Apple quit the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in 2009 in protest of the Chamber’s lobbying against federal caps on greenhouse-gas emissions. Apple, of course, would not be directly affected by a U.S. greenhouse-gas cap, because 81 percent of all Apple’s emissions happen overseas.
The folks at the National Center for Public Policy Research think Apple’s pro-cap-and-trade stance, however, might be less about pursuing the company’s interest, and more about a board-member’s self-interest — and not just any board member.
NCPPR is asking in a shareholder proposal if board-member Al Gore’s investments in “green tech” — investments that depend on subsidies and regulations in order to pay off — might have motivated his anti-Chamber effort, and pushed Apple to take its pro-regulation stance.
From the NCPPR release:
Several companies, including Apple, ended their relationship with the Chamber over the trade group’s aggressive opposition to the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill and EPA regulation of carbon emissions.
Gore’s significant personal investments in renewable energy and related technologies would have benefited from these greenhouse gas regulations.
