# Should the United Negro College Fund turn down the gift from the Koch brothers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 6, 2014, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199 "2014-06-06T14:09:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/121 "2014-06-09T18:28:48Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Wow, the IPCC has a whopping budget of $7 million a year? [This study found a network of anti-climate change groups spent $558 million over the same period.](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/) I believe the $7 million refers to the operating budget of the IPCC as an organization. Clerical personel, PC’s, pencils, porno mags, sheep, etc. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/122 "2014-06-09T18:31:00Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > It’s also a good place to note that the decline in support of the IPCC beliefs could be because many former believers in the IPCC results seem to have changed their minds. Not among actual scientists, among whom agreement is as close to universal as it ever gets. Or even among people who have actually looked at the data and analyses, a cohort which I suspect does not include you. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/123 "2014-06-09T18:33:26Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Yes. I wonder if that has anything to do with the shit tons of money donated to anti-climate change groups I mentioned in my last post. > > Nah, it’s probably a coincidence. I can only hope so. I believe there should always be a loyal opposition to debate the facts and help reach a proper course of action. (p.s. Did you mean “shit tons” or “shit loads” of money?) ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/124 "2014-06-09T18:35:13Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Not among actual scientists, among whom agreement is as close to universal as it ever gets. Or even among people who have actually looked at the data and analyses, a cohort which I suspect does not include you. SPQR! I always wanted to be the guy with the lion headed helmet! … … Oh, you meant a different kind of cohort. Sorry. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/125 "2014-06-09T18:38:14Z")
Sorry, all we have left is Third Spear Carrier from the Left. At least it’s a stage credit, ya want it? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/126 "2014-06-09T18:39:51Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Sorry, all we have left is Third Spear Carrier from the Left. At least it’s a stage credit, ya want it? No Roman legionary would carry a spear! Do I get a plumed helm at least?? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/127 "2014-06-09T18:43:01Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I can only hope so. I believe there should always be a loyal opposition to debate the facts and help reach a proper course of action. I was wondering if we’ve given up the pretense that the Koch Bros aren’t giving this money to further an agenda that profits them? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/128 "2014-06-09T18:46:37Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I believe the $7 million refers to the operating budget of the IPCC as an organization. Clerical personel, PC’s, pencils, porno mags, sheep, etc. I think that’s what I said earlier, although of course without the jokes about sheep fucking. So your claim earlier was that climate science is big business. As proof, you submitted that the budget of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has an operating budget of $7 million a year… which is about a tenth the amount that a slew of anti-climate science groups spent in the same period. > [@doorhinge](#): > > p.s. Did you mean “shit tons” or “shit loads” of money? I meant shit ton. I expect a ton is more than a load. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/129 "2014-06-09T18:52:24Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I was wondering if we’ve given up the pretense that the Koch Bros aren’t giving this money to further an agenda that profits them? You must have confused the Koch bros with George Soros. The UNCF should accept the Koch bros funding. You should accept any Koch bros or UNCF funds offered. And I will gladly accept any funding you can spare. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/130 "2014-06-09T18:53:52Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > The UNCF should accept the Koch bros funding. You should accept any Koch bros or UNCF funds offered. Especially if they’re offering to donate land far from the coast. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/131 "2014-06-09T18:55:29Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I think that’s what I said earlier, although of course without the jokes about sheep fucking. So your claim earlier was that climate science is big business. As proof, you submitted that the budget of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has an operating budget of $7 million a year… which is about a tenth the amount that a slew of anti-climate science groups spent in the same period. > > I meant shit ton. I expect a ton is more than a load. I assumed the sheep would have been used for methane studies but your ideas on their use is intriguing. