On March 20, President Joe Biden vetoed the US Senate’s vote to overturn the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) rule, which allows retirement plan fiduciaries to consider ESG factors when selecting investments.
The Senate’s vote followed the US House of Representatives’ approval of an identical resolution on February 28.
The rule is firmly opposed by Republican lawmakers and state attorneys general. In late January, 25 states filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration, alleging that the ESG rule does not align with the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) mandate, which covers approximately 2.5 million health plans, 747,000 retirement plans, and 673,000 other welfare benefit plans. ERISA requires fiduciaries of retirement plans to act solely in the best interests of their beneficiaries.
Opponents of the ESG rule argue that it imposes undue burdens on fiduciaries and may result in suboptimal investment decisions. They contend that the rule’s focus on ESG factors may cause fiduciaries to prioritize environmental and social concerns over the financial well-being of plan beneficiaries.
Lack of Clarity and its Controversy
The ESG rule aims to look beyond profit and loss to determine whether to make an investment. This lack of clarity makes it a rather controversial rule. As Joe McGowan says, writing in Forbes, “Conservatives, rightfully or wrongly, believe that ESG has become a tool for outside interests to impose their beliefs on private companies. Not just environmental concerns, but also political debates…. This has become a significant concern within the business sector, hence the congressional override by Republicans.”
Overriding the president’s veto is unlikely, as it would require a two-thirds majority in both chambers of Congress. However, even though the ERISA rule is going to stand for now, its implementation remains problematic, as the Department of Labor deals with how to write up clear guidelines on its implementation and the states continue to fight it.
For more Employee Benefits tips, contact INSURICA today.
Copyright © 2023 Smarts Publishing
This is not intended to be exhaustive nor should any discussion or opinions be construed as legal advice. Readers should contact legal counsel or an insurance professional for appropriate advice.
About the Author
Share This Story
Related Blogs
Fiduciary Responsibilities for Employer Health Plans: What Employers Should Know Now
When employers think about fiduciary responsibility, retirement plans often come to mind first. But recent developments make it clear that fiduciary duties also matter—sometimes significantly—when it comes to employer-sponsored health and welfare plans.
The New Era of Mental Health Parity Enforcement in 2026
Federal agencies have made mental health parity enforcement a top priority in 2026, and employers sponsoring group health plans are feeling the impact. Regulators are no longer satisfied with high‑level assurances that plans comply with the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA). Instead, they expect detailed, data‑driven documentation showing that mental health and substance‑use‑disorder benefits are truly comparable to medical and surgical benefits. This includes not only the written plan design but also how rules are applied in real‑world scenarios.
The 2026 Specialty Drug Surge: What Employers Need to Prepare For
Specialty drugs have been a major cost driver for years, but 2026 marks a significant shift in both scale and urgency. With GLP 1 medications expanding into new indications, gene therapies entering the market at record pace, and oncology drugs continuing to rise in both cost and utilization, specialty medications are projected to account for more than 60% of total pharmacy spending this year. That’s a dramatic change for employers, especially considering that specialty drugs represent fewer than 5% of total prescriptions.