Divesting Alaska Funds From Iran
The State Affairs Committee didn't start this morning until 8:15am, which meant I wasn't late. The topic was a bill sponsored by Rep. Gatto.
Introduced by Representative GATTO, Ramras (The capitalized name indicates he is the person who introduced the bill, then any others are co-sponsors who signed on later.)
I've been wondering about the usefulness of these rough notes here on the blog since many of the meetings are recorded by Gavel to Gavel and available online. This one was broadcast live and you can listen to it now here.
I've decided that when I take my notes on my laptop, I might as well post them. Even though you can listen, it's easier to scan the notes to get a sense of it and decide if you need to get the details by listening to it.
Quick Overview
Basic Premise: Companies doing business in Iran enable the government to continue to develop nuclear capability to fulfill their threat to wipe out Israel and also to continue to develop weapons - notably IED's - that kill American soldiers in Iraq. Thus, by investing in those companies, the State of Alaska is assisting in the killing of American soldiers and in Iran's goal to destroy Israel. The bill calls for the Permanent Fund, State Retirement Funds, etc.
Questions:
1. How will the divestment happen?
2. What will it cost?
3. Will it make a difference?
Answers:
There are about 20 states that already do this and the Federal government already has something like this in place. The state will only have to use existing lists of 'scrutinized' companies already identified by the other states and not have to do the research itself. The bar would be a $20 million investment.
More Questions:
1. Are Alaska oil companies on the list?
2. If we are partners with the oil companies on the list, does that make Alaska a terrorist supporting organization?
It was an interesting discussion and witnesses included the Commissioner of Revenue Pat Galvin, Alaska Permanent Fund Director Michael J. Burns. Also the former State Treasurer of Missouri, Sarah Steelman. testified by phone about the Missouri experience and the philosophy of terror-free investing. David Gottstein, Alaska's AIPAC chair, testified by phone from Anchorage about the threat of Iran.
Rough Notes - DISCLAIMER - I typed as fast as I could, there are gaps, and probably mistakes where I couldn't keep up or hear. Check the Gavel to Gavel tape for more accurate details.
Opened at 8:15am by Chair Lynn.
Bill sponsored by our good friend and Committee member, co-sponsored by Ramras and Keller.
Gatto: My aide will introduce it
Tom Reiker: Not just a symbolic bill. Iran is diffeent from a hostile country such as Venezuela, Iran is actually sponsoring military action against us in Afganistand and Iraq. A nation we are at least indirectly fighting on the ground. The bill is to make all Americans, not just the soldiers on the ground, safer.
Make a list of scrutinzed companies. $20 Million is the bar for investment in Iran. The funds covered (see above). Department of Revenue makes a list of scrutinzed companies and turns over to the funds. For other funds where our money is co-mingled, we would encourage fund managers to divest. Based on Massachusetts doing a similar bill, and our size, it is estimated we would pull out half billion dollars out of Iran which would decrease their ability to pursue nuclear weapons and military in Iraq.
Provisions significant undertaking to enforce, so we did taylor the bill to piggy back off of lists other governments have compiled, which is why we changed the language to ‘scrutinized companies’ and the same with the $20 million bar, so this is consistent with other governmental.
We have several witnesses we are excited about.
Gatto: Thank you. We had a different bill before us, divestiture from Sudan. That was because genocide was being practiced. That isn’t the case in Iran. It is difficult to know who is elected in Iran??. We do know they are producing nuclear materials. They are awash in oil, so don’t know why they need nuclear. But we know they are arming their allies, and they want to eliminate Israel from the face of the earth. Israel is already talking about boots on the ground. Word is they are producing and will want to sell it and it won’t be to US or Canada. Iran, for all the oil they have, they have to import gasoline. So sanctions against their ability to import things they need.
In earlier legislation, we had difficulty of seperating money going to military, it’s hard for APF to separate those stocks going to iran.
We have to take a good look at those people whose goal is to wipe another country off the face of the earth. We can’t stand by and hope for the best when we have an opportunity to do something.
