Melanie Stansbury Rep
---
On August 31, Rep. Melanie Stansbury (NM-1) and Rep. Nanette Barragán (CA-44) officially joined the growing list 9 26
---
5 26 
412- 4 harrison schmidt astronaught sen unanimous?
"Project 2025 Specifically CALLS FOR The Changes That Are IN These Bills"
god squad nat am tribes
hr 85x7
260505__IV02_MELANIESTANSBURYHOUSERULESEARTHDAYPROJECT2025
0:23
23 seconds
It seems particularly ironic that on the week that we are celebrating Earth Day,
0:28
28 seconds
the Republican majority is bringing several bills to the floor that seek to gut some of the most successful environmental protections in American history and on the face of planet Earth,
0:40
40 seconds
including one of the most successful conservation bills to protect endangered species. In fact, the ESA has not only
0:47
47 seconds
been one of our most successful, it has helped to save iconic species like whooping cranes, paragan falcons, grey
0:56
56 seconds
wolves, and the very symbol of America itself, the bald [snorts] eagle. But what is particularly stunning is that
1:03
1 minute, 3 seconds
these attacks come to some of the most bipartisan bills in the history of this country. In fact, the ESA was signed
1:10
1 minute, 10 seconds
into law in 1973 by Richard Nixon, of course, a Republican, and passed unanimously in the Senate and 4 to2 to 4
1:20
1 minute, 20 seconds
here in the House. It was championed, in fact, by a Republican senator from New Mexico named Harrison Schmidt, who you
1:26
1 minute, 26 seconds
might recognize as an astronaut who was the only geologist to ever step foot,
1:32
1 minute, 32 seconds
yes, on the moon. The passage of the ESA followed the passage of NEPA three years earlier. also signed by Nixon and also passed unanimously in the Senate. Why?
1:44
1 minute, 44 seconds
Because 50 years ago, Republicans in this body believe that saving wildlife,
1:48
1 minute, 48 seconds
protecting the planet, and investing in science was not a partisan issue, but a patriotic duty. It is noteworthy that
1:57
1 minute, 57 seconds
even then under immense pressure from the very same industries that are lobbying to pass these bills here today,
2:04
2 minutes, 4 seconds
oil and gas, mining, logging, and real estate development, they still pass unanimously in the Senate and with
2:10
2 minutes, 10 seconds
overwhelming bipartisan support. This is of course in stark contrast to what we see before us today as we see those same
2:19
2 minutes, 19 seconds
industries pushing these bills 50 years later, but with support from our colleagues across the aisle. HR1 1897
2:27
2 minutes, 27 seconds
would gut core provisions of the ESA and threaten countless endangered species.
2:33
2 minutes, 33 seconds
It would lead to premature dis delisting of species, gutting protections for critical habitat, opening the door to
2:39
2 minutes, 39 seconds
junk science, expanding the use of the god squad, limiting the ability of tribes, communities, and those most
2:46
2 minutes, 46 seconds
affected to stop bad actors in the courts, and prioritize corporate profits over our people and our environment.
2:56
2 minutes, 56 seconds
HR5587 or the Heats Act is in truth a wolf in sheep's clothing which hasn't been able
3:02
3 minutes, 2 seconds
to be passed out of Congress because it bypasses and guts the National Environmental Policy Act. It allows
3:10
3 minutes, 10 seconds
corporations to drill under public and private lands potentially for miles without consideration for public safety,
3:17
3 minutes, 17 seconds
drinking water, cultural resources, and in reality represents a backdoor to permitting that our oil and gas
3:25
3 minutes, 25 seconds
industries have sought for years. And all of this represents years of influence by special interests and big money and politics. In fact, the
3:33
3 minutes, 33 seconds
coordination between those special interest lobbyists and conservative think tanks culminating in Project 2025,
75-90% favor esa fischbach grey worlves ranchers
---
Republican U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene ignited a heated confrontation during Wednesday [vid] by claiming that budgets have nothing to do with policy — a stance that top Democrats have long argued contradicts core American values. Her assertion drew an immediate rebuttal from one of the committee’s top Democrats, but Oversight Chairman James Comer jumped to Greene’s defense, attempting to cut off the correction and escalating the exchange into a shouting match, while mocking Democrats' efforts to preserve and honor American values.
After U.S. Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) made an impassioned plea to not cut the budget of the Veterans Administration, or Social Security, or Medicare in order to produce a $4 trillion tax cut largely for the wealthy — a top Trump priority — Congresswoman Greene lashed out.
