John Curry: An open letter to Rep. Josh Mandel re: HB 151

From John Curry, July 5, 2007
Subject: An open letter to Representative Josh Mandel re. HB 151

Josh Mandel
77 S. High St.
12th Floor
Columbus, Oh 43215-6111

Honorable Mr. Mandel,

First of all, I wish to congratulate you re. your service to our country in the battlefields of Iraq. I have the utmost respect for all U.S. Vets. I, just like most all other Buckeyes, detest terrorism and/or oppressive governments who subject their citizens to abuses and economic hardships. I have no doubt that both Iran, Sudan, and a host of other countries have and are subjecting their citizens to these same types of hardships.

That being said, I want to state that your HB 151 will also subject my fellow retirees to a similar hardship.... the hardship of my (and other) state retirement systems losing millions of dollars should your "forced" divestment survive (as written) the Ohio House, the Ohio Senate, Governor Strickland, and then become law.

I am aware of the "deal" brokered by Rep. Husted with the state retirement systems that will cause these systems to voluntarily divest of some holdings of companies that are purportedly doing business with terrorist nations. This deal is one that apparently the Ohio systems can live with and suffer minor losses as compared to the much greater losses that would have been imposed by the inclusion of hundreds of some "terrorist related" companies that appeared on an earlier list obtained and released on the Ohio Retirement Study Council's website ... a list which included Honda, Rolls-Royce (showing interest in an Ohio location), and many other companies which employ thousands of Ohioans...a list which disappeared as quickly as it appeared on the same site - if you'd like a copy of "that" list, I will gladly forward it to you.

At this point in time there are several questions that I would like you to consider. (1) Will this "brokered" deal be enough to satisfy you and your fellow House members or will you continue to peruse your bill regardless of the "deal?" (2) Why is it that an Ohio legislator is assuming the role of the U.S. Government by sanctioning companies who supposedly do business with terrorist regimes? (3) Why does your bill only require state retirement system monies to be involved in the proposed divestment? (4) What about private investors, banks, and other institutions that also invest in these companies... do they get off unscathed?

Mr. Mandel, you and your fellow House members have a few months off to ponder the ramifications of HB 151. I hope you and your fellow House members have a chance to contemplate the above questions and will come back to work in the fall with an increased understanding of why your bill is not in the best interest of hundreds of thousands of Ohio public retirees. Leave foreign policy and related sanctioning to our federal government and spend more time legislating items that will serve the citizens of the State of Ohio whom you were elected to serve. If, after the summer break,you still think your bill is in the best interest of the citizens of the State of Ohio then I suggest you take a hint from State Representative Steve Nickol (R) of Pennsylvania (article below) who said, and I quote, " If we're going to conduct foreign policy with pension money that really doesn't belong to us, we should be willing to reimburse (the) pension funds for any (my emphasis) losses." Mr. Mandel, I get a little nervous when some politicians put my (and thousands of others') retirement moneys where their mouth is.

Sincerely & Respectfully,

John Curry
Wapakoneta, OH
30 year "vested" member of The State Teachers Retirement System
Member of Concerned Ohio Retired Educators (CORE)

07/03/2007
House advances bill to ban pension holdings related to Darfur
The Associated Press

A bill to force Pennsylvania's two massive public sector pension plans to sell stock in companies deemed to be complicit in bloodshed in the Darfur region of Sudan was changed Monday so that state taxpayers -- not the pension funds -- would cover resulting investment losses.

"It's a chance for you all to put your money where your mouth is," said Rep. Steve Nickol, R-York, sponsor of the amendment. "If we're going to conduct foreign policy with pension money that really doesn't belong to us, we should be willing to reimburse (the) pension funds for any losses."
Nineteen Democrats crossed party lines to vote for the Nickol amendment, and only four Republicans voted against it. It passed 113-85.

The Democratic majority defeated several other Republican sponsored amendments to the proposed Sudan Divestment Act, which covers investments by the State Employees' Retirement System and Public School Employees' Retirement System. A final vote on the bill in this House could occur later this week.

"I do not want blood on my hands. I do not want my money going to a company which helps a government perform genocide," said the bill's sponsor, Rep. Babette Josephs, D-Philadelphia.

Josephs' bill would require the sale of stock in companies that directly or indirectly help the Sudanese government perpetuate genocide if those companies do not change their behavior after being contacted about it.

The bill includes a "stop loss" provision that would limit the funds' losses to $500 million. Together, their value is approaching $100 billion.

The State Employees' Retirement System estimates that it currently holds about $145 million in companies that have been identified as divestiture targets by the Sudan Divestment Task Force. A figure for the teachers' pension was not immediately available.