch hunt” and a “fishing expedition.” 
July 13, 2016
Escalating his opposition to recent probes of Exxonmobil over what the company knew about climate change, Rep. Lamar Smith and several Republican colleagues issued subpoenas to two state attorneys general and nongovernmental advocacy groups, InsideClimate News reports. , 
“It is regrettable that two state attorneys general and several organizations continue to threaten legitimate scientific debate about climate change,” Smith said during a press conference on Capital Hill. “The attorneys general have appointed themselves to decide what is valid and invalid regarding climate change. Attorneys general are pursuing a political agenda at the expense of scientists' rights to free speech.” 
Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists among the groups named by Smith, called the subpoenas an abuse of power:
“By attempting to interfere with the attorneys general investigations, Chairman Smith directly undermines efforts to hold ExxonMobil accountable for misrepresenting climate science,” Kimmell said. “It's also just plain wrong to investigate a nonprofit for doing its job—in this case, providing public officials with science and evidence to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for deception on climate change.”
Exxon has been under investigation by a coalition of 17 attorneys general since earlier in 2016, following the publication of an investigative series by InsideClimate News which revealed Exxon had conducted its own research on climate change in the 1970s. (A following Desmog investigation found similar information from an Exxon subsidiary.) , , 
“The requests served upon Greenpeace and 350.org simply cannot be squared with the Committee’s stated concerns regarding freedom of speech and scientific inquiry,” the groups wrote.
“The Committee’s requests violate basic First Amendment protections, fall outside the proper jurisdiction of the Committee, and are impermissibly vague, overbroad, and burdensome. For these reasons, Greenpeace and 350.org respectfully refuse to comply with the Committee’s requests.” 
The add that they would be interested in the panel's own interaction with Exxon, and question whether members may have met privately with representative sof the oil company and whether they may have accepted funding from them or related organizations:
“We would like to know exactly how much money Exxon, other fossil fuel companies, and allied nonprofits and think tanks have given members of the House Science Committee,” Annie Leonard, Greenpeace’s executive director, said in a statement. “We would also love Rep. Smith to make public all communications between members of the Committee and those same groups.” 
February 22, 2016
As part of his ongoing fight to obtain documents from the NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) Lamar Smith sent another letter demanding documents relating to the NOAA's analysis of global temperature data. This was after the NOAA already handed over 301 pages worth of emails regarding a study published in 2015 in the journal Science. “There apparently wasn’t anything juicy in those e-mails, however, because Rep. Smith is now asking for a great deal more,” Ars Technica reports. 
Rep. Smith cites a letter sent to him by “325 scientists, engineers, economists, and other scholars raising serious inquiries about the adherence of NOAA to [Office of Management and Budget] guidelines established under the Data Quality Act.” 
The '300 scientists' letter (PDF) had been circulated in “climate 'skeptic' circles' by the George C. Marshall Institute's chairman William Happer and includes names of many well-document climate change deniers.
February 2, 2016
Lamar Smith's Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a hearing to “examine the various scientific, economic and other policy issues” following the Paris Climate Agreement where President Obama pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions.” 
The president’s climate pledge is a bad deal for the American economy, the American people and would produce no substantive environmental benefits,” Smith said. Video of Smith's full statement below. 
Witnesses included noted climate change skeptic John Christy as well as Steve Eule of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Steven Groves of The Heritage Foundation. Notably, the Heritage Foundation has received at least $585,000 from ExxonMobil, while the Chamber of Commerce has received millions from large corporations like Dow Chemical and American Electric Power. 
November 20, 2015
Lamar Smith was a speaker at the “At the Crossroads Energy & Climate Policy Summit” hosted by the Texas Public Policy Foundation. Smith's speech was titled “Confronting EPA's Shredding of Science and the Constitution” (Video below). 
The event attracted a number of notable climate change deniers including:
- H. Leighton Steward
- Don Easterbrook
- Kathleen Hartnett White
- William Happer
- Richard Lindzen
- Patrick Moore
- E. Calvin Beisner
- Mark P. Mills
- Rupert Darwall
- Hal Doiron
- Walter Cunningham
- Stephen Moore
- Marc Morano
October 13, 2015
Lamar Smith demanded documents from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) regarding a study it published showing that climate change had not paused or slowed down, counter to what many climate change deniers have claimed. 
The subpoenas ordered NOAA to turn over scientific data as well as internal “communications between or among employees” involved in the study. The Washington Post reports the NOAA told the committee that the study's finding were publicly available and met with the panel's staff to go over the results, but did not comply with the subpoenas. 
“Your failure to comply with a duly issued subpoena may expose you to civil and/or criminal enforcement mechanisms,” Smith wrote. 
The chief society of meteorologists replied to Lamar Smith, saying his demands “can be viewed as a form of intimidation” that could thwart federally funded research. 
