Jim Webb apparently took more in one cycle from Dominion than John Warner his entire career.

I am not sure I mind energy companies donating in PACs but the expectation of reciprocation should never be there. I believe in donating because you believe in the process or the candidate and not necessarily to promote an issue. Thoughts?

companies like Dominion, Smithfield, other bad actors like these.

Not taking PAC money is easy.  But barring the employees who work for these companies from giving you money is a more difficult task.  And industry can get around a PAC bar by just having the donations come from individuals at the company (suggested donations, of course).

but I'd like to see the politicians at least make an effort.

While definitely a mixed bag, did take some corageous stands on energy issues in this (his last) term. I'm not too familiar with his career prior to his most recent re-election in 02.

On Webb, I think that energy is one potential area where he could really make a huge difference in the Senate, but has chosen to stay mum. Check out this quote from his book on mountaintop removal/strip-mining.

The ever-hungry industrialists had discovered that...southwest Virginia sat atop one huge vein of coal.  And so the rape began.  The people from the outside showed up with complicated contracts that the small-scale cattle raisers and tobacco farmers could not fully understand, asking for 'rights' to mineral deposits they could not see, and soon they were treated to a sundering of their own earth as the mining companies ripped apart their way of life, so that after a time the only option was to go down into the hole and bring the Man his coal, or starve.  The Man got his coal, and the profits it brought when he shipped it out. Oil made the Middle East rich.  Coal made this part of Appalachia a poverty-stricken basket case while the rest of the mountain region remained mired in isolation.

So, revalations like yours are exactly why the FollowtheCoalMoney.org site can be useful in discerning motives.  

again.  Brilliant and spot on.  

and not a whole lot at that.  This seems like a chicken or egg question though.  Did politicians attract this money because of their positions or vice versa?  In many cases, I think it has to do with the economic activity in their districts that drives their positions on certain things.  This is why it is easy for Nancy Pelosi to be anti-coal.  And probably the reason Obama sponsored a coal liquefaction bill.  And why Mary Landrieu is a favorite of big oil.  If Louisiana wasn't sitting on a boatload of oil revenue, then things would be different.  

Politicians favor the economic status quo of their districts because the known is easy.  Challenging that, going with the unknown is difficult.  Especially say supporting some alternative source, whose to say that economic activity will benefit SW Virginia or West Virginia?  What replaces the economic activity that is lost and the tax revenue and jobs and people that go with it?  

I'm not saying that I support this, but that I can understand the motivation.

Like you said, its obvious that Rick Boucher would take a lot of money from coal (more than anyone else in the House this session), because his district has a lot of coal in it. However, places like Wise County and other coal counties in his district are some of the most impoverished counties in this part of the country. So he's not really doing the local economy, or the local people, any favors by increasing his support for coal.

The SCC, for instance, says that building a new coal-fired power plant in Wise County will actually cost the area jobs, just as mountaintop removal mining costs Virginia traditional coal-mining jobs.

Lifted from CleanEnergyVA:

While the coal plant would have 75 permanent employees,9 the hundreds of jobs Dominion promises would only be temporary construction jobs that would disappear once the plant is built. At the same time, the coal plant would accelerate mountaintop removal coal mining, a process that has done far more economic harm than good. Since 1980, Wise County has experienced a 28% decline in the average income and a 53.1% decline in mining jobs - despite an increase in coal production during the same timeframe.10
Mountain top removal coal mining also hurts the tourism industry in Wise County, which generates more than $32 million a year in expenditures, payroll, and state and local taxes. The Crooked Trail, Virginia's Heritage Music Trail, draws more than 60,000 visitors to Appalachia and Southwestern Virginia each year.11 The USA Today reports, "From Dickenson County to Galax, rural areas that offer winding trails, bluegrass music and wine tastings have become some of the state's fastest-growing attractions."12 And more than 35,000 acres of the pristine Jefferson National Forest lie within Wise County, providing a "multitude of outdoor recreational opportunities: hiking, biking, swimming, canoeing, hunting, fishing, camping, boating ...."13

So, the chicken or the egg? In this case, I think Boucher and Dominion (et. al) have built a lasting a trusting relationship that they both have each others' backs.

To respond to this:

Politicians favor the economic status quo of their districts because the known is easy.  Challenging that, going with the unknown is difficult.  Especially say supporting some alternative source, whose to say that economic activity will benefit SW Virginia or West Virginia?  What replaces the economic activity that is lost and the tax revenue and jobs and people that go with it?  

I'd personally recommend Virginia look to abolish the use of mountaintop removal mining and the burning of mountaintop removal coal for the damage MTR does to our economy through job-loss and destruction of valuable tourist areas. I'd also suggest that the state look to mandate investment in conservation and efficiency from the utilities. VA is near the very bottom in the nation in spending on C+E from our utilities. There are a million ways to decrease the energy we use from changing light bulbs to increasing the efficiency of the grid.

I'd also suggest that we tap into some of Appalachia's amazing wind potential. The workforce is well trained to transition from MTR/mining to industrial wind production, and we know we have the potential there.

Thoughts?

In fact, I love the idea of EEC programs.  I wish we should do more of them.  But other than me as an individual telling my reps and the SCC that these programs are a good idea.  And also putting my money where my mouth is.  I don't know what else I can do.  You have other state budget priorities to contend with if we want to expand a subsidy program like the Weatherization one.  

Dominion is also a big fish in a small pond.  They are one of the largest utility companies in the country.  It's difficult to contend with a Fortune 500 company headquartered in your state capital.

I think we will be more successful with a national RPS standard.  And with a cap and trade system, coal is going to lose out to natural gas.  No matter who is president next year, next year is going to be a giant leap forward in energy policy at the federal level; I'm sure of it.