(C) Common Dreams
This story was originally published by Common Dreams and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



The U.S. Chamber's Climate Policy Engagement, February 2023 [1]

[]

Date: 2023-04

While the Chamber’s climate advocacy remains largely negative, many of its member companies demonstrate significantly more positive engagement. As evident in the graphic below, the Chamber’s engagement mirrors that of its fossil fuel members – in some cases falling even lower. Despite being a cross-sector group, the Chamber does not seem to adopt the positions of its numerous, highly positive members from other sectors beyond oil and gas.

More information on US companies and their industry association links is available on the InfluenceMap US platform.

In fact, the Chamber’s score of E- is the same as the American Gas Association (E-) and only marginally higher than the American Petroleum Institute (F). Below is a table of six major federal climate policies (*and one additional transparency measure proposed by the SEC, assessed separately under InfluenceMap’s sustainable finance program) that were introduced in 2022. While not comprehensive of all climate-related action taken in 2022, these six policies represent specific items of legislation or regulation introduced by the federal government in 2022 to mitigate climate change as motivated by the country’s commitment to the Paris Agreement. They span multiple sectors and exclude non-binding targets and other related initiatives. Notably, the Chamber’s position mirrors API’s on all six measures, except for one instance where InfluenceMap did not locate any evidence of engagement from API.

2022 Climate Policy API Position U.S. Chamber Position Build Back Better Act OPPOSED The API advocated against the Clean Electricity Performance Program and the methane fee in Build Back Better from 2021-22, including soliciting scores of state trade associations to cosign a joint letter against the methane fee before it was incorporated into the bill. OPPOSED The US Chamber appeared to run an extensive campaign the Build Back Better Act, repeatedly opposing the bill on the basis of its corporate tax increases. Inflation Reduction Act OPPOSED The API strongly opposed the Inflation Reduction Act, joining multiple coalition letters against the bill, including one in August 2022 critiquing the methane fee in particular. OPPOSED The Chamber appeared to run another extensive campaign against the Inflation Reduction Act. It joined an August 2022 coalition letter against the IRA and ran ads in two of Arizona’s largest papers in February 2022, pressuring state Senators to vote against the bill. EPA Methane Regulations OPPOSED In comments to the EPA in February 2022, the API attempted to weaken multiple parts of the proposal, describing them as unnecessarily burdensome. OPPOSED The Chamber submitted comments to the EPA in January 2022 critiquing the proposal and contesting the EPA’s legal authority to regulate methane emissions from existing sources. EPA Clean Trucks Plan OPPOSED The API submitted comments to the EPA in May 2022 cautioning against the Clean Trucks Plan and calling for a technology-neutral approach to transportation policy in the U.S. to transportation policy in the U.S. OPPOSED The Chamber heavily criticized the Clean Trucks proposal in direct comments to the EPA in May 2022. DoE Gas Boiler Standards No Recorded Engagement OPPOSED The Chamber submitted joint comments in October 2022 opposing the Department of Energy’s proposal to raise the ambition of Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Furnaces. Revision to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) OPPOSED API released a “10-in-2022 Plan” outlining ten policy recommendations for the U.S. federal government to support oil and gas production, which included limiting the NEPA review process in apparent contrast with the administration’s proposed changes. OPPOSED The Chamber suggested that the Biden Administration’s decisions to restore climate provisions under NEPA would result in unnecessarily extensive and duplicative bureaucratic red tape. *SEC Climate Disclosure Rule OPPOSED In June 2022 comments to the SEC, the API opposed the rule, asserting that it would violate the First Amendment and face legal challenges. OPPOSED In June 2022 comments to the SEC, the Chamber opposed the rule, asserting that it would violate the First Amendment and face legal challenges.

Companies are now facing growing scrutiny over their links to powerful industry groups that continue to block climate action in their name. Policymakers, investors, NGOs, and other actors are calling attention to the issue. Climate Action 100+ (CA100+), for example, is a voluntary initiative of 700 investors responsible for over $68 trillion in assets under management working to ensure the world's largest corporate greenhouse gas emitters take necessary action on climate change. Through CA100+ as well as various other investor initiatives, shareholders are requesting enhanced disclosures from companies on the topic of climate policy engagement and industry association membership. Since 2021, InfluenceMap has detected an uptick of disclosures and other statements from Chamber members highlighting where they disagree with the group on climate and, in some cases, steps they are taking to evolve its positions. However, the vast majority of Chamber member companies have not publicly disclosed where they disagree with the group on climate.

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Climate Disclosure Rule The Chamber has, in its own words, been “at the forefront of fighting” the SEC’s proposed climate disclosure rule. In comments on the proposal in June 2022, the Chamber asserted that the proposal exceeded the SEC’s statutory authority and violated the First Amendment. In supplemental comments to the SEC in November 2022, the Chamber suggested that the major questions doctrine, a principle employed in the West Virginia v. EPA decision, “confirms the Commission’s lack of statutory authority.” The Chamber has suggested that the rule will be vulnerable to legal challenges if finalized in its current form. Facing this opposition, the SEC is considering scaling back its climate disclosure rule. According to a Politico story from February 2023, “the top Wall Street regulator’s team has signaled that a primary concern is the wave of lawsuits that are expected to challenge the rule once it’s finalized.” An area of potential rollback is the rule’s mandate to disclose Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions if material, or if the registrant has set a target or goal that includes Scope 3 emissions. The Chamber has opposed Scope 3 disclosure requirements in its comment letters and other public messaging. In its opposition to the SEC rule and Scope 3 emissions disclosure requirements, the Chamber appears to be adopting the most negative positions of its members, and omitting the positions of members that fully or partially support the rule. Members that have expressed support for the rules, including its Scope 3 disclosure requirements, include United Airlines, Bank of America, Capital Group, UPS, and BP, to name a few. Members that have expressed opposition to Scope 3 requirements include Devon Energy, ConocoPhillips, Walmart, and ExxonMobil.

As of November 2022, over 55 companies globally have published audits of their industry association memberships. 22 US companies have produced these disclosures (18 of which are members of the Chamber). While none identified full misalignment with the Chamber on climate change policy, 5 of them – General Motors, ConocoPhillips, Delta, Dominion Energy, and Teck Resources – as well as EU-based Bayer, BHP, BP, Shell PLC, and Rio Tinto identified partial misalignment.

When it came to the Chamber and its opposition to the Inflation Reduction Act – the greatest attempt at emissions reductions in US history – not a single company publicly disavowed the group’s advocacy against the bill.

GM and Delta provided details on the steps they were taking to evolve the Chamber’s positions, while ConocoPhillips and Dominion did not. Teck Resources outlined general ‘Next Steps and Actions’ it would take towards trade associations it was misaligned and partially misaligned with but did not provide specific steps it would take for the Chamber.

In its review, General Motors stated that CEO Mary Barra meets frequently with the Chamber to push the group to support policies complementary to its vision for an all-EV future. During the debate over the Inflation Reduction Act, GM also distanced itself from the Business Roundtable, where its CEO Mary Barra chairs the Board, in supporting the bill.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://influencemap.org/briefing/The-U-S-Chamber-of-Commerce-and-Climate-Policy-21084

Published and (C) by Common Dreams
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0..

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/commondreams/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.