Front and Center at Climate Week last week in New York a panel discussed the almost extreme stance some aggressive rightwing politicians have been perusing to try to distort, divide and concur to eliminate consideration for ESG and Sustainability. This blog article intends to clarify and inform without being political yet the honest observation of this author is that America is more Divided than United. We respectfully share California Attorney General Rob Bonta recent statement “We’re pushing back because the Republicans are rewriting reality, trying to voice the false narrative on business … and we can’t stand for that,” said. In recent political discourse, the term “ESG” (Environmental, Social, and Governance) has been framed largely by aggressive rightwing lawmakers, who have actively worked to limit the use of ESG factors in corporate decision-making. Yet, a growing number of centrist to democratic state Attorneys General have stepped up to defend the practice and challenge the aggressive rightwing narrative.

A coalition of Democratic Attorneys Generals expressed support for the U.S. Department of Labor’s rule that allows fiduciaries to consider ESG factors as a tiebreaker in investment decisions. This rule, however, faces legal opposition from Republican Attorneys Generals. Additionally, Democratic Attorneys Generals are intervening to defend the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) climate-risk disclosure rule enacted within the last year from lawsuits, recognizing the urgency of protecting ESG-focused policies.

Arizona Attorneys General Kris Mayes highlighted the increasing pressure to counter the aggressive rightwing portrayal of ESG as “woke,” arguing that the opposing side is impeding corporate America’s freedom to invest in sustainable technologies. California Attorneys General Rob Bonta echoed this sentiment, accusing Republicans of distorting the narrative and suggesting their actions could harm businesses by discouraging climate-related initiatives.

At present, 43 anti-ESG laws have been enacted across 21 states. These regulations aim to restrict the consideration of ESG factors by state investment fund managers and blacklist firms based on their ESG positions. Yet, some of these laws have been challenged and struck down, as seen in Missouri and Oklahoma, where legal actions against the restrictions succeeded.

Several Attorney Generals including Letitia James of New York and Matthew Platkin of New Jersey, argue that ESG factors are essential for sound business decisions and long-term financial stability, not merely values-based considerations.  They emphasize that climate change impacts all aspects of business and should be accounted for in financial planning. These Attorney Generals remain committed to pushing back against politically motivated-led anti-ESG initiatives, maintaining that informed investment decisions must include ESG considerations.  

We will continue to try to share objective information that moves the planet forward in opposition to self serving political stances.