Smith's fellow Committee member, Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), wrote a critical letter of Smith's recent actions. She described his subpoena to the NOAA as “furthering a fishing expedition, rather than engaged in focused oversight with a legitimate goal in mind.” 
She notes that prior to Smith's subpoena, the Committee had already made three written requests for information on a peer-reviewed study by Thomas Karl, NOAA“s Director of the National Centers for Environmental Information. NOAA had also responded twice to those requests, and through informal staff communications. They also engaged in a second briefing to Majority staff (Minority members were not invited) on October 19. A key excerpt from Johnson's letter below (emphasis added): 
“It is important to note what is and what is not contained in this history of requests and responses. Your requests repeatedly asked for data and methodologies used in the study, and also requested that this information be made publically available. NOAA, through its two response letters, pointed the Committee to publically accessible locations where all of the underlying data and methodologies can be accessed. Moreover, NOAA attempted to explain certain aspects of the methodology about which the Majority was apparently confused.
However, obtaining all of the data and methods used in this study seemingly was not enough for the Majority. You also demanded internal communications by NOAA scientists regarding their scientific research. NOAA, rightfully, has been reluctant to waste their time and resources, not to mention break confidence with their superb research scientists by responding to this demand.In your various demand letters you noted that the scientific study in question was of some consequence, and could potentially have an effect on policy decisions. However, it should be emphasized that the issue in question is a scientific research study, not a policy decision by a Federal agency. As such, this is not an area of delegated legislative authority by Congress to the Executive (unless you are proposing that Congress should somehow legislatively overrule peer-reviewed scientific findings). Moreover, in none of the letters do you allege any scientific misconduct, abuse of discretion, or fraud. In sum, NOAA has provided all the information necessary for the Committee to understand the scientific process at play. You have not articulated a legitimate need for anything beyond what NOAA has already provided.” 
September 9, 2015
Smith contends there has been a writes that “even the most advanced climate models all failed to predict the lack of warming the Earth has experienced over the last 18 years. But the president and his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) refuse to let facts get in the way of their determination to impose greater government control over the lives of the American people.” 
In his article, Smith lists seven so-called “Irrefutable facts about climate change that are ignored because they do not fit into the alarmists’ scare tactics.” 
Skeptical Science lists refutations to many of Smith's so-called “irrefutable facts” including his claims that global warming is merely part of a natural cycle, that there is no link between extreme weather and climate change, and that carbon dioxide is only a trace greenhouse gas.
August 13, 2014
Lamar Smith sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy, contending that the EPA has “hidden the truth from the American people.” 
“Credible analysis is critical to a well-informed debate concerning climate change and energy policy choices now before American people,” the letter reads. “EPA’s incomplete modeling disregards a number of technical, regulatory, and economic realities. Americans deserve the bottom line: what does it cost and what will we get for the money?” 
June 23, 2014
Lamar Smith received a letter of support for H.R. 4012, the Secret Science Reform Act. According to the letter, signed by a number of prominent climate change deniers, the Act would push the EPA to be “open to public and scientific scrutiny.” 
Notable signatories included: 
- Ralph B. Alexander
- J. Scott Armstrong
- Charles Battig
- William M. Briggs
- Alan Carlin
- Michael S. Coffman
- Roger Cohen
- Harold H. Doiron
- John Droz Jr.
- John Dale Dunn
- James E. Enstrom
- Laurence I. Gould
- William M. Gray
- William Happer
- Victor Davis Hanson
- Jay Lehr
- Anthony Lupo
- Henry I. Miller
- Michael Newton
- S. Fred Singer
- George S. Taylor
- James Wanliss
- George T. Wolff
- Peter W. Wood
Desmog reports that Lamar Smith was “enraged” that the EPA was not complying with a subpoena that his committee issued requiring them to hand over all documents and studies relating to standards issued by the EPA. Smith wrote that the “EPA has failed to comply with its obligations under the subpoena” and “currently stands in default,” , 
According to Smith, this information is vital for the public, as the safety standards that it spurs cost the public “trillions of dollars,” as he wrote in a letter to the EPA. Desmog notes that Smith never specifies how he came up with that figure, and research shows that regulations put in place by the EPA actually save taxpayers much more money than they cost. Smith’s letter has given the agency until September 16th to hand over the documents. 
According to Oil Change International's Dirty Energy Money database Lamar Smith has received at least $554,295 from either the oil or coal industries between 1999 and 2016. Rep. Smith has taken $24,770 in campaign contributions from Exxon over his career, with $17,500 of that coming in the last five years. 
OpenSecrets.org puts Lamar Smith's career total from the Oil and Gas Industry at $679,947. 
