Sunday, July 09, 2023
Jim Jordan Launches Probe Into Financial Giants’ ‘Radical’ Plans To ‘Decarbonize’ Economy by Phasing Out Fossil Fuels
The House Judiciary Committee will soon begin an investigation into some of the nation’s largest financial institutions for so-called collusive agreements that seek to “decarbonize” the world economy. This comes as the panel prepares for a flurry of summer activity that includes testimony from top Department of Justice officials, anti-censorship activists, and those charged with enforcing immigration law.
The chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Congressman Jim Jordan, sent a letter on Thursday to the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, which according to the group’s website is “a global coalition of leading financial institutions committed to accelerating the decarbonization of the economy.” The letter was first reported by the Daily Caller.
Mr. Jordan sent the missive to Mayor Bloomberg, who serves as the Glasgow Alliance’s co-chairman, as well as the group’s vice chairwoman, Mary Schapiro, who once served as the head of the Securities and Exchange Commission. “The Committee on the Judiciary is conducting oversight of the adequacy and enforcement of U.S. antitrust laws,” the letter states.
“We write because the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero and the Net Zero Asset Managers initiative are potentially violating U.S. antitrust law by coordinating their members’ agreements to ‘decarbonize’ their assets under management and reduce emissions to net zero.” Mr. Jordan also claims that the organization’s alleged collusion with asset managers will have “potentially harmful effects on Americans’ freedom and economic well-being.”
Beyond the Glasgow Alliance, the letter was sent to three of the nation’s largest asset managers — BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street. Combined, those three firms hold more than $20 trillion in assets under management.
When reached by The New York Sun for comment, a spokesman for BlackRock, Chris Van Es, said his firm will cooperate with the Judiciary Committee. “BlackRock’s sole focus as a fiduciary is seeking the best financial outcomes for our clients, consistent with their investment objectives,” Mr. Van Es said in a message. “We look forward to engaging with the Committee on how we do that.”
The Glasgow Alliance, Vanguard, and State Street did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The letter was also signed by the chairman of the subcommittee that handles antitrust issues, Congressman Thomas Massie, as well as a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, Congressman Dan Bishop.
The letter further describes what the congressmen call “radical” aspirations to decarbonize the economy, including eliminating more than 90 percent of coal and oil production, as well as halting the sale of internal combustion passenger cars by 2035.
The crux of the committee inquiry is whether the Glasgow Alliance and its members are violating American antitrust law by “limiting production” of certain commodities to coercively change consumer behavior. The organization was founded in 2021 in order to facilitate “the net-zero transition,” its website states.
The document sent by the Judiciary Committee chairman and his colleagues is not a legally binding subpoena, though the full panel could consider such a move in the coming months. The letter asks that the Glasgow Alliance transfer to the committee all documents and communications related to the formation of the organization, the development of its climate goals, the commitments made by asset managers in joining the group, and how the group plans to track net-zero goals, among other things.
Mr. Jordan, in his letter, asks that such documents be presented to the Judiciary Committee on or before July 20. He further states that the Glasgow Alliance “should construe this preservation notice as an instruction to take all reasonable steps to prevent the destruction or alteration, whether intentionally or negligently, of all documents, communications, and other information” related to the topics addressed in his letter.
Investment practices that take into consideration factors such as companies’ environmental impact are known as environmental, social, and corporate governance strategies, or ESG. The use of such environmental and social considerations in deciding which companies to invest in has come to the attention of conservatives in recent years, many of whom label ESG as “woke finance.”
Earlier this year, the Republican-led House and the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution that would have struck down a Department of Labor rule that encouraged asset managers to consider ESG when making investment decisions. The episode culminated in President Biden issuing the first veto of his presidency.
Mr. Jordan, who is also the head of the select subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government, which falls under the Judiciary Committee, has already planned a busy summer that will put him in the spotlight on a host of issues ranging from investigations into Hunter Biden to so-called Big Tech censorship to immigration.
**********************************************
Why Won't the Media Admit When Mass Murderers Are Environmentalists?
