Too often, the news is filled with stories of large corporations getting away with all kinds of abuses—mistreating workers, fouling the environment, cheating consumers, undermining our privacy. This week has been different.
On the labor front, there has been more coverage of strikes than we have seen for a long while. This includes a resolved dispute involving film and TV writers, a continuing one involving actors and an escalating one involving autoworkers. These work stoppages are all receiving widespread public support.
The auto strike also brought about the first-ever visit of a sitting U.S. President to a picket line. Occupants of the White House have more typically responded to walkouts by blocking them—as Biden did with railroad workers last year—or with more extreme measures such as Reagan’s firing of the air traffic controllers in 1981.
At the same time, news outlets are giving substantial play to efforts by federal and state governments to curb the power of Big Tech. The Federal Trade Commission, along with 17 state attorneys general, just filed a sweeping complaint against Amazon.com, accusing the e-commerce giant of abusing its market power to the detriment of both consumers and small businesses that rely on its platform to sell their goods.
The FTC complaint arrives as the trial proceeds in a Justice Department lawsuit against Google for monopolizing the online search market. Both cases challenge the core business models of the companies. Even if break-ups of the tech giants are unlikely, adverse court rulings could require them to make fundamental structural changes in the way they operate.
Significant changes, while perhaps not as drastic, could also result from the current labor disputes. It appears that the new contract won by the Writers Guild of America will put limits on the industry’s control of content created with the help of artificial intelligence. United Autoworkers members are seeking to dismantle tiered wage structures and reduce the basic workweek while the industry is making the transition to electric vehicles.
Other fundamental challenges to corporations can be seen in the environmental area. Not long ago, a group of young people in Montana prevailed in their lawsuit arguing that the state’s failure to consider climate change when approving fossil fuel projects was a violation of a provision in the Montana constitution guaranteeing residents the right to a clean and healthy environment. This is just one of numerous efforts to use the courts to address the climate crisis. Large companies are also facing the prospect of new greenhouse gas disclosure requirements—one passed by the California legislature and another pending in the European Union.
Corporations are not giving into these challenges without a fight. They are trying to limit their concessions to unions, aggressively arguing their positions in the court cases, taking steps to sway public opinion and employing legions of lobbyists to promote their point of view to legislators and policymakers.
Yet, for the moment, it is a pleasure to see Big Business on the defensive.
web version: https://dirtdiggersdigest.org/archives/7390
RI’s landmark climate lawsuit is part of a strong and necessary response to the climate crisis
In a recent column, Doug Gablinske—former executive director of TEC-RI, a coalition of large corporate energy users —criticized the state’s pending lawsuit against large fossil fuel companies. The case, brought by the Office of Attorney General Peter Neronha, seeks to hold fossil fuel giants liable for decades of intentional efforts to deceive regulators and the public on the causes and impacts of climate change, and recover some of the costs that the state has incurred and will continue to incur because of the climate crisis. Rather than sue fossil fuel companies, Mr. Gablinske says, Rhode Island should partner with them, while recognizing that “fossil fuel supplies are critical to public health, welfare and safety.”
This outlook ignores both the urgency of the climate crisis and the active role that fossil fuel companies have played in delaying necessary action. Mr. Gablinske mentions the high utility prices in Rhode Island and tells us we should be investing in infrastructure instead of lawsuits with polluters. We need to do both. The people bringing the lawsuits do not control utility prices and are simply seeking additional tools to stop the pollution. The industry is working to stop progress and protect profits. Ultimately it is our job as global citizens to strive to be the best steward for the little corner of the world that we inhabit, as well as working to solve the root causes of climate change.
Climate change is here now, bringing hotter summers, rising seas, and more frequent and severe storms. 2023 is on track to be the hottest on record, Rhode Islanders have been hit with a wave of intense rainfall events and flash floods. These impacts of our changing climate will only get worse in the future. In addition to driving the climate crisis, fossil fuels also contribute to other public health crises with toxic air pollution. A recent study found that eliminating air pollution caused by burning fossil fuels would save tens of thousands of lives in the US annually. Contrary to Mr. Gablinske’s claims, continued reliance on fossil fuels is one of the greatest threats to our public health, welfare, and safety.
Last year—when sky-rocketing natural gas prices caused Rhode Islanders’ utility bills to reach record highs—fossil fuels demonstrated that they have highly volatile prices, often changing based on events on the other side of the world. The best way to protect our natural environment and guard against sudden, unpredictable rate increases is to transition to sustainable energy.
Rhode Islanders will have to work together to transform our energy system and solve the climate crisis. It’s not a task that we can leave just to corporations that have long used their immense wealth and power to delay change. Yes, climate change should be addressed by Congress. But fossil fuel companies have been using their money and influence to stop Congress from taking meaningful action to address the climate crisis, and people are dying.
Citizens and states have turned to our legal system in the hopes that our courts are a place where facts still matter, and where the harms that these companies have perpetrated can start to be redressed. Recently a Montana court ruled that young people in the state have a right to a healthy environment, and that the state must consider potential climate damage when approving projects.
Rhode Island needs bold climate action that needs to include using the legal system to ensure that fossil fuel companies are forced to help pay for the crisis they have contributed to. We are confident that Rhode Island’s courts are capable of giving the state’s climate case a fair and impartial hearing.
Everett Pope Vice President for Development Environment Council of RI
Greg Gerritt Director of Research, Prosperity For Rhode Island