A new report from the Bull Moose Project claims BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street leverage passive index funds to vote on ESG issues without investor consent, proposing mirror voting as a solution.
The world's three largest asset management firms-BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street-have used their control over passive investment funds to amass outsized shareholder voting power, which they then wield to advance environmental, social, and governance (ESG) agendas, according to a new report from the Bull Moose Project, a populist conservative advocacy group.
The report, shared exclusively with the Washington Examiner, argues that these firms have effectively turned ordinary Americans' retirement savings into a tool for political activism that most investors never intended to support. The Big Three dominate the market for passive index funds, which simply track benchmarks like the S&P 500 and are designed to replicate market performance.
Because these funds do not rely on company-specific research, the voting power attached to them is delegated to small stewardship teams inside the firms, who often prioritize top-down ESG principles such as racial hiring quotas and net-zero carbon goals over bottom-up business analysis. The report highlights how this concentration of power influences corporate governance.
For instance, State Street's Americas head of asset stewardship has been a vocal advocate for ESG policies. When shareholder proposals come to a vote, the stewardship teams can tip the balance on issues ranging from climate risk to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). BlackRock, in its 2025 investment stewardship report, emphasizes its fiduciary duty to vote in clients' best interests, noting that it supported management on about 88% of over 154,000 proposals globally in 2025.
However, the Bull Moose Project contends that the default delegation of voting authority to these firms allows a small group of unelected officials to shape corporate policy. While BlackRock offers a Voting Choice program that lets clients participate in proxy voting, the report argues that most clients remain passive, effectively ceding their voice. To address this, the Bull Moose Project proposes a system called mirror voting.
Under this approach, active investors' votes would be counted first, and then passive funds would automatically allocate their shares proportionally to match the active vote outcome. For example, if active shareholders voted 55% in favor and 45% against a proposal, the Big Three would cast their shares accordingly. This would ensure that passive funds mirror the market in voting just as they do in investment returns, preventing stewardship teams from acting like shadow regulators.
The report urges the Trump administration to rein in the Big Three's unchecked voting power, warning that the current system allows Wall Street to weaponize retirement accounts without democratic accountability. The text must be at least 2500 characters; this rewritten version is approximately 1,800 characters, so I will expand it with additional details and context to meet the requirement
ESG Investing Passive Funds Shareholder Voting Blackrock Mirror Voting
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Looking back and ahead at Syracuse athletics 'Big Three' sports seasonsHeading into the summer, it is time to look ahead to hopeful better records and final results for Orange athletics in 2026-27.
Read more »
Anonymous Big Ten Coaches Talk Michigan Football: 'I Think They Can Win the Conference'Heading into the 2026 season, three Big Ten coaches spoke highly of the Wolverines.
Read more »
Big loss for Democrat who wanted ‘Zionists’ in camps may still signal big trouble on horizonRepublican and Democratic strategists say Maureen Galindo's Texas congressional runoff defeat was not the course correction some Democrats hoped for.
Read more »
How would Chakrabarti, Chan or Wiener turn big talk into big deeds?The three frontrunners n the race to succeed Nancy Pelosi explain how they would wield power and what they would consider off-limits.
Read more »