On Friday, a federal judge sentenced the El Paso Walmart mass murderer, who killed 23 people and wounded another 22, to 90 consecutive life sentences. He still faces additional charges from Texas, where he could receive the death penalty.
With the sentencing announcement, over and over, the news media, such as USA Today, Forbes, and the Dallas Morning News, describes this monster as a “white supremacist,” the Washington Post as a “white nationalist,” and the Texas Tribune, a racist who “wanted to shoot as many Mexicans as possible.” Headlines for the Associated Press claimed, “White gunman to be sentenced for killing 23 people in a racist Walmart attack in a Texas border city,” and Rolling Stone noted, “White Supremacist Who Killed 23 at El Paso Walmart Receives 90 Consecutive Life Sentences.”
All that is true. But it is only part of the story. And it is a part of the story that the media wants to ignore.
Since the murderer’s vicious attack on August 3, 2019, the news media has constantly described the El Paso murderer as “far-right” in Newsweek and raised this case as an example of “right-wing extremism in the U.S.” at NBC. Indeed, attacks such as the El Paso mass murder are counted by the Anti-Defamation League as right-wing extremists.
But the El Paso murderer was not a right-winger by any normal definition. His views clearly match up much closer with the views of Democrats. The news media views anyone who is racist as a right-winger.
But the El Paso murderer was a racist because of his environmentalist views. In his manifesto, he wrote: “The decimation of the environment is creating a massive burden for future generations … The next logical step is to decrease the number of people in America using resources. If we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can become more sustainable.”
Nor is it just the El Paso murderer. The Buffalo, New York, and Dayton, Ohio, mass murderers were also racists who were clearly of the left. The Buffalo mass murderer labeled himself an “eco-fascist national socialist” and a part of the “mild-moderate authoritarian left.” He worried minorities have too many children and that it damages the environment. “The invaders are the ones overpopulating the world,” he claimed. “Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation, and by doing so, save the environment.” His views were no different than the El Paso murderer, but he also has been continually labeled a right-winger.
These deranged killers made minorities their principal target. But they’ve done so out of a crazy environmentalist determination to reduce the human population by whatever means necessary.
The news media and politicians who constantly warn about the world’s imminent end can’t bring themselves to acknowledge the environmental connection, even though climate activists time and again agree that overpopulation is part of the problem. “It does lead, I think, young people to have a legitimate question: Is it okay to still have children?” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in 2019. She also warned that the “‘world will end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.”
Similarly, President Biden fans the flames of alarmism when he claims that “climate change poses an existential threat to our lives … this is code red.”
The New York Times, the Washington Post, and other news outlets intend to constrain any racist as a conservative right-winger. But they aren’t. And if there’s any ideological cause that really is sparking violence, it’s environmental extremism. But even when they aren’t labeling these mass murderers as right-wingers, they refuse to admit the real ideology driving these killers.
*************************************************
Beware of Far-Left Energy Policies Coming For Red States
The anti-energy radical left is getting arrogant. Following its implementation of successful radical initiatives in liberal states like California, New York, and Washington, which have cost tens of thousands of jobs and driven up the costs of home heating oil, gasoline, and natural gas, its members are starting to turn their sites to red states. And now they are seeking to reshape the American energy landscape in all 50 states — even energy-producing ones like Alaska.
Rather than call for an outright ban as they did in California, these anti-energy advocates are trying to convince Republican members of the state legislature in Juneau to jeopardize hundreds of thousands of blue-collar jobs and their state’s most reliable energy sources. With the state facing fiscal challenges, they are presenting this self-destructive policy as necessary to raise needed revenue.
They neglect to mention one of the most reliable laws of basic economics: the more you tax something, the less you get of it. Natural gas generates over $19 billion of the state’s annual GDP (and over two-thirds of its tax revenue). That’s the highest percentage of economic contributions from oil and natural gas in the nation. Alaska takes drilling so seriously that every year, each of its residents receives a dividend check for the state’s oil and natural gas profits. But if the radical left gets its way, this resounding economic success story will be put at risk.
