PDA

View Full Version : Chase Begins Stampede Out Of Climate Action 100 Group



Kathianne
02-17-2024, 09:18 AM
I did not know this was coming. Seems GOP is being given some credit for it, threatening to investigate investments, much like Democrats did originally:

https://hotair.com/tree-hugging-sister/2024/02/16/savor-john-kerrys-bitter-tears-trillions-in-assets-backing-out-of-un-backed-climate-action-100-group-n3783076


Savor John Kerry's Bitter Tears: Trillions in Assets Backing Out of UN-Backed Climate Action 100+ GroupBEEGE WELBORN 8:00 PM | February 16, 2024



Paul Morigi/AP Images for JPMorgan Chase
WHOA, DAWG.


That sound you hear is the beginning of the implosion of the Climate Action 100 group, a cabal of some of the largest investment firms on Earth. They are dedicated to enforcing and monitoring the companies they invest in to force them to focus on and execute strategies to achieve the climate cult's greenhouse gas goals. In other words, if you don't follow the Green initiative dictates for carbon reduction, etc you don't receive your financing from these people.


Climate Action 100+ was launched in December 2017 at the One Planet Summit, hosted by the French government. Since then it has grown into the largest ever investor engagement initiative on climate change.


...Climate Action 100+ is an investor initiative to ensure the world’s largest corporate greenhouse gas emitters take necessary action on climate change.










I got a screenshot of their home page because the above numbers are going to have to be adjusted as of yesterday. In a further sign that the nuts of NetZero are being cracked and discarded, there was some pretty stunning news about the 900-pound, ESG-happy investment thugs who populate this club.


A bunch of them quit, one after the other, and man. Did they take a buttload of money with them when they walked out.


The first pair of shoes out the door belonged to Jamie Dimon's JP Morgan. They're taking $3T+ with them as they exit, saying they can handle the business of global warming solutions just fine on their own, thank you.


JPMorgan Asset Management (JPMAM) has withdrawn from Climate Action 100+, a climate-focused investor network focused on engaging with companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and implement climate transition plans.


According to a statement from a JPMAM spokesperson, the firm’s decision follows the development of its internal engagement capabilities, allowing the company to act on its own.


The spokesperson said:


“J.P. Morgan Asset Management (JPMAM) is not renewing its membership in Climate Action 100+in recognition of the significant investment it has made in its investment stewardship team and engagement capabilities, as well as the development of its own climate risk engagement framework over the past couple of years.”


It's also a pretty strategic move on their part, not to mention a sign that the actions of Republican state attorneys general and governors, plus the GOP congress, are starting to pay big dividends. These purely ESG/climate change fund groups make big targets. While they enjoyed lording it over their captive clients while they could, Dimon and his buddies want no part of being under any more government scrutiny than necessary. So they are pulling chocks.


...Launched in 2017, Climate Action 100+ is an investor initiative that has targeted the world’s largest corporate greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters to promote taking necessary action on climate change, and align their business strategies with net zero in order to help limit average global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The network has grown to include more than 700 investors representing more than $68 trillion in assets.


The group, however, has also become a key target for anti-ESG politicians, and fueling claims that its members are “boycotting” energy companies. Last year, a group of U.S. Republican state attorneys general sent a letter to large asset managers warning that participation in groups such as CA100+ raised concerns about the investors’ adherence to fiduciary duties and compliance with anti-trust rules.


State officials who were all part of the action had a few measured, but kind words for JP Morgan.


...Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton applauded the news, saying financial companies had undertaken an "unlawful" campaign to force environmental, social and corporate governance on customers.


"I'm pleased JPMorgan has exited the Climate Action 100+," Paxton said on X, the former Twitter. "This is a critical step toward putting customers' financial well-being first."


Those words, I'm sure, gave the next company who was already behind JP Morgan as they went out the door a warm fuzzy that, climate cultists aside, this was the right decision for the business.


... A second large asset manager, State Street Global Advisors, with $3.7 trillion, also dropped out, saying Climate Action's approach "will not be consistent with our independent approach to proxy voting and portfolio company engagement," according to a statement.


You'll never guess who "scaled back" next - only the ESG arch-villain themselves.


