

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Arielle Swernoff, arielle@stopthemoneypipeline.com
Resolutions a “litmus test” for investors
This coming Tuesday, April 25, shareholders at Citi, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America, the second, third, and fourth largest global funders of fossil fuels, respectively, will vote on climate and Indigenous rights resolutions at their annual shareholder meetings. These three banks have provided over $789 billion in financing to fossil fuel companies since 2016.
Background on the resolutions
Shareholders at Citi, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America will be voting on four resolutions related to climate and Indigenous rights. Those resolutions include:
· Fossil Fuel Phase Out: Calls on banks to adopt a time-bound phase-out of financing for projects and companies engaged in fossil fuel expansion. Filed at Citigroup, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo. A version of this resolution was filed last year at the same companies, and received 12.8% support at Citi and 11% support at Bank of America and Wells Fargo.
· Indigenous Rights Report: Filed at Citigroup, this resolution urges the company to issue a report on the efficacy of their current practices in ensuring their financing respects internationally-recognized standards for respecting Indigenous rights. A version of this resolution was filed last year at Citi and Wells Fargo, where it received 34% and 26%, respectively.
· Absolute Emissions Targets: Filed by New York City and New York State at Bank of America, these resolutions call on the banks to set absolute emission reduction targets. Banks currently use Intensity-based targets, which allow them to increase the amount of greenhouse gas emissions financed so long as the emissions per dollar or per unit goes down; absolute targets require companies to decrease emissions funded overall.
· 2030 Transition Plan: Filed at Bank of America and Wells Fargo, these resolutions urge the respective banks to publish a comprehensive plan detailing how they will meet their 2030 climate targets.
Significance of the Results
Shareholder voting is not like a Presidential election; the outcomes and impacts of the vote carry different weight. In the US the results of shareholder votes are non-binding. Resolutions that receive more than 50% of the vote are not automatically adopted, nor are those which fail to receive a majority vote considered a failure. Votes represent capital and power. Votes in support of climate resolutions at Citi, Bank of America and Wells Fargo last year, which received 11-13% support, represent tens of billions of dollars in shareholder equity.
It’s also worth noting that the largest bank shareholders are other Wall Street institutions and other banks. For example, asset managers Vanguard, Blackrock, and State Street, and banks JP Morgan Chase and Morgan Stanley, hold over 24% of shares at Citi. If these companies are trying to block accountability by shareholders at their own annual general meetings, they are hardly going to support similar resolutions at Citi’s.
Grassroots Action
On April 5, Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) – now the world’s #1 fossil fuel financing bank of 2022 – harassed and segregated Black and Indigenous land defenders at its AGM in Saskatoon, and dodged accountability for its financing of toxic fossil fuel projects including the Coastal GasLink fracked gas pipeline through unceded Wet’suwet’en Hereditary territory without consent from the rightful titleholders.
Citi, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs are expected to face intense grassroots protest over their fossil fuel financing and violations of Indigenous rights in the lead up to the AGMs. Groups in New York City, Charlotte, San Francisco and Dallas have announced their intention to shut down the headquarters of the three banks leading up to the AGM.
“Hiding behind “green” lingo and playing at hapless, innocent lender of billions to the fossil fuel industry is the kind of BS that got us to full-on climate crisis. Our actions have consequences. Funding the destruction of what remains is unconscionable. Indigenous peoples are on frontlines all over the earth, bringing the voice of nature to those who have forgotten and threatening big oil profit margins.” said Tara Houska, Giniw Collective. “Respect Indigenous rights, respect our only home. For our children and yours.”
“It’s despicable, in this time of extreme flooding, droughts, and fires, that the likes of Citibank continue to be the top financiers of fossil fuels in the world,” said Amy Gray, Senior Climate Finance Strategist with Stand.earth, and coordinator of the Climate Safe Pensions Network. “They clearly don’t care about communities, particularly Black and Indigenous communities facing the brunt of climate chaos. While bank executives greenwash and lie about supporting coal, oil and gas companies transitioning, big oil is raking in record profits and increasing pollution. It's time for shareholders, especially public pension funds, to wield voting power for Indigenous sovereignty and climate action."
"There is no more time for banks to delay addressing the urgent demands of frontline communities and climate science,” said Ernesto Archila, Strategy and Engagement Manager at the Rainforest Action Network. “This year's crop of resolutions demonstrate that a critical mass of investors are demanding clear limits and reporting on fossil fuel financing and indigenous rights. These responsible investors are not fooled by the continuous greenwashing and evasion we have seen from the banks, to the tune of $5.5 trillion in financing for fossil fuels since the Paris Agreement was signed."
