A blockbuster from Jim Kimmel: An Open Letter to State Representative Shannon Jones

From Jim Kimmel, May 12, 2007
Subject: Fw: Terrorism STRS Investment.doc

Kathie: I received a questionnaire from Shannon Jones, Ohio Representative District 67. She asked me 5 questions, 4 of which were not so significant as number 1. Number 1 asked: what I thought about the "shocking" news that Ohio's public retirement systems were investing in Iran. (Like Halliburton and so many others aren't?) My letter which I sent last week via USPS is below.

---

Jim Kimmel to State Rep. Shannon Jones, May 8, 2007

AN OPEN LETTER TO STATE REPRESENTATIVE
SHANNON JONES

State Representative Shannon Jones
77 S. High Street District 67
Columbus, Ohio 43215-6111

Dear Representative Jones:

I am responding to your questionnaire which I received today. First the answers to questions 2-5 :

1.See comments below regarding retirement systems investing in terrorism.

2. Regarding income taxes : NO

3. Reducing Estate Taxes NO

4. Sales tax ½% increase to help support schools: YES – Because if you have a bad year and earn a small amount you will buy less and pay less tax- If the next year you earn lots of money you will buy more and pay more in sales taxes. Property tax becomes a burden which people cannot easily reduce when they have a bad year , layoffs, or become disabled or retire. Also the way schools are now funded in Ohio (mostly property tax ) is ILLEGAL!!

5. Abstinence education. Yes. Parents should teach this but many do not!!

Answer to Question One:

You asked about tax dollars and the retirement benefits of government employees such as teachers, firemen, police, and others being invested in companies connected to terrorist groups. First of all, the BENEFITS are paid to the retirees. I doubt that with the high cost of prescriptions and medical insurance many public service retirees are dabbling very much in the stock market .Surely you really mean the money in the retirement FUNDS used for investment. But even here, once the money is received from teachers, police, and others in the public sector it is no longer “public” money but is part of the remuneration for these employees. No longer public. Part of a public employee’s remuneration set aside for his/her retirement. Herb Dyer, failed STRS executive director made a similar mistake when he said the money was the STRS Board’s –not the teachers’. My main concern is that you seem to be targeting retired police, teachers, firefighters, state patrolmen, and other hard working public servants as if their retirement systems are somehow supporting terrorism. Also, you seem to be making the point that our pension systems are a special case. Would you say the same to a large US corporation? Are you just as “shocked” to learn that many big US corporations invest in companies with ties to terror?

This idea of yours about terrorist supporting investments only makes sense if such legislation includes ALL investment in terror connected stocks, bonds, companies, and financial interests.in the US as well as foreign countries. It should apply to Halliburton, Pand G , General Motors, and all bankers and brokers and mutual funds. They should not invest in terror either. Why the narrow focus on STRS, PERS, SERS, and all the other public retirement systems? Large corporations, brokers and mutual funds invest much more in all areas than all the retirement systems combined. You know that as well as I do. ANY investor, public or private, should be prevented on penalty of law from investing ANY money, their own or that of others, in a company suspected of supporting terror. It matters not whether the money starts out as tax money or private salaries, retirement funds, or corporate profits invested overseas. It should all be stopped. All companies and organizations doing investment in Ohio should be included in such legislation. Are you sure you are not trying to make public pensions the “whipping boy” as part of some unrelated political agenda? Why DO you make the false distinction between public retirement systems and private business entities regarding terrorism concerns?

How do you plan to determine which company or investment is “terror related”? How thoroughly has this been researched? If STRS shouldn’t invest in a suspicious Middle Eastern entity, neither should any private company operating in our state. This issue is so large it probably should be done by the US Congress, not on a piecemeal state by state basis and applied to all business activity in the nation.

It seems to me that this issue, making the retirement systems seem “terror friendly,” comes at just the same moment in our state’s history that a bill is being proposed to increase contributions to STRS by 5% to improve health care for retirees who are very much in need of help. It is also at this time that a bill is being proposed which would REQUIRE boards of education to offer private investment plans using money that normally would go to STRS. Most young teachers do not realize that they would never receive in that kind of defined contribution plan, completely outside of STRS, nearly as much in retirement as they would in the STRS Defined Benefit Program. Are you trying to deconstruct Ohio’s public pension systems? I hope not!

I would also hope that this terrorism issue, targeting STRS, PERS, and the rest would not be used by you and other Republican party members to put public pension systems on some sort of McCarthyesque Black List in the public eye in order to defeat the 5% increase by saying-“See – they are investing in companies that help the terrorists!” while at the same time Halliburton is running amok in Iraq, and who knows what other American companies are investing where there is profit -- if no questions are asked!.

Your original question mentioned Iran. Why just Iran? I would guess that there are US corporate investments throughout the Middle East in countries from Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Iraq to Syria, and many others. Even Indonesia for that matter. With the issue of terror related investment becoming this large it makes no sense to single out public retirement systems and especially the “benefits” as if those “ungrateful” public servants who somehow are more suspect of engaging in such investments than multinational corporations.

SO WHAT IS MY ANSWER TO QUESTION NUMBER ONE?

IN SHORT IT IS THAT NO AMERICAN MONEY SHOULD BE INVESTED IN COMPANIES OR ENTITIES WHICH SUPPORT TERRORISM. BUT BE VERY CAREFUL THROWING THE TERM “TERRORISM” AROUND BECAUSE IT COULD MAKE YOU SOUND QUITE HYPOCRITICAL .

Sincerely,

James O. Kimmel, M.Ed
STRS Retiree