April 27- This afternoon, Georgetown Divest received a response to its letters to President DeGioia of April 14, 23 and 26, which called on the University to live up to its Jesuit values by investing its endowment in a socially responsible manner, and called for the establishment of a body comprised of faculty, staff and students that would advise the Investment Office on issues of socially responsible investment, so that endowment investments would conform to the University’s foundational values.

This letter includes many misleading and contradictory statements. For example, it states, “The specific holdings of a managed fund change from time to time, sometimes frequently, due to investment decisions outside of University control. In this context, divestment of individual investments in companies is not possible…” This statement directly contradicts the current Investment Policy Statement for Georgetown’s Endowment, available online (or until the University removes it after the coalition publicizes it, as it did statements about a Committee on Socially Responsible Investment) at the Investment Office website: “” While the selection of individual securities should be based on the investment objectives and guidelines set forth in this policy, the Board of Directors may elect to exclude from portfolios certain securities that it determines are incompatible with the basic values of the University. Consistent with the acknowledgment of these values, the University shall strive to exercise its shareholders’ rights in voting proxies in a socially responsible manner.” (Bolding ours) Either their letter to us today is misleading, or the investment policy statement is. Indeed, such socially responsible investment is a common practice in America today, as we noted in our prior letters to the administration. According to the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, “roughly 11 percent of assets under professional management in the U.S.- nearly one out of every nine dollars- are now invested in SRI.” The administration must understand that it cannot continue to hide behind its argument that socially responsible investment “is not possible.”

Furthermore, the University has also ignored the call for a committee on socially responsible investment, a call that was echoed by the GUSA Senate in a resolution overwhelmingly passed on Sunday. There is precedent for such a process at a Jesuit university. Loyola University of Chicago, with an endowment in the hundreds of millions of dollars, has created the Shareholder Advocacy Committee to substantively address student concerns about university investments and to use the power of the portfolio to affect corporate policies. Santa Clara University has a similar process of socially responsible investment, and the CIO of that Jesuit institution stated in 2007 that he did not believe the school’s SRI policies negatively affect the growth of the school’s endowment. These two schools are just two examples among many colleges and universities across the country that incorporate policies of social responsibility into their investment practices.

We believe that this letter does not constitute a good faith response to student concerns about our university’s blatant disregard for social responsibility when it comes to its endowment. It is not a response that the coalition will accept, and we will continue to pressure the University until it recognizes that ethical values should be considered in the university’s investment decisions at all. Tomorrow afternoon at 2:30 PM, we will return this letter to President DeGioia.

Letter from Administration April 27, 2010

This week, each delegation will begin in Red Square at 2:30 and conclude at 2:40 after a walk to the President’s Office in Healy Hall. We have asked President DeGioia to ensure that there are real procedures for ethical oversight of university investment policies. Daily delegations will act as an urgent reminder to the administration to act quickly on this gravely important issue. We hold our university to a higher standard in which our investments DO uphold our Jesuit values! Please join us in reminding the administration of the necessity of ethical oversight of our investments.

When Georgetown administrators try to explain that divestment from individual companies would be impractical and unfeasible, they are wrong. According to the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, “roughly 11 percent of assets under professional management in the U.S.- nearly one out of every nine dollars- are now invested in SRI.” Furthermore, numerous studies suggest that socially responsible investment often outperforms market benchmarks.

The Chief Investment Officer of Santa Clara University, a Jesuit school, stated in 2007 that he did not believe the school’s SRI policies negatively affect the growth of the school’s endowment. Loyola University of Chicago, another Jesuit institution, has created the Shareholder Advocacy Committee to substantively address student concerns about university investments and to use the power of the portfolio to affect corporate policies. These two schools are just two examples among many colleges and universities across the country that incorporate policies of social responsibility into their investment practices.

On April 25th the Georgetown University Student Association overwhelmingly passed a resolution that “calls for the institution of policies that ensure that all investments are compatible with the basic values of the University,” and “further calls for the establishment of a body comprised of faculty, staff and students that advise the Georgetown University Investment Office on issues of socially responsible investment, so that Georgetown University Endowment investments conform to the University’s foundational values.” This support from the elected representatives of the student body is yet another demonstration of the real concern that students have on this issue.

Every day that Georgetown University has no policy of socially responsible investment, we are morally culpable for practices by companies in which our endowment is invested that violate international law and abuse human rights.

Georgetown Voice blog post about the Senate session

Presentation to GUSA 4.18.10

Saxa Politica: Immoral Investments: “While divestment is non-negotiable to administrators, it appears that Georgetown’s Jesuit and Catholic identity is.”

Misguided idealism of Georgetown, Divest!: “The string of reports coming from the Middle East appear to confirm the assertions aired by the newly formed coalition Georgetown, Divest! that the human rights situation in Gaza and the West Bank is deplorable and the University is obliged to take action….Yet as dire as the situation in Israel may be, Georgetown, Divest!’s argument that the University has an obligation to pull its investments in companies that profit from Israel’s poor policies is impractical.”

