June, 21 2022, 04:39pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
CJ Koepp, Fossil Free California, cj.koepp@fossilfreeca.org
Miriam Eide, Fossil Free California, miriam@fossilfreeca.org
Fossil Fuel-Funded Cop Kills California Climate Legislation
Climate justice coalition keeps up the fight for CalPERS, CalSTRS divestment, promises to return with similar legislation next year.
WASHINGTON
Today amidst a historic mega-drought, wildfires, and fossil-fueled public health crises, Assemblymember Jim Cooper, Chair of the Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement, refused to allow Senate Bill 1173, California's Fossil Fuel Divestment Act, to be heard in his committee. This one-man veto allows the state's pensions to continue to invest billions from public funds into the fossil fuel industry, for now.
This decision is a moral failure that disproportionately impacts young people, Indigenous communities, communities of color, and low-income communities. Climate chaos has already cost California billions in damages and health costs from fossil fuel pollution and climate disasters. Jim Cooper, who has just been elected Sacramento County Sheriff, has reported $36,350 in Big Oil campaign contributions from this election season alone.
Since the bill was introduced in February, it has gained the support of 143 unions, cities, and organizations, inspiring Californians to make thousands of calls, write nearly 20,000 letters, and organize dozens of meetings with legislators to advocate for SB 1173. All across the state, the fossil fuel industry's power to kill climate legislation has been exposed. The coalition promises to return with similar legislation next year, and will turn up the pressure directly on CalPERS and CalSTRS to live up to their fiduciary duty. Youth organizers will gather tomorrow morning at the Capitol for an action and press conference to chart the path forward to pension divestment.
"The fossil fuel industry doesn't benefit low-income communities or people of color. We are never considered when they make decisions about their business. It's infuriating that our elected officials take huge donations from this industry, and then turn around and deny young people, frontline communities, and our entire movement the chance to even make our case and have a fair vote," said Marlay'ja Hackett, 15, Youth vs. Apocalypse.
The California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) and the California State Teachers' Retirement System (CalSTRS) are the two largest public pension funds in the United States, with an estimated $9 billion invested in fossil fuel companies. If passed by the Assembly, SB 1173 would have protected the retirement savings of California's teachers, firefighters, and state workers from being used to finance oil, gas, and coal.
An estimated 1,500 institutions representing over $40 trillion in assets have already committed to fossil fuel divestment. SB 1173, and the broader divestment movement, intends to end the contradictory and incongruous policies that position the state of California as a climate leader while simultaneously investing billions into the fossil fuel companies powering the climate crisis. Specifically, SB 1173 would have prohibited CalPERS and CalSTRS from investing in the top 200 fossil fuel companies, required that they divest any current investments in those companies by 2030, and annually report on their divestment progress beginning in 2024.
"Today is a sad day in the history of California when the fossil fuel industry and its political allies defeated the will of the majority of CalSTRS and CalPERS beneficiaries and silenced the voices of the majority of the citizens of our great state," said James Stone, Southern California Divestment Network. "This defeat is just a temporary setback, however. We will organize to come back stronger to make our demand for fossil fuel divestment heard because fossil fuel companies are driving us toward unimaginable disaster and neither CalSTRS and CalPERS management nor our elected representatives are doing enough to hold them accountable. We must prevail because our common future is at stake."
This vote follows the release of a comprehensive report from Fossil Free California, which revealed that CalPERS and CalSTRS have used their influence as shareholders to obstruct climate action at major fossil fuel corporations, including BP and Shell, as well as financial institutions around the world. Since 2009, the funds' failure to divest has cost their members over $17.4 billion in returns.
