Public urges legislature to force PRIM transparency, climate risk review and divestment from weapons and fossil fuels

Representative Erica Udehaven asked the Joint Committee on Public Service to consider a package of bills aimed at changing how the state's pension assets are managed, including H 2984, which would require divestment from companies providing military equipment to the state of Israel.

A broad coalition of witnesses — from the Sierra Club and Warheads to Windmills to members of Jewish Voice for Peace, Mass Peace Action, medical professionals, and financial planners — urged the committee to press PRIM for a more systematic review of climate‑related financial risk and to divest pension funds from companies tied to fossil fuels, weapon manufacturers and, in a separate filing, the firearm industry.

Sierra Club deputy director Jess McGahn told the committee that mitigating climate risk "is essential to upholding the funds' fiduciary duty," adding that climate change is a systemic, undiversifiable risk to long‑term pension returns. Warheads to Windmills, Third Act Massachusetts and other groups urged passage of H 2811 to require PRIM to identify climate risk investments, develop a plan to sell or withdraw from those holdings, publish a quarterly list and report annually on actions taken.

Separately, Representative Udehaven pressed H 2984, saying the Commonwealth should not invest in companies "explicitly complicit" in military actions in Israel. Testimony included graphic, repeated accounts of civilian deaths in Gaza and appeals from constituents — doctors, parents and survivors — who said pension investments that touch companies such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Palantir and others make the Commonwealth “complicit.” Susan Nicholson, a retired lawyer, told lawmakers she read reports that Israel used automated targeting tools (which she linked to Palantir) to select strikes, saying such technologies turn traditional laws of war “upside down.”

Financial arguments also featured: Nick Cantrell, a certified financial planner, and other presenters said fossil fuel assets have delivered markedly lower returns over the past decade and are increasingly at risk of stranded assets and litigation. Cantrell told the committee that global energy stocks returned roughly 16% over the decade while broad global equities returned about 116%, arguing the evidence does not support a compelling financial case to keep fossil fuels in a long‑term pension portfolio.

Other testimony urged divestment from firearms and greater oversight of private equity exposures that channel pension dollars into fossil fuel assets. Rena Schnaor of Grassroots for Gun Violence Prevention argued the firearm industry actively lobbies against Massachusetts' gun safety laws and that pension investments in the industry undermine state public‑safety policies.

Why it matters: speakers framed the bills both as a moral imperative and a fiduciary duty: climate change and geopolitical risks pose financial threats to pension beneficiaries and to taxpayers liable for unfunded pension obligations. Advocates pointed to precedents — Massachusetts' 1980s divestment from apartheid South Africa and more recent state action on Russia — as models for moral and fiscal leadership.

Committee process and next steps: the hearing gathered an unusually large and diverse set of speakers; chairs accepted oral testimony and set a written testimony deadline. No committee votes or formal actions on the divestment or PRIM bills were recorded at the hearing.