by Claude Solnik
Published: October 3, 2011

It looks like a few firms have agreed to open the books on their political donations, a year after the Supreme Court unceremoniously closed the door on once strict limits to contributions.

A trio of Fortune 500 companies whose stock is held by the New York State Common Retirement Fund have agreed to disclose their political campaign contributions and procedures, after requests from New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli.

DiNapoli said Marriott International, Yum Brands (parent of Pizza Hut and Taco Bell) and Limited Brands(parent of Henri Bendel and Victoria’s Secret), whose stock is held by the state’s $146.9 billion retirement fund, agreed to disclose contributions to political campaigns and advocacy groups and outline their approval process for political contributions.

The comptroller and the Center for Political Accountability began a push last year for greater disclosure after the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision opened the doors to big corporate contributions.

“There’s cause for concern when corporations make it their business to finance campaigns,” DiNapoli said. “Now we’re asking corporations to do the responsible thing for their shareholders and for the public. These three companies have heeded the call.”

After finding that about 70 of the S&P 500 companies had public policies regarding disclosing political donations, the comptroller and the center sent out letters requesting information from the remaining firms.

“We engaged with these companies. Some came forward and said we’ll work with you,” said Eric Sumberg, a spokesman for the comptroller. “We proposed shareholder resolutions at some.”

The retirement fund filed nine shareholder resolutions, leading to agreements with these three firms during the proxy season.

The New York State Common Retirement Fund as of Sept. 16 owned nearly $150 million combined in these firms’ shares including 1.6 million shares of Yum Brands worth $86.2 million; 873,292 shares of Limited Brands worth $35.2 million and 938,109 shares of Marriott International worth $27.4 million.

DiNapoli said he’s continuing to push for disclosure of corporate contributions as a way of monitoring spending of firms whose shares are held by the state an their interaction with the political process.

“Proxy season is in the spring,” Sumberg said. “Over the next couple of months, we’ll look at which companies to engage with the next season. Hopefully, we’ll have more successful engagements.”

WASHINGTON, D.C., Sep. 01 /CSRwire/ - Two leading sustainable business organizations representing 5,000 small businesses today sent a letter calling on President Obama to reject the controversial Keystone XL pipeline and, instead, invest in clean energy technologies.  

The pipeline would deliver oil from the tar sands in Canada to the Gulf of Mexico across the United States.

In their letter, Green America’s Green Business Network and The Green Chamber of Commercesaid the pipeline would further United States addiction to oil and risk disastrous new oil spills in rivers and the Ogallala aquifer. Global warming and oil spills have been seen to have an extremely detrimental effect on the economy, which affects the well-being of their businesses.

In addition to these risks, production of the 700,000 barrels of heavy crude that would travel from the tar sands every day creates a tremendous amount of greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. Both the potential for environmentally harmful oils spills and increase in GHG emissions would be harmful to the environment, in addition to the harm to business in the United States.

The text of the letter to President Obama follows:

“We write to you on behalf of thousands of small businesses in the United States that are deeply concerned about the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. The well-being of our businesses and the economy in the United States are tied to the health of our environment. The Keystone XL pipeline will have an immensely negative impact on the environment. It would bring 700,000 barrels of heavy crude from Canadian tar sands to the US every day, furthering the US addiction to oil, and risking new oil spills in rivers and the Ogallala aquifer. The production of oil from tar sands would generate enormous greenhouse gas emissions, and create greater impacts from global warming.

The impacts of global warming -- from droughts, to floods, to extreme weather -- are bad for business in the United States. As we saw in the Gulf, oil spills also have a devastating impact on the economy. The failure to shift America away from its dependence on oil to cleaner fuels will further imperil our economy and reduce the number of green jobs we need for sustainable economic growth.

Your administration has taken bold and necessary steps to increase the green energy economy in the US. Now, we urge you to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, and further invest in clean energy technologies. It is the right decision for the US, and it is the right decision for business.”

WASHINGTON, March 28, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Green America, Global Exchange and the International Labor Rights Forum are launching a brand-jamming contest in order to bring attention to Hershey's failure to crack down on child labor and other abuses in its cocoa supply chain.

Contestants may submit entries under three categories: Slogan/tagline, print advertisement, or video. These advertisements and slogans will be mock versions of Hershey's promotions, with prizes going to the most creative submissions.  For more information about how to participate in the Hershey brand-jamming contest, go to http://www.raisethebarhershey.org/take-action-hershey-brandjam-contest/.

All entries must be submitted by April 10, 2011, after which a public vote will be taken to help determine the winner. The grand prize winner will be awarded $1000 and best-in-category winners also will receive prizes, including Fair Trade Certified chocolate.  The awards will be announced on April 28, 2011, the day of Hershey's Annual General Meeting for shareholders.

