Becerra Declines to Join Exxon Investigation

5 min Click here to listen to this article Share via Close extra sharing options Email Facebook X LinkedIn Threads Reddit WhatsApp Copy Link URL Copied! Print This is read by an automated voice. Please report any issues or inconsistencies here. In June 2017, with President Trump newly installed in office for the first time, one of the biggest battles with the administration was about oil. He’d just named the chief executive of Exxon Mobil, Rex Tillerson, as his secretary of State, even though great reporting — in this newspaper among others — had recently shown that the company knew all about, and lied all about, climate change as far back as the 1980s. Back east, the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts were trying to take the oil giant on, initiating investigations of the company to try to hold it accountable. Environmental advocates and consumer groups were pressing hard for California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris to join in, and she seemed to be considering it. Then she left the office to assume her new U.S. Senate seat, and the decision fell to her replacement, Xavier Becerra — now a leading candidate for California governor. As I wrote in these pages at the time, it was a great test for him, and a great curiosity that he was staying silent, “since the rest of Sacramento is hard at work dealing with climate change.” I was not the only one who noticed. Seventy thousand Californians signed petitions demanding action. Eight California representatives in Congress — including Jared Huffman and Ted Lieu — sent him a letter demanding a “vigorous” inquiry and pointing out that it was particularly important because the newly elected Trump administration was clearly favoring the oil industry. “California has led the world in responding to the dangers of climate change, and we know that it will continue to do so,” they wrote. “You now have a leading role in that effort.” But ultimately Becerra did not have a leading role, or indeed any role at all: He punted, as this editorial page pointed out. What Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is now trying to do by statute — immunize the big oil companies from prosecution for climate liability — Becerra accomplished by sheer silence. In the years since, of course, California has paid a huge price for our inaction on climate. Just looking at wildfire, there were of course the great blazes that Los Angeles County will never forget in 2025, but also the 2020 August Complex fire in Humboldt and Mendocino counties, the 2021 Dixie fire up north, the 2017 conflagration across Napa and Sonoma counties, the 2017 Thomas fire in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, the 2018 Camp fire that devastated Paradise — the list goes sadly on and on and on. Meanwhile, Big Oil and its friends at Big Utility have racked up huge profits, and Californians have faced ever higher bills. An unhobbled oil industry played a huge role in reelecting Trump in 2024 and in taking us to war with Iran. And through it all, during his years as attorney general, Becerra did little or nothing to help. As I said all those years ago, it’s a mystery why, though I fear the mystery gets clearer with each campaign funding filing over his long career. As California’s top prosecutor, he took big donations from oil industry giants such as Chevron, and also from energy companies Sempra and Southern California Edison. As a member of Congress, he took larger checks from Pacific Gas and Electric and Edison International. This time around, as he seeks the governor’s office, Chevron has maxed out its contributions to his campaign, the first time they’ve found a gubernatorial candidate to back in a decade. Meanwhile, across the country, leading progressives have signed a pledge refusing fossil fuel donations. Another gubernatorial contender, Katie Porter, is among them. Needless to say, Becerra is not. The California chapters of Third Act — a group of Americans over 60 that I helped found — canvassed their members last month and issued an endorsement of Tom Steyer, on the grounds that he had worked hard over the years to address energy and climate issues. Instead of taking money from Big Oil, he’s given money, time and counsel to those of us volunteering in the fight against the industry. In fact, I think that whether one is most concerned about lowering utility bills with clean energy or protecting California’s forests, beaches and insurance rates from the global warming threat, he’d be the most climate-conscious elected official in America. But Third Act was also founded to help protect our democracy. And that means disconnecting public policy from campaign donations. We need leaders who will do the right thing for us, not for their donors. Steyer has called on Becerra to return his donations from Big Oil. That would be a start, but it doesn’t really make up for the wasted decade we’ll never get back. Bill McKibben is the founder of Third Act and the author, most recently, of “Here Comes the Sun: A Last Chance for the Climate, a Fresh Chance for Our Civilization.” The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content. Ideas expressed in the piece The article contends that as California Attorney General, Becerra failed to investigate Exxon Mobil in 2017 despite receiving a letter from eight California Congressional representatives urging vigorous action and despite approximately 70,000 Californians signing petitions demanding the inquiry. The piece argues that Becerra’s inaction was particularly troubling given that other states were pursuing legal action against the fossil fuel company and that California was otherwise actively addressing climate change. The column asserts that by remaining silent on the Exxon investigation, Becerra effectively accomplished what the fossil fuel industry sought—immunity from prosecution for climate liability—through inaction rather than through statutory protection. The article highlights that throughout his political career as a congressman and attorney general, Becerra has accepted substantial campaign donations from major fossil fuel companies including Chevron, Pacific Gas and Electric, Sempra, and Southern California Edison. The piece contends that Becerra’s acceptance of Chevron’s maxed-out contributions to his current gubernatorial campaign is especially noteworthy, as Chevron has not backed a gubernatorial candidate in over a decade. The column argues that other Democratic gubernatorial candidates, namely Katie Porter, have signed pledges refusing fossil fuel donations, while Becerra has declined to make such a commitment. The article suggests that Becerra’s pattern of accepting oil industry donations while failing to take action against that industry demonstrates that his loyalty lies with fossil fuel companies rather than with climate action and the public interest. The piece contends that California has suffered enormously from climate inaction, with devastating wildfires from 2017 through 2025 occurring while oil companies accumulated substantial profits and energy companies continued raising utility bills. The article argues that public policy should not be influenced by campaign donations, and leaders should instead act in the interests of constituents rather than donors. Different views on the topic According to reporting on the gubernatorial race, Becerra has dominated most polling[1], suggesting that a significant segment of voters maintains confidence in his overall candidacy despite the climate-related criticisms raised against him. Becerra’s campaign has recently experienced notable growth in both polling and fundraising momentum[1], which indicates that he has generated grassroots support beyond traditional campaign structures. When faced with criticism about his record, Becerra has disputed characterizations of his actions and attributed responsibility to other government agencies[1], offering his own explanation for contested decisions.