American Petroleum Institute Thanks Sen. Begich for Keystone Vote

I got this postcard in the mail the other day.

Was I supposed to be happy about this?  I understand having a Democratic Senator in a state where red voters tend to turn out better than blue voters means we have a hybrid Senator who thinks (and probably is right) that he has to support big oil to get reelected.

But who sent it?  The other side gave that info on the bottom.

 

The American Petroleum Institute uses pictures of  pristine snowy mountains on both sides of the postcard.  No pipeline pictures.  No Kulluk oil rigs.  No oil company profit statements.  Just the beautiful Alaskan landscapes.  (Or something that looks like an Alaskan landscape.)  You'd think though they could have found a second Begich picture.   

I'd love to have been an invisible observer at the meeting where they decided to send this out.  What were there motives?  To piss off Begich's Democratic supporters?  To let Mark know this is what he gets when he votes right, but if he votes wrong . . .  

What's the message to his Republican opponents?  

On the simplest level, it's just asking Alaskans to call an thank Mark for his vote.  

Of course, the large coporations give money to everyone who might get elected.  They've got plenty and want that door to open when they come knocking. 

The American Petroleum Institute gave more money to the Democratic Governor's Association, according to Open Secrets, than to anyone else.  Given current disclosure laws post Citizens United, I'm not sure how much money is given, but not identified.  They list political contributions which I'm guessing are for 2012:

"CONTRIBUTIONS: $931,706

Contributions to candidates: $235,970
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $9,500
Contributions to parties: $128,226
Contributions to 527 committees: $558,010
Contributions to outside spending groups: $0"

But you'll notice they gave almost four times as much to 527 committees (that can fund campaigns without disclosing donors, if I understand it right)  than they gave to parties.


And the contributions pale compared to the $6 +  million they spend annually on lobbyists.