QUOTE SHEET
"While I am deeply disappointed that my Senate Bill 1173 was not set for a hearing in the Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement this week, I remain committed to the necessary and ongoing fight against the impacts of climate change on our state, and especially those communities in my district that are disproportionately impacted by the negative effects of the climate crisis," said Senator Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach). "Teachers and state employees whose retirement futures are invested by our state's pension funds have long demanded that CalPERS and CalSTRS cease investing their money in fossil fuel companies, and this demand will only grow stronger and louder. I'm thankful for the hard work of our grassroots supporters at Fossil Free California, the California Faculty Association, and the youth climate activists with Youth Vs Apocalypse who helped move this bill out of the Senate and look forward to continuing this fight to ensure policy aligns with our state's values as a world climate leader, and that we can pass on a livable planet to future generations."
"Jim Cooper just decided to continue investing public money in the unequal suffering of my community. CalPERS and CalSTRS have been invested in these companies for decades, and during that time, their 'engagement' has come nowhere close to stopping the harm to my community or our world. Instead, fossil fuel companies have put billions into lies and disinformation to stop life-saving action on climate and pollution, and billions into exploiting more and more dangerous forms of fossil fuel extraction," said Lizbeth Ibarra, 18, Youth vs. Apocalypse. "They've been responsible for causing sickness and death to the 2 million Californians who live within a mile of fossil fuel infrastructure, a disproportionate amount of whom are Black and Brown communities like mine. Jim Cooper decided this injustice didn't even deserve a vote."
"By killing the fossil fuel divestment bill, Assemblymember Cooper is denying our communities a chance to fight back against the fossil fuel industry that is poisoning our air. The divestment bill offered a chance for our teachers and public employees to invest their retirement funds in line with their values of protecting our air, water and soil," said Martha Dina Arguello, Executive Director Physicians for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles.
"It is inexplicable that the Chair of the Assembly Public Employment and Retirement Committee refused to hear Senate Bill 1173 today, a CFA co-sponsored bill. This important piece of legislation would have prohibited both CalSTRS and CalPERS from making additional investments into fossil fuel companies and require them to divest nearly $9 billion in current holdings by 2030. Fossil fuel industries contribute significantly to climate change, including devastating wildfires, extreme drought, and excessive heat," said Charles Toombs, CFA President. "Why do we continue to fund fossil fuel companies--which exacerbate our climate crisis--with our pension and public funds? Right now, our state and our country are feeling the effects of the destruction of our planet and our communities, as our elected leaders remain morally absent, allowing this to happen with no repercussions to the fossil fuel companies accelerating this disaster."
"It's not surprising that our biggest obstacle to reducing the political influence of the fossil fuel industry in California and beyond is exactly that--the chokehold that Big Oil has on our political systems and our representatives," said CJ Koepp, Communications Coordinator at Fossil Free California. "While the bill's progress has been cut short this session, our youth-led coalition has already accomplished so much and we'll be back next year stronger than ever."
"As a long-time CalSTRS member and grandmother, I am heartbroken that my pension continues to finance the mega-drought, wildfires, and health issues affecting so many Californians. I don't understand how Assemblymembers such as Committee Chair Cooper continue to buy the argument or CalSTRS' reasoning that divestiture means less money in the pension fund -- a rationalization that BlackRock has disproved," said Marjorie Lasky, CalSTRS beneficiary and retired History Professor. "One thing's for sure: we're going to keep organizing and pushing for our state pension funds to do the right thing with our retirement savings."
" California's progress on climate action is undermined by its huge public investments in fossil fuels--trying to make a profit off the end of the earth is a mug's game, not to mention immoral. It's time to join the thousands of jurisdictions around the world that have done the economically and environmentally sane thing and divested," said Bill McKibben, Founder, Third Act.
"I am very proud of all the achievements that I and my fellow youth have made, but I find it wrong that youth find themselves fighting for what should be a human right to liveable and just planet to live on for years to come. It is sad that there are people in the world who prioritize their power and personal profit over the lives of future generations," said Christopher Soriano, 15, Youth vs. Apocalypse.
"It is upsetting to see one man backed by fossil fuel interests halt a powerful coalition of voices calling for climate accountability and the divestment of our state pensions from fossil fuels. SB 1173--the Fossil Fuel Divestment Act of 2022--may have died, but we will be back next year stronger than ever," said Miriam Eide, Coordinating Director, Fossil Free California. "Already we are pivoting to continue building power with our union and community allies and to keep the pressure on the state pensions through future legislation and direct pressure on the pension boards."