Lynn: What are the other states and how many?
Tom Reiker: About 21. Missouri was the first, through executive branch. California, Mass, Maryland.
Questions?
Johnson: You indicated on page 2 line ? Is importing gas a direct investment?
Tom Reiker: I don’t believe, need further guidance, that a direct exchange like that, that our influence the kind of thing our bill is targeting…
Johnson: Do we have a list of companies?
Gatto: We do, People will testify.
Johnson: What about oil companies in Alaska on the list? Exxon?
Reiker: I don’t think any oil company in Alaska.
Johnson: I want to see a list.
Pat Galvin: Commissioner of Revenue: Not here representing Permanant Fund or other boards, but for Administration and Dept. of Revenue. We will be responsible for implementing the bill. And the sponsors have drafted the bill i a way that makes it easier to implement than most such bills.
Impact, if any, diversion of funds from companies that otherwise would be appropriate investments.
Seaton: Page 2 starting line 12-21. Commissioner shall update quarterly, shall make reasonable efforts to examine all companies to see if they are scrutinized company. As I read it, you are required to scrutinized. Gives you things you can use, doesn’t say you can’t use others. This is not a significant item?
Galvin: I also landed this morning, and haven’t had a chance to read the CS [Committee Substitute], and my understanding from the sponsor is it is intended to allow the department to utilize existing lists and previously prepared investigatory material. We’ll look at the language to see it doesn’t exceed that.
Seaton: I would like the dept to make that analysis. As I read it it’s more difficult.
Galvin: i would like to comment on behalf of the governor on the general policy carried out through this bill. Generally the governor would be skeptical to mix our investment policy with social or political goals. But he does recognize that on occassion we need to isolate nation states, particularly when there is an attempt to avoid armed conrflcit. The Gov. will look at the bill to determine if it meets those circumstances. I’m not here to say the Gov approves, he will check to see if it is appropriate.
Lynn: Not so much social, as political and possibly national security.
Gatto: I don’t know if it’s a secret to anyone, but a lot of the weapons that show up in Iraq are made in Iran. They are very much involve in a war with our soldiers. if there is anything we can do to prevent the killing and maiming our boys and girls. We don’t know if this will affect our profits. The last thing we should be doing is to support Iran in any way. Our moral obligation.
Burns: Michael Burns, Exec Dir. of Permanent Fund. No testimony prepared. Just here to answer questions.
Lynn: We discussed divestiture in Darfur. Not the same. Any comparison, remarks comparing - is this apple and oranges, or just fruit?
Burns: Just saw this morning. Board has longstanding opposition to social investing. Darfur was a major exception. This is different.
Lynn: Wasn’t there some change you approved when discussing Darfur?
Burns: We did pass a resolution in support of those bills proposed. We did support it, but just narrowly and didn’t change policy for tha specific blll.
Lynn: This, appears more political and national security bill, would you agree?
Burns: Yes sir I do.
Petersen: I notice there is a zero fiscal note. Charges to sell stocks? Possible losses in selling stocks?
Burns: At times we’e looked at trading epenses, The differnce in the cost here, is the Commissioner of Revenue has the montioring responsibility. I don’t know tht we hae anything that rises to the $20million mark. I was surprised to hear the half billion level. I haven’t seen the list.
Gatto: With 21 states already establishing list of companies to divest. Would that not have a downward pressure on those stocks and so it would be wise to divest?
Burns: I don’t know.
Gatto: One would expect that pressures from so many countries to divest, this would be a good time.
Burns: Might would be the operative word.
Galvin:
Seaton: Page 3, line 11, business operations. List oil related activities. Retail sales of gasoline and related products. If you look at sales of one of our major producers going intto that country, what would you have to do to be sure this fuel wouldn’t go into military vehicles. Does that mean any oil company that sold diesel or gasoline would automatically be on this list? You need to get back to us on that.
