{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cotton-asks-blackrock-to-explain-its-inadequate-response-to-antitrust-concerns-from-esg-scam", "Cotton Asks BlackRock to Explain its Inadequate Response to Antitrust Concerns from ESG Scam", "2022-07-27", "2022", "2022-07", "Republican", "Senate", "AR", "Tom Cotton", "C001095", "www.cotton.senate.gov", "cotton", "https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases", "scraper", "FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEContact: James Arnold or Mary Collins Atkinson (202) 224-2353\n\nJuly 27, 2022\n\nCotton Asks BlackRock to Explain its Inadequate Response to Antitrust Concerns from ESG Scam\n\nWashington, D.C. \u2014 Senator Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) last night sent a second letter to Larry Fink, Chairman and CEO of BlackRock Inc., reiterating his demand for answers about the firm\u2019s involvement in a scheme to reduce drilling for oil and gas that may violate antitrust law.\n\nIn part, Cotton wrote, \u201cBlackRock\u2019s intimation that it set boundaries when joining CA100+ is unconvincing, as the statement mirrors CA100+\u2019s own language on its website. And if this was a response to my letter, it did not answer my questions.\u201d\n\n\u201cBlackRock\u2019s statement raises additional questions about its commitments to the CA100+ initiative. Many of the commitments investor participants make when joining CA100+ raise potential antitrust issues,\u201d Cotton continued.\n\nText of the letter may be found here and below.\n\nMr. Larry Fink\n\nChairman and Chief Executive Officer\n\nBlackRock Inc.\n\n55 East 52nd Street\n\nNew York, NY 10055\n\nDear Mr. Fink,\n\nOn July 13, I sent you a letter inquiring about BlackRock\u2019s involvement with Climate Action 100+ (\u201cCA100+\u201d).\n\nThough BlackRock failed to provide my office with a response, it did respond to a request for a statement by \u201cresponsible-investor.com.\u201d BlackRock\u2019s statement to the website was:\n\nBlackRock joined Climate Action 100+ to participate in dialogue with companies and financial institutions on matters important to our clients. As we made clear to CA100+ when we joined, BlackRock acts independently in its investment decisions. We do not co-ordinate investment decisions with any members of Climate Action 100+, and we do not buy, sell, hold or vote our shares together with any Climate Action 100+ signatory. As fiduciaries to our clients, we consistently prioritise the long-term economic interests of our clients above any commitments or pledges not required by law.\n\nBlackRock\u2019s intimation that it set boundaries when joining CA100+ is unconvincing, as the statement mirrors CA100+\u2019s own language on its website. And if this was a response to my letter, it did not answer my questions.\n\nBlackRock\u2019s statement raises additional questions about its commitments to the CA100+ initiative. Many of the commitments investor participants make when joining CA100+ raise potential antitrust issues. For example, based on CA100+\u2019s website:\n\n\u2022\u201cinvestors commit to engaging with at least one of 166 focus companies . . . and to seek commitments on the initiative\u2019s key asks\u201d;\n\n\u2022investors are required to \u201cwork cooperatively with a number of collaborating investors\u201d;\n\n\u2022investors are \u201crequired to share information with the engagement working group and the coordinating investor network\u201d;\n\n\u2022investors are \u201crequired to liaise with relevant network staff and/or lead investors to ensure engagement priorities and ambition are aligned with the goals of the initiative, as well as with the overall collaborative approach\u201d;\n\n\u2022investors are required to \u201cdisclose through a bi-annual survey their engagement plans and priorities over the coming 12 months to ensure strong and concerted action\u201d; and\n\n\u2022investors are required to warn focus companies that \u201cinaction by companies following engagement may result in investors taking further action.\u201d\n\nIn light of these commitments that BlackRock made when becoming a CA100+ \u201cinvestor participant,\u201d please provide answers to the following questions by August 2, 2022:\n\n1.Has BlackRock followed through on its intention to \u201cparticipate in dialogue with companies and financial institutions\u201d as part of the CA100+ initiative? If so, please list each company and financial institution BlackRock engaged in \u201cdialogue\u201d with, and explain what was discussed during such \u201cdialogue.\u201d\n\n2.In light of BlackRock\u2019s insistence that it \u201cacts independently\u201d and \u201cdo[es] not co-ordinate\u201d with other CA100+ members, does BlackRock count itself among the CA100+ \u201cinvestors [that] recognise that unprecedented cross-sector collaboration is required to achieve net zero across the global economy\u201d?\n\n3.Has Blackrock fulfilled the CA100+ commitments listed above? If so, please identify:\n\na.the companies BlackRock has engaged with;\n\nb.the investors BlackRock has collaborated with;\n\nc.the investors BlackRock has shared information with;\n\nd.the investors and network staff BlackRock has liaised with; and\n\ne.the companies BlackRock has threatened with \u201cfurther action.\u201d\n\nIn addition, please provide a copy of all bi-annual surveys BlackRock has prepared for CA100+.", 1, "2026-03-30T01:40:41Z", "2026-04-08T02:49:02Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cotton-asks-blackrock-to-explain-its-inadequate-response-to-antitrust-concerns-from-esg-scam"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.8276979681104422, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}