"At a time when frontline communities cannot afford anymore lip service, it's devastating that fossil fuel and corporate interest blocked this crucial legislation through committee. We cannot allow fossil fuel financing and legislators' delay tactics to wreak any more havoc on our climate," said Amy Gray, Senior Climate Finance Strategist at Stand.earth. "Frontline communities won't wait for lawmakers to appease the fossil fuel executives while our homes burn and flood, while our bodies are polluted and our children's futures are destroyed for profit. This isn't the end of this fight."
"When I read what scientists are relying on me about my future on this planet I often go through cycles of grief and frustration. When a new IPCC report gets released, I get immobilized with anxiety, and dread. Oftentimes I can't find the motivation to get through the day. I'm not the only young person with this struggle--most of us all grew up with an understanding that our environment was in danger and the time to act was limited," said Sim Bilal, Logistics Lead, Youth Climate Strike LA.
"It took New York organizers five years of work in the legislature to get their state's pensions fund to divest. We got through the California senate in one year, and were stopped by a committee chair who has never let a divestment bill through his committee. Along with others, we plan to expose Assembly and Senate members running for seats this November with fossil fuel money. We will get a bill through in the next session and in the process, we will expose the toxic power of fossil fuel money to slow the transition to a livable and just society," said Cynthia Kaufman, author of The Sea is Rising and So are We.
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
Report Exposes Instacart's Hidden AI Price Experiments That Could Cost Families $1,200 Per Year
"At a time when everyday Americans are struggling with high prices, it is particularly egregious to see corporations secretly conducting individual experiments to see how much a person is willing to pay," said one advocate.
Dec 09, 2025
Consumer advocates on Tuesday called on the Federal Trade Commission and state officials to investigate artificial intelligence-enabled pricing experiments used by Instacart, the grocery shopping app millions of Americans rely on, that charge up to 23% more for some shoppers than others when they buy the same item at the same store.
Consumer Reports joined the advocacy group Groundwork Collaborative and the labor-focused media organization More Perfect Union to uncover Instacart's pricing experiments enabled by Eversight, an AI pricing software that Instacart acquired in 2022. The company's CEO said last year that the experiments have helped the company “to really figure out which categories of products our customers [are] more price sensitive on"—in other words, to tailor prices based on a customer's shopping habits, whether they're near a competing store, and other factors.
The groups' study, Same Cart, Different Price, describes how researchers ran five tests with 437 participants, studying the prices of a basket of items bought at two Target stores and three Safeway stores using Instacart.
In one test at a Safeway in Washington, DC, shoppers logged on to the app to buy a carton of eggs from the same brand at the same time and found that the price they were given varied widely. Some shoppers were charged just $3.99 for the eggs, while others saw a price as high as $4.79—20% higher.
Shoppers at a Safeway in Seattle saw a 23% difference in prices for Skippy peanut butter, Oscar Mayer turkey, and Wheat Thins crackers. At two different Safeways in Washington, DC, Instacart quoted shoppers at one store a price that was 23% higher than at another for Signature Select Corn Flakes.
"It’s time for Instacart to close the lab. Americans shopping for groceries aren’t guinea pigs and shouldn't have to pay an Instacart tax.”
For the same basket of groceries, shoppers at the Seattle store were asked to pay as much as $123.93, while others were charged just $114.34.
"The average price variations observed in the study could cost a household of four about $1,200 per year," said Groundwork.
Justin Brookman, director of tech policy at Consumer Reports, said Instacart's tactics "hurt families who are simply trying to purchase essential groceries."
"At a time when everyday Americans are struggling with high prices, it is particularly egregious to see corporations secretly conducting individual experiments to see how much a person is willing to pay," said Brookman. "Companies must be transparent and upfront with people about pricing, so that they can make informed choices and keep more of their hard-earned money. We encourage the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to investigate Instacart’s pricing tactics."