“As communities of color are literally fighting for our lives on the frontlines of the climate crisis, U.S banks continue funding the fossil fuel industry. These banks target communities, like mine, treating us as collateral damage to corporate profiteering. By funding the fossil fuel industry these banks are also funding environmental racism and climate chaos. Our communities don’t have clean air or drinkable water. Our children have asthma and eczema. Our elders are dying of cancer and other health issues caused by methane and other pollutants being emitted. Enough is enough.” Said Roishetta Ozane, founder, director and CEO of The Vessel Project of Louisiana and Gulf Fossil Finance Coordinator for Texas Campaign for the Environment.
“Wall Street banks continue to sacrifice Black and Indigenous communities for profit. At some point the people who lead these banks will have to decide what is more important: their children’s future & the future of our planet, or another dollar in their pocket. History will judge us all by the actions we take today,” said Michael Esealuka, organizer with Healthy Gulf and True Transition
“Indigenous communities have bore the brunt of energy colonization. From the exploitation of traditional homelands, forced removal, pollution, the exploitation of resources, forced labor and the crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous peoples, financial are not only complicit in these human and environmental rights abuses, but are directly financing it,” said Matt Remle (Lakota), co-founder of Mazaska Talks. “Financial institutions can, and must, do better.”
“Banks’ financing decisions have a significant outcome on whether the world will meet its climate goals. It is imperative for banks to adopt science-based policies that translate to real-world emissions reductions. They cannot hide behind accounting tricks to shield themselves and their shareholders from climate-related financial risks,” said Jessye Waxman, Senior Campaign Representative at the Sierra Club. “Prudent investors recognize the threats climate change poses to our economy and to their investments, and will support these resolutions that help shield banks from future risk.”
“As shareholders consider resolutions on climate and Indigenous rights, we’re organizing grassroots protests at Citi, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo in order to give them a glimpse into the destruction people are experiencing because of climate chaos,” said Alice Hu, Lead Climate Campaigner at New York Communities for Change. “Banks like Citi like to say verbally that they are funding the energy transition, but in reality it’s business as usual: pumping money into the fossil fuels driving worsening extreme weather, droughts, and food shortages that hit working class communities of color like ours the worst.”
The Stop the Money Pipeline coalition is over 160 organizations strong holding the financial backers of climate chaos accountable.
"Children were murdered in the first days of Trump’s illegal, pointless war that has wreaked havoc across the world," said Rep. Yassamin Ansari.
The House Democrat who introduced articles of impeachment against Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth earlier this year revived her call for his removal on Wednesday following news that top US military commanders bypassed warnings about the reliability of their targeting information before authorizing the bombing of an Iranian school, killing more than 150 people—mostly young children.
"This is unconscionable," Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), one of two Iranian Americans in Congress, wrote on social media in response to CNN's reporting on the US commanders' catastrophic decision. "Children were murdered in the first days of [President Donald] Trump’s illegal, pointless war that has wreaked havoc across the world. It is an abomination. It is a war crime. And it is why I’ve introduced articles of impeachment against Pete Hegseth."
Ansari urged her colleagues to support the Hegseth impeachment articles, which state that the Pentagon chief "has authorized, condoned, or failed to prevent the use of military force in a manner inconsistent with the law of armed conflict" and "demonstrated a willful disregard for the Constitution," among other alleged violations.
Currently, just 16 House Democrats are listed as co-sponsors of Ansari's impeachment articles against Hegseth, who dismantled the Pentagon's civilian harm mitigation programs before the Trump administration attacked Iran in late February. According to ProPublica, "Hegseth made deep cuts to the Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response programs and slashed CHMR staff at military commands by more than 90%."
"That included removing civilian harm specialists from target development strike teams and reducing the team of 10 at Central Command to only one full-time staffer," the outlet added.
CNN reported on Tuesday that senior US military commanders ignored warnings that intelligence pertaining to possible targets in Iran "was severely out of date and approved some strikes"—including the bombing of Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Minab, an attack that human rights groups say should be investigated as a war crime.
Months later, the Pentagon has not publicly released the findings of its investigation into the strike, and Trump recently said he doesn't believe the US was responsible for the Minab school attack, despite now-abundant evidence to the contrary. The attack is seen as one of the worst massacres of civilians in recent US military history.
Last week, The Associated Press reported that when news of the school bombing emerged on the first day of the US-Israeli assault on Iran, "the US military knew they had conducted strikes in the vicinity—though it took the military time to verify the Iranian claims that a school was struck and begin a formal investigation."
"One former Pentagon official, similarly speaking on condition of anonymity, said the bombing came as a natural result of changes made by the Trump administration to reduce staff to mitigate civilian harm and Hegseth’s emphasis on lethality," the outlet noted. "When Hegseth took charge, he slashed the size of an office called the Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, created at the direction of Congress in late 2022. That stopped the office’s work on updating 'no-strike lists,' which are lists of protected sites such as hospitals, schools, churches, and mosques, that the Pentagon keeps."
"These deals produce harm reliably enough that researchers can now count it."