"I'd like to point something out that our Democrat colleagues know this, because they did reconciliation before when they are they were in charge and, you know, it may be hard for some of the freshman Dems to understand, but this is not a policy debate," the Georgia Republican alleged. "That's not what reconciliation is. This is a budget process."
"And so for the American people watching at home, our Democrat colleagues are sitting here trying to score points and spread more lies and divisiveness about Republicans in order to spread more garbage across the country," she charged, calling Democrats' pleas "entertainment."
READ MORE: ‘Please Chill This Is Going Great’: Trump Mocked for Blaming Biden Amid Poor Economic Data
That's when U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch, a Massachusetts Democrat in Congress for nearly a quarter century and possibly next in line for Ranking Member of the Oversight Committee, slammed Greene's interpretation of the Committee's work.
"Mr. Chairman, I just want to say, our federal budget reflects our values," Lynch declared, a statement many budget experts would affirm, and one that has been by President Joe Biden and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.
"When we fund the VA," Lynch continued, "it's not just about numbers. It's about, it's about the mission, and the purpose of our budget."
Chairman Comer appeared to grow angry.
"You do understand our federal budget is $2.5 trillion?" Comer declared, appearing to suggest details like how much spent on veterans was not worth the Committee's time. "We can't have 'values'," Comer insisted, with the amount of debt the federal government is carrying.
"Reclaiming my time — you don't get to just interject, Mr. Chairman," Lynch charged.
You know what? I think you've already spoken, so you're out of order," Comer declared, hitting his desk with his gavel.
"I will speak," Lynch, now heated, told the Chair. "You're about to put our country $4 trillion more than debt."
"I don't think you all could find a billion dollars in savings," Comer alleged.
"Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time. Reclaiming my time," Lynch again declared.
"You can talk all you want. I want everyone in America to see how much — " Comer snapped.
"Mr. Chairman. You're out of order. You're out of order. You're the chairman, you're out of order," Lynch again charged.
READ MORE: ‘Prices Go Up’: Economist Mocks Treasury Secretary’s ‘Empty Shelves’ Position
"Now, without interruption," Lynch continued, "what we decide here in the budget is what I'm the point I'm trying to make is it's not just dollars and cents. It's about where, where that money goes, and what, what purposes and what, what priorities it reflects. And those, you know, governing is about making decisions, and we we choose to fund things that in this country, we have honored for a very long time, and that, you know, I have to say, in my 25 years in Congress, we have had very little disagreement on funding veteran benefits."
Lynch went on to lament that "now we're fighting tooth and tongs — and nail — about whether we're gonna lay off 80,000 employees at the VA. What I'm saying is that, sure, it's about the budget, but underlying that budget is is our priorities as a country. What we consider to be worthwhile . And I feel that veterans' benefits are worthwhile. Veterans, healthcare is worthwhile. The way we treat our federal employees is important. It is intrinsic to be the work of the federal government and how we help the most vulnerable, as well as, you, average everyday Americans on Social Security, on Medicaid."
Watch the videos below or at this link.
---
---
:3 25 sotu
A lawmaker holds a 'This is not normal' sign as
Trump enters, before it is snatched from her hands
Democrat Melanie Stansbury, representative from New Mexico, was seen holding up the sign as Trump was greeting delegates upon arrival in the Congress chamber.
Seconds later, Republican Lance Gooden, representative from Texas, yanked it out of her hands, sending the sign flying up and falling to the ground.
The partisan rancour was reflective of the tumult that has accompanied Trump's first six weeks in office, as he upended U.S. foreign policy, ignited a trade war with close allies and slashed the federal workforce.
..the hill
Stansbury, a New Mexico native, first took national office in 2021, filling a seat vacated when Rep. Deb Haaland was tapped as former President Joe Biden’s Secretary of Interior.
Before joining the House of Representatives, she served in the state legislature as a Senate committee staffer and in the White House Office of Management and Budget. Her platform positions include protecting natural resources, fighting climate change and addressing food insecurity.
Since Trump took office in January, Stansbury has advocated for containing the measles outbreak (which is growing in New Mexico) and protecting programs serving Native American tribes....
