Dark money is trying to take down the Inflation Reduction Act from the left

A new campaign is using social media to target voters in progressive districts to ask their representatives to vote against the Inflation Reduction Act. But it appears to be linked to GOP operatives.

WASHINGTON, DC - AUGUST 02: Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) speaks to reporters outside of his office in the Hart Senate Office Building on August 02, 2022 in Washington, DC. Negotiations in the U.S. Senate continue for the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

United for Clean Power's campaign is a symptom of how quickly and easily social media allows interest groups to reach a targeted audience.

Photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

The social media feeds of progressive voters have been bombarded by a series of ads this past week telling them to urge their Democratic representatives to vote against the Inflation Reduction Act.

The ads aren’t from the Sunrise Movement or other progressive climate stalwarts, though. Instead, they’re being pushed by United for Clean Power, a murky dark money operation that appears to have connections with Republican operatives.

While the campaign itself is not particularly sophisticated — the tagline “no reconciliation without comprehensive climate change” seems to forget that climate change is not desirable, in a bill or otherwise — it is an illustration of how social media is still being leveraged to sow doubt and confusion despite platforms trying to clean up the information environment.

The blitz started on the day Sen. Joe Manchin and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced that they had arrived at a deal for $369 billion in climate investments as part of a reconciliation bill. On Thursday, conservative Democrat Sen. Kyrsten Sinema signaled she supported the bill after agreeing to a few tweaks to the tax policies, indicating it will likely clear the Senate.

But the votes in the House aren’t quite tied up yet, and the campaign — which newsletter FWIW first identified — has been using a swath of strategies that include social media advertising, direct text messages to voters and even a sponsorship of the POLITICO New York newsletter to try to chip away support from the left.

(Both POLITICO and Protocol are POLITICO Media Group publications, and are owned by Axel Springer.)

FWIW found a series of digital ads running on platforms like Facebook, whose parent company Meta has received at least $11,500 from the group so far, and on Google, where the group has spent at least $9,900. The campaign seems to specifically target constituents of progressive lawmakers like Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, and urges those voters to push them to “demand environmental justice or kill the reconciliation bill.”

United for Clean Power is a symptom of how quickly and easily social media allows interest groups — both nefarious and not — to reach a targeted audience.

“Social media has allowed people to target super-specific audiences with messages about energy,” Kert Davies, founder and director of the Climate Investigations Center, told Protocol. “The scariest thing about social media is that you can test if a message is working.”

A review of both Meta’s and Google’s ad policies by the climate newsletter Heated suggests that United for Clean Power may be abusing at least Google’s policy, which doesn’t allow "coordinated deceptive practices.” POLITICO did not respond to questions from Protocol about whether a sponsor misrepresenting its position on an issue would typically be a cause for refusing to work with them.

The campaign is also targeting voters in districts represented by noted progressives via text message. Huffington Post journalist Alexander Kaufman lives in Ocasio-Cortez’s district in Queens and received one, and Sarah Loschiavo, a progressive constituent of Omar’s who has voted for the Democrat more than once, received one as well.

A collage of United for Clean Power ads and text campaigns. United for Clean Power's Facebook ads and one of its text messages sent to Sarah Loschiavo.Images: Sarah Loschiavo; FWIW

United for Clean Power has been around since 2015, though its current iteration is largely divorced from its origins. The group was co-founded by Erin Cummings, who currently works at the Department of Homeland Security, to promote bipartisan energy policies. In 2017, she transferred control of the group to its current director, Greg Finnerty, an Ohio-based lawyer who did not respond to Protocol’s request for comment. It is unclear who is funding the group under his leadership.

Cummings, who is no longer at all involved, told Protocol she is baffled by the group’s current campaign, which represents a different iteration of United for Clean Power than the one she was involved in.

“I support the bill,” she said.

In 2018, the group mounted a campaign against Ohio Republican Rep. Kyle Koehler via a Facebook page that has been quiet ever since; a 2019 tax form shows that the group spun out Ohioans for Efficient Government, which has virtually no internet presence.

The campaign’s 2018 tax forms show it spent over $135,000 enlisting the GOP-focused firm Majority Strategies for advertising services. The 2019 form, which is the most recent that is publicly available, shows the group had revenue of nearly $208,000. Neither the campaign itself nor Majority Strategies responded to requests for comment.

What is so striking about these ads is how wildly out of step they are with the reality of what progressive politicians have been pushing for on climate. While progressives had pushed for more climate funding as part of the Build Back Better Act, the Inflation Reduction Act is still historic and may be Democrats’ last best shot to pass climate legislation with the upcoming midterms likely to result in the party losing one or both chambers of Congress. Though it has not made it to the House yet, progressive independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has explicitly said that the climate funding is “a step forward” despite it coming alongside breaks for the fossil fuel industry; while he said he would submit some amendments, he seems prepared to vote for it given Democrats are moving ahead with the legislative process.

The campaign seems to ignore these dynamics entirely. But Davies said this and campaigns like it are designed to exploit the ongoing division within the party, political reality notwithstanding.

