Connecticut Senate Bill SB01092

Connecticut 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/25
• Refer: 1/22/25
• Refer: 2/19/25

Caption

An Act Requiring Neutrality And Transparency In Decisions Involving The Investment Of Public Funds.

Impact

The act seeks to amend the general statutes to prevent state contracts with or public investments in companies that are seen as engaging in discrimination against particular sectors. This measure is specifically aimed at shielding public funds from investments that may be detrimental to state's fiscal integrity. Under this bill, there would be increased scrutiny and transparency required from state boards of investment and other government agencies regarding their investment strategies and policies. It also empowers the state's attorney general to investigate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices among financial institutions.

Summary

SB01092 is a proposed act introduced in the Connecticut General Assembly aimed at ensuring neutrality and transparency in the investment decisions involving public funds. The bill outlines a series of mandates for fiduciaries of public funds, primarily focusing on the restriction of how investment decisions are made. It requires fiduciaries to consider only financial factors when fulfilling their duties, effectively excluding political or social agendas from influencing investment choices. This proposed act comes as a response to rising concerns about the politicization of investment strategies, particularly around certain industries and social factors.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding SB01092 include its impact on the ability of financial institutions to employ ESG criteria in their investment decisions. Critics may argue that the ban on ESG considerations in public investments could significantly limit the states’ capacity to invest in companies that adhere to broader social responsibilities, potentially clashing with modern investment trends towards sustainable and responsible investing. Additionally, the bill's restrictions on social credit scoring practices and transparency mandates could raise debates over regulatory overreach and the appropriateness of monitoring financial actions to ensure they align strictly with financial performance rather than social outcomes.