December, 15 2022, 01:32pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Ginny Cleaveland, Deputy Press Secretary, Fossil-Free Finance, Sierra Club, ginny.cleaveland@sierraclub.
Major Asset Managers Blackrock, State Street Testify on Climate at Texas Hearing
Sierra Club calls hearing ‘political theater of fossil fuel interests.'
WASHINGTON
Executives from two of the world's biggest asset managers -- BlackRock and State Street -- as well as proxy advisory firm ISS appeared today before a state senate committee in Marshall, Texas, to testify on their position on climate in the face of Republican backlash against environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies.
Notably missing from the hearing was the world's second largest asset manager Vanguard, after the Financial Times reported on Wednesday that the company was no longer required to attend the hearing due to recently leaving the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative. At that time, Sierra Club called out the company for greenwashing and said the move placed the asset manager even further behind its peers.
At the hearing, executives were asked to address their role in initiatives like CA100+, their participation in federal rulemaking on ESG standards, the role of climate risk in investment decisions, and whether their ESG policies may impact the state's public pensions. (A recent study revealed that failing to consider ESG factors is likely more costly, with a Texas anti-ESG law from 2021 costing taxpayers more than $500 million in the 8 months after it was passed.)
In response to the hearing, Jessye Waxman, Senior Campaign Representative in the Sierra Club's Fossil-Free Finance campaign, issued the following statements:
"In its testimony at a Texas Senate hearing, BlackRock's representative acknowledged climate risk is a material financial risk, but failed to state clearly that managing and mitigating said risk is an essential part of its fiduciary duty as a long-term investor. Rather than standing up for what's best for its clients and the entire economy, BlackRock's testimony kowtowed to politically-motivated, fossil fuel interests.
By contrast, State Street's representative testified it understands climate risk is a material financial risk, and part of putting its clients' financial interests first means addressing climate risk. State Street still has a long way to go in translating that conviction into its investment management and stewardship practices, but today, the company stood up to the political theater of fossil fuel interests.
In its testimony, a representative from ISS took the stance that the guidance in its benchmark policy is a reflection of the market, not activist interests. Texas Republicans would be wise to remember that the marketplace is increasingly moving in the direction of holding companies accountable on climate risk."
BACKGROUND
Over the past several months, media outlets, alongside major advocacy groups like the Sierra Club, have begun drawing attention to how Republicans are weaponizing public office against climate action. In an op-ed published in December 2022 in Sierra Magazine, Sierra Club Fossil-Free Finance Campaign Director Ben Cushing called the right-wing attack on sustainable finance the latest form of climate denial.
BlackRock recently disclosed that two-thirds of its largest clients, collectively representing $3.3 trillion in assets under management, have committed to support the energy transition through investments in their portfolios. This is almost 1,000 times the overall amount pulled from the asset manager so far by Republican-led states including Louisiana, West Virginia, and Texas.
Recent polling suggests the GOP's attempts to curb sustainable investing do not resonate with its base, with Republican registered voters opposing measures to restrict investor choice more than Democrats.
The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our 3.8 million members and supporters to defend everyone's right to a healthy world.
(415) 977-5500LATEST NEWS
'A Travesty': Clarence Thomas Refuses to Recuse in Case That Could Benefit Billionaire Benefactor
"Crow's interest in these cases is unambiguous, as is the depth of Thomas' relationship with his patron," said the head of the Revolving Door Project.
Oct 02, 2023
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday recused himself from a decision—but the rare move from the embattled right-winger came as he weighed in on another case involving his billionaire benefactor, which outraged one watchdog group.
The high court declined to hear Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) v. City of New York, New York, a landlord-backed constitutional challenge to the massive city's longtime rent stabilization policies for about a million apartments.
"It is a travesty that Clarence Thomas failed to recuse himself in yet another case from which his right-wing donors could directly benefit," said Revolving Door Project executive director Jeff Hauser in a statement. "Justice Thomas' billionaire benefactor Harlan Crow has a vested interest in weakening rent control laws across the country to buttress his real estate empire's profits."
The Supreme Court in recent months has faced calls for new ethics rules, a U.S. Department of Justice probe, and Thomas' resignation in response to revelations about his relationship with Crow and other rich GOP donors. In addition to treating Thomas to luxury vacations, Crow bought his mother's house and contributed to the private school tuition for a great-nephew he raised.