View the summary below, or view the attached spreadsheet for full details on Lamar Smith's industry funding (.xlsx).
|Company||Oil Funding||Coal Funding||Total|
|Energy Future Holdings Corp||$2,250||$18,000||$20,250|
|WB Osborn Oil||$19,900||$0||$19,900|
|Energy Transfer Equity||$14,800||$0||$14,800|
|American Fuel & Petrochem Manufacturers||$13,500||$0||$13,500|
|Kinder Morgan Inc||$7,500||$0||$7,500|
|Barrett Brothers Oil & Gas||$7,250||$0||$7,250|
|Lucas Petroleum Group||$6,550||$0||$6,550|
|National Rural Electric Cooperative Assn||$0||$6,500||$6,500|
|Oil & Gas||$5,900||$0||$5,900|
|Society of Independent Gasoline Marketers||$5,500||$0||$5,500|
|Osborn Heirs Co||$4,450||$0||$4,450|
|MJ Harvey Oil & Gas||$4,000||$0||$4,000|
|Centerpoint Energy, Inc||$0||$4,000||$4,000|
|Dan A Hughes Co||$3,650||$0||$3,650|
|American Petroleum Institute||$3,500||$0||$3,500|
|Independent Petroleum Assn of America||$3,000||$0||$3,000|
|Pinnacle West Capital||$0||$2,500||$2,500|
|Wagner & Brown||$2,000||$0||$2,000|
|Earle M Craig Jr Corp||$2,000||$0||$2,000|
|American Electric Power||$0||$2,000||$2,000|
|JR Butler & Co||$1,750||$0||$1,750|
|Gas Station Operator||$1,700||$0||$1,700|
|Independent Oil Producer||$1,600||$0||$1,600|
|Holliman Oil Corp||$1,500||$0||$1,500|
|Anderson Oil & Gas||$1,000||$0||$1,000|
|Pure Resources Inc||$1,000||$0||$1,000|
|American Gas Assn||$1,000||$0||$1,000|
|Oil & Gas Operations||$1,000||$0||$1,000|
|Newfield Exploration Co||$1,000||$0||$1,000|
|Oil & Gas Producer||$1,000||$0||$1,000|
|National Ocean Industries Assn||$1,000||$0||$1,000|
|San Antonio Gas & Oil||$1,000||$0||$1,000|
|Oil & Gas Investor||$800||$0||$800|
|Mission Gas Co||$600||$0||$600|
|Oil & Gas Investments||$600||$0||$600|
|Three Span Oil & Gas||$550||$0||$550|
|Oil & Gas Developer||$500||$0||$500|
|Oil & Gas & Investments||$500||$0||$500|
|National Fuel Gas||$500||$0||$500|
|P2 Energy Solutions||$500||$0||$500|
|National Stripper Well Assn||$500||$0||$500|
|Royal Dutch Shell||$500||$0||$500|
|Cap Rock Energy||$350||$0||$350|
|Del Ray Oil Co||$250||$0||$250|
|Tom Brown Inc||$250||$0||$250|
|Rio Grande Inc||$200||$0||$200|
|Boyd & McWilliams Energy||$200||$0||$200|
- House Committee on Science, Space, & Technology — Chair. 
- The Christian Science Monitor — Former Business & Financial Writer (1969-1970). , 
- Maebius and Duncan, Inc.— Practiced law, beginning in 1975. 
H.R. 3293: Scientific Research in the National Interest Act
Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith [R-TX21]
Introduced: Jul 29, 2015
Passed House: Feb 10, 2016
H.R. 1030: Secret Science Reform Act of 2015
Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith [R-TX21]
Introduced: Feb 24, 2015
Passed House: Mar 18, 2015
H.R. 2850 (113th): EPA Hydraulic Fracturing Study Improvement Act
Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith [R-TX21]
Introduced: Jul 30, 2013
Reported by Committee: Aug 1, 2013
H.R. 1772 (113th): Legal Workforce Act
Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith [R-TX21]
Introduced: Apr 26, 2013
Reported by Committee: Jun 26, 2013
H.R. 3261 (112th): Stop Online Piracy Act
Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith [R-TX21]
Introduced: Oct 26, 2011
Referred to Committee: Oct 26, 2011
H.Res. 1607 (111th): Disapproving Judge Walker’s Proposition 8 Decision on Same-Sex Marriage.
Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith [R-TX21]
Introduced: Aug 10, 2010
Referred to Committee: Aug 10, 2010
Some samples of Lamar Smith's recent Op-Eds and other news articles are listed below:
- “The Climate Change 1%,” The Wall Street Journal, March 3, 2016.
- “Rep. Lamar Smith: If we secure our border, we will secure our future,” Fox News, February 25, 2016.
- “Halting Refugees is the Right Thing To Do,” Breitbart, February 1, 2016.
- “NOAA Officials FINALLY Surrender Staff Emails To Lawmakers,” The Daily Caller, December 16, 2015.
