Wall St.Journal 27Feb2020

A16| Thursday, February 27, 2020 THE WALL STREET JOURNAL.

The SASB Doesn’t Work for Mike Bloomberg

Regarding your editorial “Bloom-

berg’s Business Nanny” (Feb. 18) on

the Sustainability Accounting Stan-

dards Board: The SASB is not pursu-

ing Michael Bloomberg’s—or any-

one’s—policy agenda. Furthermore,

the SASB has always believed that

“materiality judgments can properly

be made only by those that under-

stand the reporting entity’s pertinent

facts and circumstances,” which is

why we encourage companies to con-

sider and assess for themselves each

topic in the SASB standard for their

industry or industries. When a com-

pany determines that a sustainability

topic is financially material to its

business, SASB’s voluntary standards

offer a way to standardize disclosure

on that topic for the benefit of both

companies and investors.

Finally, contrary to the implica-

tions of your editorial, the SASB sets

standards for company disclosure—

not for performance. Our work is

premised on the idea that when mar-

kets have access to consistent, com-

parable and reliable information

about drivers of risk and return, they

can more efficiently price risks and

opportunities, and investors can

more effectively allocate capital.

Standardization is important be-

cause, while companies already re-

port a large and rapidly growing vol-

ume of sustainability information, it

has not typically met the needs of

shareholders and other providers of

financial capital. The SASB’s work is

supported by a broad swath of main-

stream investors with nearly $40 tril-

lion under management. The SASB’s

aim is to help facilitate efficient and

resilient capital markets that can

support long-term economic growth.

JANINEGUILLOT

CEO, SASB Foundation

San Francisco

Will we be counting the cage-free

eggs before or after the goose is

killed?

JAMESRADKINS

Vancouver, Wash.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Letters intended for publication should

be addressed to: The Editor, 1211 Avenue

of the Americas, New York, NY 10036,

or emailed to [email protected]. Please

include your city and state. All letters

are subject to editing, and unpublished

letters can be neither acknowledged nor

returned.

“If you can’t bond with him,

at least ‘like’ him on social media.”

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Solar Power Grows, but Market Share Is Low

“Cheap Solar Power Challenges

Coal’s Dominance in India” (Page One,

Feb. 18) may invite undue compla-

cency about solar power’s capabili-

ties. According to the International

Energy Agency, solar’s total installed

gigawatts may surpass other electric-

power sources as early as 2035, but

photovoltaic technology still will lag

far behind fossil fuels in the electric-

ity it actually produces. This is be-

cause solar has a “capacity factor,” or

average level of electricity generation

relative to maximum technical out-

put, that is much lower than other

fuel sources. The IEA estimates that

solar has a capacity factor of 10% to

21%. For natural-gas plants, the range

is several times higher. Based on this

and other differences, the IEA’s

“stated policies” scenario estimates

that coal and natural gas will still be

producing about 45% of the world’s

electricity by 2040, while solar will

supply only about 11%.

For those who are looking for an

exit strategy from fossil fuels, this

should be a call to action. To make a

real dent in global carbon emissions,

we need an investment in solar and

other renewable energy sources far

beyond currently stated policies.

PHILIPWARBURG

Newton, Mass.

We Are Volunteers in Mike Bloomberg’s Army

Regarding “Bloomberg Hires Social-

Media Army” (U.S. News, Feb. 20):

Mike Bloomberg has thousands of vol-

unteer grass-roots supporters who are

creating and participating in online

communities on Facebook without pay-

ment. Volunteers stepped up to create

or manage Facebook groups in support

of Mike’s candidacy before the cam-

paign had any state or local online

presence. Our goal is to foster positive

online communities that enable Bloom-

berg supporters and the “Bloomberg-

curious” to connect with each other,

ask questions and share information.

For example, Sheikh Musa Dram-

meh, a New York-based African-Ameri-

can Muslim community leader, set up

the largest independent social-media-

campaign platform for Mike

Bloomberg: the national Facebook

group Bloomberg for President, which

now has more than 40,000 members.