"Justice Thomas' billionaire benefactor Harlan Crow has a vested interest in weakening rent control laws across the country to buttress his real estate empire's profits."
"Crow's industry lobbyist of choice, the National Multifamily Housing Council, filed an amicus brief urging the 2nd Circuit to take up the challenge to New York City's rent control law in 2021," Hauser noted. "While the NMHC did not file a brief for the case before the Supreme Court, there should be little doubt that Thomas and his clerks are aware of NMHC's, and therefore Crow's, interest in the case."
As The New York Timesreported Monday, "Other petitions asking the Supreme Court to rule on aspects of the regulations are pending, and the justices may yet agree to consider one or more of those cases."
Given that, "the threat from the Thomas-Crow relationship remains imminent," Hauser stressed. "We call on Thomas to immediately recuse himself from two additional challenges to New York City's rent control law relisted for the October 6th conference by the court: 74 Pinehurst LLC v. New York (22-1130) and 335-7 LLC v. City of New York. Crow's interest in these cases is unambiguous, as is the depth of Thomas' relationship with his patron Crow."
The recusal demand comes after the Revolving Door Project in July released a report on Crow's ties to the National Multifamily Housing Council, including that—as the group highlighted Monday—NMHC Chair Ken Valach is CEO of three subsidiaries of his company Crow Holdings.
Thomas and other members of the court have also recently faced calls to recuse themselves from other cases due to similar conflicts. For example, he and fellow right-wing Justice Samuel Alito are under pressure to not be involved in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America, which they are set to hear arguments for on Tuesday.
As Common Dreamsreported earlier Monday, in response to concerns about that case, Stand Up America's Brett Edkins said that "Justices Thomas and Alito are shamelessly thumbing their noses at judicial ethics, living the high life on GOP billionaires' dime. While they bask in luxury, the court's conservative supermajority is ruthlessly stacking the deck in favor of the wealthy and powerful, while chipping away at the freedoms of everyday Americans."
Although Thomas' involvement in the court's decision to not hear the New York rent stabilization case was cause for concern, advocates in the city still cautiously welcomed the outcome—while recognizing the threats to the protections for renters loom.
"It's definitely positive news that CHIP was denied and we hope that the same will happen in the other two cases," Ed Josephson of the Legal Aid Society, co-counsel for tenant groups who joined all of the related suits, toldCity Limits.
"I think I'm optimistic that the other petitions will be denied," he said, "because all of them are contrary to long-standing precedent."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Largest Healthcare Worker Strike in US History Set to Kick Off on Oct. 4
"We're burning ourselves out trying to do the jobs of two or three people, and our patients suffer when they can't get the care they need due to Kaiser's short-staffing," said one Kaiser Permanente worker.
Oct 02, 2023
In what's expected to be the largest-ever U.S. healthcare worker strike, more than 75,000 Kaiser Permanente employees in six states and Washington, D.C. are set to stop working for three days starting Wednesday to protest what they say are unfair working conditions and unsafe staffing levels at hundreds of hospitals and clinics across the country.
The Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions—which represents 85,000 KP workers in eight unions—began its national bargaining process in April in anticipation of worker contracts expiring at the end of September. Union members are seeking across-the-board raises of between 5.75%-6.5%; KP is offering 3%. Additionally, workers want protections against subcontracting and outsourcing, better performance-sharing bonuses, an improved retiree medical plan, and unionization rights for employees of nonunion entities acquired by the KP.
In a 2022 survey of 33,000 KP employees, two-thirds of respondents said they've seen patient care delayed or denied due to short staffing during the Covid-19 pandemic.
"Kaiser executives are refusing to listen to us and are bargaining in bad faith over the solutions we need to end the Kaiser short-staffing crisis," said Jessica Cruz, a licensed vocational nurse at Kaiser Los Angeles Medical Center. "I see my patients' frustrations when I have to rush them and hurry on to my next patient."
"That's not the care I want to give," Cruz added. "We're burning ourselves out trying to do the jobs of two or three people, and our patients suffer when they can't get the care they need due to Kaiser's short-staffing."
Based in Oakland, California, KP—which operates 39 hospitals and more than 700 medical offices staffed by over 300,000 workers and serving nearly 13 million patients—is the nation's largest nonprofit healthcare provider.
