United Nations Foundation Funding Climate Activism in 12 State Governments
The group wired $5.4 million to 12 state governments between 2020 and 2022, with grants often being vaguely earmarked for “UN strengthening.”
The last time we checked on the United Nations, in terms of its attempt to manipulate climate hysteria into more money and power for its bureaucrats, many of the participants in its annual climate conference challenged the assertions about Net Zero and fossil fuels. Ultimately, the “Iron Law of Electricity” won the day.
Now it turns out the UN may be quietly funding climate cult antics in the bureaucracies of 12 states within this country.
The United Nations Foundation, a nonprofit founded in the 1990s to support global U.N. initiatives, is quietly fueling climate change policies in top Democratic state government offices nationwide, Fox News Digital has learned.
The Washington, D.C.-based organization — which was “created to work closely with the United Nations” — houses the U.S. Climate Alliance, a coalition of Democrat-led states launched to coordinate environmental policy after former President Donald Trump withdrew from the U.N. Paris climate accords. As part of the initiative, the United Nations Foundation has wired millions of dollars to state governors and agencies, in many cases even funding state officials’ salaries.
According to United Nations Foundation tax filings reviewed by Fox News Digital, the group wired a staggering $5.4 million to 12 state governments between 2020 and 2022, the most recent year with data available, with grants often being vaguely earmarked for “UN strengthening.” Further, information requests shared with Fox News Digital indicate another state, Michigan, received $451,000 from the group circuitously routed through the University of Michigan.
North Carolina has been the biggest winner, receiving $1.2 million in U.S. Climate Alliance grants. The monies were sent to the state’s Office of the Governor, Department of Commerce, and Department of Transportation.
In the same time frame, the nonprofit sent $853,000 to Maine’s Office of the Governor, Energy Office and Department of Agriculture. And New Mexico’s government received another $725,193, sent to its Environment Department and Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department.
“It is extremely concerning that global government activists may be secretly influencing public policy in New Mexico,” New Mexico state Senate Republican Leader Greg Baca told Fox News Digital. “If these grants are funding employees within our state agencies, the people of New Mexico deserve to know about it. We call on the Governor to disclose the details of what these funds are being used for and why New Mexico was selected as a beneficiary.”
State departments in Michigan, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Nevada, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin have received funding from the U.S. Climate Alliance.
Keep in mind that in 2023, the then-head of the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres proclaimed, “Fossil fuels were incompatible with human survival.”
What is incompatible with national survival is secret funding by globalists intent on foisting destructive energy policy on a country.
Fortunately, Americans are growing increasingly skeptical of climate alarmists and their pseudoscience. Fox News Digital has opened an important curtain on hidden influences impacting our nation that will cause people to be even more “climate change questioning.”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Blue States
NC is not a blue state, but we do have an awful dem governor.
Money laundering.
We pay UN dues and kickbacks are sent to politicians for UN strengthening.
Nope. This money isn’t coming from the UN. Therefore it can’t be coming from our dues.
And how do you know it isn’t? The foundation was started to support global U.N. initiatives. Why wouldn’t UN money be flowing into it? Cite some source, please, so we can all investigate.
Because it has big money donors. If the UN wanted to fund things itself it wouldn’t need a foundation. It doesn’t pay taxes anyway, and donations to it are already tax-deductible, so why bother with an entity that is subject to US law and has to file forms and be audited and all that bothersome stuff? No, the foundation is not part of the UN, it’s a private initiative by UN supporters, but it likely takes instructions from the UN.
Think of it like a super-PAC that supports a candidate but isn’t part of his campaign; except that super-PACs are not allowed to consult with the campaign, let alone take instructions from it, and have to figure out on their own what will best help the candidate, whereas this foundation surely does consult with the UN and probably does take instructions.
Milhouse. Claiming the Constitution is a suicide pact, one comment at a time.
Huh? Now you’re just babbling.
When will we pull the UN plug? Thye push one thing after another to damage our economy and standard of living. Get rid of them.
That wouldn’t stop this funding.
This is reason #398 why the U.S. should get out of the UN.
How is it a reason? If the first 397 were not enough, how is this a reason? How would getting out of the UN stop this funding?