Joshua Shemtov, a Miami-based real-

estate broker, administers Florida for

Mike Bloomberg and other Bloomberg

supporter groups on Facebook. He’s

been volunteering up to 14 hours a day

to support the groups and fend off

troll attacks, primarily from support-

ers of Bernie Sanders and Donald

Trump. Heather Rosmarin, a Califor-

nia-based clean-energy lawyer,

founded and administers California for

Bloomberg on Facebook as a volunteer.

None of us was asked to start

these social-media groups for the

campaign nor do we take direction or

receive payment from the campaign.

Whether our groups have several

hundred or tens of thousands of

members, we are all proud to be part

of a thriving, organically growing,

volunteer-led grass-roots network

that supports Mike Bloomberg for

president.

SHEIKHMUSADRAMMEH

New York

HEATHERROSMARIN

Oakland, Calif.

Bernie’s Foreign Sympathies

B

ernie Sanders wants Americans to be-
lieve he’s a garden variety “democratic
socialist,” with the emphasis on demo-
cratic. But as media scrutiny
of the Democratic presidential
front-runner increases, we’re
learning more about where his
political sympathies lie, and
they’re revealing about what
a Sanders foreign policy
would look like.
The latest example came this week when Mr.
Sanders rejected an invitation to speak at the
annual American Israel Public Affairs Commit-
tee summit in Washington next week. The con-
ference is a campaign staple for candidates of
both parties, though there is no obligation to
attend.
But Mr. Sanders didn’t merely reply with a
polite “sorry I’m busy.” The Senator took to
Twitter on Sunday to say that “I remain con-
cerned about the platform AIPAC provides for
leaders who express bigotry and oppose basic
Palestinian rights. For that reason I will not at-
tend their conference.”
Bigotry? America’s pro-Israel lobby that in-
cludes more than 100,000 members nurtures
racial hatred?
Apparently Mr. Sanders meant what he said
because in the Charleston debate Tuesday night
he was asked about the tweet and whether he
would move the U.S. Embassy back to Tel Aviv
from Jerusalem. President Trump moved the
Embassy to Jerusalem in 2018 after many years
of bipartisan Congressional support for doing
so that included Joe Biden.
“Let me just—the answer is, it’s something
that we would take into consideration,” Mr.
Sanders replied about the Embassy. Then he
loaded up for the kicker: “I am very proud of
being Jewish. I actually lived in Israel for some
months. But what I happen to believe is that,
right now, sadly, tragically, in Israel, through
Bibi Netanyahu, you have a reactionary racist
who is now running that country.”
Wow. The man who could be the next U.S.
President calls the 14-year Prime Minister of
America’s closest Middle East ally a racist. It’s
true that Mr. Sanders is a profligate user of the
“racist” label against people he dislikes, includ-
ing Mr. Trump. But this was still what our
friends at the New York Sun called “a breathtak-
ing moment.” All the more so because none of
the other Democratic candidates on stage spoke
up to disagree.
Mr. Sanders also promised to protect “the in-

dependence and security of Israel,” but it’s clear

from these public statements that he sees Israel

as the main obstacle to a stable peace with the

Palestinians. This ignores de-

cades of Palestinian rejection

of extraordinary Israel peace

offers, notably midwifed by

American Presidents, includ-

ing Bill Clinton in 2000 and

George W. Bush in 2008.

Mr. Sanders condemns Mr. Netanyahu, who

was democratically elected, but he says nothing

about Hamas’s dictatorial control of Gaza and

missile assaults on Israeli civilians. A U.S. Presi-

dent who is this hostile to Israel would have no

chance of persuading Mr. Netanyahu, or any Is-

raeli Prime Minister, to make sacrifices in re-

turn for supporting a Palestinian state.

These sympathies are part of Mr. Sanders’s

long-time worldview, and he has collected ad-

visers of similar mind. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D.,

Minn.) is a Bernie backer known for her anti-Is-

rael broadsides that caused House Democrats

to rebuke her.

