Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) has issued a public letter criticizing the SEC's recent proposal for mandatory climate disclosures.  Specifically, Manchin questions the need for such a rule based on the fact that a majority of companies "already publish sustainability reports that include information about climate risks," and since the "Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) collects such information from fossil fuel companies through its Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP)."  But the heart of Manchin's critique focuses on "the targeting of our nation's fossil fuel companies."  According to Manchin, he is "deeply concerned that the proposed rule . . . send[s] a signal of opposition to the all-of-the-above energy policy that is critical to our country right now" and that these proposed rules are "tainted" because the SEC has "seemingly politicize[d] a process aimed at assessing the financial health and compliance of a public company."  

Senator Manchin's criticism is hardly unexpected.  Despite being a member of the Democratic Party, he has long dissented from mainstream Democratic policies and principles on environmental issues, likely due in large part to his longstanding association with the interests of West Virginia's coal mining industry.  As such, his opposition to the SEC's proposal on climate disclosures is unsurprising. 

But the significance of this public dissent should not be understated.  The fact that an SEC proposal approved on a party-line vote by the SEC Commissioners has now been pointedly criticized by a significant Democratic Senator indicates both the range and power of the political opposition that the SEC proposal will likely encounter.  Faced with such obstacles, it is increasingly likely that aspects of the SEC's proposal will be adjusted or otherwise "trimmed-back" to account for such concerns.

On March 21, 2022, the Democratic majority of the Commissioners approved the publication of a new proposed rule that would require domestic and foreign registrants to disclose certain climate related impacts. I am deeply concerned that the proposed rule has the potential to run counter to the SEC’s long-standing commitment to its mission by adding undue burdens on companies, while simultaneously sending a signal of opposition to the all-of-the-above energy policy that is critical to our country right now.

 https://www.manchin.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/SEC%20Climate