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/132 "2014-06-09T18:57:47Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I assumed the sheep would have been used for methane studies but your ideas on their use is intriguing. The methane problem is usually associated with cows, which are somewhat like sheep but different. I do see some articles about sheep possibly having lower ‘emissions,’ so maybe you’re talking about that. What studies do you think the IPCC is doing on porn? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/133 "2014-06-09T18:59:54Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > You must have confused the Koch bros with George Soros. No, I’m pretty sure _I_ know what the topic of this thread is. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/134 "2014-06-09T22:56:42Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Wow, the IPCC has a whopping budget of $7 million a year? [This study found a network of anti-climate change groups spent $558 million over the same period.](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/) Of course the IPCC is just the agency tasked with collecting the data from researchers, collating it and publishing it. So how much funding is being provided for climate science? It’s not an easy number to nail down as funding is provided through universities, governments, NGOs, private individuals, and other organizations. There’s no one ‘umbrella’ for climate change funding. However, I’ve heard personally from more than one scientist that so much funding has moved into climate change subjects that it’s hurting other fields. There’s a common joke that a paper titled, “A study on the migration pattern of ducks” has a much better chance of being funded if it’s titled, “A study on the changing migration patterns of ducks due to climate change.” In any event, a little poking around on the internet found: €281.4 million in EU funding for 284 projects on climate change and biodiversity. Germany’s [International Climate Initiative](http://www.climatefundsupdate.org/listing/international-climate-initiative) has raised over a billion dollars in funds. and receives regular funding additions of €120 million per year. In Canada, NSERC grants were available for applicants in amounts up to $1 million per year per project. That program recently closed. The UN Global Climate Fund is trying to ramp up fundraising to the level of $100 billion _per year_ by 2020. It is described as a mechanism for transferring money from the developed world to the developing nations for climate change mitigation. If you don’t think putting the U.N. in control of hundreds of billions of dollars in wealth transfer isn’t a potential conflict of interest, I’m not sure what to say. [The Ford Foundation](http://www.fordfoundation.org/issues/sustainable-development/climate-change-responses-that-strengthen-rural-communities) provides grants for research in climate change. The [International Research Initiative on Adaptation to Climate Change](http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Programs/Science_and_Innovation/IDRC_Challenge_Fund/Pages/IRIACC.aspx) is a 12.5 million dollar Canadian program that provides money for climate research. [Here is a list of projects funded by the Climate and Development Knowledge Network](http://cdkn.org/projects/). There appears to be hundreds of them. [GlobalChange.gov](http://www.globalchange.gov/) is a U.S. umbrella agency controlling funding for climate change research. It has an annual budget of about 2.5 billion dollars. Really, I could go for many pages. Every developed country is spending major bucks on climate change research. But the real money isn’t in the research. The real money (and power) comes from tariffs, cap and trade, carbon taxes, etc. There are HUGE vested interests in government and industry fighting for control of this money. As mentioned, the U.N. wants 100 billion PER YEAR. Carbon taxes in the U.S. would net the U.S. government at least 50 billion per year. Companies like GE, which makes nuclear power plants, gas turbines, windmills, factory control systems, and other industrial products would be huge winners - in fact, GE, Siemens and other big industrial firms are already talking about the profits to be had by government regulations forcing industrial changes that require scrapping old equipment and buying new. So I’m not impressed by your $500 million figure for anti-climate change research and promotion. It’s a drop in the bucket compared to the money that will flow to special interests if climate change regulations can be implemented, and to the amount of money available for research on the pro-AGW side. Now, I’m not claiming that this money is necessarily biasing research. That’s the claim on your side. But if it’s true that money is directing this research and biasing the outcome, then it has to be true on both sides unless you think somehow pro-AGW researchers are immune to the influence of money and status. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/135 "2014-06-09T23:11:52Z")
