Current Events > Conservatives are prepping to take on Critical Energy Theory

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://newrepublic.com/article/164641/conservatives-new-bogeyman-critical-energy-theory

This morning at the ALEC Committee meetings, Jason Isaac, director of the Koch-funded Texas Public Policy Foundation, wrote last Friday morning, youll have the opportunity to push back against woke financial institutions that are colluding against American energy producers. The emailobtained by the Center for Media and Democracy, and first reported by CMD investigative journalist Alex Kotchoffers a window into a rapidly congealing strategy among Republican state-level officials: declaring war on critical energy theory within the financial sector.

The American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, held its States and Nation Policy Summit in San Diego last week. The eventattended by a mix of state legislators and representatives from the private sectorfeatured spirited discussions about a potential Constitutional Convention, as well as lots of excitement about Virginia Governor-elect Glenn Youngkins attempt to galvanize voters around critical race theory, the once-obscure academic subfield that right-wingers now regularly rant about, claiming that CRT has infected the K-12 curriculum and that teaching students accurate facts about slavery and segregation is somehow unfair to white people.

Now ALEC seems gearing up for a similar move on energy policy. The groups Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force, which met on Friday, voted to back two pieces of model legislation that portray climate policyeven climate policy that doesnt exist yetas unfairly discriminating against fossil fuel companies. The Resolution Opposing Securities and Exchange Commission and White House Mandates on Climate-Related Financial Matters encourages states to take up legal challenges against forthcoming rules from federal financial regulators around climate risk and disclosures, potentially aiming to trigger a similar wave of lawsuits from states that followed the Clean Power Plan during the Obama administration. This follows a letter sent to the U.S. Banking Industry by state treasurers, plus a comptroller and auditor, from 16 extraction-heavy, Republican-controlled states just before Thanksgiving, pledging collective action against reckless attacks on law-abiding energy companies.

The Energy Discrimination Elimination Act, voted through unanimously on Friday, directs states to compile a list of entities that are supposedly boycotting fossil fuel companies, explicitly citing banks that are increasingly denying financing to creditworthy fossil energy companies solely for the purpose of decarbonizing their lending portfolios and marketing their environmental credentials; institutional investors that are divesting from fossil energy companies and pressuring corporations to commit to the goal of the Paris Agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050; and large investments that are colluding to force energy companies to cannibalize their existing businesses.

Both draft laws exhibit the emerging right-wing argument that policy that reduces emissions is in fact discriminatory. Major banks and investment firms, Isaac argued in his email to participants, urging them to vote for the measure, are colluding to deny lending and investment in fossil fuel companies, using their market power to force companies to make green investments. The model legislation opposes that, he adds, by setting forth a strategy in which states use their collective economic purchasing power to counter the rise of politically motivated and discriminatory investing practices. Texas already has a similar law on the books. Arguing in favor of the bill, Texas state Representative Dennis Paul said there was a need to stand up to this wokeness.

State comptrollers would be directed to create and maintain a list of all financial companies that boycott energy companies, further allowing them to request written verification from a financial company that it does not boycott energy companies. Any company that doesnt reply to said request within 61 days, per the model bill, would be presumed to be boycotting energy companies. Listed companies that dont stop boycotting energy companies within 90 days would then be subject to losing state contracts or investments. State agencies would then be required to sell, redeem, divest, or withdraw all publicly traded securities in qualifying companies unless that would result in a loss in value or a benchmark deviation. Attorneys general would be empowered to enforce rules mandating that state agencies report which companies theyve divested from and the prohibited investments they still hold.

The legislation is modeled explicitly on anti-BDS bills written to counter the Boycott, Divest, Sanctions call from Palestinian civil society groups for economic actions against firms complicit in the Israeli occupation there. But such measures have proven controversial, and in some cases unconstitutional. Arkansass version was struck down by the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals as a violation of the First Amendment. To counter such claims, Isaacand those presenting the legislation, according to an attendee who spoke with The New Republicassured lawmakers that the model bill is in fact constitutional and intended to allow each state to protect its economic interest, not breach fiduciary responsibility for ideological reasons.
...
Contrary to right-wing rhetoric claiming liberals have it in for Exxon investors, growing private-sector buzz around greening the financial sector hasnt so far included much of a substantive challenge to banks or asset managers continued investments in fossil fuels. In the five years since the Paris Agreement, the worlds 60 biggest banks have showered fossil fuel projects with $3.8 trillion worth of financing, according to a report released this spring from the Rainforest Action Network and the Sierra Club. The well-publicized Global Financial Alliance for Net-Zerothe allegedly $130-trillion-strong effort launched by former Bank of England turned green central banking guru Mark Carney at the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow last monthincluded no stipulation that the asset managers involved, including Blackrock, the worlds largest, would need to stop investing in coal, oil, or gas anytime soon. As of last year, Blackrock alone controlled $87 billion in shares of fossil fuel companies.

