March 18, 2021
I am a semi-retired securities attorney. Attorneys do not accumulate equity in any business by practicing law, which is what I have done my entire working life. The small firms and solo practice that have been my career do not have pension plans. The investments in my IRA are what I am relying on the support my wife and me through retirement.
I consider myself an avid environmentalist and dedicate much of my time away from my practice to environmental pursuits. I do not consider Climate change one of our more urgent environmental issues.
The function of the Securities Laws should be to help inform me of the risks and rewards of investments, not to promote the religion of Climate change. The Department of Labor got it right. Climate change and other EGT issues should be considered only the extent the impact the company's bottom line.
If people want to invest in EGT funds, that is their right, but I have other and better ways to support good causes directly. What I want the companies in which I invest to do is make a lot of money, send out dividends and increase the price of their stock.
I think I am not the only informed investor that thinks this way, but most are too afraid of being cancelled to speak out. So are the companies which you are considering burdening with additional environmental disclosures which do not directly effect their bottom line.
The SEC is not the EPD. You need to focus on your job of giving me and other investors good economic information upon which to base our investment decisions. Climate change is an issue for EPD and John Kerry, not for the SEC.