It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the Biden administration’s war on energy has helped leave Alaska with a massive fiscal crisis. So how is the radical left seeking to fix this problem? They’re of course not advocating President Biden stop his war on energy and help restore American energy independence. And they’re surely not advocating for the removal of job-killing state regulations. Instead, they’re trying to push Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy to impose new taxes and costly fees that will only make the problem worse.
There is no place in America more synonymous with the old refrain “drill baby drill!” than the Last Frontier State. Though that mantra has served them well in good times and bad, the left is determined to see oil and gas disappear for good. However, this time they are cleverly dressing their goals in free-market talking points.
It’s unlikely that Dunleavy will take their bait. He’s a strong fiscal conservative who has previously pledged to protect the energy industry and not raise taxes. If he does, however, it can signal the beginning of a dangerous nationwide trend — a red wave of far-left energy policies gaining nationwide steam.
Some leftists are saying that it doesn’t matter because the Alaska energy industry is a dying industry. This is the furthest thing from the truth. As Steve Moore put it, “Some analysts say that the days of wine and roses in Alaska from the state’s oil and gas bonanza are long gone. Nonsense. Alaska has only skimmed the surface of its vast pools of energy. Oil drilling projects Willow and Pikka on the North Slope have bountiful resources and are critical for Alaska’s economy and America’s energy security. Half of the nation’s coal reserves are also way up north.”
Even President Biden administration seems to recognize the folly of the far-left’s anti-Alaska energy crusade. Earlier this year, it approved the Willow Project in northern Alaska — one of the largest U.S. oil drilling projects in decades.
Alaska isn’t the only red state the far left is trying to squeeze with this “free market” anti-energy playbook. Alabama, Missouri, Texas, and a consortium of other right-leaning ones have all faced similar proposals cloaked in free-market talking points. What will it mean if Alaska, one of the most energy-critical red states in the nation, bucks to pressure and moves forward with this leftist anti-energy proposal? Nothing good, that’s for sure.
The goal of the far-left is not to be fiscally responsible but to end all oil and gas production in the entire United States. Alaska cannot be the first red domino to fall.
Saying no to this reckless, job-destroying assault on Alaska’s energy production should be a no-brainer. For the sake of Alaska and the nation, let’s hope it is.
***********************************************
Republicans Bash Biden’s Woke EV Rule As ‘Unlawful’
Democrat’s obsession with sounding the alarm and causing hysteria over the Earth combusting one day due to so-called “climate change” has taken another turn in the wrong direction.
President Joe Biden is being criticized over its proposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule that would force auto manufacturers to make more electric vehicles.
The proposed rule would force auto manufacturers to grow today’s 8.4 percent share of light-duty new electric vehicle sales to 67 percent by 2032.
Republican Attorneys Generals are bashing Biden’s proposed plans, calling them “unlawful and misguided.”
Attorneys general for Kentucky and West Virginia are leading a letter signed by more than 20 Republican state attorneys to argue that Biden’s rule would pose risks for “consumer safety, economic stability, and national security.”
While billed as tightening existing standards for “criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from” certain motor vehicles, id. At 29,186, the Proposed Rule is, more accurately, the next phase in a top-to-bottom attempt to restructure the automobile industry … And the Proposed Rule’s approach will create more problems than it purports to solve. We urge EPA to adopt instead possible standards that maintain our nation’s air quality without risking consumer safety, economic stability, and national security,” the letter states.
Mike Sommers, president, and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, also slammed the president’s rule, arguing it missed the mark.
“While not an explicit ban on internal combustion engines, this proposal is a de facto ban that will eliminate competition, distort the market, and restrict consumer choice while being potentially more costly to taxpayers,” Sommers said.
The Republican AGs said more time is needed to develop better solutions, arguing that mandating fast and extreme transformations before supply chains, national security, or consumer confidence will backfire.
Alliance for Automotive Innovation argued that the market is not ready for a surplus of electric vehicles even if consumers are ready to buy one.
Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron criticized the Democrat’s escalated panic and his attempt to use “the power of government to force a massive shift in demand for automobiles, with the government putting its thumb on the scale in favor of EVs.”
“This is the latest head-in-the-sand approach to achieving the left’s impossible green-energy fantasies,” Cameron said.
***************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment