CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. | Political and Electioneering Expenditure Congruency Report at CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

Status
30.01% votes in favour
AGM date
Proposal number
5
Resolution details
Company ticker
CHTR
Lead filer
Handlery Hotel
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Corporate purpose
  • Lobbying / political engagement
  • Public health
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Telecom
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved: Shareholders request that Charter publish an annual report, at reasonable expense, analyzing the congruence of political, lobbying, and electioneering expenditures during the preceding year against publicly stated organizational priorities, listing and explaining any instances of incongruent expenditures, and stating whether the identified incongruencies have led to a change in future expenditures or contributions.
Whereas clause
“Whereas: Public data collected by OpenSecrets.org show that Charter Communications (“Charter”) and its employee PAC rank in the top 1% of political donors.

Charter has stated: “We approach diversity and inclusion holistically through a framework that recognizes the importance of diversity and inclusion in enabling our commercial strategy and continued business success. Our leaders understand that a workforce that is reflective of the customers and communities that we serve helps drive strong business performance. We are proud that our workforce reflects the full range of diversity and abilities, and we actively promote diversity at every level of our organization through a strong focus on the recruitment, retention, and development of our employees.”

Charter’s political expenditures appear to undermine this organizational priority.

Voter suppression legislation disenfranchises communities of color. From 2018 to 2020, Charter contributed at least $1 million to 527 organizations underwriting efforts to pass voter suppress legislation. In the 2020 election cycle, Charter contributed directly to a Florida state legislator who championed voter suppression legislation and contributed to an organization that supported a Texas state legislator who did the same.

Based on public records, the proponents estimate that in the 2020 election cycle, Charter and its employee PAC have donated at least $3.78 million to politicians and political organizations working to weaken women’s access to abortion. This includes $218,500 to the sponsors of Texas SB 8 and over $130,000 to the sponsors of restrictive abortion bills in 9 other states. These contributions have been criticized in television ads and generated articles in mainstream media outlets.

Charter has a stated goal of becoming carbon neutral with respect to its operational greenhouse gas emissions while reducing Scope 3 emissions. Yet a Bloomberg analysis found that between the 2018 midterms and October 2020, for every dollar Charter contributed to climate-friendly members of Congress, it donated over two dollars to members characterized as “ardent obstructionists” of proactive climate policy.
Supporting statement
Supporting Statement

Proponents recommend that such report also contain management’s analysis of risks to our company’s brand, reputation, or shareholder value of expenditures in conflict with organizational priorities. “Expenditures for electioneering communications” means spending, from the corporate treasury and from the PACs, directly or through a third party, at any time during the year, on printed, internet or broadcast communications, which are reasonably susceptible to interpretation as in support of or opposition to a specific candidate. This proposal aligns with the standards and procedures set forth in the Center for Political Accountability’s Model Code of Conduct.”

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.