---
nyp bs
GOP lawmaker rips ‘This is not normal’ sign out of protesting Dem rep’s hands before Trump speech
By
Published March 4, 2025
GOP lawmaker grabs 'This is not normal' sign out of Dem reps hands ahead of Trump's speech
A Republican congressional lawmaker ripped a sign protesting President Trump out of the hands of one of his Democratic colleagues Tuesday in a dramatic scene that played out just moments before the commander in chief’sspeech to a joint session of Congress.
“This is not normal,” read the paper sign held up by Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM).
Stansbury, who has represented New Mexico’s 1st Congressional District since 2021, positioned her handwritten message in the direction of TV cameras as Trump walked down the House chamber aisle to deliver his address.
Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) ripped the small paper sign out of Stansbury’s hands shortly after she displayed it and tossed it into the air. CNN
The sign was only visible for a few seconds before Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) noticed it and ripped the sheet of paper out of Stansbury’s hands.
Gooden, who has represented Texas’ 5th District since 2019, then tossed the sign into the air.
Explore More
All the key moments from Trump’s speech to Congress you may have missed: Hot mic moment, Dem booted and more
Rep. Al Green threatened with censure for heckling Trump during joint session of Congress
Democrats mercilessly mocked for protesting Trump speech with paddles: ‘It is giving bingo!’
Trump was just feet in front of the disturbance.
It’s not clear whether the president noticed the small commotion behind him.
“This is not normal. We will resist,” Stansbury wrote on X after her demonstration.
Meanwhile, Gooden argued that “Putting the American people FIRST is normal.”
“No one will disrespect President [Trump] in front of me,” he added in an X post.
“It’s not normal for men to play in women’s sports. It’s not normal for children to have gender surgery. It’s not normal for tax dollars to fund trans mice. What today’s Democrat Party stands for is not normal, Melanie,” Gooden wrote in a separate post.
Trump was just feet in front of the disturbance, and it’s not clear whether he noticed it.via REUTERS
Stansbury’s sign wasone of several acts of protest inside the House chamber during the president’s speech.
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) repeatedly interrupted Trump early on during his speech – waving around his cane and shouting at the commander in chief.
Initially, Trump tried to speak over the 77-year-old congressman, but Green persisted, shouting, “You don’t have a mandate.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) eventually intervened and directed the sergeant-at-arms to “restore order” and remove Green from the chamber.
Green was eventually escorted out by the House sergeant-at-arms.
Several other Democratic lawmakers shouted at Trump at various points in his speech but none were as disruptive as Green.
Some Democrats in black “Resist” T-shirts left the proceedings early. Many were also spotted on their phones, largely ignoring Trump’s remarks.
---
an 2 25
During Wednesday’s heated House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing, Chairman Jim Comer and his Republican colleagues blocked a vote on Democratic Ranking Member Gerry Connolly’s motion to subpoena Elon Musk. The Director of President Donald Trump’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency has been accused of systematically dismantling federal agencies one by one, while his associates have allegedly gained access to the private data of potentially millions of Americans, as well as vast amounts of federal government information—including, reportedly, some classified material.
In Wednesday’s hearing on “Rightsizing Government,” Ranking Member Connolly was quickly blocked when he attempted to subpoena the person in charge of all those efforts testify before them.
The Oversight Committee’s mission is to “ensure the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of the federal government and all its agencies,” according to its website. “We provide a check and balance on the role and power of Washington – and a voice to the people it serves.”
READ MORE: ‘Democracy Weeks Away From Disintegrating’: Democratic Senator Issues Warning — and a Plan
Connolly had filed formal notice on Monday requesting that Comer “invite” Elon Musk “to appear as a witness.”
“Who is this unelected billionaire that he can attempt to dismantle federal agencies, fire people, transfer them, offer them early retirement, and have sweeping changes to agencies without any congressional review, oversight, or concurrence?” Connolly asked on Wednesday. “Mr. Chairman, given his prominence and his importance, I move that the committee subpoena Elon Musk to come to before it as a witness at the earliest possible moment.”
But Chairman Comer quickly squelched the Democrat’s motion, declaring it was “not debatable.”
A direction to “table the motion,” apparently from Comer, came, as Connolly asked, “Mr. Chairman, why don’t we want to debate Elon Musk coming in and talking to us about his work and how he’s enriched himself by 64 billion dollars?”
Congresswoman Virginia Foxx (R-NC) then moved to formally block the motion, sparking a chaotic exchange as members talked over one another while Comer reprimanded a Democrat he deemed “out of order.”
U.S. Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) blasted Comer: “You will not even entertain a motion to bring him (Elon) in front of the Oversight Committee?”