By the way, since we’re talking about the pernicious effects of Billionaires providing money with strings attached, shall we talk about Tom Steyer? Tom Steyer is a billionaire who heavily funds Democratic causes. He has been fighting tooth and nail to block the Keystone pipeline, spending millions of dollars on anti-Keystone ads, providing millions in funding to political candidates who oppose the pipeline, etc. This despite the fact that his hedge fund invested $125 million in the Kinder Morgan pipeline, a direct competitor to Keystone for moving Alberta oil. Steyer says he has divested himself in interest in that pipeline, but the fact remains that he isn’t opposing it - only Keystone. This despite the fact that if Keystone is killed the prime beneficiary will be the Kinder Morgan pipeline - and Tom Steyer’s hedge fund, which has a major interest. Steyer claims that he is now at arm’s length from the hedge fund, but in reality these transfers and divestments take years to complete. In any event, I’m not going to claim that Steyer has black motives here - for all I know, he feels guilty for his past heavy investment in fossil fuels and is now trying to make amends. But if you’re going to accuse the Kochs of bad faith simply because they have some indirect investments that may benefit, then Steyer is fair game too. And so is George Soros. And any other billionaires that are ‘activists’ for Democrats and provide funding to them. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/136 "2014-06-09T23:22:33Z")
Sam Stone: I thought you were part of the crowd who agree that billionaires wield too much influence over political activities–which is one of the arguments among sophisticated libertarians for smaller government. Do I misremember? In any event, I’d be curious to hear what George Soros’s profit motives are for his principal charitable activities. I suspect he’s a tad less self-interested than the man whose history you use to indict Soros. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/137 "2014-06-10T01:15:10Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > In any event, I’m not going to claim that Steyer has black motives here Good, since you can’t even hypothesize any. But that should make you pause before trying to draw an equivalence to people whose motives are very clear, as well as contrary to the public interest. It _should_, that is. > [@](#): > > But if you’re going to accuse the Kochs of bad faith simply because they have some indirect investments that may benefit Cut the shit. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/138 "2014-06-10T03:34:24Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > The UN Global Climate Fund is trying to ramp up fundraising to the level of $100 billion _per year_ by 2020. It is described as a mechanism for transferring money from the developed world to the developing nations for climate change mitigation. If you don’t think putting the U.N. in control of hundreds of billions of dollars in wealth transfer isn’t a potential conflict of interest, I’m not sure what to say. Poor countries are generally the ones who are going to get hit the worst, so you’re not sure what to say. But I’ll point out here that **doorhinge** ’s initial claim was that both sides are spending millions to influence public opinion. That’s technically true, but one side is outspending the other, and I expect the real ratio is far higher than 10:1. Since then **doorhinge** has been trying to broaden his claim until it no longer means anything, and you seem to be playing along. Of course studying climate change costs money, and of course alternative energy and AGW countermeasures cost money. I guess the endgame here is that researching climate change makes you biased. The oil industry, though- those are folks we can trust. It’s not like they have anything at stake here. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/139 "2014-06-10T04:54:00Z")
That’s not at all what I said, and you know it. The point is that you can’t have your cake and eat it too - you can’t accuse the Koch Brothers of only funding AGW research because they have a vested interest in protecting oil interests, while at the same time ignoring the huge benefits to be had by the many special interests on the other side who are funding other research. The Kochs have a long history of funding science and other philanthropic activity that they did not personally benefit from. There is no reason to believe that they are funding current research for any other reason. If they were interested in making a few hundred million dollars or even a few billion dollars from this, it’s kind of hard to explain why they _give away_ hundreds of millions or billions to various charities. And it’s already been noted in this thread that they funded the Berkeley Earth Project with no strings attached, and that study came out supporting AGW which proves they did not attach strings to it. There are quotes from members of that team in this very thread saying that the Kochs never pressured them once to come to any specific conclusion. That little piece of data was _completely ignored_, but it seems rather important, doesn’t it? Charles Koch recently published [this editorial](http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303978304579475860515021286) explaining his motives: > [@Charles Koch](#): > > Rather than try to understand my vision for a free society or accurately report the facts about Koch Industries, our critics would have you believe we’re “un-American” and trying to “rig the system,” that we’re against “environmental protection” or eager to “end workplace safety standards.” These falsehoods remind me of the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s observation, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Here are some facts about my philosophy and our company: > … > Koch employees have earned well over 700 awards for environmental, health and safety excellence since 2009, many of them from the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. EPA officials have commended us for our “commitment to a cleaner environment” and called us “a model for other companies.” > > Our