Like fury around critical race theory, though, the Republicans war on critical energy theory doesnt necessarily need to be rooted in reality. It just needs to get people riled up.

---

Is this their new [Topic of the Week]Gate

---

They want to ban teaching global warming in science class.

Seriously fuck the right.

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

so all we have to do to trigger the right is call things "Critical [thing they hold evil views about] Theory"?

sounds like the poor snowflakes need a safe space

Well, they're going to pass laws on that basis, so it's kind of our problem, not theirs.

---

Garbage human beings doing garbage human things.

---

Republicans will literally do anything to put more money in the pockets of their donors.

---

Antifar posted...

directs states to compile a list of entities that are supposedly boycotting fossil fuel companies, explicitly citing banks that are increasingly denying financing to creditworthy fossil energy companies solely for the purpose of decarbonizing their lending portfolios and marketing their environmental credentials; institutional investors that are divesting from fossil energy companies and pressuring corporations to commit to the goal of the Paris Agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050; and large investments that are colluding to force energy companies to cannibalize their existing businesses.

let me get this straight. these people are angry that the free market is going against their wishes, so now they're calling for government regulation? aren't these the same folks who bitch and moan and scream about regulation while demanding a completely open and free market?


---

SparkClark posted...

let me get this straight. these people are angry that the free market is going against their wishes, so now they're calling for government regulation? aren't these the same folks who bitch and moan and scream about regulation while demanding a completely open and free market?

Your fault for believing that that was what they cared about.

---

They'll never be able to criticize Critical Lake Irrigation Theory, because they won't be able to find it.

---

They should have described it as "Denying legitimate businesses financing increases energy costs, gas prices, heating and electric bills across the board. This disproportionately impacts people of color in the low and middle class and is institutional racism."

---

Antifar posted...

Your fault for believing that that was what they cared about.

yeah. i should know by now the only belief these people have is self enrichment. anything else is just a facade over means to that end

---

Conservatives should just unironically adopt the "I just want to grill for gods sake" meme.

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

They should have described it as "Denying legitimate businesses financing increases energy costs, gas prices, heating and electric bills across the board. This disproportionately impacts people of color in the low and middle class and is institutional racism."

If you think those impacts are larger than that of the air pollution and climate change caused by fossil fuel infrastructure, you've been sorely misled.

---

ScazarMeltex posted...

Republicans will literally do anything to put more money in the pockets of their donors.

That's not true, if something would actually help people they'd fight it tooth and nail regardless of how much money is in it.

Intro2Logic posted...

If you think those impacts are larger than that of the air pollution and climate change caused by fossil fuel infrastructure, you've been sorely misled.

This does nothing to curb fossil fuel demand.

The US infrastructure is heavily regulated and low emission. Shutting this down and getting more fossil fuels from countries with no regulations in OPEC will increase air pollution and climate change.

---

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

They should have described it as "Denying legitimate businesses financing increases energy costs, gas prices, heating and electric bills across the board. This disproportionately impacts people of color in the low and middle class and is institutional racism."

So Republicans believe in institutional racism?

Ruvan22 posted...

So Republicans believe in institutional racism?

You're making a big mistake in assuming he's doing anything other than cynically wielding that language for the purpose of scoring a cheap point. It will be swiftly discarded the moment his next argument requires as much.

---

Regressive country.

---

A couple key trigger words and all Republicans are riled up lining up in uniform like a bunch of robot drones

Antifar posted...

You're making a big mistake in assuming he's doing anything other than cynically wielding that language for the purpose of scoring a cheap point. It will be swiftly discarded the moment his next argument requires as much.

True, part of me enjoys seeing the arbitrary jumps and disconnects in his logic, like an off brand DE

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

Shutting this down and getting more fossil fuels from countries with no regulations in OPEC will increase air pollution and climate change.

US companies are funding that shit too:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-06/aramco-agrees-15-5-billion-gas-pipeline-deal-with-blackrock?sref=Vk6YSWcd

---