The Free Enterprise Project (FEP) presented proposals at the Goldman Sachs, Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson annual shareholder meetings on April 28. The Goldman Sachs and Pfizer proposals addressed the companies’ charitable and political contributions, respectively, while the Johnson & Johnson proposal challenged diversity policies that give preference to members of certain racial, ethnic and sexual identity groups.
At today’s Goldman Sachs meeting, held in New York City, FEP Director Scott Shepard presented Item 4, which called on Goldman Sachs to increase reporting on its charitable contributions.
“Goldman Sachs thinks it’s OK to distribute shareholder money according to the personal policy preferences of executives instead of on an objective basis, and may do so without any restrictions or monitoring,” said Shepard after the meeting. “There’s that infamous Goldman arrogance again.”
Shepard also called out Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon for exploiting shareholders:
“As it happens, Goldman is using shareholder assets to fund corrupt organizations or to pay for David Solomon’s fancy lunches and trips to Davos, Switzerland to hobnob with his World Economic Forum pals. That’s not how fiduciary duty works, and he and his board should be ashamed – not arrogantly proud – of that behavior.”
Shepard’s remarks, as prepared for delivery, can be read here. The audio of his presentation can be heard here. Item 4, and Goldman Sachs’ response to it, can be found on pages 75-76 of the company’s proxy statement. The proposal was not approved.
FEP’s proposal at the Pfizer annual meeting also addressed corporate spending, specifically regarding funds used for political lobbying. At the virtual meeting, FEP Associate Ethan Peck presented Item 5, which requested that the company publish an annual report on the congruency of its political expenditures against the company’s fundamental purpose and fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders.
After the meeting, Peck commented:
“The Pfizer board isn’t incompetent; it’s malicious. It knows that the company’s political contributions deepen corporate ties with the administrative state in a way that squashes the individual, and that’s exactly why it does what it can to conceal such spending from shareholders. It knows that sponsoring organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign and the World Economic Forum is controversial – for obvious reasons – and that’s exactly why the company champions its mysteriously perfect Corporate Equality Index score and Mr. Bourla’s “invitation” to Davos while all too conveniently failing to disclose Pfizer’s paid partnerships with such organizations.”
Peck also called out Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla directly:
“Bourla is a globalist leech. He collects a $21 million salary from a company that’s killing everyday Americans with addictive drugs at a faster rate than any South American cartel. In a nation that welcomed him, he uses his position to stomp on our civil liberties and spin the revolving door faster. And he is using shareholder money to finance his free trips to Davos where he advances the transhumanist agenda.”
In addition, Peck attempted to ask Bourla a question about Pfizer’s involvement with the World Economic Forum’s transhumanism agenda. However, Pfizer did not provide investors with the ability to ask live questions until the official Q&A session was over, with Pfizer investor relations telling Bourla that no live questions had been received. The online window to submit questions was then opened, unannounced, for less than 30 seconds during Bourla’s closing remarks, but despite Peck submitting his question twice during that window, his question was ignored.
“It’s uncommon for there to be no questions at all at a shareholder meeting, especially at the meeting of a massive corporation like Pfizer,” Peck noted afterwards. “Perhaps it was an honest mistake on their part, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was an intentional ‘mistake’ instead. Either way – incompetence or malice – Pfizer has yet again failed to fulfill its responsibility to its shareholders.”
Peck’s full statement in support of Item 5, as prepared for delivery, can be read here. The audio of his presentation can be heard here. Item 5, and Pfizer’s response to it, can be found on pages 79-80 of the company’s proxy statement. The proposal was not approved.
At the shareholder meeting of another pharmaceutical giant, Johnson & Johnson, FEP Program Coordinator Sarah Rehberg presented Item 6, which requested that the Board of Directors commission a racial equity audit analyzing the companys impacts on civil rights, equity, diversity and inclusion, and the impacts of those issues on the companys business.
“Our proposal seeks to ensure that all employees – not just those deemed diverse by the company – feel included and receive equal treatment when it comes to workplace dynamics and career advancement,” Rehberg said at the meeting, which was held virtually.
Rehberg questioned how the company’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies comport with its nondiscrimination policies:
“Progress on DEI goals is a consideration when it comes to the company’s compensation and benefits program. It is difficult to therefore reconcile the company’s DEI policy with its nondiscrimination policy, when it attaches financial incentives to necessarily suppressing the advancement of those the company deems non-diverse.”
Rehberg’s remarks, as prepared for delivery, can be read here. The audio of her presentation can be heard here. Item 6, and Johnson & Johnson’s response to it, can be found on pages 126-130 of the company’s proxy statement. The proposal was not approved.
Investors wishing to oppose left-wing corporate donations, race-based discrimination and other “woke” policies infiltrating Corporate America should download FEP’s 2022 editions of the “Investor Value Voter Guide” and the “Balancing the Boardroom” guide. Other action items for investors and non-investors alike can be found on FEP’s website.