Lobbying Governance
Overall Assessment | Analysis | Score |
---|---|---|
Moderate |
MGM Resorts International discloses a limited but identifiable process to keep its policy engagement in line with its climate strategy, stating that "our environmental policy establishes priorities for the company and serves as the foundation for ensuring that all engagement is consistent through the review and consultation process" and that "if any engagement is determined inconsistent, this would be identified by the CSR Committee of the Board and other key stakeholders, and then all engagement activities would cease or be addressed as appropriate." Governance responsibility is explicitly assigned to the Board-level Corporate Social Responsibility & Sustainability Committee, which "meets multiple times per year with management to review significant policies and performance and provides guidance on ESG topics," and the company confirms that this committee would intervene on misaligned engagement. This indicates the existence of a policy-based review mechanism and a named oversight body, suggesting some governance strength. However, the disclosures do not set out how lobbying activities—either the company’s direct advocacy or its participation in trade associations—are systematically monitored, audited, or aligned over time, nor do they describe any instances of engaging, correcting, or exiting third-party groups whose positions conflict with the company’s climate goals. There is also no published lobbying alignment report, no description of internal controls such as pre-approval of specific lobbying positions, and no reference to dedicated management of political spending. Consequently, while MGM Resorts shows that its Board committee can halt inconsistent engagement, the company does not disclose a detailed, ongoing governance framework that covers both direct and indirect lobbying activities.
View Sources
|
C |