“[The campaign is] hitting a nerve that is raw, and somebody is aware of that and trying to divide the Democratic camp based on real divides that exist,” Davies said. “They know that there are divisions on the left that remain from the Green New Deal … It’s really difficult for some people to bite their tongue at this point.”

Update: This story was updated with new details, including comment from its co-founder Erin Cummings, on Aug. 9.


Upstart has a new plan to sell Wall Street on its loans

The AI-powered lender will hold some loans on its balance sheet as it seeks partners for long-term capital.

Despite the current struggles, Upstart views the marketplace model as the best way to write to keep its loan business growing.

Photo: Upstart

After a revenue drop its CEO called “unacceptable,” the leadership at fintech lender Upstart is making a bet on the strength of its ability to underwrite loans with AI.

The San Mateo company is planning to leave some loans on its balance sheet that investors do not want to buy, as concerns about the economy shift Wall Street away from backing riskier consumer debt. Rather than pull back on its lending in response, the company said it will hold some loans as it seeks longer-term capital partners.

Keep Reading Show less
Ryan Deffenbaugh
Ryan Deffenbaugh is a reporter at Protocol focused on fintech. Before joining Protocol, he reported on New York's technology industry for Crain's New York Business. He is based in New York and can be reached at
Sponsored Content

How cybercrime is going small time

Blockbuster hacks are no longer the norm – causing problems for companies trying to track down small-scale crime

Cybercrime is often thought of on a relatively large scale. Massive breaches lead to painful financial losses, bankrupting companies and causing untold embarrassment, splashed across the front pages of news websites worldwide. That’s unsurprising: cyber events typically cost businesses around $200,000, according to cybersecurity firm the Cyentia Institute. One in 10 of those victims suffer losses of more than $20 million, with some reaching $100 million or more.

That’s big money – but there’s plenty of loot out there for cybercriminals willing to aim lower. In 2021, the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) received 847,376 complaints – reports by cybercrime victims – totaling losses of $6.9 billion. Averaged out, each victim lost $8,143.

Keep Reading Show less
Chris Stokel-Walker

Chris Stokel-Walker is a freelance technology and culture journalist and author of "YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars." His work has been published in The New York Times, The Guardian and Wired.


Does your boss sound a little funny? It might be an audio deepfake

Voice deepfake attacks against enterprises, often aimed at tricking corporate employees into transferring money to the attackers, are on the rise. And at least in some cases, they’re succeeding.

Audio deepfakes are a new spin on the impersonation tactics that have long been used in social engineering and phishing attacks, but most people aren’t trained to disbelieve their ears.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

As a cyberattack investigator, Nick Giacopuzzi’s work now includes responding to growing attacks against businesses that involve deepfaked voices — and has ultimately left him convinced that in today's world, "we need to question everything."

In particular, Giacopuzzi has investigated multiple incidents where an attacker deployed fabricated audio, created with the help of AI, that purported to be an executive or a manager at a company. You can guess how it went: The fake boss asked an employee to urgently transfer funds. And in some cases, it’s worked, he said.

Keep Reading Show less
Kyle Alspach

Kyle Alspach ( @KyleAlspach) is a senior reporter at Protocol, focused on cybersecurity. He has covered the tech industry since 2010 for outlets including VentureBeat, CRN and the Boston Globe. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and can be reached at


Binance’s co-founder could remake its crypto deal-making

Yi He is overseeing a $7.5 billion portfolio, with more investments to come, making her one of the most powerful investors in the industry.

Binance co-founder Yi He will oversee $7.5 billion in assets.

Photo: Binance

Binance co-founder Yi He isn’t as well known as the crypto giant’s colorful and controversial CEO, Changpeng “CZ” Zhao.

That could soon change. The 35-year-old executive is taking on a new, higher-profile role at the world’s largest crypto exchange as head of Binance Labs, the company’s venture capital arm. With $7.5 billion in assets to oversee, that instantly makes her one of the most powerful VC investors in crypto.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.


Trump ordered social media visa screening. Biden's defending it.

The Knight First Amendment Institute just lost a battle to force the Biden administration to provide a report on the collection of social media handles from millions of visa applicants every year.

Visa applicants have to give up any of their social media handles from the past five years.

Photo: belterz/Getty Images

Would you feel comfortable if a U.S. immigration official reviewed all that you post on Facebook, Reddit, Snapchat, Twitter or even YouTube? Would it change what you decide to post or whom you talk to online? Perhaps you’ve said something critical of the U.S. government. Perhaps you’ve jokingly threatened to whack someone.

If you’ve applied for a U.S. visa, there’s a chance your online missives have been subjected to this kind of scrutiny, all in the name of keeping America safe. But three years after the Trump administration ordered enhanced vetting of visa applications, the Biden White House has not only continued the program, but is defending it — despite refusing to say if it’s had any impact.

Keep Reading Show less
Anna Kramer

Anna Kramer is a reporter at Protocol (Twitter: @ anna_c_kramer, email:, where she writes about labor and workplace issues. Prior to joining the team, she covered tech and small business for the San Francisco Chronicle and privacy for Bloomberg Law. She is a recent graduate of Brown University, where she studied International Relations and Arabic and wrote her senior thesis about surveillance tools and technological development in the Middle East.

Latest Stories