Galvin: Wil have to gt back to you. My reading of the bill, would not, if a producer would refine a gasoline product that was sold to company outside of Iran which then sold it to Iran, not our job to follow the chain of product. It would be the company tht makes the final sale.
Seaton: If we had a wholly owned subsidiary of one of our refiners, if they sold related products - not sure what that means - say jet fuel, that subsidiary sold that product w/in Iran, without certificant for retail sale only, so I’m trying to figure out, what kind of chain of ownership would you the commissioner be required to look at? If a subsidiary of major oil company, would that throw them onto the list? You’ll need to look into that.
Galvin: Following up that line of inquiry, the intent to which the subsidiary will affect the determination as well.
Seaton: If someone forms a subsidiary, they could do whatever they liked and avoid the intent.
Gatto: I believe SEaton mentioned jet fuel and diesel. Iran has refineries and make those products, but they have more trouble with gasoline.
Seaton: Maybe the commissioer will get back to us - “and related products” what does that mean? While we produce jet fuel in Alaska, we may import it too.
Sarah Steelman by audio - Pleasure to share with you about this important issue. Former state treasurer of Missouri, and started this in Missouri, we were the first to divest. Speaking at request of Rep. Gatto. I’m also in charge of a divestment free fund. I will tell you about what happened in 2005 in Missouri. When I took office it was shocking for me to find out we were funding the people we were fighting. The previous treasurer was using foreign companies to invest the state’s money, which did the oil for food scandal and is still investing in Iran today. I started asking questions about our inevestments. Found we were doing nothing to prevent us from investing in companies investing in iran. We started the first terror free fund. We screened out these companies from our folio. We showed we could make the same return on investment by keeping the same type of portfolio. We then had UBS and other investors.
Set up nations first terrorism free policy for pension fund, and police and fire fighter terror free investment plan. A lot has changed in last five years, but much remains the same. I applaud you for taking this up today. The threat posed by Iran has increased, yet we still invest in Siemens and Nokia who are helping the Iranian government stifle the people.
Pleased that your fund manager isn’t taking a position opposed to this bill. There is defiitely room for debate, but the arguments we heard were wrong, untrue. - States shouldn’t set foreign policy, poor investments, costs too high. I know it is too high NOT to do this. Empowerment Financial Group offers fund for individuals to have terror free investments. No US $ should ever end in the hands of terrorists. Be happy to answer any questions. I’ve listened to your questions earlier about potential oil companies. Petro China signed a deal. French oil company. BP Got out. Royal Dutch Shell was there.
Lynn: Thank you. Questions. Did you miss the snow storm?
Steelman: We got more snow here than you have up there.
Lynn: Juneau has no snow ont he ground.
Steelman: You’re kidding?
Mr. David Gottstein: Thank you for allowing me to testify. Thank you. There has been a lot of thought and detail put in this so you know what we are asking here. I’m also Alaska chair of the AIPAC.
Sobering issue. US and the world under attack from radical islam. Terrorists incidents happening weekly. Radical islam that controls most of the muslim world. Arrests around US and Christmas airplane show we are under siege. All sahre embracing of Jihad against the west. Heart of radical Islamic movement and most dangerous is Iran. Their vast wealth and radical Islam, allows them to build nuclear power. Prospect of nuclear Iran with ability to launch missiles including Europe, with Israel in their sights.
Only good outcome is we get iran to change their behavior. ARsenal includes diplomacy, sanctions, blockades, then military. Sanctions have mixed results. We should use all non-violent means possible before more …
Digress from my prepared remarks to address the issues.
1. Divestiture in Iran package, 1996.
2. Iran refined petroleum ??? whatever fuel
Both passed by US Congress. It makes moot some of the questions asked earlier, because the president has the right to say it is illegal for insurance companies to insure tankers going to Iran. This is aimed at reducing the ability of Iran to raise money through use of their refineries. One day the state would own shares in a company, the next day they would not. It wouldn’t change any other relationship the state had with the company.