From The Hoya:

Students Decry No Investment Oversight: “‘Social responsibility and ethics currently play no role in Georgetown’s investment practices, and the establishment of some mechanism for oversight is a pressing concern,’ Schwartz said. According to the university, the question of divestment is a non-issue because the university generally does not directly invest in specific companies. ‘The endowment fund managed by the Investment Office does not directly invest in individual companies,’ said Andy Pino, director of media relations. ‘Rather, it invests in managed funds that are similar to the mutual fund most people invest in as part of their retirement plans. Georgetown’s investment practices do not include the selection of individual securities. As a result, the question of divestment does not apply.’ Members of the Georgetown, Divest! Coalition said that this distinction is nothing more than a loophole, and that they are not satisfied with the university’s response to their concerns.”

Poor Execution: “For those of us who aren’t economics majors, the details of the new campaign by Georgetown, Divest! — and the university’s response to it — may seem somewhat baffling. Anyone who does comb through all of the facts, however, will conclude that Georgetown, Divest! is a group with a good heart but an outdated and politically divisive strategy….While the group’s leaders have claimed that they do not favor either side of the conflict, their Web site exhibits a clear pro-Palestinian leaning.”

We’re unsure where The Hoya heard this claim of neutrality. We contend that certain Israeli actions and policies have oppressed the Palestinian people, such as the construction of illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, the construction of the illegal separation barrier on Palestinian land, military action against innocent civilians, and institutional discrimination against persons of a specific race, religion, or ethnicity. I don’t think we’re trying to hide our stance on the “conflict.”

We refuse to accept our money being invested in a way that utterly disregards social responsibility. After all, you yourself have written that “our Jesuit heritage and tradition inspire all of us- in the spirit of St. Ignatius Loyola- to engage in the world to make it a better place” and that “our heritage requires that social justice issues are never consigned to the shadows of our consciousness.”

Current university practices provide no justification for ignoring the responsibility to stand for social justice that we all share. Georgetown, Divest! reiterates its demand of divestment from Ahava, Motorola, Caterpillar, Lockheed Martin, Riwal, and Roadstone Holdings. As the President of our university, we call upon you to ensure that there are real procedures for ethical oversight of university investment policies and ask that you respond no later than Monday, April 19.

More information about the event has been published on the blog of the Georgetown Voice, linked here: http://blog.georgetownvoice.com/2010/04/14/the-georgetown-divest-forum-on-university-investment-in-palestine-and-israel/. More information about the event and our argument can be found under the Argument link on the Home Page of this blog or by contacting the coalition at GeorgetownDivest@Gmail.com.

Dear Student Leaders at the University of California – Berkeley

It was with great joy that I learned of your recent 16-4 vote in support of divesting your university’s money from companies that enable and profit from the injustice of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and violation of Palestinian human rights. Principled stands like this, supported by a fast growing number of US civil society organizations and people of conscience, including prominent Jewish groups, are essential for a better world in the making, and it is always an inspiration when young people lead the way and speak truth to power.

I am writing to tell you that, despite what detractors may allege, you are doing the right thing. You are doing the moral thing. You are doing that which is incumbent on you as humans who believe that all people have dignity and rights, and that all those being denied their dignity and rights deserve the solidarity of their fellow human beings.

I have been to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and I have witnessed the racially segregated roads and housing that reminded me so much of the conditions we experienced in South Africa under the racist system of Apartheid. I have witnessed the humiliation of Palestinian men, women, and children made to wait hours at Israeli military checkpoints routinely when trying to make the most basic of trips to visit relatives or attend school or college, and this humiliation is familiar to me and the many black South Africans who were corralled and regularly insulted by the security forces of the Apartheid government.

In South Africa, we could not have achieved our freedom and just peace without the help of people around the world, who through the use of non-violent means, such as boycotts and divestment, encouraged their governments and other corporate actors to reverse decades-long support for the Apartheid regime.

Students played a leading role in that struggle, and I write this letter with a special indebtedness to your school, Berkeley, for its pioneering role in advocating equality in South Africa and promoting corporate ethical and social responsibility to end complicity in Apartheid. I visited your campus in the 1980’s and was touched to find students sitting out in the baking sunshine to demonstrate for the University’s divestment in companies supporting the South African regime.

The same issue of equality is what motivates the divestment movement of today, which tries to end Israel’s 43 year long occupation and the unequal treatment of the Palestinian people by the Israeli government ruling over them. The abuses they face are real, and no person should be offended by principled, morally consistent, non-violent acts to oppose them. It is no more wrong to call out Israel in particular for its abuses than it was to call out the Apartheid regime in particular for its abuses.

To those who wrongly accuse you of unfairness or harm done to them by this call for divestment, I suggest, with humility, that the harm suffered from being confronted with opinions that challenge one’s own pales in comparison to the harm done by living a life under occupation and daily denial of basic rights and dignity. It is not with rancor that we criticize the Israeli government, but with hope, a hope that a better future can be made for both Israelis and Palestinians, a future in which both the violence of the occupier and the resulting violent resistance of the occupied come to an end, and where one people need not rule over another, engendering suffering, humiliation, and retaliation. True peace must be anchored in justice and an unwavering commitment to universal rights for all humans, regardless of ethnicity, religion, gender, national origin or any other identity attribute. You, students, are helping to pave that path to a just peace.

