Back to States List

South Carolina

South Carolina has one main public pension fund administrator: the Public Employees Benefit Authority (PEBA). PEBA administers pension benefits for the South Carolina Retirement System (SCRS), the Police Officers Retirement System (PORS), the General Assembly Retirement System (GARS), and the Judges and Solicitors Retirement System (JSRS). The assets of PEBA and the South Carolina National Guard Plan (SCNGP) are managed by the South Carolina Retirement System Investment Commission (RSIC).

  • The RSIC board consists of 8 members: 1 Ex Officio (Audit & Enterprise Risk Management Committee Member); 2 members appointed by the Governor; 1 member appointed by the State Comptroller General; 1 member appointed by the Senate Finance Committee Chairman; 1 member appointed by the Treasurer; 1 member appointed by the House Ways and Means Committee Chairman; 1 elected by the RSIC.

The “By Asset Manager” and “Asset Manager Voting” tables show the proxy voting records of the state’s asset managers who manage the pensions’ stock market portfolio through index, exchange-traded, or mutual funds. Since these are externally managed funds, the asset managers typically retain and exercise proxy voting privileges. This data is used to calculate the state’s pro-ESG and anti-ESG scores to see how the state leverages its externally managed funds in proxy voting.

The “State Voting” table shows RSIC’s proxy voting records for directly owned securities through pension fund portfolios. This data was obtained by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request since South Carolina does not publicly disclose this information to its pensioners. The 1792 Exchange encourages South Carolina to publish its proxy voting records instead of keeping its pensioners in the dark about how the state votes on ESG issues with their money.

Both tables are important to show a comprehensive picture of the state’s proxy voting record.

By Asset Manager

BlackRock Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

7%

IMA Funds

Percentage of times Mgr. voted “for” pro-ESG proposals:

-

Asset Manager Voting

Pro-ESG

8.6%

Anti-ESG

0.6%

Anti-Fossil Fuels

13%

Anti-Pollution/Waste

9%

Animal Rights

2%

DEI

7%

Weapons/Defense

8%

Human Rights

8%

Income Equality

8%

Political Speech/Lobbying Spending

7%

Health Care

2%

Race/Gender targets on Boards

2%

Non-Pecuniary

0%

ESG-Focused Governance

1%

Abortion

1%

Pro-Fossil Fuel

1%

Equality not DEI

1%

Controversial Cause Support

1%

Geopolitical Rivals/China

2%

Generate Reports
Clear
Toast