Reading… chance to influence positively, Iran’s president aims to wipe israel from the planet and would have serious consequence and middle east would turn into a firestorm. Seldom are you asked to grasp with national issues. Able to join in the ost serious war effort since the fight against Nazism.
provided committee with lists I’ve faxed during the others’ testimony.
Lynn: Thank you very much. I appreciate most of your comments.
Anyone else on line? In the audience? Close public testimony. Committee discussion.
Seaton: I appreciate some of the testimony, but i think in some ways we’re beyond our level of expertise. We’re talking about alqaeda and racical islam. We need to be aware we need to be much more clear, I’m not an expert on these things. Make sure we aren’t indicting all of a religion and we have bill before us and need further definition on the bill.
Lynn: I agree with that, and I think the distinction between radical islam and islam. Not talking about Al qaeda. We are talking about nation survival. What can we do here in Alaska, if we don’t invest in these countries we do one small part.
Johnson: I am concerned and I think Gottstein sums it up. He mentions Shell, One day were doing business and the next they are still doing business with the companies. This may be one of those feel good kind of things. We haen’t een any evidence of any problem or effect. I don’t hold it up, I have doubts we do much good with these feel good bill.
Lynn: National security is very feel good.
Johnson: If I thought it did any good I would support it.
Lynn: Does it do any harm?
Johnson: That’s why I’m not opposed.
Peterson: .. missed it -
Seaton - we have Royal Dutch Shell. If it is fine to do business with these companies, but we can’t buy their stock, but basically be in partnership with them. I’m not sure of the effect. Hope we will get a little more information.
Johnson: SEaton raises interesting issue. Since we are partners with these company, do we qualify as someone who should be on the divestiture list? Are we know bad guys?
Wilson: As I look at the list, it amazes me that 9 of the 36 are from Malaysia and …???
I think we need to think where most of them are from. We are partners with some. I think we need more information just to make sure. I would like to know for sure if there would be ramiication for Alaska because we might have a partnership.
Seaton: Some of this we’ve asked the commissioner to gt back to us. We are looking at in the finance aspects. Commissioner would gt from the Department of Law about subsidiaries. Our partnerships in the wells that these companies have.
Lynn to Galvin: Seaton’s asked these questions. How long would it take to get that information?
Galvin: hard to hear.
Gruenberg: # of us were interested in …. this seems structured the same way. Has your position changed since Darfur. No change on bill, but situation changed.
Lynn: Don’t want to go down that path talking about Darfur.
Mr. Cane: I’d have to talke time to research deeper concerns. A few days at least, depending on depth of questions
Gatto: i think we could research this info to April 20. There is no end to the details we could look up. I count number of GI’s no longer with us. ⅔ killed, not in battle, but by IEDs and these come from Iran. This isnt’ to destroy the country of iran. This is to help save our soldiers. These are manufactured in Iran, They have the labels on them. I wish this bill wiould end Iran’s involvement. it does something to lessen the losses. If people want to investigate, let them. But pass the bill. Later, we can find out it has no effect. So what? It won’t hurt our portfolio. If you find out in your portfolio, some is helping IRAN. Would you not act, even if it meant you would lose a few dollars. I would, I hope you would, I hope the Prmanent fund would. I’m looking beyond money. Go to some of the memorials. Do it. Thank you.
Gatto: It made it somewhat easier ????? If divestiture had no effect, none. Why would BP remove their investments?
Petersen: It might be pretty dangerous for the employees to be working in that environment. In some places, employees taken for ransom. Oil companies may have hard time getting employees to go their and work. It could be political.
Brief at ease.
Lynn: I basically support this bill, but I have some questions, if meets agreement of committee, would like to bring it up next meeting - APOC, SC decision on campaing, if we have time I’d bring it back, if not then next time.
Gatto: OK
Lynn: Close out this hearing. Thrusday, overview on Citizens United overview.