Again, from Bret Weinstein’s interview on Tucker Carlson (really worth watching):
Bret talks about how decades ago, the major corrupt election issue was “campaign funding transparency,” and it never did get “solved.” It was only later on that it occurred to him that our global enemies no longer had to worry about attacking us… if they could just buy us instead,
Or just walk across the border.
America flushed more than $12 billion down the UN toilet in 2021.
Why in God’s name are we still a part of (and bankroller) of this stinking hot mess?
Why do we still support this Anti-American land fill?
Confirmed: The UN has too much disposable income.
Nope. I mean it does, but this does not confirm it, because this money is not coming from the UN. The UN could have been parsimonious to an extreme, and running on a budget of $37.50, and this would still be happening.
Again, Milhouse, show us whence you glean the fact that this isn’t UN money. I don’t see that mentioned above. So, where are you getting that information?
It’s clearly mentioned above that the money is coming from the foundation, which means it’s not coming from the UN. The UN has no reason to give the foundation money.
People, Milhouse is correct. Please read the headline and the article more carefully. The money isn’t coming from the UN. It’s coming from a private foundation that has “United Nations” in its name (“United Nations Foundation” “a nonprofit founded in the 1990s to support global U.N. initiatives”).
But I understand your confusion, because Leslie got it wrong in the second paragraph when she wrote “Now it turns out the UN may be quietly funding climate cult antics in the bureaucracies of 12 states within this country.” The UN isn’t the source of the money, the source is the nonprofit United Nations Foundation.
However, it’s long past time for us to cut our ties to the UN. I’m still disappointed that Ronald Reagan didn’t do it.
I think Leslie’s wording may be correct, because the foundation ‘was “created to work closely with the United Nations”’, so I think Leslie assumes the request to send the funding came from the UN. But the funding itself doesn’t.
the source is the nonprofit United Nations Foundation.
Well, no, you’re wrong there. That foundation isn’t sitting on a pile of Scrooge McDuck money that it’s spending over the last 30 years. The foundation is funded from somewhere. And I’m betting (look at why the foundation was built) the UN is sending it money.
The UN Foundation is what we call a “cutout” or “pass through” for money that otherwise wouldn’t get touched with a 10-foot pole. (Any government entity directly receiving UN funds would raise a populist ruckus that would impress even Trump.) It’s the same as saying “No politician in NY ever received a single cent from the Mafia.”
It actually is sitting on a pile of money. That’s what foundations do. They start with a pile of money, and sure, they accept donations too, but mostly they invest the money they started with and spend the proceeds on whatever it is that they’re founded for. In this case, supporting the UN.
This was the fund established by Ted Turner with $1B decades ago. He then hired former Senator Tim Wirth to run it. So it is money supplied by a man who divorced Jane Fonda because she was too religious.
“Green” energy is of course the in your face code word for
destroying the white mans green monetary system as they
shift the monetary system to hand out the new iteration of coinage
to the people of their choosing
guess whos coming to dinner
UN: “Hey, you guys, those guys could use some $upport, for their righteous policies we agree with. How about you cut a check.”
ANAPOUNF (Absolutely Not A Part Of UN Foundation): “OK, boss.”
DONOR PEOPLE, also absolutely not part of the UN: “Hey, you got enough to cover that, or you need $ome more from our internal account for you?”
ANAPOUNF: “Yeah, thanks for topping us off.”
ANAPOUNF: “Hey, UN, we give this to who, for what, in which states?”
But it’s not UN action, not funds on account, and tho it didn’t come up above, not foreign interference in policy, govt, or election — just the UN, which is not the US, directing funding sourced from somewhere, through a US foundation based in the US, into US administrations to implement its — the UNs — policy preferences through US State governments. Nothing to see here.
Are there not some recent
persecutionsprosecutions about foreign election interference — Russia, Russia, Russia — and that convolution looks kinda RICO-y, does it not? Maybe money laundering.In other news, I just today got my hairs
splitcut, but Barber went cross the strands, not long-ways.As I said in the first place, the money isn’t coming from the UN. Therefore it can’t be coming from our dues. And leaving the UN would do nothing to stop it.