Groundwork noted that Instcart's website acknowledges that it runs price tests, but states that "shoppers are not aware that they’re in an experiment" and are having their grocery prices selected for them via algorithm.
While Instacart has claimed its price experiments are "negligible," the groups emphasized that they're being used "against the backdrop of the fastest increase in food prices since the late 1970s."
After previous reporting on companies' use of "shrinkflation," "dynamic pricing," and other practices that keep prices high even as pandemic-era labor and supply chain issues have subsided, "today’s report shows Instacart’s experiments are yet another way corporate pricing tactics are squeezing American families," said Groundwork.
The study did not find evidence that Instacart is giving shoppers different prices based on their ZIP code or income, as companies like Amazon, Delta Air Lines, and Home Deport have been accused of doing.
But the groups said Eversight gives the company the capability to use that data to make pricing decisions tailored to particular shoppers.
“Instacart is quietly running pricing experiments on millions of shoppers during the worst grocery affordability crisis in a generation, and it’s costing households as much as $1,200 a year,” said Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens. “They have turned the simple act of buying groceries into a high-tech game of pricing roulette. When the same box of Wheat Thins can jump 23% in price because of an algorithm, that’s not innovation or convenience, it’s unfair. It’s time for Instacart to close the lab. Americans shopping for groceries aren’t guinea pigs and shouldn't have to pay an Instacart tax.”
The groups credited some state and federal lawmakers who have begun to take notice of pricing practices like Instacart's; US Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) introduced the Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act in July with the aim of prohibiting the use of automated systems to set prices. New York has enacted the first-of-its-kind Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act, which requires companies to prominently disclose to customers, "This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data" when they use methods like Instacart's. Other state legislation has been introduced in Colorado, California, and Pennsylvania to ban the use of surveillance to set prices.
The groups called on the FTC to take action under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which bans "unfair methods of competition." Those could include “'price discrimination not justified by differences in cost or distribution,' which appears to match Instacart’s pricing experiments and fluctuations," the report reads.
The FTC could also bring enforcement cases or initiate rulemaking to officially label AI-enabled pricing strategies as an "unfair or deceptive practice," affirming that companies who use them are breaking a consumer protection standard.
"Fair and honest markets are the bedrock of a healthy economy," reads Tuesday's report. "Companies like Instacart offer great convenience, but they are increasingly pursuing corporate pricing practices that unfairly decouple the price of a product from its true cost. As more consumers learn about, and decry, these practices, perhaps companies will change course. But if they do not, policymakers should intervene and require them to change their practices."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Group Warns US Allies Against Complicity in 'Criminal' Trump Boat Bombings
"The UK, Canada, and other allied nations who partner with the United States on counternarcotics efforts have ample evidence that the US is unlawfully killing people at sea," said Human Rights Watch.
Dec 09, 2025
A leading human rights organization on Tuesday pushed allies of the United States to more forcefully condemn and take steps to stop President Donald Trump's deadly boat strikes in international waters, attacks that experts have characterized as extrajudicial killings.
"The UK, Canada, and other allied nations who partner with the United States on counternarcotics efforts have ample evidence that the US is unlawfully killing people at sea,” Sarah Yager, Washington director at Human Rights Watch (HRW), said in a statement. “The rules-based international order depends on countries speaking out against violations, even when they’re committed by powerful friends.”
HRW specifically urged countries at risk of complicity to closely examine their maritime cooperation and intelligence-sharing with the Trump administration, which claims—without evidence—that every vessel targeted was involved in drug smuggling operations that posed a threat to the US.
"The UK, France, and the Kingdom of the Netherlands have significant influence in the Caribbean due to their overseas territories in the region," the group said. "All three governments are also participants in Campaign Martillo, a multinational counternarcotics detection, monitoring, and interdiction operation that includes US Navy and Coast Guard vessels, along with military and law enforcement units from a dozen other nations, including Canada."
"Australia and New Zealand, which are part of the 'Five Eyes' intelligence sharing community with the United States, UK, and Canada where the governments share all signals and geospatial intelligence by default, may also find themselves implicated in the strikes and should take steps to evaluate their own risks," HRW added.