HB (House Bill) 241 An Act relating to certain investments of the Alaska permanent fund, the state’s retirement systems, the State of Alaska Supplemental Annuity Plan, and the deferred compensation program for state employees in companies that do business in Iran, and restricting those investments; and providing for an effective date.”[You can get the whole bill itself (It's five pages) here, but as I write, the committee substitute isn't yet available there. Here are the links to documents related to today's hearing from the State Affairs Committee:
Introduced by Representative GATTO, Ramras (The capitalized name indicates he is the person who introduced the bill, then any others are co-sponsors who signed on later.)
I've been wondering about the usefulness of these rough notes here on the blog since many of the meetings are recorded by Gavel to Gavel and available online. This one was broadcast live and you can listen to it now here.
I've decided that when I take my notes on my laptop, I might as well post them. Even though you can listen, it's easier to scan the notes to get a sense of it and decide if you need to get the details by listening to it.
Basic Premise: Companies doing business in Iran enable the government to continue to develop nuclear capability to fulfill their threat to wipe out Israel and also to continue to develop weapons - notably IED's - that kill American soldiers in Iraq. Thus, by investing in those companies, the State of Alaska is assisting in the killing of American soldiers and in Iran's goal to destroy Israel. The bill calls for the Permanent Fund, State Retirement Funds, etc.
Questions:
1. How will the divestment happen?
2. What will it cost?
3. Will it make a difference?
Answers:
There are about 20 states that already do this and the Federal government already has something like this in place. The state will only have to use existing lists of 'scrutinized' companies already identified by the other states and not have to do the research itself. The bar would be a $20 million investment.
More Questions:
1. Are Alaska oil companies on the list?
2. If we are partners with the oil companies on the list, does that make Alaska a terrorist supporting organization?
It was an interesting discussion and witnesses included the Commissioner of Revenue Pat Galvin, Alaska Permanent Fund Director Michael J. Burns. Also the former State Treasurer of Missouri, Sarah Steelman. testified by phone about the Missouri experience and the philosophy of terror-free investing. David Gottstein, Alaska's AIPAC chair, testified by phone from Anchorage about the threat of Iran.
Rough Notes - DISCLAIMER - I typed as fast as I could, there are gaps, and probably mistakes where I couldn't keep up or hear. Check the Gavel to Gavel tape for more accurate details.
Opened at 8:15am by Chair Lynn.
Bill sponsored by our good friend and Committee member, co-sponsored by Ramras and Keller.
Gatto: My aide will introduce it
Tom Reiker: Not just a symbolic bill. Iran is diffeent from a hostile country such as Venezuela, Iran is actually sponsoring military action against us in Afganistand and Iraq. A nation we are at least indirectly fighting on the ground. The bill is to make all Americans, not just the soldiers on the ground, safer.
Make a list of scrutinzed companies. $20 Million is the bar for investment in Iran. The funds covered (see above). Department of Revenue makes a list of scrutinzed companies and turns over to the funds. For other funds where our money is co-mingled, we would encourage fund managers to divest. Based on Massachusetts doing a similar bill, and our size, it is estimated we would pull out half billion dollars out of Iran which would decrease their ability to pursue nuclear weapons and military in Iraq.
Provisions significant undertaking to enforce, so we did taylor the bill to piggy back off of lists other governments have compiled, which is why we changed the language to ‘scrutinized companies’ and the same with the $20 million bar, so this is consistent with other governmental.
We have several witnesses we are excited about.
Gatto: Thank you. We had a different bill before us, divestiture from Sudan. That was because genocide was being practiced. That isn’t the case in Iran. It is difficult to know who is elected in Iran??. We do know they are producing nuclear materials. They are awash in oil, so don’t know why they need nuclear. But we know they are arming their allies, and they want to eliminate Israel from the face of the earth. Israel is already talking about boots on the ground. Word is they are producing and will want to sell it and it won’t be to US or Canada. Iran, for all the oil they have, they have to import gasoline. So sanctions against their ability to import things they need.
In earlier legislation, we had difficulty of seperating money going to military, it’s hard for APF to separate those stocks going to iran.