“Yes, let’s have order in this country,” she exclaimed before adding, “Mr. Elon Musk is out of order!”
READ MORE: Dems Blocked From Entering USAID Offices: ‘Illegal and Corrupt’
Comer accused her of “demagoguery.”
U.S. Congressman Maxwell Frost (D-FL) wrote, “I’m in Oversight Committee right now. Ranking Member Connolly just called for a vote to subpoena Elon Musk. Republicans out-number us on this committee, but many aren’t in the room. We’ll see who wins this vote. We deserve transparency and answers.”
Just minutes later he added: “Republicans ran into the room to SHEILD Elon Musk from having to come and speak to Congress. They want their billionaire takeover done behind closed doors. The people deserve transparency. No one elected Elon Musk.”
Responding to a video of the event Connolly wrote: “You read that right – blocked without debate. If Republicans are such big fans of Elon Musk’s hostile takeover of our government, why are they so afraid to hear from him? Because they know you, the American people, aren’t gonna like what he has to say.”
“They will stop at nothing to cover up Elon Musk’s lawlessness,” he added.
In a press release, Chairman Comer accused Democrats of “hyperventilating and sensationalizing the Trump Administration’s efforts to advance necessary reforms,” while he vowed to “continue working with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on solutions to make federal operations more efficient and effective for all Americans.”
Watch the videos above or at this link.
READ MORE: ‘Blind to What’s Happening on His Watch’: Rubio Slammed After ‘Cheap Shot’ at Aid Groups
------
an 2 25
During Wednesday’s heated House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing, Chairman Jim Comer and his Republican colleagues blocked a vote on Democratic Ranking Member Gerry Connolly’s motion to subpoena Elon Musk. The Director of President Donald Trump’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency has been accused of systematically dismantling federal agencies one by one, while his associates have allegedly gained access to the private data of potentially millions of Americans, as well as vast amounts of federal government information—including, reportedly, some classified material.
In Wednesday’s hearing on “Rightsizing Government,” Ranking Member Connolly was quickly blocked when he attempted to subpoena the person in charge of all those efforts testify before them.
The Oversight Committee’s mission is to “ensure the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of the federal government and all its agencies,” according to its website. “We provide a check and balance on the role and power of Washington – and a voice to the people it serves.”
READ MORE: ‘Democracy Weeks Away From Disintegrating’: Democratic Senator Issues Warning — and a Plan
Connolly had filed formal notice on Monday requesting that Comer “invite” Elon Musk “to appear as a witness.”
“Who is this unelected billionaire that he can attempt to dismantle federal agencies, fire people, transfer them, offer them early retirement, and have sweeping changes to agencies without any congressional review, oversight, or concurrence?” Connolly asked on Wednesday. “Mr. Chairman, given his prominence and his importance, I move that the committee subpoena Elon Musk to come to before it as a witness at the earliest possible moment.”
But Chairman Comer quickly squelched the Democrat’s motion, declaring it was “not debatable.”
A direction to “table the motion,” apparently from Comer, came, as Connolly asked, “Mr. Chairman, why don’t we want to debate Elon Musk coming in and talking to us about his work and how he’s enriched himself by 64 billion dollars?”
Congresswoman Virginia Foxx (R-NC) then moved to formally block the motion, sparking a chaotic exchange as members talked over one another while Comer reprimanded a Democrat he deemed “out of order.”
U.S. Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) blasted Comer: “You will not even entertain a motion to bring him (Elon) in front of the Oversight Committee?”
“Yes, let’s have order in this country,” she exclaimed before adding, “Mr. Elon Musk is out of order!”
READ MORE: Dems Blocked From Entering USAID Offices: ‘Illegal and Corrupt’
Comer accused her of “demagoguery.”
U.S. Congressman Maxwell Frost (D-FL) wrote, “I’m in Oversight Committee right now. Ranking Member Connolly just called for a vote to subpoena Elon Musk. Republicans out-number us on this committee, but many aren’t in the room. We’ll see who wins this vote. We deserve transparency and answers.”
Just minutes later he added: “Republicans ran into the room to SHEILD Elon Musk from having to come and speak to Congress. They want their billionaire takeover done behind closed doors. The people deserve transparency. No one elected Elon Musk.”
Responding to a video of the event Connolly wrote: “You read that right – blocked without debate. If Republicans are such big fans of Elon Musk’s hostile takeover of our government, why are they so afraid to hear from him? Because they know you, the American people, aren’t gonna like what he has to say.”
