The head of the advocacy group, Americans for Free Markets says Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond has it wrong in defending the state’s anti-oil discrimination act, the one called the Energy Discriminations Eliminations Act.
John Wittman, executive director of the coalition of groups in support of free markets and economic growth, recently wrote how he believes the act is harmful to Oklahomans.
Below is his opinion piece:
In 2022, Oklahoma passed the Energy Discriminations Eliminations Act (EDEA), barring public state funds, including pension assets, from being managed by financial firms that are believed to be boycotting certain industries, including energy companies.
EDEA empowered the state treasurer to identify financial institutions accused of boycotting energy companies and blacklist them from managing state pension funds. However, this claim does not hold up. In fact, many of the targeted firms are among the largest oil and gas industry financers, as highlighted in the Banking on Climate Chaos report released earlier this year. Additionally, traditional energy faces no difficulty in securing financing and banking services, raising a critical question: What criteria is the treasurer using to justify these decisions?
This law aims to solve a non-existent issue while creating real costs for taxpayers and retirees. By increasing administrative burdens and jeopardizing pensions, it exemplifies massive government overreach. Oklahoma County District Court Judge Sheila Stinson recognized this, affirming that “the Court finds that divesture or transfer of assets and investments has the potential to affect the financial soundness of the investment accounts.” Judge Stinson made the correct decision, and this legislation must be overturned.
Still, Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond is doubling down on his support for the EDEA and appealed the county judge’s ruling to the Oklahoma Supreme Court where it now awaits judgement. Oklahoma’s lawmakers show no signs of seeing reason, despite the obvious consequences on retirees’ pensions.
Oklahoma’s approach mirrors California’s—though from the opposite political perspective. While California imposes strict climate reporting mandates, Oklahoma limits access to profitable pension investments. In both cases, partisan-driven policies impose unnecessary regulatory burdens on markets. While this type of political power grab may work in California, that is not the reputation the Sooner State should be known for.
Lawmakers should prioritize free market principles, empowering asset managers to pursue the best returns for pensioners, and voters passionately support this sentiment. A recent National Taxpayers Association poll found that over 90% of voters oppose state governments using taxpayer dollars to push their own political agendas on in the marketplace.
Anytime the government inserts politics into the marketplace, whether from the Left or the Right, it’s the taxpayers who pay the price.
John Wittman is the executive director of Americans for Free Markets, a coalition of groups in support of free markets and economic growth.