With people rioting in the streets all across the country and a pandemic that’s still not under control, the Faculty Senate of Stanford University felt that it was time to leap into action on the pressing matter of… divesting the University’s endowment from fossil fuels. (Don’t ask me, buddy. I just work here.) A motion was put in place at the end of May to ask the Trustees to divest from all oil and gas companies within 90 days. After that, they were to make arrangements to end all private partnerships or other ties with the fossil fuel industry within five years. The full vote of the Senate recommended against the motion, but it was passed on to the trustees anyway. Yesterday, the board voted on the proposal and once again gave it a thumbs down. (Divestment Facts)
“In considering the Fossil Free Stanford request for divestment of any investments in the top 100 oil and gas companies, the Board was guided by its Statement on Investment Responsibility. That statement notes SMC’s approach to evaluating investments and also provides an avenue for the Board to require divestment, saying that “very rare occasions may arise when companies’ actions or inactions are so abhorrent and ethically unjustifiable as to warrant the University’s disassociation from those investments.
In evaluating the request and consulting with stakeholders and experts, the Board said it was unable to conclude that all investments in oil and gas companies could be deemed to meet that threshold.
BREAKING: The Board of Trustees has decided not to divest from publicly traded oil and natural gas companies, despite calls to do so from students and some faculty members.
— The Stanford Daily (@StanfordDaily) June 12, 2020
The board agreed with the findings of the Faculty Senate on a number of points. First of all, many oil and gas industry-funded innovations have contributed to the health of the planet. Further, the University has spent years cultivating relationships with many of those companies and they currently fund scholarships for more than 1,000 students in the science and engineering departments. That sort of relationship would be hard to maintain after a slap in the face like the requested divestment maneuver.
This isn’t the first time the board has responded in this fashion. Under pressure from students and liberal faculty members alike, an identical request was sent to the board in 2016. They responded in the same way then, citing essentially the same reasons. Nothing much has changed since then except for an increase in the industry’s funding to the school.
As with nearly every large university in the country, Stanford’s administrators are trying to eat their cake and have it too. They host all manner of protests decrying the oil and gas industry for destroying the planet, causing climate change, killing the polar bears and pretty much anything else they can think of. They publicly call for more renewable energy, carbon taxes and similar schemes. But when you talk about removing a highly profitable asset from the endowment’s portfolio or endangering a major source of scholarship money, they slam on the brakes and say, “let’s not be too hasty here.”
Most of these schools talk a good game when it comes to hating capitalism. But when any significant action that affects their own bottom line comes along, they’re suddenly struck with a wave of common sense. Funny how that works, isn’t it?