According to a statement from the coalition:
Kaiser has reported $3 billion in profits in just the first six months of this year. Despite being a nonprofit organization—which means it pays no income taxes on its earnings and extremely limited property taxes—Kaiser has reported more than $24 billion in profit over the last five years. Kaiser's CEO was compensated more than $16 million in 2021, and 49 executives at Kaiser are compensated more than $1 million annually. Kaiser Permanente has investments of $113 billion in the U.S. and abroad, including in fossil fuels, casinos, for-profit prisons, alcohol companies, military weapons, and more.
Workers in California, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. will take part in the strike.
KP communications manager Hilary Costa toldHealthcare Dive Monday that "the best place to reach an agreement is at the bargaining table. We will ask our employees to reject any call to walk away from their jobs."
However, 30-year KP employee Maria Jostes told the outlet that while "there used to be this real collaborative problem-solving approach," over the past five or six years there's been "a culture shift from folks at the very top."
The imminent Kaiser strike comes amid a surge in U.S. labor organizing and action, including the expanding United Auto Workers strike and the Hollywood writers' strike, which ended last week with union members now voting on a tentative three-year contract.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Global Campaigners Call On Norway to Ditch Deep-Sea Mining Plan
"By embarking on mining in the deep sea without sufficient knowledge, we risk destroying unique nature, eradicating vulnerable species, and disrupting the world's largest carbon sink," said one advocate.
Oct 02, 2023
Calling on Norway to "live up to the responsibilities" it has as co-chair of an international panel on sustainable oceans, more than 30 climate and conservation organizations on Monday delivered a letter to nearly two dozen Norwegian embassies on all continents, intensifying global outcry over plans for deep-seabed mining in the Arctic.
The groups, including Greenpeace, Sustainable Ocean Alliance, and the Blue Climate Initiative, called on officials to abandon plans to open 281,000 square kilometers—an area nearly the size of the United Kingdom—to deep-sea mining, saying the world currently lacks "the robust, comprehensive, and credible scientific knowledge to allow for reliable assessment of impacts of deep-sea minerals extraction, including impacts on the planet's life-support systems and human rights."
Therefore, they said, the plan violates Norway's "ambition to act according to a knowledge-based and precautionary approach."
"By embarking on mining in the deep sea without sufficient knowledge, we risk destroying unique nature, eradicating vulnerable species, and disrupting the world's largest carbon sink," said Sofia Tsenikli, global campaign lead for the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition. "At a time when humanity is racing against the clock to tackle both the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis, we should protect nature—not destroy it."
"European countries like France, Germany and Spain have taken a precautionary position, advocating a precautionary pause, a moratorium or a ban on deep-sea mining."
Mining companies have lobbied for deep-sea mining, claiming it is necessary to source cobalt and copper, but advocates have noted that the minerals are already found elsewhere on the planet and have warned that the mining process could disturb the habitat of thousands of marine species.
The advocates behind Monday's letter, which was delivered on the day Norway's parliament began its autumn session, noted that the country's co-chair on the High-Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy—Palau—is among a growing number of governments that have urged caution regarding deep-sea mining.
"European countries like France, Germany and Spain have taken a precautionary position, advocating a precautionary pause, a moratorium or a ban on deep-sea mining," wrote the groups. "Scientists, Indigenous groups, fisheries and seafood organizations, civil society organizations, and major businesses including Storebrand, BMW, and Google are all calling for a stop to deep-sea mining. The European Investment Bank has excluded deep-sea mining from its investments as it is deemed 'unacceptable in climate and environmental terms,' and the European Parliament has called for a moratorium multiple times."
The international coalition further called on Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre to "step back from the brink of introducing this destructive industry and to support a global moratorium on deep sea mining."
The letter was sent a week after Greenpeace activists confronted Støre and other Norwegian Labour Party politicians with a 45-foot long octopus model that displayed a banner reading, "Don't destroy my home."
Greenpeace campaigners in Denmark shared on social media that on Monday, the letter was delivered by an activist dressed as a jellyfish.
"Norway opening for deep-sea mining while chairing the international Ocean panel, and committing to 100% sustainable use of its waters, is hypocrisy and risks destroying both ecosystems in the vulnerable Arctic and Norway's reputation internationally," said Louisa Casson, senior campaigner for the group's Stop Deep-Sea Mining campaign. "If Norway decides to proceed with their plans, they must give up their seat in the Ocean panel to a state that delivers on ocean protection."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
Independent, nonprofit journalism needs your help.
Please Pitch In
Today!
Today!