- “EPA water rule is a massive land grab,” The Boerne Star, June 22, 2015.
- Lamar Smith and Rand Paul. “No, the GOP Is Not at War With Science,” Politico, January 13, 2015.
- “What Is the EPA Hiding From the Public?” The Wall Street Journal, June 23, 2014.
- “Fox News: Immigration Enforcement and Border Security Are the First Line Defense Against Terrorists,” Fox News, September 12, 2011.
Steve Horn. “Exxon, Koch Ties May Help Explain Rep. Lamar Smith's Probing Request of 'Exxon Knew' Environmental Groups,” Desmog, June 21, 2016.
Stephen Lacey. “Rep. Lamar Smith, Who Criticized ‘The Idea Of Human-Made Global Warming,’ Set To Chair House Science Panel,” ThinkProgress, November 28, 2012. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/IhKC4
Farron Cousins. “GOP Representative Lamar Smith On A Foolish Crusade To Discredit Climate Scientists,” Desmog, November 26, 2015.
“State Attorneys General Subpoenaed by Rep. Lamar Smith for Exxon Fraud Probe,” InsideClimate News, July 13, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/cHn4E
(Press Release). “Smith: Paris Climate Agreement a Bad Deal for Americans,” Congressman Lamar Smith, February 2, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/PaALb
“Dear Chair White:” (PDF), Congress of the United Stated House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, September 29, 2016. Archive. pdf on file at Desmog.
Christine Wang. “SEC investigating Exxon Mobil on climate change, accounting practices: Report,” CNBC, September 20, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/P6SZc
David Hasemyer. “Lamar Smith Seeks to Affirm Exxon Climate Subpoenas With Hearing,” Inside Climate News, August 31, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/97lYU
“Full Committee Hearing - Affirming Congress’ Constitutional Oversight Responsibilities: Subpoena Authority and Recourse for Failure to Comply with Lawfully Issued Subpoenas,” Committee on Science, Space, & Technology. Archived .mp4 on file at Desmog. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/aN156
“Dear Chairman Smith:” (PDF), State of New York Office of the Attorney General, July 26, 2016. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
Ben Jervey. “Who Are the Expert Witnesses Hand Picked by Lamar Smith to Testify on #ExxonKnew Subpoenas?” Desmog, September 12, 2016.
“Subpoena by Authority of the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States of America to The Honorable Maura Tracy Healey, Attorney General of Massachusetts” (PDF), Retrieved from Documentcloud. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
David Hasemyer and Sabrina Shankman. “Climate Fraud Investigation of Exxon Draws Attention of 17 Attorneys General,” InsideClimate News. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/2xJyY
“'There is no doubt': Exxon Knew CO2 Pollution Was A Global Threat By Late 1970s,” Desmog, April 26, 2016.
Timothy Cama. “Greens fire back at House GOP over Exxon climate probe,” The Hill, July 13, 2016. Archived October 15, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/vt9NM
Scott K. Johnson. “Congressman demands more NOAA e-mails about climate study,” Ars Technica, February 26, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/Ti7M0
“At the Crossroads: Energy & Climate Summit” (PDF), Texas Public Policy Foundation. Notes in red by Desmog.
Lisa Rein. “Congressman demands climate study documents as scientists warn of ‘chilling effect’,” The Washington Post, November 6, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/T8xxE
“Dear Chairman Smith” (PDF), Congress of the United States House of Representatives, October 23, 2015. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
“Dear Administrator McCarthy” (PDF), Congress of the United States House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, August 13, 2014. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
“Dear Chairman Smith,” (PDF), Retrieved from House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
Farron Cousins. “With Congress Back to Work, Republican Attacks On EPA Resume,” Desmog, September 4, 2013.
“Dear Administrator McCarthy” (PDF), Congress of the United States House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. Archived .pdf on file at Desmog.
Ruth Greenspan Bell. “For EPA Regulations, Cost Predictions Are Overstated,” World Resources Institute, November 17, 2010. Archived October 15, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/sAbzb
Legislation Search for sponsor: Smith, Lamar (Rep.) [R-TX21], Govtrack.us. Accessed October 15, 2016.
Andrew Follett. “Obama's NASA Budget Is All About Global Warming, Not Space,” The Daily Caller News Foundation, February 10, 2016. Archived October 18, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/cIsPT
“At the Crossroads III: Energy and Climate Policy Summit,” Heritage Foundation, December 8, 2016. Archived December 22, 2016. Archive.is URL: https://archive.is/AKaKq
“Part 1 - At the Crossroads III: Energy and Climate Policy Summit,” YouTube video (timestamp 11:20) uploaded by user The Heritage Foundation, December 9, 2016. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.
“Lamar S. Smith,” Wikipedia.