In November, MMA co-filed a shareholder resolution with Bank of America (BAC) which calls for a moratorium on the financing of new coal-fired power plants and mountain top removal projects. BAC has sinced challenged the validity of the resolution at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and both sides are currently submitting arguments. MMA, along with several other investor groups, began direct dialogue with the company in January, and talks continue.

BAC has established itself as one of the most “green” financial institutions, committing to increased energy efficiency and emissions reduction in its facilities. It has also taken the bold step of setting greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals for the projects it funds in its loan portfolio – the first bank to do so. As a socially concerned shareholder, MMA applauds BAC’s initiatives. However, continued financing of coal projects seems to contradict its own stated environmental goals. MMA hopes to encourage BAC to better align its policies with its goals.

Ultimately, the goal is to reduce GHG emissions, which contribute to climate change. Coal-fired power plants are the single largest source of GHG emissions in the nation, and many more plants are in the works. Mountain top removal mining is increasingly practiced by coal companies in Appalachia, resulting in ruined watersheds, mudslides, and devastated communities. Banks play a pivotal role in financing energy generation, and if they begin to phase out their support of fossil fuel projects and support clean energy instead, it can make a big difference in reducing overall GHG emissions.

MMA Praxis applauds the decision by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) not to pursue its controversial process to curtail or even eliminate the right to file shareholder resolutions, proposed in the middle of 2007. SRI and related organizations, including MMA, helped to organize many of the record 34,000 comments the SEC received in opposition to limiting shareowner proposals and the stifling of shareholder speech. However, the Commission has left the door open to revisit such changes in 2008. Thus, MMA will remain vigilant in safeguarding the rights of American investors.

With only a tiny handful of comments on the public record supporting the controversial proposals, the overwhelming expression of opposition paralleled national opinion survey findings released in September. That scientific survey found that only about a third or less of U.S. investors supported any of the five potential approaches outlined by the SEC to curb the rights of shareholders to file shareholder resolutions and participate in the process of selecting members of corporate boards.

This was not the first time that socially responsible and religious investors have challenged a potential SEC curb on the voice of shareholders. The current campaign by concerned investors surpassed by a significant margin the outcry that ensued in 1997-1998 when more than 300 socially responsible investing, religious, labor and other groups coalesced to oppose an earlier SEC staff plan to gut the shareholder resolution process. The groups prevailed in that fight in which the SEC was forced to withdraw its widely-criticized proposal.

In late January, Lee Scott, CEO and president of Wal-Mart, delivered an address at Wal-Mart’s Year Beginning Meeting that primarily covered sustainability. The speech can be downloaded below.

Scott’s remarks are visionary and echo a number of points made by socially concerned investors for many years. He also states, “Now it is one thing to say you want to do this. It is a whole different ballgame to actually do it, especially for a retailer of our size. But your Wal-Mart will do this.” This acknowledgment is helpful, as shareholder advocates have had concerns for the last few years as Wal-Mart’s sustainability rhetoric has increased but its practices lag behind.

Of greatest significance to me is Scott’s pledge to prefer and - possibly pay more for - suppliers that meet or exceed Wal-Mart’s social and environmental criteria. If Wal-Mart is truly committed to this, it constitutes a fundamental change of business plan. The relentless drive toward low $ costs (at all other costs) is the root cause of Wal-Mart’s current unsustainable business approach. If that approach changes to value long term ecological and social soundness, it is positive news.

Lee Scott’s Speech