Green America Fair Trade Coordinator Elizabeth O'Connell said:   "We've already had tens of thousands of U.S. consumers participate directly in various campaigns to highlight Hershey's troubling reliance on forced and child labor in West Africa.  Now, we want to get consumers directly involved in spoofing the ads of Hershey to put more heat on the company."  

Global Exchange Fair Trade Director Adrienne Fitch Frankel said: "It remains our hope that Hershey will put an end to these unconscionable labor abuses.  That day is likely to come about more quickly as even more Americans tell Hershey to clean up its chocolate mess."

ILRF Campaigns Director Tim Newman said: "Hershey lags behind the rest of the industry in failing to have any independent, third party certification for its cocoa.  More and more consumers are calling on Hershey to raise the bar and begin sourcing Fair Trade Certified cocoa."

All submissions will be eligible to be used as part of the "Raise the Bar, Hershey!" Campaign.

The "Raise the Bar, Hershey!" Campaign is spearheading actions to encourage Hershey to switch to Fair Trade Certified cocoa, which is grown under standards that prohibit the use of child and forced labor and trafficking. The cocoa industry has been plagued for years by this type of exploitation. Currently, Hershey lags behind its competitors in sourcing cocoa that has been certified by independent, third parties to meet international labor rights standards.  Fair Trade also guarantees farmers a stable, minimum price, empowering them to start to escape the cycle of poverty in conventional trade.

GREEN AMERICA is the nation's leading green economy organization. Founded in 1982, Green America (formerly Co-op America) provides the economic strategies, organizing power and practical tools for businesses and individuals to solve today's social and environmental problems. www.GreenAmerica.org.

GLOBAL EXCHANGE is a membership-based international human rights organization dedicated to promoting social, economic and environmental justice around the world. www.GlobalExchange.org

THE INTERNATIONAL LABOR RIGHTS FORUM is an advocacy organization dedicated to achieving just and humane treatment for workers worldwide. www.LaborRights.org

SOURCE Green America, Washington, D.C.

By Jeff Cossette

Doling out corporate cash to support political campaigns is not winning any votes with shareholders.

The debacle at Target pointed to just how bad it could be. Despite a strong record in support of diversity, the Minnesota-based retailer embroiled itself in a stew of controversy and boycott last summer after revelations it gave a remarkably generous fraction of the corporate treasury to an organization that supported a politician some considered a bigot. Now the incident has reverberated into the shareowner relations realm with Target facing the uncomfortable prospect of a shareholder resolution on its corporate political activities.

Still, Target isn't alone. More than 45 companies could face proxy initiatives on disclosing and accounting for their political donations this year. Since such resolutions were first filed in 2004, shareholders are increasingly inclined to support them. Last year saw an average 30 percent vote in favor of 28 resolutions on contribution disclosure resolutions; votes above 40 percent were reached at Coventry Health Care, CVS Caremark and Sprint Nextel. Proxy advisers, public pension funds and mainstream mutual funds are getting on the bandwagon. Even business leaders oppose secretive political spending, according to a recent poll.

'There are real risks involved in political giving,' explains Bruce Freed, president of the Center for Political Accountability (CPA), a Washington-based corporate governance advocate. Freed co-wrote a handbook on corporate political activity with the Conference Board that warned companies face heightened financial, legal and reputational risk following the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, which effectively eliminated most legal restraints on corporate political spending. The widely distributed handbook also includes a model code of conduct developed by the CPA. 'Our request is straightforward,' says Freed. 'That companies disclose the political spending of all corporate funds and adopt and disclose policies for review and management.'

Just over half of S&P 100 companies now meet the CPA's basic guidelines, but investors remain engaged in about a dozen dialogues. 'A resolution is just a way to spur a dialogue,' says Freed. 'Our preference is to resolve this. But some companies, frankly, have not been moved.' He points to Goldman Sachs as one example. 'It has made some movement but the sticking point is its disclosure of money given to trade associations.' To add pressure on such companies, the CPA will soon introduce an index rating companies' political disclosure and accountability.

The Chamber

Indeed, corporate payments - often secret - to controversial trade associations have become a major issue for investors. A coalition of CPA members and other institutions filed resolutions in November at Accenture, IBM, PepsiCo and Pfizer (among the 120 or so members of the board of the US Chamber of Commerce) to disclose and review their oversight of trade association donations.

'The significant disconnect between some of the Chamber of Commerce's goals and many corporations' goals and stated CSR values troubles investors,' says Shelley Alpern, vice president at Trillium Asset Management. 'They are wondering why these companies associate with a trade association actively working against their interests.' The board, which has opposed measures aimed at climate change, reportedly poured $75 mn into the 2010 election campaigns largely to unseat pro-healthcare reform candidates. In recent years, Nike withdrew as a board member while Apple and energy utility PG&E resigned as members as a result of the chamber's climate change position.