We have to take a good look at those people whose goal is to wipe another country off the face of the earth. We can’t stand by and hope for the best when we have an opportunity to do something.
Lynn: What are the other states and how many?
Tom Reiker: About 21. Missouri was the first, through executive branch. California, Mass, Maryland.
Questions?
Johnson: You indicated on page 2 line ? Is importing gas a direct investment?
Tom Reiker: I don’t believe, need further guidance, that a direct exchange like that, that our influence the kind of thing our bill is targeting…
Johnson: Do we have a list of companies?
Gatto: We do, People will testify.
Johnson: What about oil companies in Alaska on the list? Exxon?
Reiker: I don’t think any oil company in Alaska.
Johnson: I want to see a list.
Pat Galvin: Commissioner of Revenue: Not here representing Permanant Fund or other boards, but for Administration and Dept. of Revenue. We will be responsible for implementing the bill. And the sponsors have drafted the bill i a way that makes it easier to implement than most such bills.
Impact, if any, diversion of funds from companies that otherwise would be appropriate investments.
Seaton: Page 2 starting line 12-21. Commissioner shall update quarterly, shall make reasonable efforts to examine all companies to see if they are scrutinized company. As I read it, you are required to scrutinized. Gives you things you can use, doesn’t say you can’t use others. This is not a significant item?
Galvin: I also landed this morning, and haven’t had a chance to read the CS [Committee Substitute], and my understanding from the sponsor is it is intended to allow the department to utilize existing lists and previously prepared investigatory material. We’ll look at the language to see it doesn’t exceed that.
Seaton: I would like the dept to make that analysis. As I read it it’s more difficult.
Galvin: i would like to comment on behalf of the governor on the general policy carried out through this bill. Generally the governor would be skeptical to mix our investment policy with social or political goals. But he does recognize that on occassion we need to isolate nation states, particularly when there is an attempt to avoid armed conrflcit. The Gov. will look at the bill to determine if it meets those circumstances. I’m not here to say the Gov approves, he will check to see if it is appropriate.
Lynn: Not so much social, as political and possibly national security.
Gatto: I don’t know if it’s a secret to anyone, but a lot of the weapons that show up in Iraq are made in Iran. They are very much involve in a war with our soldiers. if there is anything we can do to prevent the killing and maiming our boys and girls. We don’t know if this will affect our profits. The last thing we should be doing is to support Iran in any way. Our moral obligation.
Burns: Michael Burns, Exec Dir. of Permanent Fund. No testimony prepared. Just here to answer questions.
Lynn: We discussed divestiture in Darfur. Not the same. Any comparison, remarks comparing - is this apple and oranges, or just fruit?
Burns: Just saw this morning. Board has longstanding opposition to social investing. Darfur was a major exception. This is different.
Lynn: Wasn’t there some change you approved when discussing Darfur?
Burns: We did pass a resolution in support of those bills proposed. We did support it, but just narrowly and didn’t change policy for tha specific blll.
Lynn: This, appears more political and national security bill, would you agree?
Burns: Yes sir I do.
Petersen: I notice there is a zero fiscal note. Charges to sell stocks? Possible losses in selling stocks?
Burns: At times we’e looked at trading epenses, The differnce in the cost here, is the Commissioner of Revenue has the montioring responsibility. I don’t know tht we hae anything that rises to the $20million mark. I was surprised to hear the half billion level. I haven’t seen the list.
Gatto: With 21 states already establishing list of companies to divest. Would that not have a downward pressure on those stocks and so it would be wise to divest?
Burns: I don’t know.
Gatto: One would expect that pressures from so many countries to divest, this would be a good time.
Burns: Might would be the operative word.
Galvin:
Seaton: Page 3, line 11, business operations. List oil related activities. Retail sales of gasoline and related products. If you look at sales of one of our major producers going intto that country, what would you have to do to be sure this fuel wouldn’t go into military vehicles. Does that mean any oil company that sold diesel or gasoline would automatically be on this list? You need to get back to us on that.
