House GOP expands ESG inquiry to major asset managers

The House Judiciary Committee on Thursday sent letters to several asset managers and climate organizations over potential antitrust violations related to "decarbonization" agreements between firms as part of a larger investigative inquiry into Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) practices in the financial sector.

ESG investing is the practice of using investor capital to advance non-financial goals, among them those outlined in ESG initiatives. Conservative critics have contended that the practice may constitute a breach of an asset manager's fiduciary duties to its investors.

The Judiciary Committee in June issued a subpoena to climate group Ceres over a concern that its Climate Action 100+ initiative may have violated antitrust law…

…Writing to asset managers BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, as well as climate groups Net Zero Asset Managers initiative (NZAM) and the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio., Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Dan Bishop, R-N.C., suggested that each of the asset managers "has potentially violated U.S. antitrust law by entering into agreements to 'decarbonize' its assets under management and reduce emissions to net zero—with potentially harmful effects on Americans' freedom and economic well-being."…





https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/house-gop-expands-esg-inquiry-major-asset-managers








These investment groups need to be broken up. They need to be taken to court. If found guilty there they pay treble damages. They are harming both certain companies and investors by their actions.

 

Conservative investors are moving our money to smaller different investment groups not engaging in this like Strive. Also GOP states are pulling their investment portfolios out of those three groups. They need to be reminded of their fiduciary responsibility to us investors and our ROI above all else.

 

Lol only republicans would try to criminalize ethical investing

 

There is nothing ethical about collusion and coordination of anti competitive actions or about disregarding one’s fiduciary responsibility to their investors or not seeking the best possible return on investment of my money.

 

So long as they disclose it, I don’t see why you care. People should be allowed to invest with someone who factors in ethics as well as profits.

 

fiduciary duties are acting in good faith in the best interest of the investors. It is not necessarily to "maximize return on investment". If it were, there would be no Wall Street as the maximum return on investment would be to sell off all the assets of a company.

 

If they create specific funds advocating such a purpose, not a problem. It’s when they take general purpose passive indexes that everyone invests in and in the case of 401k type investment where some indexes from the big three are the only choices available is a different matter. Taking everyday general investors and compelling our speech and choice at the expense of my/our ROI is the issue and where anti trust comes into play. If I were to buy Black Rocks energy index which I once did, that idiot Fink spoke for my shares in those companies instead of me. When Strive came out with the identical index to Vanguard and Black Rock, I sold all my shares of them and bought Strive so that fiduciary responsibility and ROI (return on investment) were the message to the corporate board I am sending. I sold all my black rock and vanguard indexes where strive now has an identical competing one.

 

Long term results over time far outweigh a one time selling off of all the assets of a company. We aren’t talking day traders here. Fiduciary responsibility and ROI involve making the company as profitable as possible over time.

 

How much time? Beause ESG practices over 100 years probably will make you more money/save you more expenses in a century than it will in a week, a month, or even 5 years. If I own Ford stock, over 100 years I can sell a lot more units of electric vehicles than gas ones and at a higher price point and building a solar farm somewhere real sunny might very well cost less than buying that much output worth of energy from someone in Detroit by paying them with the grid credits I get from the solar farm. There are a lot of calculations that go into these things. Amazon isn't building solar farms all over god's creation because they plan to use the electricity generated by them. They want you to use the electricity and they get the grid credit. They want the grid credits to redeem in the places they actually need electricity for their warehouses and server farms where the energy costs are much higher per Mw. Trade 6 Mw of grid credit generated in rural Georgia for 6 Mw of grid consumption in San Fransisco for instance.

 

Like I said. If people want to invest in DEI or ESG there can be social funds for the former and green funds for the latter. That though is not the purpose of passive not actively managed funds. People like me who know what’s going on do pull all our money out of such fake passives and invest in actual ones. When we find woke management we try to make them go broke.

 

SNIP
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan and two other House Republicans fired off letters to financial industry giants including BlackRock Inc., Vanguard Group Inc., and State Street, contending that their efforts to combat climate change could violate US antitrust law.

The lawmakers warned in the letters on Thursday that agreements to decarbonize their assets “and reduce emissions to zero” could have “potentially harmful effects on Americans’ freedom and economic well-being.”

Companies that follow environmental, social and governance investing, or ESG, principles have come under increasing attack from Republicans on Capitol Hill as well as candidates seeking the GOP presidential nomination.
ENDSNIP

https://www.yahoo.com/news/house-republicans-probe-blackrock-vanguard-013806115.html

More MAGA horseshit....

Can somebody explain to me how a private company legally disclosing and investing based on strategies that are specifically good for the environment is a reason for any MAGA interest?? Other than their complete disinterest in the concept of environment, of course....

Fortunately, it sounds like from the article, there will be pretty smart people there to answer/deflect from the guaranteed stupid questions and send the laser pointer crew off to stop some other imaginary problem in this country.

18 months until we can put adults back in charge in the House.

 

Sure, you are asking the wrong question. A company can invest any way it wishes. It can have as many woke ideologies as it wishes. The problems occur when these firms apply financial pressure to get their customers to join in the ideology. It isn't illegal. It is un-american and destructive of freedom, however.

 

Wasn't my question, but I'm glad you agree the MAGA is fishing here...

If you have proof that any of these firms isn't disclosing their investment policies and strategies or "applying financial pressure", then that could be a problem.

You don't, and I KNOW the GOP clown show doesn't. I'm sure they'll find some clueless housefrau who will make that claim, but I'm equally sure the companies will present evidence that the policies are disclosed, even if the dolts don't fully (remotely) understand them.

And if people want to leave those companies based on that, then Vaya Con Dios....

 

Sounds like a variation of ridiculous cap and trade pollution credits…Not something a passive investment fund manager should be involved with. An actively managed green or social fund, sure totally acceptable for those.

 

You're the expert. I wouldn't dream of correcting you.

 

This gave me a good hearty chuckle!!!

They sure know what their base is "mouth watering" for.......

 

What customers have been forced to invest in these firms?

 

None. You don't understand what these firms do or what I am talking about. The investment is in the other direction.

 

You don't seem to understand. You said ESG is applying financial pressure to get customers to join an ideology. Vanguards website specifically lists which investments funds are geared towards ESG. They also have non ESG funds. So what are republicans complaining about.

 

No I said Black Rock is applying financial pressure. I didn't even use the term ESG.

 

No. You said these financial firms. That includes Vanguard.

I still haven't seen an example of a financial firm applying pressure to become woke.

 

Let it go. You are just being argumentative.

 

So you have no basis for any customer being forced to join an ideology and are content with a baseless investigation. Should have said that in the beginning.

 

That has proven to be a highly successful posting strategy....

 

The usual stuff they complain about.