Chubb, one of the world’s largest insurance companies, has found itself at the center of a heated political debate in the United States. Recently, a conservative advocacy group called Consumers’ Research launched a major campaign accusing the company of pushing a “radical woke ideology” through its policies on diversity and climate change.
Consumers’ Research, a nonprofit group based in Washington and known for its ties to conservative causes, is spending millions on this national campaign. They claim that Chubb’s diversity and climate initiatives may violate federal anti-discrimination laws, and they have asked the Justice and Treasury Departments to investigate the company.
The group’s executive director, Will Hild, criticized Chubb for its strong support of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), its move away from insuring new coal projects, and its backing of criminal justice reform organizations. According to Hild, these positions show that Chubb is fully committed to pushing what they call “radical woke ideology.”
Chubb, however, sees things differently. The company has long made diversity a core part of its culture. In 2021, Joseph Wayland, Chubb’s executive vice president and general counsel, called DEI “the foundation” of the company’s culture. CEO Evan Greenberg has also spoken about the risks of “America First” nationalism and the importance of U.S. leadership on the world stage.
On the environmental front, Chubb announced in 2019 that it would stop underwriting new coal-fired power plants and coal companies above a certain revenue level. By 2022, it began reducing coverage for existing coal-related risks and introduced new limits for certain oil and gas projects. Greenberg has stated that the company acknowledges climate change and the human impact on the planet, seeing the shift to a low-carbon economy as a collective responsibility.
The timing of these attacks comes as reports highlight the deadly effects of climate change, such as the sharp rise in heat-related deaths in Spain.
Consumers’ Research is using TV ads, mobile billboards in major cities, and a dedicated website called WokeChubb.com to spread its message. The group argues that Chubb’s stance harms American energy producers and conservative values.
This campaign is part of a larger push by Consumers’ Research. Founded in 1929 as a consumer protection group, it has recently focused on opposing corporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies. It has targeted major brands like Coca-Cola, Disney, and BlackRock before turning its attention to insurers, which play a key role in funding and pricing energy-related risks.
Interestingly, Chubb’s political donations show a more balanced approach than the “wokest insurer” label suggests. Over the last two election cycles, its political action committee evenly split contributions between Democrats and Republicans. The company also paused political donations temporarily after the January 6 Capitol attack. In 2024, Chubb spent nearly $2.8 million lobbying on issues important to its business, such as insurance regulation and cyber risk, without focusing on partisan causes.
For insurance professionals, this controversy highlights the delicate spot insurers are in. On one side, investors and regulators want clear disclosures about climate risks. On the other, conservative groups see climate and diversity initiatives as political points of conflict. The campaign against Chubb could lead to reputational risks, increased regulatory scrutiny, tougher capital allocation decisions, and pressure on other insurers with similar policies.
Beyond Chubb, several major insurers around the world have introduced policies to reduce support for fossil fuels. Companies like Germany’s Allianz, France’s AXA, Italy’s Generali, and Zurich Insurance have placed limits on coal, oil, and gas underwriting. In the U.S., firms such as AIG and Liberty Mutual have also set partial restrictions, though others like State Farm and Berkshire Hathaway still hold significant fossil fuel exposure.
However, these policies often vary in their definitions and scope. Some only target coal or extreme oil and gas projects, while many allow exceptions or apply restrictions only in certain regions. Differences also exist between insurers’ investment practices and their underwriting standards.
Chubb’s experience shows how climate and social policies can become a flashpoint in America’s divided political landscape. While the company tries to maintain a bipartisan political stance behind the scenes, its public commitments make it a target for activists on the right. As the debate continues, many in the insurance industry will be watching closely to see if more companies face similar challenges.