refineries have consistently ranked among the best in the nation for low per-barrel emissions. In 2012, our Total Case Incident Rate (an important safety measure) was 67% better than a Bureau of Labor Statistics average for peer industries. Even so, we have never rested on our laurels. We believe there is always room for innovation and improvement. > > Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs—even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished. > > Koch Industries was the only major producer in the ethanol industry to argue for the demise of the ethanol tax credit in 2011. That government handout (which cost taxpayers billions) needlessly drove up food and fuel prices as well as other costs for consumers—many of whom were poor or otherwise disadvantaged. Now the mandate needs to go, so that consumers and the marketplace are the ones who decide the future of ethanol. You can read his op-ed as a libertarian diatribe if you want, and from your perspective that might be fair. But it’s an ideological position, not one designed to manipulate the wheels of power to benefit him financially. It’s no different than George Soros or Tom Steyer or Paul Allen or any other billionaire providing funding for left-wing causes they believe in. And how many companies have come out against subsidies that they themselves benefited from? How do you square that with the claim that the Kochs are funding anti-AGW research for economic gain? It seems to me that the orchestrated smearing of the Kochs by the left is nothing more than a blatant attempt to rile up the ‘base’ and to intimidate the Kochs into withdrawing from the public arena. I find it particularly offensive that the Senate Majority leader repeatedly calls out these private citizens by name and accuses them of being un-American and attempts to rile up hatred towards them. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199/140 "2014-06-10T05:14:26Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Sam Stone: I thought you were part of the crowd who agree that billionaires wield too much influence over political activities–which is one of the arguments among sophisticated libertarians for smaller government. Do I misremember? No, that’s not me. I’m a first-amendment absolutist. Free speech is free speech. Even when it’s harmful, the alternative of allowing the government to choose which speech is ‘good’ speech is abhorrent and would do much more damage in the long run. Besides, I think those billionaires largely balance each other out. For every Koch there’s a Soros or a Steyer opposing them. In my opinion, campaign finance reform has been a total failure - more money was spent in the last election than in any other. All CFR has done is to make the sources of funding murkier. I’d allow anyone to contribute as much money to any campaign as they want, with one proviso: every nickel of funding must come with a complete paper trail showing exactly where the money came from, and that paper trail should be published online for all to see. > [@](#): > > In any event, I’d be curious to hear what George Soros’s profit motives are for his principal charitable activities. I suspect he’s a tad less self-interested than the man whose history you use to indict Soros. My point wasn’t to indict Soros or Steyer or anyone else. My point is that if you’re going to assume that the Kochs are funding political campaigns purely for financial profit, it’s hypocritical to assume the other billionaires have hearts of gold simply because they’re on your side. But since you asked, I had a quick look at what Soros has been up to. In December he wrote [this editorial](http://economia.icaew.com/opinion/december-2013/george-soros-the-shifting-world-economy), supporting Japan’s massive round of quantitative easing: > [@George Soros](#): > > As 2013 comes to a close, efforts to revive growth in the world’s most influential economies – with the exception of the eurozone – are having a beneficial effect worldwide. All of the looming problems for the global economy are political in character > > After 25 years of stagnation, Japan is attempting to reinvigorate its economy by engaging in quantitative easing on an unprecedented scale. It is a risky experiment: faster growth could drive up interest rates, making debt-servicing costs unsustainable. But Prime Minister Shinzo Abe would rather take that risk than condemn Japan to a slow death. And, judging from the public’s enthusiastic support, so would ordinary Japanese. He goes on to condemn austerity and political polarization preventing the U.S. from following Japan’s sterling example. Interestingly, while publicly praising Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for his ‘bold experiment’, Soros’s hedge fund shorted the Japanese Yen, earning him about $1 billion dollars. The devaluation of the Yen was the expected result of Shinzo’s massive QE, and Soros cheerfully helped that along - then bet against it and won. Did he do this intentionally? Was this a coldly calculated strategy, or was he merely hedging his bets? I’d say the evidence that Soros pushed for policies that he could profit from is at least as strong as that against the Kochs. I also recall that the left didn’t have much of a problem with T. Boone Pickens spending millions to lobby for wind farms, despite the massive personal investment he had in the scheme. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-united-negro-college-fund-turn-down-the-gift-from-the-koch-brothers/690199.md?page=8)