Matt Duss, a Sanders adviser who could run

the National Security Council, has written that

“Like segregation in the American South, the

siege of Gaza (and the entire Israeli occupation,

for that matter) is a moral abomination.” Mr.

Duss scrapped with the American Jewish Com-

mittee, the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the

Anti-Defamation League as a blogger for an af-

filiate of the left-wing Center for American

Progress.

On Wednesday Bernie adviser David Sirota

tweeted that “I love that Politico’s newsletter

for military-industrial complex lobbyists this

morning warns that out of all the candidates

running, @BernieSanders represents an ‘un-

precedented threat to the status quo.’” Mr. Duss

retweeted with a “Sounds good.”

Mr. Sirota, a likely aide in a Sanders White

House, praised Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez upon

his death in 2013 for having “racked up an eco-

nomic record that a legacy-obsessed American

president could only dream of achieving.” This

is a crowd that, like Mr. Sanders, looks for the

“bright side of the Castro regime” in Cuba, as

Pete Buttigieg put it Tuesday night.

Mr. Sanders is careful these days to say he

opposes “authoritarians” of all stripes, left and

right. And Michael Bloomberg was unfair to im-

ply he supports Communism. But every now

and then the mask of soft democratic socialism

slips from Mr. Sanders, and the face of hard left-

ist international solidarity emerges.

He assails Americans

who support Israel and

calls Bibi a ‘racist.’

No Asylum for Sanctuary States

D

emocratic states are refusing to coop-
erate with federal immigration en-
forcement, but then they complain
that the Justice Department
is using its legal authority to
impose financial conse-
quences for their resistance.
Sorry, they can’t have it both
ways, the Second Circuit
Court of Appeals ruled on
Wednesday.
The Justice Department under Jeff Sessions
sought to condition Byrne Program grants for
public safety to cooperation with federal immi-
gration law. Congress in 2006 required states
and cities to satisfy requirements “in such form
as the Attorney General may require” and “shall
issue.” States must also certify they will comply
with all “applicable Federal laws.”
Mr. Sessions required grant applicants to
comply with a federal immigration law that
bars local governments from restricting com-
munications about citizenship information
with federal immigration authorities. He also
required states and cities to give immigration
officials, upon request, the release dates of in-
carcerated undocumented immigrants and ac-
cess to them.
Sanctuary states refused and then sued to
force the Trump Administration to pay up. They
claimed Justice’s conditions violate the Admin-
istrative Procedure Act (APA) and Tenth Amend-
ment’s anti-commandeering principle, which
prohibits the federal government from compel-
ling states to enact or administer a fed-
eral regulatory program.
The Third, Seventh and Ninth Circuits issued
injunctions against Justice. So did federal judge
Edgardo Ramos, who cited a sloppy Seventh
Circuit decision that glazed over the plain lan-
guage of the law. But he was reversed Wednes-
day by the Second Circuit three-judge panel,

which upheld Justice’s authority to withhold

funds from New York City and seven states.

“We conclude that the plain lan-

guage of the relevant statutes

authorizes the Attorney Gen-

eral to impose the chal-

lenged conditions,” Judge Re-

ena Raggi wrote for the court.

She explained that the Supreme

Court has held, since Maryland

tried to tax the Second Bank of the U.S. two cen-

turies ago, that a “State may not pursue pol-

icies that undermine federal law.”

She added that Justice did not violate the

APA because the Attorney General invoked

rather than interpreted the plain text of federal

immigration law. The APA applies only when a

government agency is seeking to give new

meaning to federal law.

As for the Tenth Amendment, sanctuary

states need a refresher course in federalism.

The Supreme Court has long held that Congress

can seek to influence state policy choices as

long as a state has a “legitimate choice whether

to accept the federal conditions in exchange for

federal funds.”

The Supreme Court struck down the Afford-

able Care Act’s Medicaid expansion because it

threatened states by withholding

100% of their Medicaid funding, which com-

prised between 10% and 16% of their bud-

gets. But Byrne grants are relatively minuscule,

making up less than 0.1% of Massachusetts and

New York budgets.

