Bloomberg recently reported that Blackrock, the world’s largest asset manager, has been embarking on a charm offensive in the state of Texas.
Meetings with state officials, including the Lieutenant Governor, and contributions to conservative organizations and a significant shift in rhetoric away from earlier aggressive repetition of commitment to ESG and DEI all signal that Blackrock is courting the conservatives it previously alienated.
But let’s put things in perspective:
Blackrock got itself in deep before pivoting away from a progressive social agenda. Conservatives started talking to the company as early as 2019 when it helped spearhead a statement from the Business Roundtable redefining the purpose of a corporation to shift focus away from the owners towards a diffuse group of abstractions known as “stakeholders.” The company did not start to budge until the backlash began to hit their bottom line, with states divesting from Blackrock, including an 8.5 billion dollar divestment by the Texas Permanent School Fund spearheaded by Aaron Kinsey. Other states, including Indiana under the leadership of Treasurer Dan Elliot, have also divested.
In addition, Blackrock has been placed on lists of companies not to do business with in several states, including Oklahoma under the auspices of Treasurer Todd Russ.
Finally, Blackrock has been the subject of numerous lawsuits from state Attorneys General and was implicated in the recent American Airlines lawsuit, which held the air carrier liable for what the suit alleges is a conflict of interest in its dealings with Blackrock.
So, for many conservatives, the question lingers: is this contrition or is it just submission? Has Blackrock changed its mind or is it just knuckling under and biding its time? We’re not mind readers and wouldn’t deign to claim that we know what is in the hearts of the executives of Blackrock, but we at least ask some questions about the company’s actions.
Here are some questions worth asking:
When Blackrock drops out of various climate alliances, does it still stay committed to the goals on those alliances on its own public statements?
Dropping out of alliances and spreading grants and contributions around on the right are one thing, but what does Blackrock actually do when voting with the money of red state public fiduciaries? Do their votes show an anti-hydrocarbon bias? Do their votes attack the predominant values of the citizens of the state on matters such as debanking, DEI, and 2nd Amendment issues?
If non-ESG asset owners such as public pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, corporate pension plans, universities, foundations, and non-profits don’t know the answers to those questions, we can help. Better to practice risk management (which gets answers to those questions in advance) than crisis management, which scrambles for answers after something goes wrong.