I heartily endorse your divestment vote and encourage you to stand firm on the side of what is right,

God bless you richly,

Desmond Tutu

Archbishop Emeritus of Cape Town

Meet at Red Square at 2:30PM on Wednesday to march to President DeGioia’s office to demand the return of ethics and the consideration of social responsibility in Georgetown’s investment practices! Let President DeGioia know that we won’t let the death of social responsibility at Georgetown happen quietly!

Georgetown, Divest! will personally deliver a letter to President DeGioia insisting he take action to ensure Georgetown’s commitment to social justice is respected through divestment from Ahava, Motorola, Caterpillar, Lockheed Martin, Riwal, Roadstone Holdings, Mekorot Water Company Ltd., and Veolia Transportation. These are companies that abuse human rights and violate international law in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

In a meeting that lasted for over an hour, the coalition members and the administrators discussed Georgetown University’s investment strategy and whether it addresses concerns of social responsibility. CIO Larry Kochard emphasized that Georgetown University generally does not directly invest in individual companies, but rather in funds overseen by managers whose actions are guided by certain allocation and risk policies set forth by the Investment Office. Therefore, he argued, Georgetown University cannot divest from the several companies the coalition is highlighting, because the University is not directly invested in them.

The university officials further distanced themselves from statements on the Investment Office’s website surrounding ethical oversight of the endowment. The website declares that “Georgetown is strongly committed to investing in a socially responsible manner” and, to that end, has created a Committee on Investments and Social Responsibility with a mandate to review all “shareholder proposals on social responsibility.” Dr. Porterfield described this language as outdated and not in line with how the university’s processes function today. Mr. Kochard went further in suggesting that no process exists to ensure ethical oversight over the investments made by fund managers. Instead, he encouraged the coalition to focus on investments made by GUSIF, the Georgetown University Student Investment Fund, which has a total investment budget of $350,000, as opposed to the University endowment that surpasses $1 billion. When Mr. Kochard was asked how the University ensures that its managers are investing in a socially responsible manner, he pointed out that the Investment Office “does its due diligence” prior to hiring fund managers, and that these are people he “trusts.”

Coalition leaders left the meeting convinced that ethical concerns play no role in the way the university invests its endowment. The administration has put forth the argument that the supposed necessities of modern investment for large endowments means that “company-by-company” investigation of social responsible practices is no longer feasible. Indeed, the Chief Investment Officer Mr. Kochard admitted that it is often impossible to know what companies the funds are investing in, as they are considered “trade secrets.” This complete lack of oversight is unacceptable and contradicts the University’s foundational ethics of social responsibility.

Furthermore, referencing the STAND-led campaign focused on investments in Sudan, Mr. Kochard disputed that the University had released any statement of divestment from companies operating in Sudan. Indeed, upon review of University statements released at the time, it appears that the University used this loophole of “direct investment” versus investment through fund managers to mislead the student body into believing that action had taken place and silence student advocates. The university rarely invests directly in individual companies, so its April 2008 declaration that it had zero direct investment in companies operating in Sudan had no functional impact. Georgetown, Divest! will not accept such an outcome and will fight to ensure that the university lives up to the spirit upon which it was founded.

In September of 1986, Georgetown students united to call for an end to our university’s ties to apartheid South Africa, initiating a campaign that led the university to divest from corporations tied to South Africa’s military and government. In April of 2008, Georgetown students successfully convinced the Board of Trustees to divest from companies that supported the Sudanese government in carrying out human rights abuses. On April 13, 2010, Georgetown students will unveil a campaign to encourage our university to divest from companies in Israel and the Occupied Territories that violate human rights and support apartheid.

With the decisions of the Presbyterian Church the Academic Union of Teachers in the United Kingdom, the Norwegian government, the Board of Trustees at Hampshire College, and many other organizations to pursue divestment from companies that violate international law and violate human rights in Israel and Palestine, a growing international movement is building to pressure Israel to reform its policies and end its illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territories. Georgetown Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) seeks to make Georgetown a relevant player in this grassroots movement for change. SJP encourages the Board of Trustees to acknowledge Georgetown’s commitment to social justice and human rights.

Coalition member Jackson Perry will formally present the case for pursuing selective divestment in the Israeli-Palestinian context. The event will also include a panel comprised of Father Raymond Kemp (Woodstock Theological Center), Professor Mark Lance (Program on Justice and Peace), and Shelley Fudge (Jewish Voice for Peace). Join us as we launch this historic campaign at Georgetown to end apartheid and bring peace to Israel and Palestine!

8:00PM Tuesday, April 13th, 2010
White-Gravenor 201B
Georgetown University

Hosted by Georgetown, Divest!