Galvin: Wil have to gt back to you. My reading of the bill, would not, if a producer would refine a gasoline product that was sold to company outside of Iran which then sold it to Iran, not our job to follow the chain of product. It would be the company tht makes the final sale.
Seaton: If we had a wholly owned subsidiary of one of our refiners, if they sold related products - not sure what that means - say jet fuel, that subsidiary sold that product w/in Iran, without certificant for retail sale only, so I’m trying to figure out, what kind of chain of ownership would you the commissioner be required to look at? If a subsidiary of major oil company, would that throw them onto the list? You’ll need to look into that.
Galvin: Following up that line of inquiry, the intent to which the subsidiary will affect the determination as well.
Seaton: If someone forms a subsidiary, they could do whatever they liked and avoid the intent.
Gatto: I believe SEaton mentioned jet fuel and diesel. Iran has refineries and make those products, but they have more trouble with gasoline.
Seaton: Maybe the commissioer will get back to us - “and related products” what does that mean? While we produce jet fuel in Alaska, we may import it too.
Sarah Steelman by audio - Pleasure to share with you about this important issue. Former state treasurer of Missouri, and started this in Missouri, we were the first to divest. Speaking at request of Rep. Gatto. I’m also in charge of a divestment free fund. I will tell you about what happened in 2005 in Missouri. When I took office it was shocking for me to find out we were funding the people we were fighting. The previous treasurer was using foreign companies to invest the state’s money, which did the oil for food scandal and is still investing in Iran today. I started asking questions about our inevestments. Found we were doing nothing to prevent us from investing in companies investing in iran. We started the first terror free fund. We screened out these companies from our folio. We showed we could make the same return on investment by keeping the same type of portfolio. We then had UBS and other investors.
Set up nations first terrorism free policy for pension fund, and police and fire fighter terror free investment plan. A lot has changed in last five years, but much remains the same. I applaud you for taking this up today. The threat posed by Iran has increased, yet we still invest in Siemens and Nokia who are helping the Iranian government stifle the people.
Pleased that your fund manager isn’t taking a position opposed to this bill. There is defiitely room for debate, but the arguments we heard were wrong, untrue. - States shouldn’t set foreign policy, poor investments, costs too high. I know it is too high NOT to do this. Empowerment Financial Group offers fund for individuals to have terror free investments. No US $ should ever end in the hands of terrorists. Be happy to answer any questions. I’ve listened to your questions earlier about potential oil companies. Petro China signed a deal. French oil company. BP Got out. Royal Dutch Shell was there.
Lynn: Thank you. Questions. Did you miss the snow storm?
Steelman: We got more snow here than you have up there.
Lynn: Juneau has no snow ont he ground.
Steelman: You’re kidding?
Mr. David Gottstein: Thank you for allowing me to testify. Thank you. There has been a lot of thought and detail put in this so you know what we are asking here. I’m also Alaska chair of the AIPAC.
Sobering issue. US and the world under attack from radical islam. Terrorists incidents happening weekly. Radical islam that controls most of the muslim world. Arrests around US and Christmas airplane show we are under siege. All sahre embracing of Jihad against the west. Heart of radical Islamic movement and most dangerous is Iran. Their vast wealth and radical Islam, allows them to build nuclear power. Prospect of nuclear Iran with ability to launch missiles including Europe, with Israel in their sights.
Only good outcome is we get iran to change their behavior. ARsenal includes diplomacy, sanctions, blockades, then military. Sanctions have mixed results. We should use all non-violent means possible before more …
Digress from my prepared remarks to address the issues.
1. Divestiture in Iran package, 1996.
2. Iran refined petroleum ??? whatever fuel
Both passed by US Congress. It makes moot some of the questions asked earlier, because the president has the right to say it is illegal for insurance companies to insure tankers going to Iran. This is aimed at reducing the ability of Iran to raise money through use of their refineries. One day the state would own shares in a company, the next day they would not. It wouldn’t change any other relationship the state had with the company.