“They will stop at nothing to cover up Elon Musk’s lawlessness,” he added.
In a press release, Chairman Comer accused Democrats of “hyperventilating and sensationalizing the Trump Administration’s efforts to advance necessary reforms,” while he vowed to “continue working with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on solutions to make federal operations more efficient and effective for all Americans.”
Watch the videos above or at this link.
READ MORE: ‘Blind to What’s Happening on His Watch’: Rubio Slammed After ‘Cheap Shot’ at Aid Groups
---
---
https://podtail.com/en/podcast/drilled/the-anti-esg-campaign-gets-a-boost-from-raga/
no lnx
The Anti-ESG Campaign Gets a Boost from RAGA - Transcripts
June 13, 2023
Ever since the Securities and Exchange Commission announced its intention to make Environmental Social and Governance metrics actually mean something to investors, polluting industries have suddenly turned on ESG. Now that fight has a legal strategy, being carried out by the Republican Attorneys General Association.
Transcript: https://www.steno.ai/drilled/the-anti-esg-campaign-gets-a-boost-from-raga
Hello and welcome back to Drilled, I'm Amy Westervelt. We've talked before on this show about the growing backlash against taking environmental, social, and governance, or ESG, factors into consideration when it comes to investing. The watchdog group Documented first revealed last year that state treasurers were getting in on the action, kicking woke investment firms likeBlackRock out of their states. Back then I wondered when the attorneys general would show up to join the fray, and now sure enough, they are here. The Republican Attorneys General Association, RAGA, our old favorite, has come to play in the anti-ESG space. But first, a quick reminder, why all this upset about ESG all of a sudden in the first place? Good question. For a really long time, oil companies actually kind of loved ESG. It was all very loose and self-reported, and it gave them a way to unlock so-called green capital. But in 2021, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the SEC, looked around and went, huh, there are all these different SEG ratings, and some of them seem a little scammy, and no one knows what these disclosures even really mean. These are the kinds of things it's our job to clean up. So we are going to provide formal guidance on climate risk disclosure.
And that is when you start to see corporate interests, fossil fuel companies, and right-wing politicians lose their minds over ESG. Because all of a sudden, they couldn't just write whatever they wanted to in a report, they might have to actually disclose what their real climate risks are.
Speaker 5 00:02:16
Here is Jesse Coleman withDocumented. I think that a lot of this, both the legislative side, this legal strategy, the strategy of using state treasurers to pressure asset managers into attack climate disclosure, all of this is really mostly aimed at SEC scope three emissions disclosure requirements coming, you know, supposedly coming soon
Speaker 4 00:02:43
in the next couple of months, even. Wait, sorry, I'm gonna pause to define scope three. That means how your product's actually being used, not how you're making it, which is a big deal for especially heavy polluting industries
Speaker 5 00:02:58
like oil and gas companies, for example. Yeah, yeah, it's a really big deal. Whereas ESG, having a non-standardized ESG disclosure is no big deal to a major company. The SEC coming and saying, how much carbon emissions are you really responsible for? Not just, you know, what you're claiming you're responsible for, but if you're an oil company, for example, how much carbon are you actually putting in the atmosphere from everything that you've gotten from underground? What is your real impact? And that is a really big deal. It's probably one of the biggest climate policy issues in play right now. So, you know, in my opinion, a lot of this anti-ESG stuff, which doesn't make a lot of sense on its face, you know, these state bills that have passed in some states and been introduced in a ton of states, the actual thing that those bills are gonna do, they're not gonna have a really big impact. And sort of this antitrust stuff is very similar in the sense that, you know, the claims are kind of weak and it's hard to say exactly what the impact is gonna be specifically. But at the same time, it's building up all of this pressure and it's building up all of this political inertia that is all aimed at opposing, disclosing climate emissions. And that's what this SEC rule would do when it comes out, is that it would require publicly traded companies to disclose those emissions.
So, you know, in my opinion,
that's the real goal, is to keep that from happening. You may have heard Jesse mention there the words antitrust. That is where the Republican Attorney's General Association comes into the picture. Back in June, 2021, a guy named Jason Isaac, who spearheads the Texas Public Policy Foundation's work on energy, went to a meeting of theAmerican Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC, with an idea for a legal strategy that he thought could take ESG down.