Investigative journalist Ronan Farrow on Tuesday published a video on social media where he examines how private equity firms have been buying up hospitals throughout the US and saddling them with enormous debt burdens.
At the start of the video, Farrow notes that private equity firms such as The Carlyle Group, Cerberus, and Pinta have acquired hundreds of hospitals and nursing homes over the last 20 years.
"The pitch is generally: Infuse capital, cut inefficiency, and exit in five to seven years," Farrow explains. "And the deals work like this: A private equity firm puts some of its own money and borrows the rest. Typically, it'll borrow more than 70% of the purchase price."
"The twist is that debt doesn't sit on the firm's books," Farrow continues. "It gets placed on the facility itself, so the hospital or nursing home now carries the debt and the interest on it."
Studies now present a striking picture of what happens when private equity firms acquire hospitals and nursing homes: predictable increases in harm and deaths. One landmark study shows: patient deaths up about 11% after such acquisitions. pic.twitter.com/N6yfXJQIwW
— Ronan Farrow (@RonanFarrow) July 7, 2026
Farrow then cites research published by The Review of Financial Studies in 2023, which found healthcare facilities saw their interest payments more than triple after being acquired by private equity firms.
"In many cases," Farrow says, "private equity firms sold the nursing home's building shortly after acquiring it, returning the proceeds to investors, and then charging the facility rent on the building it used to own."
In addition to added debt burdens placed on hospitals and nursing homes, Farrow adds, the 2023 study found that private equity firms also cut staff hours after acquiring facilities, which has hurt patient care.
"The authors... found that private equity ownership can increase patient mortality by up to 11%," he says. "Over the study period, that translated to more than 20,000 lives lost."
Farrow then points to a 2025 study that found salaries of emergency room workers fall by an average of 18% in hospitals acquired by private equity firms, while hospital-acquired infections and complications rose by 25%.
Farrow concedes that not all private-equity deals turn out poorly and that some of the facilities are already in distress before being acquired.
However, he warns that "these deals produce harm reliably enough that researchers can now count it," adding that "so far, the industry has moved faster than the rules."
Research published Monday by the Private Equity Stakeholder Project (PESP) warned that private equity firms have been increasingly relying on nonprofit joint ventures to expand their reach throughout the US healthcare industry and "siphon profits from health systems and critical healthcare infrastructure."
"Private equity's healthcare playbook is evolving,” said Jim Baker, executive director of PESP. “Our research documents how private equity has increasingly relied on joint ventures with nonprofits to expand its presence in healthcare. These arrangements have received far less attention than traditional private equity buyouts, even as they become more common across hospitals and other healthcare sectors."
The US president, who launched the illegal and costly war earlier this year, attacked Iranian leaders as "scum" and "sick people."
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday said the interim ceasefire agreement designed to provide space for a lasting peace agreement with Iran was "over," remarks that came just hours after the American military launched a new wave of airstrikes against Iran.
Speaking alongside NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in Ankara, Türkiye, Trump attacked Iranian leaders as "scum" and "sick people" and dismissed the idea of returning to negotiations as "a waste of time."
"To me, I think it's over," said the US president, referring to the temporary ceasefire established under the memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed last month. "I don't want to deal with them."
Trump's comments, which sent oil prices surging and intensified fears of a resumption of deadly all-out war in the Middle East, came after the US Central Command launched what it characterized as "powerful strikes against Iran to impose heavy costs for targeting and attacking commercial shipping" in the Strait of Hormuz.
Earlier on Tuesday, the Trump administration revoked a waiver allowing Iran to export its oil—a key component of the faltering MOU, which Iran and the US signed less than a month ago. Iran's Foreign Ministry decried the Trump administration's move as a violation of the MOU and "yet another indication of the US administration’s bad faith, inconsistency, and unreliability," according to a statement published by Iran's Fars News Agency.
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said Wednesday that it hit more than 80 US military targets in the Middle East in response to the Trump administration's latest strikes.
Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, warned in a statement late Tuesday that "it is critical that Iran and the US recommit to the terms of the MOU and get negotiations back on track before it is too late."
"The US has consistently pushed the boundaries of the agreement and put it on uncertain footing, from the failure to rein in Israel’s actions in Lebanon to the establishment of the ‘alternative corridor’ in the Strait outside of Iranian purview," said Abdi. "Iran believes this is an attempt to relitigate the MOU that it says recognized Iran’s authority to manage the waterway. So long as Iran perceives the US as seeking to weaken its position and eventually return to war, negotiations are likely to take a back seat to more fighting."
"As disastrous as this war has been for American interests thus far, President Trump appeared to have found an off-ramp before it triggered uncontrollable economic fallout or escalated to a ground war that could become a generational quagmire," Abdi added. "Now, after having narrowly avoided a worst-case scenario, the president risks being pulled back in and returning us to an unwinnable war."