Molly Janczyk: Rep. McGregor on Investments

Molly Janczyk to Rep. Jim McGregor, June 20, 2007
Subject: Rep. McGregor on investments

Dear Jim, As always, I appreciate that you take the time to respond to us. I know some agree with you but many of us feel politics should not play a role in our futures. Ford, Coca Cola, Honda, etc. all provide jobs and earnings for many in multiple countries and are not there to promote terrorists in any manner. All countries have folks just wanting to support families while a faction of all countries raise terrorists and supremists-just as dangerous to individuals living their lives. I am not certain which companies are now included and dislodged as the list numbers are different depending on the source. But, I am certain that many are simply providing jobs and trying to make a profit to produce earnings for their investors.

YES! IF A COMPANY INDIVIDUALLY DISPLAYS SUPPORT OF TERRORISTS, SUPREMACY, PREDJUDICE OF ANY KIND, OR POOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, DISINVEST BOTH IN AND OUT OF THE U.S.

I simply find it difficult to believe the vast majority of these companies , if any at all, are in countries to support terrorists vs. supplying jobs and selling product for the countries' citizens.

Thank you, I always welcome your comments and am happy to share them.

Molly J.

From Representative Jim McGregor
Subject: RE: The Plain Dealer: HB151: Sponsor Mandel calls pension bureaucrats liars

Dear Molly,

It seems to me that our number one goal is to keep our retirement investments safe and profitable. Not too long ago, our investment experts at STRS felt Enron was a great place for them to invest our hard earned dollars (mine are in PERS). Because they received a fair return on our investment dollars, they ignored the rising signs of corruption and gross excess at Enron. They lost our retiree's money. Now the investment experts have placed our money in another corrupt and self-destructive entity. I think a good solution has come out of this. The Retirement systems may reinvest our money in safer investments and do so gradually so as to invest with equal profitability and with much less risk. This voluntary program allows them the flexibility to exit this unwise investment without losing any profit on our dollars.

Sincerely,

Jim

From Molly Janczyk, June 20, 2007
Subject: The Plain Dealer: HB151: Sponsor Mandel calls pension bureaucrats liars

Where is Mandel's proof of losses overstated? Any of us can state anything without substance to back it.

Deal or no deal?
Openers: The Plain Dealer Politics Blog
Posted by Aaron Marshall June 06, 2007 17:33PM

A controversial bill forcing Ohio pension systems to pull $1.1 billion worth of investments in businesses with ties to Iran and the Sudan was stopped in its tracks Tuesday on the House floor with pension fund managers in an uproar at the mandatory requirements.

Hoping to reach a compromise after several hours of talks, House Speaker Jon Husted offered to pull back the divestment bill -- which was scheduled for a vote Tuesday that never happened -- if the pension systems agreed to a voluntary divestment of the half of those funds (more than $500 million) by the end of 2007.

Husted spokeswoman Karen Tabor said the fund managers have until the end of the day Thursday to send a letter agreeing to the deal.

But it's a slightly different tune from Rep. Josh Mandel, a freshman

Republican state rep from Lyndhurst, who said Wednesday that "there is no formal agreement or compromise" and that he plans to push forward for a

House floor vote next Tuesday. Mandel and other backers of the bill want to pass the legislation because of the ties both countries have to terrorism.

So is there a deal here or not?

"There wasn't an agreement as of yet," said Laura Ecklar, spokeswoman for the State Teachers Retirement System, one of the five state employee retirement systems affected by the bill. "The speaker made a proposal and we've asked for 48 hours to respond and are mulling it over and creating a response back."

The brouhaha began when state nsion fund managers and some public retirees railed against the bill, saying it would cost pension funds big bucks -- one estimate said almost $250 million a year. Mandel said he "fundamentally rejects" the idea that it will cost pension funds anything to divest and said that divestment in Missouri actually brought gains of
3.9 percent. And the Iraq war vet opened fire on pension fund "bureaucrats," who he said overstated how much they would lose.

"It's been eye opening seeing how the pension systems act," said Mandel. "I've learned that many of the pension system bureaucrats are dishonest and don't communicate with retirees and retiree associations in good faith."

The bill originally targeted all investments in businesses with ties to Iran, but was scaled back to just energy companies in Iran and broadened to include Sudan as Mandel sought to widen support among lawmakers in his caucus getting cold feet.

So how much support did the bill have among House Republicans Tuesday?

"That was in flux all day long," Tabor