Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Rule Submitted By the Department of Labor Relating to ``Prudence and Loyalty in Selecting Plan Investments and Exercising Shareholder Rights''

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MAGAZINER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this misguided resolution, which will tie the hands of investors from doing their jobs and will hurt the retirement savings of millions of hardworking Americans.

The evidence is clear. Companies that adopt thoughtful policies to manage their environmental, social, and governance risks outperform those that don't. I will say that again. Companies that have thoughtful policies to manage their environmental, social, and governance risks outperform those that don't.

Don't believe me? Ask the shareholders of BP, whose stock fell more than 50 percent after the Gulf oilspill, wiping out billions of dollars of shareholder value; or Volkswagen, whose stock fell 45 percent after they were caught cheating on emissions tests.

How about Norfolk Southern? They are in the news lately. Their stock is tanking because of their inattention to managing the safety of their operations.

The fact is that environmental, social, and governance issues are financially material to company performance. Any investor who knows what they are doing would be foolish to ignore those factors.

I know this because, as State treasurer and as an investor in the private sector, I have spent the last 10 years studying corporate performance. ESG issues matter.

Even if you don't agree with me, even if you think that environmental and social issues are not material to performance, you ought to at least believe that, in a free market, investors should have the power to make their own decisions and to choose which factors they think are material or not.

Let them use their professional judgment. Don't try to police what investors are thinking when they are making decisions.

Why is it that the Republican majority, which claims to be the party of limited government and free markets, is abandoning its free-market principles and trying to dictate to investors what they have to think? It makes no sense.

If anyone was wondering what this is about, it is not about free markets. It is not, certainly, about protecting workers' retirement security.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MAGAZINER. I will just say again, let's be honest about what this debate is really about. It is not about protecting worker retirement savings. If we were serious about that, we would be saying that ESG is material and should be considered.

It is not about free-market principles.

Could it be that it has to do with the oil and gas industry pouring tens of millions of dollars into campaign accounts on the Republican side? Could that be what is driving this?

Well, I think we see now where the priorities of our colleagues on the Republican side lie--not with workers, not with free-market principles, but with doing the bidding of the oil and gas industry.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source