'We are trying to have a thoughtful conversation with companies on this issue,' adds Tim Smith, senior vice president at Walden Asset Management. 'It's an uncomfortable issue to deal with. Few companies are stepping up and saying, Yes, we must reassess our role on the board. Still, many business leaders recognize it's not good for a major business organization to be so partisan.'

The Sticking Point

Companies have taken a broad variety of approaches to political participation risk. Some, like IBM and Avon, skirt the issue entirely by banning any sort of contribution. Microsoft, acknowledging the Citizens United case, has informed trade associations its contributions may not be used for independent expenditures. Merck posts its political contributions categorized by state candidate and amount on its website, and discloses the portion of dues major US trade associations report as being used for political advocacy.

Norfolk Southern recently agreed to beef up its political disclosure policy after receiving shareholder proposals on the issue from the New York City pension funds. The shipping and transportation company will not only disclose its political contributions, but will also state on its website when the company disagrees with political efforts supported by trade associations to which it belongs. The NYC Comptroller gushed that Norfolk Southern's new transparency stood 'in stark contrast to those corporations that make anonymous donations to trade associations to hide management's support for issues and political campaigns that may be publicly distasteful or even contrary to their company's publicly stated positions or best interests'.

This year, the New York City pension funds have renewed their call for transparency, filing proposals at six companies, including Charles Schwab, Coventry Health Care and Sprint Nextel, to provide detailed accounts of their direct and indirect political contributions and who decides to make them.

Meanwhile, another group of investors filed proposals at oil firms Valero Energy, Tesoro, and Occidental Petroleum seeking an independent board review of their political spending policies. The resolutions were inspired by the companies' support for a California ballot initiative to block the state's global warming law. At least one resolution has been withdrawn, however: Tesoro agreed in December to the disclosure and board oversight of all direct and indirect political spending.

'Working with Tesoro was a cooperative experience,' remarks Laura Campos, director of shareholder activities at the Nathan Cummings Foundation. 'In many of our dialogues over the years, the main sticking point has been disclosure of contributions to trade and other associations.'

The Argument

That's just where Bruce Herbert is stuck. As founder of Seattle-based Newground Social Investment he's been pursuing Boeing on political spending issues for several years. 'Boeing has made some disclosures,' he says. 'But it isn't willing to disclose what it pay to trade associations. That's the big one.'

While activist arguments are framed in terms of financial opportunity and risk and the materiality of superficially non-financial issues, the broader implications of a brave new post-Citizen's United world are lost to none. 'The court was astonishingly naïve or extremely cynical and manipulative,' Herbert says. ' is ludicrous and counter to democracy and the common good.' Pointing to the rising flow of direct and anonymous funding in US elections, he adds: 'Spending so much money won't benefit us as investors and it certainly can't benefit us as citizens.'

'The materiality argument holds the day,' confirms Laura Berry, executive director of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) whose members filed at least 25 shareholder resolutions aimed at corporate political spending. 'But broader issues come up when one human being talks with another. I've met some deeply engaged people at the highest corporate levels who desire the kinds of transparency we are talking about.'

As for rolling back Citizens United, Berry sees light in the longer term. 'We need to go through another presidential election cycle before people start to really see the money flows,' she says. 'There will undoubtedly be many examples demonstrating its flawed judgment.'

Spending Patterns

While nearly 80 percent of S&P 500 companies have disclosed political spending policies, they are often communicated with a short, imprecise statement buried deep in the company's website, according to a report released last October by the Investor Responsibility Research Center Institute and Sustainable Investments Institute. The study also finds less than one quarter of companies require boards to oversee political spending, with health boards most likely to be involved. Less than 14 percent have revealed policies on indirect spending. Financials are least likely to provide information on indirect spending. Less than 20 percent of America's largest companies provide any information on how much they spend. Utilities are most prone to political giving, technology companies least.

Read the full article here.

Millions of people love checking out the daily deals on discount sites like Groupon or LivingSocial, but if you’ve been yearning for a more environmentally-focused way to save, GreenAmerica has just what you need.

Green America, the United States’ leading green economy organization, recently launched Green Deals, a Web site that provides people who care about good deals and going green with discounts from local and national online green companies.

Over 100,000 people are already signed on to Green Deals, and all participating companies meet Green America’s strict standards for sustainability.

Green America Executive Director Alisa Gravitz said: “Green Deals helps Americans who are tightening their belts live a green life and save money at the same time.  From household necessities to great gift ideas, Green Deals provides terrific products from businesses that have been screened by Green America for their social and environmental responsibility.”

Green Deals also features tips on everyday green living, coupons, and other offers from their Green Approved Businesses. Recent deals have included organic chocolates, green cleaning supplies, and environmentally friendly water bottles.

Read the original post here.