While officials from the nations named by HRW have criticized and distanced themselves from the Trump administration's strikes, their comments have largely been vague and tepid—especially when compared to the responses of some South American leaders. Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, for instance, said her country "is not involved in these US actions" and that "it is for the United States to articulate the legal basis of its actions."
HRW also pointed to Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand's statement that “the United States has made clear that it is using its own intelligence” to target the vessels in international waters.
"It is not sufficient to accept the US government’s assurances that it is not leveraging shared intelligence for its unlawful strikes," said HRW. "In contrast, when asked directly about the legality of the strikes, [Ahmed] declined to address the matter, saying instead that 'it is within the purview of US authorities to make that determination.'"
Last month, the UK reportedly suspended some intelligence sharing with the US due to the boat strikes. But US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the CNN reporting a "fake story," and the UK's foreign secretary cited Rubio's comment when asked about the report.
HRW said major US allies "should make public any internal legal assessments as to whether the US strikes are violating international law, use their bilateral relationships to raise concerns directly with US officials, and push for individual criminal accountability for those responsible."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israeli Raid on UNRWA Compound Slammed as 'Dangerous Precedent'
"This latest action represents a blatant disregard of Israel’s obligation as a United Nations member state to protect and respect the inviolability of UN premises," said UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini.
Dec 08, 2025
United Nations officials and others strongly condemned Monday's raid by Israeli authorities on a facility run by the UN's office for Palestinian refugees in occupied East Jerusalem—an act one rights group decried as part of an ongoing effort "to undermine and ultimately eliminate" the lifesaving agency.
Israeli police and other officials forcibly entered the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) compound early Monday, pulling down a UN flag on the facility's roof and replacing it with an Israeli one. Israeli officials said the raid was ordered over unpaid taxes.
"They call it 'debt collection'—we call it erasure," Claudia Webbe, a socialist former member of British Parliament, said on social media. "Over 70,000 dead in Gaza, they now seek to kill the memory of the living. The occupation must end."
Police vehicles including motorcycles, trucks, and forklifts entered the compound, while communications were cut and furniture, computer equipment, and other property were seized from the facility, according to UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini.
"This latest action represents a blatant disregard of Israel’s obligation as a United Nations member state to protect and respect the inviolability of UN premises," Lazzarini said in a statement.
"To allow this represents a new challenge to international law, one that creates a dangerous precedent anywhere else the UN is present across the world," he added.
Secretary-General António Guterres was among the other senior UN officials who condemned Monday's raid.
“This compound remains United Nations premises and is inviolable and immune from any other form of interference,” he said.
“I urge Israel to immediately take all necessary steps to restore, preserve, and uphold the inviolability of UNRWA premises and to refrain from taking any further action with regard to UNRWA premises, in line with its obligations under the charter of the United Nations and its other obligations under international law," Guterres added.
In late 2024, Israeli lawmakers approved a ban on UNRWA in Israel over disproven allegations that some of its staffers were Hamas members who took part in the October 7, 2023 attack. Those accusations led to numerous nations suspending financial support for UNRWA, although most of the countries have since restored funding. Israel has also sought to ban UNRWA from Gaza since early 2024.
Israeli forces have killed more than 370 UNRWA staff members since October 2023 and destroyed or damaged over 300 of the agency's facilities in Gaza. Lazzarini and others have also accused Israeli forces of torturing UNRWA staffers in a bid to force false confessions of Hamas involvement.
In October, the International Court of Justice—which is currently weighing a genocide case against Israel—found that UNRWA has not been infiltrated by Hamas as claimed by Israeli leaders.
Others also condemned Monday's raid, including Human Rights Watch (HRW), which called the action part of an effort "to undermine and ultimately eliminate a United Nations agency providing vital services to millions of Palestinian refugees."
"Governments should condemn Israel's unlawful moves against UNRWA and urgently act to stop further abuses," HRW added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


