Louisiana House Bill HB21

Louisiana 2018 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/25/18
• Refer: 1/25/18
• Refer: 3/12/18

Caption

Adds members to the Public Retirement Systems' Actuarial Committee

Impact

If enacted, HB21 would have a direct impact on the composition and decision-making processes of the PRSAC. The bill stipulates that two additional members from the House and two from the Senate will be appointed, which may lead to more balanced representation of stakeholders involved in state retirement systems. Additionally, changing the quorum requirement from six to nine members for conducting official business could lead to more rigorous discussions and considerations of actuarial matters, affecting the overall governance of retirement planning in the state.

Summary

House Bill 21, introduced by Representative Ivey, aims to enhance the effectiveness of the Public Retirement Systems' Actuarial Committee (PRSAC) by increasing its membership from seven to eleven voting members. This expansion is intended to ensure that the committee can better fulfill its role in assisting the legislature with the actuarial soundness of state and statewide retirement systems. The proposed bill amends existing statutes to add additional legislative members, thereby increasing the representation of both the House of Representatives and the Senate on the committee.

Sentiment

The discussions surrounding HB21 have generally been supportive, recognizing the importance of a committee that is thoroughly engaged with various legislative perspectives. Supporters argue that a larger committee will bring more diverse insights into retirement system management, fostering better-informed decisions that align with public sector needs. However, as is often the case with legislative changes, there may be subtle concerns about the efficiency and bureaucracy introduced by having a larger committee, which some fear could complicate decision-making processes.

Contention

While there appears to be broad agreement on the necessity of a well-functioning actuarial committee, the main points of contention revolve around the implications of expanding the committee's size. Critics may argue that increasing the number of members could not only dilute accountability but also slow down the decision-making process. Ultimately, the bill reflects ongoing discussions about how best to balance representation with effective governance within public retirement systems, highlighting the delicate balance between inclusivity and efficiency in legislative processes.