Yeah. Blackrock.




Larry "Have to Force Behavioral Changes" Fink's company. THIS execrable narcissist.




Blackrock pulled their U.S. division out, leaving a smaller European cohort in place.


Bond manager PIMCO withdrew from Climate Action 100+ first thing this afternoon. It's kinda looking like a stampede for the corral door, huh?


The Florida Agriculture Commissioner was taking a victory lap today. He was part of the concerted effort of the state of Florida along with ten others to bring pressure on these firms.


Florida Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson celebrated massive banking organizations exiting or intensely scaling back involvement in a United Nations climate group Friday.


Simpson was among 11 other agriculture commissioners nationwide who demanded “accountability” from banks for left-wing, environmental social governance practices, or ESG.


...“I was proud to stand with 11 other state agriculture commissioners demanding accountability from America’s largest banks over their commitments to left-wing, anti-agriculture, ESG-driven, and anti-consumer climate policies,” Simpson said.


“If these banks had their way, they would unilaterally force America’s farmers and ranchers – through the threat of withholding capital and financing – to adopt ‘green’ infrastructure, technology, and equipment,” he said. “We will not stand idly by and allow unelected individuals and woke institutions to make unchecked decisions that would intentionally cripple American agriculture and threaten our food security and national security.”


Simpson makes the point about ESG firms shutting farmers down for not adhering to NetZero farming standards by cutting off their access to capital.




There's another potentially huge reason these firms are suddenly reluctant to continue as climate tyrants - the return on their clients' investments. Whatever their penchant of the moment, these are "investment" firms, and as such, they have a fiduciary duty first to their clients - not to Greta Thunberg or Davos. With as many disastrous Green schemes as there have been losing money hand over fist, including the ruinously expensive strictures these firms require those seeking their capital to abide by, have JP Morgan, etc., done their fiduciary duty by their investors?


Asset managers are tasked with optimizing investments, not indulging in advocacy.




Their sojourn into Green governance could very well cost them dearly soon, and it could be the lesson they need to keep their more authoritarian tendencies in check.




This is pretty terrific.


The Green walls will come crumblin', tumblin' down.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-action-100-exodus-j-p-morgan-state-street-blackrock-esg-investing-b78d2a06?mod=Searchresults_pos2&page=1


...

Has the tide turned on environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing? It appears so. JPMorgan Asset Management, BlackRock and State Street Global Advisors on Thursday retreated from the Climate Action 100+ investor compact because they don’t want the political and legal liability..
Climate Action 100+ describes itself as the “largest ever global investor engagement initiative on climate change.” Its 700 or so institutional investor members manage more than $68 trillion in assets (before Thursday’s exits). Their goal is to force companies to zero out CO2 emissions by 2050.


Members are supposed to “engage” 170 “focus companies” such as Boeing, Home Depot and American Airlines—that is, threaten to vote against non-compliant corporate directors and back shareholder resolutions that pressure management. Their campaign has had great success with 75% of targeted companies committing to “net zero.”


But the climate left is never content. Last June the alliance impelled its members to publish information on their “engagements” and to explain how and why they voted on shareholder resolutions flagged by the outfit. The point was to embarrass asset managers that climate scolds accuse of being insufficiently committed to the cause.


Asset managers have been walking a fine legal line. GOP Attorneys General in 2022 warned that they might be violating their fiduciary obligations and antitrust laws. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan in December subpoenaed BlackRock and State Street Global Advisors for documents and communications related to their involvement in “collusive” agreements.


The climate alliance’s new rules would compound the legal and political jeopardy. In its withdrawal announcement, State Street said its rules “are not consistent with our independent approach to proxy voting and portfolio company engagement.” BlackRock said the rules “would raise legal considerations.”


All true. But perhaps their customers have also begun to realize that ESG and net-zero mandates are political crusades that accomplish little except politicizing investment. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink noted correctly last year that ESG has been “entirely weaponised.” But asset managers should have known that bowing to the left would invite pushback from the right...

SassyLady
02-17-2024, 07:41 PM
Woohoo!

I've always thought ESG was a scam. BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard were especially vile in their enforcement of their requirements.