Oil and gas workers have been giving presidential contenders Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton similar amounts in campaign contributions, which industry lobbyists chalk up to increasing ambivalence over both nominees and growing skepticism about Trump.
Employees in the oil and natural gas sector have given Democratic nominee Clinton $114,141 since the beginning of July in individual contributions of $200 or more, according to new campaign data reviewed by Reuters. Republican nominee Trump received $99,302, according to the review.
Industry experts said the close amounts are a reflection of growing ambivalence between the candidates on oil and gas issues. Clinton supports increasing regulations on the industry, which the industry and its workers oppose. But even though Trump has promised less regulation, there is a general feeling that he does not understand the industry well enough to be effective, according to industry officials interviewed by the news group.
American Gas Association CEO Dave McCurdy, a contributor to Clinton’s campaign, said he has been “moved” to support Clinton given “the disturbing nature of what I see in Trump’s vision for America on trade, the economy and national security.”
He added that natural gas is generally considered good for combating climate change and agrees with Clinton’s vision for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat global warming.
McCurdy’s trade group has not endorsed a nominee. The association represents the local natural gas utilities that distribute fuel to residential and commercial users, including the increasing number of power plants that run on the cleaner-burning fossil fuel, which now produce the majority of the nation’s electricity.
The low cost of natural gas as a result of the boom in hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, has made it the most competitive fuel in the country for power generation, home heating and the manufacturing of chemicals.
An energy lobbyist, requesting that he not be identified, said he understood the industry’s ambivalence in the election. “Clinton is pro-regulation, which hurts,” he said. “And Trump has no record in the industry, so there’s no evidence he understands the issues.”
Harold Hamm, the CEO of fracking giant Continental Resources, has been a repeat contributor to the Trump campaign in addition to serving as a confidante to the nominee on energy issues. Hamm has said Trump’s policies would benefit the country, although Trump has struggled to allay concerns over a comment he made in July about supporting local bans on fracking.
At a recent meeting this month with oil executives in Denver, he was questioned about the statement, with some CEOs saying the statement shows Trump does not understand the industry that well.
Rep. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., another Trump energy confidante, said in an interview earlier this month that we was not aware of Trump publicly saying he did not support local bans on fracking, although Hamm had said it was clear he does not.
“I don’t know if he’s clarified that or not, but that’s where I would encourage him to have some clarification,” Cramer said ahead of Trump’s meeting in Denver with the executives.
Trump would not comment publicly in Denver on the statement that he made in July about supporting local bans, although companies did make comments during the public session of that meeting that demonstrated it was clearly on their minds. Reporters were ushered out of the room during the meeting so they could discuss it in private.
“If Hillary gets in, she’ll put you out of business,” Trump said before reporters were ushered out of the meeting.
Lynn Peterson, the head of Synergy Resources, told Trump flat out during the meeting that giving municipalities control over fracking would be a threat to the oil and gas industry in the state, according to an NBC News affiliate in Denver.
“My partner and I pretty much left Colorado for that reason,” said Scott Stewart with Gilbert-Stewart Operating, Bloomberg reported.