Speaker 7 00:05:04
Documented shared audio from that meeting with us.:
Yes, so earlier, a couple months ago,our state affairs committee voted nine to nothing. So, broad bipartisan support, every single member voted in support to give the committee subpoena authority.
So, they have sent out a couple months ago,
our state some paper documents to find out where this collusion is happening. We anticipate truckloads of documents being delivered. And so, we look forward to the Texas Public Policy Foundation to going through those meticulously, because we believe that there is, and we actually partner withC. Boyden Gray, Boyden Gray Associates law firm out of Washington, D.C.
Corporate collusion, liability risk for the ESG agenda to charge higher fees and rig the market. We believe that there's antitrust violations. This is really kind of geared towards our attorneys generalto lay the foundation for antitrust violations on this corporate collusion. Find out the connections with the Glasgow Financial Alliance for net zero, which has over, I think, $100 trillion under managed assets in there. And there are the connections with the glad zero, this Paris Accord, which is net zero. So, I hope our committee gets a ton of paper bac
from these large financial institutions.
Hope our committee gets in the courts and our attorneys generalaround the country filed antitrust violations.
So, yeah, cartels colluding for decarbonization.What the hell is he talking about here?We're gonna try to answer that question right after this quick break. And we're back. So, after COP26 in Glasgow, insurers and asset managers, both formed groups focused on ESG. In both cases, these firms were saying, look, all sorts of environmental and social factors can impact our bottom line, and we would like to know what those risks might be so we can factor that into our decision-making around what to ensure and what to invest in. But according to Isaac, these firms talking to each other, issuing joint statements about what kind of information they'd like to see from companies, that's colluding to rig the market. In the wake of that 2021 ALEC meeting you heard Isaac talking at before, not only did Texas continue with the investigation Isaac mentioned, but Arizona Attorney General, Mark Bernovich, opened an investigation into ESG investing. And Raga coordinated a letter to various asset managers and politicians with more than a dozen attorneys general signed on, stating their concern that ESG investing might actually be an antitrust violation.
Speaker 5 00:08:13
Here's Jesse Coleman again. We started to see some of the bright lights of the Republican Attorneys General Association file various kinds of legal attacks on ESG issues, whether that's going directly after asset managers and asking them questions about their net zero commitments, or that's going directly after ratings agencies
Speaker 4 00:08:38
and saying that you're boycotting fossil fuels. And they seem to have coalesced around this idea of painting ESG as some sort of corporate collusion, you know, building an antitrust case. Can you explain what the thinking is there,
what they're trying to prove?
The allegation is that a lot of large asset managers get together in a shadowy cabal and they plan to collude to reduce carbon emissions. The reason these groups are alleging antitrust violations is that antitrust violations are very scary to companies. If a jury finds you guilty of an antitrust violation, it's very expensive. And it's a pretty hard bar to meet. And most experts are saying that the antitrust allegations that are coming from these people that are opposing climate policy, they probably don't have a leg to stand on, but a lot like slap suits and other kinds of legal tools that are used to silence people, just defending against the antitrust allegation is very, very expensive. So, you know, you see companies really backing away from participation in these kind of global groups that are trying to address climate emissions and trying to address investment
10:08
in the fossil fuel industry by large asset managers. In 2022, Alec once again held a meeting with a session on how to handle ESG at the state level. And again, the antitrust strategy was front and center. This time, Isaac was in the room cheering on new proponents of the strategy, including Will Hild with Consumers Research, which is funded by former Federalist Society President Leonard Leo, Paul Watkins, who used to work in the Arizona Attorney General's office and now runs an outfit called Fusion Law, advising on these sorts of strategies. Andy Puzder, former CEO of the Food Conglomerate that is home to Wendy's and Hardee's, and Catherine Gonzalez with the Heritage Foundation. Puzder kicked things off by comparing ESG investors
11:03
to, not kidding here, the Nazis. I wanna tell you, ESG investing is socialism in sheep's clothing. I mean, this is the challenge of your generation. My father's generation's challenge was the Nazis, who, by the way, were, of course, very proud socialists. The challenge of my generation was the communists, who were, of course, very committed socialists. The challenge of your generation is ESG investing, and it's more insidious than communism or the Nazis. It's the thing they're doing it. So ESG, Environmental Social and Governance. Like, how bad could that be, right? It sounds so innocuous, but it's a ruse. It's a ruse to conceal the fact that it's a direct threat to our founding principles.