Reading… chance to influence positively, Iran’s president aims to wipe israel from the planet and would have serious consequence and middle east would turn into a firestorm. Seldom are you asked to grasp with national issues. Able to join in the ost serious war effort since the fight against Nazism.
provided committee with lists I’ve faxed during the others’ testimony.
Lynn: Thank you very much. I appreciate most of your comments.
Anyone else on line? In the audience? Close public testimony. Committee discussion.
Seaton: I appreciate some of the testimony, but i think in some ways we’re beyond our level of expertise. We’re talking about alqaeda and racical islam. We need to be aware we need to be much more clear, I’m not an expert on these things. Make sure we aren’t indicting all of a religion and we have bill before us and need further definition on the bill.
Lynn: I agree with that, and I think the distinction between radical islam and islam. Not talking about Al qaeda. We are talking about nation survival. What can we do here in Alaska, if we don’t invest in these countries we do one small part.
Johnson: I am concerned and I think Gottstein sums it up. He mentions Shell, One day were doing business and the next they are still doing business with the companies. This may be one of those feel good kind of things. We haen’t een any evidence of any problem or effect. I don’t hold it up, I have doubts we do much good with these feel good bill.
Lynn: National security is very feel good.
Johnson: If I thought it did any good I would support it.
Lynn: Does it do any harm?
Johnson: That’s why I’m not opposed.
Peterson: .. missed it -
Seaton - we have Royal Dutch Shell. If it is fine to do business with these companies, but we can’t buy their stock, but basically be in partnership with them. I’m not sure of the effect. Hope we will get a little more information.
Johnson: SEaton raises interesting issue. Since we are partners with these company, do we qualify as someone who should be on the divestiture list? Are we know bad guys?
Wilson: As I look at the list, it amazes me that 9 of the 36 are from Malaysia and …???
I think we need to think where most of them are from. We are partners with some. I think we need more information just to make sure. I would like to know for sure if there would be ramiication for Alaska because we might have a partnership.
Seaton: Some of this we’ve asked the commissioner to gt back to us. We are looking at in the finance aspects. Commissioner would gt from the Department of Law about subsidiaries. Our partnerships in the wells that these companies have.
Lynn to Galvin: Seaton’s asked these questions. How long would it take to get that information?
Galvin: hard to hear.
Gruenberg: # of us were interested in …. this seems structured the same way. Has your position changed since Darfur. No change on bill, but situation changed.
Lynn: Don’t want to go down that path talking about Darfur.
Mr. Cane: I’d have to talke time to research deeper concerns. A few days at least, depending on depth of questions
Gatto: i think we could research this info to April 20. There is no end to the details we could look up. I count number of GI’s no longer with us. ⅔ killed, not in battle, but by IEDs and these come from Iran. This isnt’ to destroy the country of iran. This is to help save our soldiers. These are manufactured in Iran, They have the labels on them. I wish this bill wiould end Iran’s involvement. it does something to lessen the losses. If people want to investigate, let them. But pass the bill. Later, we can find out it has no effect. So what? It won’t hurt our portfolio. If you find out in your portfolio, some is helping IRAN. Would you not act, even if it meant you would lose a few dollars. I would, I hope you would, I hope the Prmanent fund would. I’m looking beyond money. Go to some of the memorials. Do it. Thank you.
Gatto: It made it somewhat easier ????? If divestiture had no effect, none. Why would BP remove their investments?
Petersen: It might be pretty dangerous for the employees to be working in that environment. In some places, employees taken for ransom. Oil companies may have hard time getting employees to go their and work. It could be political.
Brief at ease.
Lynn: I basically support this bill, but I have some questions, if meets agreement of committee, would like to bring it up next meeting - APOC, SC decision on campaing, if we have time I’d bring it back, if not then next time.
Gatto: OK
Lynn: Close out this hearing. Thrusday, overview on Citizens United overview.
