tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5732322676995190327.post-78016076565616091022008-03-26T00:19:00.004+02:002008-03-31T05:23:04.842+02:00<a href="http://dotherightthing.com/image/0/491/full.jpg"><img style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 320px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="http://dotherightthing.com/image/0/491/full.jpg" border="0" /></a><br /><div>I was so happy today when I got our mail. We're very minimally invested in a Fidelity fund, and they sent out a package to all shareholders on five proposals. We're supposed to vote on the proposals, and the last one is a shareholder proposal concerning "oversight procedures to screen out investments in companies that, in the judgment of the board, substantially contribute to genocide, patterns of extraordinary and egregious violations of human rights, or crimes against humanity."</div><br /><div></div><br /><div>Amazing. The anti-genocide activists (shouldn't we all be?) have actually gotten this on the ballot. This is an incredible testament to their indefatigable efforts, as they have faced tremendous opposition...as we shall shortly see.</div><br /><div></div><br /><div>It didn't take me long to figure out that the Board of Trustees is trying to do whatever it can to hinder the passage of this proposition. In fact, the cover page actually doesn't even describe the content of the shareholder proposal: unlike the other proposals, which are at least described in a phrase, the only description of this shareholder-initiated proposal is that the Trustees "recommend you vote <strong>against</strong> the proposal submitted by shareholders of certain funds." (Emphasis preserved from original).</div><br /><div></div><br /><div>I had to search through the packet to even find what this proposal entailed. When I found it, underneath the title was once again a warning from the Board of Trustees to vote "AGAINST" the proposal. (Again, emphasis preserved from the original). In fact, it almost sounded like the Board wanted people to harass the shareholders who created this proposition: it said that Fidelity will provide the names, addresses, and shareholdings of the proponents of this proposal. </div><br /><div></div><br /><div>The proposal itself is elegantly constructed, arguing that since "Fidelity portfolio managers make their investment decisions based on business and financial considerations...even in the face of egregious violations of human rights," it means that ordinary folks inadvertently invest in companies funding genocide (such as PetroChina). It cites a 2007 by KRC Research that found that 71% of respondents believe companies should take into consideration extreme human rights abuses when making investment decisions, rather than using only financial criteria.</div><br /><div></div><br /><div>This is followed by a "Statement of Opposition" from the Fidelity Funds Board of Trustees. They reply that investors "have other investment opportunities open to them should they wish to avoid investments in certain companies or countries." Basically, Fidelity will invest in anything legal, regardless of ethical implications. Its argument that there are other funds open to investors misses the point. The point is that Fidelity still has no conscience about its own funds, and also that most ordinary individuals don't know about PetroChina or Sinopec (let alone what their own portfolios look like!) so they don't realize they're supporting genocide. </div><br /><div></div><br /><div>On the voting card, there's one last deterrent. Right before Proposal #5, the line reads, "THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES RECOMMENDS A VOTE <u>AGAINST</u> THE FOLLOWING:" (again, emphasis preserved from original). </div><br /><div></div><br /><div>Incredible. For people who don't have the time to find the proposal buried in the middle of the packet, all they know about it is that it's not recommended by the trustees (who, by the way, are supposed to protect shareholder interests). And if they take to read the three lines of small print on the voting card, they may also figure out the proposal has to do with genocide.</div><br /><div></div><br /><div>At this point, I'm not too optimistic about the proposal itself, as it relies on <em>entirely</em> on the judgment of the Board - the same Board that is trying to destroy the proposal - to screen out investments that are ethically questionable. Obviously, this Board does not consider anything ethically questionable...so unfortunately, even if the proposal passes, the Board may just laugh and not change a thing. </div><br /><div></div><br /><div>But I'm still happy the proposal got on the docket. And I wrote this just so that the world knows that this is how Fidelity rolls.</div><br /><div></div><span style="font-size:85%;"><a href="http://dotherightthing.com/image/0/491/full.jpg"><em>Photo</em> </a>from dotherightthing.com.</span><br /><div></div>Kristinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12194078107819036706noreply@blogger.com