Since its establishment in 1970, Georgetown’s Committee on Investments and Social Responsibility has been charged with looking after the social integrity of the University’s endowment. Contrary to the Catholic social justice tradition the University claims to champion, the CISR’s inability to have a meaningful impact indicates that Georgetown’s supposed concern for making morally-sound investments does not extend itself to action.
The University’s most recent shortfall was in February 2010, when the Investment Office was unable—or unwilling—to reassure concerned students that Georgetown was not invested in companies implicated in violations of international law, specifically those regarding the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Instead, the Investment Office responded by removing their commitment to Jesuit values from their website.
Nevertheless, the controversy surrounding the 2010 divestment campaign motivated the expansion of the CISR and its responsibilities. Last February, CISR membership was broadened, including an additional GUSA-appointed undergraduate representative, for example. While the University claims to have outlined a specific process to receive and evaluate allegations of social injury as part of the recent CISR reform, student groups like GU Fossil Free have found the process to be unstructured and unhelpful, instead opting to bypass the committee in favor of direct dialogue with the administration.
Evidently, the amendments have not gone as far as they should. As the CISR’s operating guidelines now stand, the committee is inhibited from making more than recommendations to the board of directors, the body ultimately responsible for the management of the endowment. If an allegation is found to be valid, the CISR has no veto power or even an official vote on the board to take action on unethical investments. The lack of authority commanded by the CISR is suspicious, suggesting that high returns take priority over high ethical standards at Georgetown University.
It is imperative that the CISR have access to a full list of investments. We understand it is industry practice to keep investment information private due to the competitive nature of financial investments, but increased transparency must at least be given to the body charged with ensuring the moral integrity of our endowment. The committee also needs veto power or a vote to guarantee that our money is handled ethically.
Now is the time to allow the CISR to fulfill its responsibilities. Instead of merely nodding to social responsibility, we need to give the CISR agency—the committee already has a seat at the table, now let’s give them a voice.
