“I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade
for the public good.” (Adam Smith, 1776)
“‘I out-lawyered ExxonMobil’s high-priced, white-shoe law firm …’ said [Steve] Milloy. ‘My anti-greenwashing proposal asks the climate bedwetting, pro-CO2 tax oil giant to report to shareholders on the actual costs and benefits of its climate-related activities.’” (Steven Milloy, 2020)
In a March 31, 2020, press release, “Milloy Wins Right to Present Anti-Greenwashing Proposal at Exxon-Mobil Annual Meeting,” the Energy & Environmental Legal Institute (E&E Legal) announced the good news: ExxonMobil will need to explain its politically correct, economically incorrect position bashing its own core business. Yes, petro sales in the EU might need a little corporate greenwash, but really, who in the Left or the Right is being fooled?
The once proud ExxonMobil (remember Lee Raymond, who did not have time for fakery?) has lost big money in its biofuels ventures. With a billion dollars spent annually, the company admits “There’s still a long journey ahead of us.”
The only good thing to be said about ExxonMobil’s appeasement strategy is that it is less deceitful and damaging than that of BP (see “Fossil-fuel BP vs. Fossil Fuels“). But that is not saying much, these days.
Hats off to the entrepreneurial Steve Milloy and the ultra-productive E&E Legal. Both are negating the big-dollar campaign of the Malthusian/deep ecology Left.
The E&E Legal Press Release follows:
Washington, D.C. – On Friday, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ruled that ExxonMobil must consider E&E Legal senior policy fellow and Junkscience.com author Steve Milloy’s shareholder proposal at the company’s Annual Shareholder meeting in May.
The shareholder proposal, originally submitted in December, states that “beginning in 2020, ExxonMobil publish an annual report of the incurred costs and associated significant and actual benefits that have accrued to shareholders, the public health and the environment, including the global climate, from the company’s environment-related activities that are voluntary and that exceed U.S. and foreign compliance and regulatory requirements.”
The largest oil & gas company in the world, with some of the most experienced lawyers on retainer, was unable to prevent Milloy’s proposal from appearing as part of the May meeting agenda. They vehemently opposed his proposal.
“I out-lawyered ExxonMobil’s high-priced, white-shoe law firm to ensure my shareholder proposal will be included in ExxonMobil’s 2020 proxy materials and will be voted on at its May shareholder meeting,” said Milloy. “My anti-greenwashing proposal asks the climate bedwetting, pro-CO2 tax oil giant to report to shareholders on the actual costs and benefits of its climate-related activities.”
This is not the first time the behemoth company has lost in an effort to silence Milloy. He’s asked pertinent questions in the past like why is an oil & gas company getting in bed with radical environmentalists whose main objective is to put the traditional energy industry out of business and into bankruptcy as they’ve done with the coal companies.
At the company’s May 2017 Annual Meeting, Milloy submitted a shareholder proposal calling out management for betraying shareholders by “aiding and abetting” extremist “climate activists” enemies. His first ExxonMobil shareholder proposal occurred in May 2008 when he ripped “climate activist poseur-shareholders.”
“Large global corporations love regulations as they disproportionately hurt smaller and mid-size companies, thus killing competition,” said E&E Legal President Craig Richardson. “Exxon-Mobil’s cynical embrace of the economy-killing ‘green agenda’ is an attempt to return to its monopolistic roots when J.D. Rockefeller owned the company.”
The Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal) is a 501(c)(3) organization that champions responsible and balanced environmentalism, which seeks to conserve the nation’s natural resources while ensuring a stable and robust economy through energy dominance. Specifically, E&E Legal advocates responsible resource development, conservation, sound science, and respect for property rights.