Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the ESG Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate committee hears bill to blacklist financial providers that 'discriminate' on firearms or fossil fuels; members request fiscal analysis and broader review

STATE AGENCIES & GOVT'L AFFAIRS-SENATE · February 21, 2023
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

HB 1307 would direct the treasurer, at the direction of the attorney general, to maintain a list of financial providers that allegedly "discriminate" against firearms, ammunition or fossil-fuel industries; sponsors said retirement-system indirect holdings were exempted, but senators pressed for fiscal-impact estimates and for expanding decision-making beyond two constitutional officers.

Senator Ricky Hill and Representative Jeff Wardlaw presented House Bill 1307, an ESG-focused measure that would require the treasurer of state, at the direction of the attorney general, to keep a list of financial institutions deemed to "discriminate" against firearms, ammunition or fossil-fuel industries and to restrict state business accordingly. "Any financial institution in Arkansas who is banking or doing business with a company that discriminates against... firearms... and fossil fuel... will not do business with them," the sponsor said.

Sponsors said they worked with bank and retirement-system stakeholders to exempt indirect retirement system holdings from the bill’s reach; direct holdings would remain accountable. Senators asked repeatedly for a fiscal-impact assessment; sponsor Wardlaw said he had requested analyses but none were available and that excluding indirect retirement holdings reduced the projected fiscal impact. Several senators — including Senator Payton and Senator Tucker — queried the concentration of decision-making in the treasurer and attorney general and the lack of a broader, multi-member panel or explicit appeals process. Senator Payton asked whether liability protections or a larger board had been considered; sponsors said they would consider drafting changes and that other states’ approaches (e.g., Texas, West Virginia) informed the design. Senator Tucker and others expressed concern that the treasurer acting "at the direction" of the attorney general may raise separation-of-powers questions and recommended additional drafting work.

Sponsors agreed to pull the measure for additional work after committee members asked for further analysis and possible changes to the decision-making structure.