11:53
It's a threat to our democracy. How bad could that be, right?
Speaker 4 00:11:55
It's a threat to our democracy.
Speaker 6 00:12:02
Hild and Watkins kept it focused on the litigation strategy. They get in rooms and they talk about they're gonna set a policy across the market. Now, it's been a while since I was in law school,
but when I was there, that was antitrust 101. And that's why you see U.S. senators saying this is potentially criminal antitrust liability.
Speaker 4 00:12:22
You see AG saying that they're going to investigate. And again,I have yet to speak with a single legal expert who thinks that this strategy could actually win in court. But like we said before, that is not necessarily the point. It's already having a chilling effect on investment firms and insurance companies in these net zero groups. And now that Republicans have control of the House, it's the focus of a series of oversight committee hearings too. The first one happened back in May and featured the attorneys general of Utah and Alabama as witnesses.
Speaker 1 00:13:00
Here'sSean Reyes, attorney general of Utah. But ever since the signing of the Paris Agreement, there's been anopen conspiracy to bypass Congress using the power of horizontal agreements by key players in our financial system. Some of these groups are Climate Action 100, the Glasgow Alliance for Net Zero, which include the largest asset managers, banks and insurance companies globally. These horizontal organizations seek to use their collective market power over tens of trillions in assets
to force burdensome changes on American companies.
amy: The Democrats witnessed during this hearing, Illinois State Treasurer Michael Frerichs gave a great and completely non-climate related example
of where ESG can safeguard profits. The more data we as investors have, the better informed our decisions are when selecting investments over the long term. ESG is about looking at a wider range of risks and value opportunities that could have a material financial impact on investment performance. For example, if you're investing in apharmaceutical company, it's thinking about whether that company has exposure to massive lawsuits because of its role in the opioid epidemic. Our approach is to integrate material ESG factors into investment decisions along with many other considerations. We are not ignoring traditional financial factors like profitability and credit worthiness. We are integrating more data into our decisions
to give us a better idea of risk and growth prospects. Frerichs also pointed out that limiting the information investors can get about the companies they're investing in
is the exact opposite of a free market idea. This pushback is anti-free market and anti-investor. It is misleading and it is harmful. It harms retirement savers, pensioners, working people, businesses, and it harms America. This coordinated campaign is focused on ESG investing. Most people don't know what ESG is. ESG is data. ESG is simply additional information that investment professionals use to assess risk and return prospects. It is about value, not about values. In order to maximize returns, an investor must be able to manage and mitigate risk. The more data we as investors have, the better informed our decisions are when selecting investments over the long term. ESG is about looking at a wider range of risks and value opportunities.
It could have a material financial impact
on investment performance. Last week, the House Oversight Committee held its second hearing on this subject,
calling on none other than Jason Isaac himself to testify. I'm Jason Isaac. I'm the director of LifePowered, a national initiative of the Texas Public Policy Foundation to raise America's energy IQ. And I live a high carbon lifestyle. And I think the rest of the world should too. That's why I refer to the ESG agenda as the China ESG agenda. It does very little to help Americans. It does everything to help the Chinese Communist Party. And again, making energy expensive, scarce and government controlled. This body, the United States Congress has not ratified the Paris Treaty. It is not the law of the land here in the United States, butto force an American entrepreneur to admit that his company will comply with that
is just mind blowing to me.
Whether the committee will hold a third hearing remains to be seen. I'm not sure the anti-ESG bench of experts rolls that deep. Plus, while these ideas might get folks at an ALEC meeting riled up, they're remarkably unpopular with American voters, including the majority of Republican voters. New Mexico rep Melanie Stansberry
made that point at last week's hearing. What I find particularly strange about this conversation is that over 63% of American voters actually oppose, directly oppose, any kind of government interference in investing strategies. And the vast majority of Republicans oppose it as well. And when you look at the bigger picture, when you look at what the American people are actually asking Congress to do, asking businesses in the private sector to do, almost 70% of Americans are in support of actions to address climate change,
to transition to a clean energy economy. Whether the SEC will be swayed by the antitrust argument remains to be seen.
That's it for this week. Thanks for listening, and we'll see you next time. Drilled is an original critical frequency production. Our producer is Sarah Ventre. Sound design, mixing, and mastering are by Peter Duff, who also wrote our original score. Our first amendment attorney is James Wheatman at the First Amendment Project. And the show is reported, written, and hosted by me, Amy Westervelt.
===<