House committee report finds ESG-focused ‘climate cartel’ colluding, violating antitrust laws

The House Judiciary Committee released a report Tuesday alleging a “climate cartel” consisting of left-wing environmental activists and major financial institutions has colluded to force U.S. companies to adopt anti-fossil fuel policies, which in turn has harmed U.S. consumers.

The interim report comes as a result of a two-year investigation by House Judiciary Republicans into whether companies have “woke up” to antitrust behavior.

“Today’s report shows clear violations of antitrust laws among the companies cited. This demonstrates both an agreement and a restraint of production – two standards necessary to establish antitrust law,” said Rep. Harriet Hageman, D-Wyo. Wyo., member of the Judiciary Committee. Only News.

An interim report entitled ‘Climate control: exposing decarbonization collusion in environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing“is based on millions of pages of documents, some of which were obtained through subpoenas, as well as interviews or depositions with “key players in the climate cartel.”

According to the report, Climate Action 100+, an investor group of over 700 investors and 170 companies, “abuses and threatens asset managers by defending their climate in order to force them to join the climate cartel and obey.” The aim was to get companies to cut greenhouse gas emissions in line with the 2015 Paris Agreement, which the report says forces companies to cut production and raise prices for consumers.

“What is equally troubling is that the purpose of this collusion is to ultimately harm both consumers and shareholders. Target industries include fossil fuels, aviation and agriculture, which are crucial to our existence. In essence, this collusion limits our ability to heat our homes, drive cars, grow food, raise cattle, and travel freely. More expensive energy, travel and food mean a lower standard of living for Americans,” Hageman said.

As an example of alleged bullying and collusion, the report shows how in 2019, Blackrock, which has $8.7 trillion in assets under management, and Vanguard, which has $8.2 trillion in assets under management, voted against all shareholder proposals supported by the Climate Action 100+ program .

As a result of this vote, Ceres, an anti-fossil fuel nonprofit that works to “accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more equitable and sustainable economy… with powerful networks of investors and companies”, launched a campaign to put pressure on several leading world to asset managers to align their corporate commitments with the value of climate action. This would put pressure on “recalcitrant companies,” according to the report.

The California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), which oversees $485.8 billion in investments supporting the state’s retirement system, helped found and continues to help lead the Climate Action 100+ initiative. The report accuses CalPERS of using its portfolio to advance a left-wing political agenda.

Among the actions documented in the report are ongoing efforts by CalPERS since 2016 to force ExxonMobil to reduce its carbon footprint, which would actually require it to reduce the amount of oil and gas it produces. Recently, CalPERS, acting as an activist shareholder, campaigned for a vote against Exxon’s board in retaliation for the company filing a lawsuit against activist groups that repeatedly pushed shareholder proposals related to climate change. The campaign ultimately did not reach the board.

– said the spokesman for Climate Action 100+ Only News that the report misrepresents the group’s activities and that investors engaging in “climate change investor management” are performing a service to their clients and beneficiaries.

“Climate risk is a significant financial risk. Institutional investors will be well-served by taking actions that recognize these risks and the resulting investment opportunities. If these risks are not controlled, they will threaten investors’ long-term ability to retain value and generate consistent returns for beneficiaries,” said a Climate Action 100+ spokesman.

A CalPERS spokesman also said climate change poses one of the biggest financial threats to long-term investors. “We are proud to participate in initiatives such as Climate Action 100+, which help lead conversations with companies on how to improve shareholder value. This is not collusion; this is cooperation. “Every vote we cast and every engagement decision we make is guided by one North Star: what is best for the long-term bottom line for California officials,” a CalPERS spokesperson said.

Ceres did not respond to requests for comment on the report.

The report noted that shortly after the Judiciary Committee launched an investigation into what the report calls “anticompetitive collusion,” Blackrock, State Street and JP Morgan Asset Management withdrew nearly $14 trillion of total assets under management from Climate Action 100+. Since then, according to the report, dozens of other members have left the group.

“Despite the recent defection of many of its members, including the largest asset managers, Climate Action 100+ remains a powerful force and an ongoing threat to the well-being of American consumers,” the report states.

A spokesman for Climate Action 100+ disputed this characterization and said that 45 asset owners had reaffirmed their support for the group in recent weeks. The spokesperson also said those who left said they remained committed to climate action.

The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Government, Regulatory Reform and Antitrust will hold a hearing on Wednesday to examine whether current antitrust laws are sufficient to stop anticompetitive collusion used to promote ESG goals in the investment industry. Representatives from CalPERS and Ceres are scheduled to testify.

While the groups surveyed argue that climate change poses risks and that addressing those risks is a wise investment, Hageman said these goals are ultimately harmful to consumers.

“The concept of net zero is a fantasy of radical climate fanatics and government bureaucrats who want to control our lives. Not only will the world continue to need fossil fuels for future generations, but the demand will increase. The sooner we expose and stop the evil intentions of ESG policies, the sooner we can return to energy independence, lower inflation and affordable living,” Hageman said.