The ruling is a major victory for the plain

reading of the law and proper understanding

of federalism. Liberals might even be grateful

since the “sanctuary” movement, and its delib-

erate lawlessness, have helped immigration re-

strictionists politically. The Supreme Court may

now take up the question, and it has a formida-

ble guide in the Second Circuit ruling.

The Second Circuit says

the feds can withhold

funds for defying the law.

Religious Liberty Wins Another

T

he Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
broke no new legal ground last week
when it reversed its earlier decision rul-
ing that a cross erected on a public park in Pensa-
cola, Fla., had to go. But it carries the message
that the so-called Lemon legal test that has long
governed interpretations of the Constitution’s Es-
tablishment Clause may finally be dead.
The test comes from the Supreme Court’s
1971 ruling inLemon v. Kurtzman. In that deci-
sion the Court required that government actions
implicating religion have a “secular purpose”
and “primary effect” that “neither advances nor
inhibits religion.” In 1984 the Court added that
a “reasonable observer” must conclude the gov-
ernment is not endorsing religion.
But the Lemon test took a big hit last year in
American Legion v. American Humanist Assn.
That case also involved a cross, which had been
commissioned by the American Legion to memo-

rialize U.S. servicemen who died overseas in

World War I. Later the land it was on became pub-

lic property. The Court ruled it “does not offend

the Constitution.”

Thus the 11th circuit reconsidered its deci-

sion, and inKondrat’yev v. Pensacolathe court

has concluded that the Bayview Cross in Pensa-

cola also is not a government establishment of

religion. It’s as much a victory for common sense

as it is for the First Amendment. The cross was

erected in 1941 as the nation prepared to enter

World War II. The people of Pensacola have held

events of all kinds on the site and it is an impor-

tant part of community life.

As Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the Ameri-

can Legion case, “A government that roams the

land, tearing down monuments with religious

symbolism and scrubbing away any reference to

the divine will strike many as aggressively hos-

tile to religion.”

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

OPINION

Pepper ...

And Salt

Coronavirus Infection: DHS

Should First Do No Harm

Regarding Holman Jenkins’s “Cor-

onavirus Needs a Free Press” (Busi-

ness World, Feb. 12): Landing at

Houston’s international airport re-

cently, I found 14 immigration isles,

but only one was open. In the one-

and-a-half hours I stood in line “all”

passengers processed from my Tai-

pei flight had to use the same fin-

gerprint touch screen. There was no

hand sanitizer and no staff even oc-

casionally cleaning it.

Surely a simple way to minimize

the spread of the coronavirus to

U.S. citizens would be to clean the

one thing every person touches at

these immigration points.

CARLCARTHY

Bangkok

Is this a plot to spread Coronavirus?

MIKE BLAKE/REUTERS

Bernie Needs to Come Clean

On His Health Records Now

Regarding your editorial “Bernie’s

Medical Stonewall” (Feb. 21): I am an

80-year-old, fee-based physician

working at the Military Entrance

Processing Station in Phoenix. Inter-

views and physical examinations are

done on all military applicants 17-

years of age. If there have been any

medical issues in an applicant’s life,

the Defense Department requires the

release of all past medical records

for review before accepting the ap-

plicant for enlistment in the military.

A personal letter from his doctor

alone is not acceptable.

With that requirement for our mil-

itary applicants, how can anyone feel

comfortable voting for a 78-year-old

presidential candidate who recently

had a heart attack, treated by doc-

tors who “reopened [a blockage in

his coronary artery] and placed two

drug-eluting stents” in his heart?

Not releasing all of Sen. Sanders’s

medical records, along with his prog-

nosis for the next several years,

amounts to a huge coverup by a

presidential candidate applying for

the most demanding, strenuous job

in the world.

WILLIAMW.BOHNERT,M.D.

Phoenix

CORRECTION

Luther Henderson leads the orches-

tra in some tracks on “Eileen Farrell:

The Complete Columbia Album Col-

lection.” A Feb. 4 review of the collec-

tion gave an incorrect first name.