Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Alabama Senate advances bill opposing ESG boycotts (2023)
| Environmental, social, and corporate governance |
|---|
|
| • What is ESG? • Enacted ESG legislation • Arguments for and against ESG • Opposition to ESG • Federal ESG rules • ESG legislation tracker • Economy and Society: Ballotpedia's weekly ESG newsletter |
The Alabama State Senate on May 18 passed a bill that would prohibit state contracts with businesses that boycott certain companies and industries (like fossil fuel or mining companies) based on ESG criteria. The bill now moves to the state House for consideration:
| “ |
State senators passed a bill that would prohibit state contracts with businesses that boycott certain sectors of the economy based on environmental, social, and governance or ESGs. Sponsored by Senator Dan Roberts, R-Mountain Brook, Senate Bill 261 is among the strongest anti-ESG legislation in the nation to protect investors and funds in Alabama. “I appreciate the support of my colleagues in the Senate for working to pass this legislation,” said Senator Dan Roberts. “The Alabama Senate has made it clear that we want businesses to focus on growing and expanding and not working to push any political agenda with left-wing ESG policies.” The bill specifies company that refuses to deal with, terminates business activities with, or otherwise takes any commercial action that is intended to penalize, inflict economic harm on, limit commercial relations with, or change or limit the activities of a company because the company, without violating controlling law, does any of the following: -- Engages in the exploration, production, utilization, transportation, sale, or manufacturing of fossil fuel-based energy, timber, mining, or agriculture. -- Engages in, facilitates, or supports the manufacture, import, distribution, marketing or advertising, sale, or lawful use of firearms, ammunition, or component parts and accessories of firearms or ammunition. -- Does not meet, is not expected to meet, or does not commit to meet environmental standards or disclosure criteria, in particular, to eliminate, reduce, offset, or disclose greenhouse gas emissions. -- Does not meet, is not expected to meet, or does not commit to meet corporate employment or board composition, compensation, or disclosure criteria. -- Does not facilitate, is not expected to facilitate, or does not commit to facilitating access to abortion or sex or gender change surgery, medications, treatment, or therapies…. The bill now goes to the House for more debate.[1] |
” |
See also
- Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG)
- Economy and Society: Ballotpedia's ESG newsletter
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
